Benchmark cache type

[Mr.Yuck]

This is coming!! Hopefully before the 1st of the year, we hope to have them fully implemented.

Background: The Groundspeak site used(s) only NGS Benchmarks (National Geodetic Survey), which of course are U.S. only. The rest of the world was left out. Not to mention in the U.S. there are State and local benchmarks, as well as Army Corps of Engineers benchmarks. Maybe more? I was never a benchmark expert.

The benchmark cache type was first proposed by former admin NativTxn probably in 2010 or 2011. The original chief site admin actually didn't like the idea at the time. However, he's long since retired, and the 3 current admins are totally on board with this idea.

Rules? Of course there will be rules. OK, guidelines.

The first (and we hope most obvious one) will be no armchair cache creations. You must have visited yourself. No copying Benchmarks off of Waymarking.com.

Comments? This is the place.

[TermiteHunter]

I would like to see a photo of the marker in every listing as part of the cache page submission
That is unless we want to use some code on the marker as a password in order to verify the find
I suppose the photo could be redacted (obscuring the passphrase) if we go that route or requiring a photo as verification

[Sabrefan7]

Glad to see it coming to fruition. The photo is probably the best option since in many cases the benchmark is an object like a water tower or bridge tower. I have several pics that I can use to submit ones I have logged on the frog.

[KnowsOpie]

I've been listing benchmarks on the Waymarking site for several years now, and I enjoy them there with links to their PID numbers. I'm not really sure how they will work here as a cache type, but I'll be presenting mine very similar to they are listed as WM's. I like the idea of a logging code, but that may not be the best option for me with the BM caches.

BM caches may work well here as a cache type, they are popular with Waymarkers and Benchmarkers that don't play the soggy paper game. It will be interesting to see how they are presented, I would like to see detailed directions and accurate coordinates, but these are things that I'm already used to as a Waymarker.

[Bon Echo]

I have a number of things to say about this cache type and will say them as time permits. But here's the most unusual of all my ideas, I'll throw it out there first and see where it goes.

At groundspeak you can log Benchmarks (of the few that are available to be logged) but you cannot post them (at least not on the benchmark hunting page).
And on OCNA, there is one cache type that can only be created by a crack team of challenge-cache specialists - the locationless challenge cache type.

What I'm going to propose is that Benchmark caches are not listed by individuals, but instead by a "centralized" account which is managed by a few admin / volunteers. When a player finds a new benchmark, they take photos and coordinates and (somehow) submit that to the benchmark admin group. That group then creates the listing and gives credit to the finder, and that player can then log their find.

and here's my logic behind this;
1) really, no one "owns" a benchmark, you just find them. You might say the same for a virtual listing, but I see that as being more abstract and variable. A benchmark is a benchmark. It's a disk, a bolt, a plate.
2) this would be one way to ensure consistency listing format for benchmarks. Because we all live for consistency, no? It will be up to the "benchmark managers" if you will to fill out any details that they decide to have as important (i.e. look up the details in a database and use that to create the listing).
3) the main driver of this is the issue of players who come and go. Even if they are no longer active on this site, the benchmark they submit can continue to be found and, more importantly, managed (I mean armchair logs can be deleted, coordinates can be adjusted, etc).
4) aside from creating a new account and finding the volunteers (yes I am offering to be one), there shouldn't be any other changes required to how things are done. Well, aside from some changes to let player know how to submit their photos and coordinates.

I told you I had a great idea, didn't I?

[KnowsOpie]

What I'm going to propose is that Benchmark caches are not listed by individuals, but instead by a "centralized" account which is managed by a few admin / volunteers. When a player finds a new benchmark, they take photos and coordinates and (somehow) submit that to the benchmark admin group. That group then creates the listing and gives credit to the finder, and that player can then log their find.

and here's my logic behind this;
1) really, no one "owns" a benchmark, you just find them. You might say the same for a virtual listing, but I see that as being more abstract and variable. A benchmark is a benchmark. It's a disk, a bolt, a plate.
2) this would be one way to ensure consistency listing format for benchmarks. Because we all live for consistency, no? It will be up to the "benchmark managers" if you will to fill out any details that they decide to have as important (i.e. look up the details in a database and use that to create the listing).
3) the main driver of this is the issue of players who come and go. Even if they are no longer active on this site, the benchmark they submit can continue to be found and, more importantly, managed (I mean armchair logs can be deleted, coordinates can be adjusted, etc).
4) aside from creating a new account and finding the volunteers (yes I am offering to be one), there shouldn't be any other changes required to how things are done. Well, aside from some changes to let player know how to submit their photos and coordinates.

