Unseen, unvisited new waymark

[+The Talent]

Hi,

Im only new to Waymarking, but thus far it's been my practice not to create a waymark unless I have actually been to it. A couple of days ago I discovered a category that said this:

Making a special visit to record a waymark is not necessary. If you can get accurate coordinates for from some source (Google Earth or Mapsource for instance) without physically visiting, and you can reasonably accurately complete all of the variables on the waymark, you are encouraged to record it. (You may not however log this waymark as visited, until you make a special trip to it).

The reason for this is to get lots of waymarks in this category - the more the better. We want to help people find the waymark that they might not otherwise know about. It’s seems a shame not to record one just because you haven't made a special trip with the GPS and camera. When describing your waymark, you should have enough information there that someone could find it without their GPS. (edited)

 

What is the general idea about this?

 

This category I mentioned also included the fact that you have actually visited it at some stage in the past. It may have been before you started Waymarking, but you had to have been there. I'm looking for opinions on both past visits, and no visits at all.

Thanks

[+BruceS]

I personally won't create a waymark unless I have been to the location taken appropriate photos and coordinates using my gps.

[+Max and 99]

I personally won't create a waymark unless I have been to the location taken appropriate photos and coordinates using my gps.

 

Ditto, EXCEPT for snagging a waymark from the Uncategorized Waymark Category. What category is this from?

Edited June 28, 2013 by Max and 99