Geocaching Australia

Just had another look at www.waymarking.com

On one hand you may think pinpointing Payphones, Lincoln Highway Markers and Candy Factories may be a wonderful way to spend an afternoon.

On the other hand maybe you'd rather be doing anything but.

Does this site look like fun to you?

now if it were just trigpointing, i could see myself doing that...

think of the valuable database he's going to build up! he could sell that for a fortune!

Although If You Where Traveling With Kids A Database of Toilets Would be Handy as we get just after we have left a town " I have to go to the Toilet"

PostmanPat wrote:Although If You Where Traveling With Kids A Database of Toilets Would be Handy as we get just after we have left a town " I have to go to the Toilet"

http://www.toiletmap.gov.au

Destinator (and probably most other navigation programs) also has toilets as a points of interest database, so you can navigate to the nearest one (very handy).

I thought in the spirit of things I would create some waypoints for Adelaide. None of them have been logged though. Which shows there isn't much interest here.

I am also managing a campgrounds category which I thought would be a good database, but mainly it has been 1 or 2 people in the USA who have generated a few waypoints and scant other interest.

While locationless caches made for a bit of a diversion and added a bit of variety to regular caching, I don't think they have enough intrinsic interest to survive alone, and I don't think I'll bother checking the waymark site for categories to log.

ideology wrote:think of the valuable database he's going to build up! he could sell that for a fortune!

You mean the one he populated from existing premium users without asking?

EcoDave

I was thrilled to see waymarking.com arrive, and my only gripe is that all the locationless and virtual "caches" weren't immediately moved there from gc.com.

At last, the silly things are all in one place where I can safely ignore them and get on with actual geocaching!

(Have I mentioned before that I'm a bit of a cache snob when it comes to "caches" without caches? )

Bear_Left wrote:(Have I mentioned before that I'm a bit of a cache snob when it comes to "caches" without caches? )

Yes

BTW I have the same gripe about TNLN finders .... makes me wonder why bother finding a real cache. Also makes me wonder why I take some effort to put things in a cache in the first place.

Getting back on topic, I play on waymarking.com. Adds to my game, but I must admit I think some of the categories or proposed categories are silly at best.

Andrew

I'm a TNLN finder, I'm more interested in the getting out of the house and exercising/finding than the swapping (really, what's the point?). I leave that to my kids when they accompany me. Anyway I travel light, no need for backpack, GPSr clips to belt, iPAQ in top pocket with pen/pencil (or clips to belt if I have pocketless shirt). <br>
Although I do have a GCA virtual (spur of the moment thing) I'm not really interested in virtual/locationless/earth/event/webcam caches.

Checking the new 'guidelines' - appears webcams have gone too

Bah, the Microsoft of Geocaching has used their size to dump on another potential unlimited public sport... For the past few months I've been working on modifing a Java-based newsreader so the Usenet system can be used to create a decentralized "Points Of Interest" publishing/logging platform which isn't vunerable to 'a single point of failure', but this is going to make it harder to introduce now... :-/

After the initial rush of finding caches, I fell back into using geocaching as a means go out and find interesting places-- I would have never have located the three tunnels of the Richmond Vale Railway (an abandoned private railway line in the Hunter Valley area) without the 'practice' given by going caching.

c.j.b wrote: For the past few months I've been working on modifing a Java-based newsreader so the Usenet system can be used to create a decentralized "Points Of Interest" publishing/logging platform which isn't vunerable to 'a single point of failure', but this is going to make it harder to introduce now... :-/

Gee if you wanted to do that you should have just asked: http://www.google.com/base

Waymark all the McCafe's