I told you I had a great idea, didn't I?

Well, sounds pretty much just like the Waymarking category managers group. I would like to list my BM's here on OCNA without special permission from any group.

Benchmarks are disks, but not bolts or other type survey markers.

Sorry, but I don't think your idea is so great. It's just a knock-off from Waymarking. I don't think we need a review group for managing a cache type here. This site is too small and it would only promote exactly what the Waymarking site is now, one small group of elitist running the show.

[TermiteHunter]

I know what i hate and i don't hate that BE.
I don't know if it is a knock off of waymarking or not, i have never looked at it or at least it had been so long i don't remember it.

Maybe something in between.
A standardized format (perhaps some personalization portion included) completed by the initial finder/lister under a non-member OCNA account name.

That would accomplish both views. Now whether that is desirable or possible is another matter



Sent from my SM-J320P using Tapatalk

[TermiteHunter]

I know what i hate and i don't hate that BE.
I don't know if it is a knock off of waymarking or not, i have never looked at it or at least it had been so long i don't remember it.

Maybe something in between.
A standardized format (perhaps some personalization portion included) completed by the initial finder/lister under a non-member OCNA account name.

That would accomplish both views. Now whether that is desirable or possible is another matter



Sent from my SM-J320P using Tapatalk

[Mr.Yuck]

I know what i hate and i don't hate that BE.
I don't know if it is a knock off of waymarking or not, i have never looked at it or at least it had been so long i don't remember it.

Maybe something in between.
A standardized format (perhaps some personalization portion included) completed by the initial finder/lister under a non-member OCNA account name.

That would accomplish both views. Now whether that is desirable or possible is another matter



Sent from my SM-J320P using Tapatalk

I would say POSSIBLE, but please elaborate more.

[Bon Echo]

Benchmarks are disks, but not bolts or other type survey markers.

According to who? There are many different type. There must be at least 20 types on the ones listed on geocaching.com based on this Benchmark Types challenge cache.
https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4 ... 3ff745c697
Lets talk some more about that in a future post shall we?
I found this NGS benchmark in Canada, it's listed as "Type: Bolt"
https://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=OG0248
Sorry the photo is so big and also cut off, yo can see the entire thing here:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-geo-images/2260c606-fb70-4646-8016-d408e25c7d1f.jpg

Sorry, but I don't think your idea is so great. It's just a knock-off from Waymarking. I don't think we need a review group for managing a cache type here. This site is too small and it would only promote exactly what the Waymarking site is now, one small group of elitist running the show.

Yes it is a lot like Waymarking, and I also use that site so it no doubt influenced my thoughts. Yet it's not the same. In waymarking the category managers review the submissions and either accept or reject. The one submitting has to do the work to find the information. And guess what happens. One waymarker spends hours and puts lots of information, and another writes a one line description and submits. Very inconsistent. What I'm envisioning is a partnership. OCNA players find the benchmarks, take the photos and coordinates, and get credit for that. The "managers" if you will will then do the work of finding the data sheets and fill out the listing.

Actually, my true preference would be standardized submission form with required fields that the initial finder fills out, and that creates a standardized listing. I think that is what TermiteHunter is also suggesting. I never brought that up because that would require more coding / php and also I don't know that there can be a one-form-fits-all approach for the diversity of benchmarks that exists (and I plan to address that topic in a future forum post).

Oh, also want to add that there are no elitist running the show at Waymarking. The Space Invaders category is proof of that IMO. Yes I know about the closed group. I could care less. Time to move on and put the past behind you.