Adopting waymarks

[+NCDaywalker]

Is there a way to adopt a waymark from a player that is not longer participating?

[+Max and 99]

No can do.

[+MountainWoods]

I don't think there is a way either.

 

You could try making a new waymark (for the same category) at the same spot, ignore the warning that there is already one there, and then put something in the note to the reviewer about your waymark taking over in place of the old waymark (and indicating why the old waymark needs replaced). Might want to send a message to the group leader or an active officer for the category first, to come to agreement on the wherefores.

 

I haven't tried that myself. But if there is a good reason to do that, a reviewer may choose to either archive the old waymark and accept yours, or they may simply change the title of the old waymark to indicate that it has been replaced and accept yours.

[+Max and 99]

I don't think there is a way either.

 

You could try making a new waymark (for the same category) at the same spot, ignore the warning that there is already one there, and then put something in the note to the reviewer about your waymark taking over in place of the old waymark (and indicating why the old waymark needs replaced). Might want to send a message to the group leader or an active officer for the category first, to come to agreement on the wherefores.

 

I haven't tried that myself. But if there is a good reason to do that, a reviewer may choose to either archive the old waymark and accept yours, or they may simply change the title of the old waymark to indicate that it has been replaced and accept yours.

 

Then both waymarks will show up in searches. Duplicates. (Even if you archive the first one).

 

There really isn't anything to do with a waymark once it's created (no maintenance), so rarely would it even matter that the original waymark poster isn't active in the hobby.

[+fi67]

I don't think there is a way either.

 

You could try making a new waymark (for the same category) at the same spot, ignore the warning that there is already one there, and then put something in the note to the reviewer about your waymark taking over in place of the old waymark (and indicating why the old waymark needs replaced). Might want to send a message to the group leader or an active officer for the category first, to come to agreement on the wherefores.

 

I haven't tried that myself. But if there is a good reason to do that, a reviewer may choose to either archive the old waymark and accept yours, or they may simply change the title of the old waymark to indicate that it has been replaced and accept yours.

Well, it's a creative idea, but I as an officer would certainly not support this attempt, and I do not see any reason for anyone else to do so. Waymarking as it is, simply does not need the concept of adoption. If something changes and the original poster does not notice or care, then anyone can edit any Waymark (Edit Waymark in the box below the map). This edit suggestion is reviewed by an officer. If the waymark is valid, then there is even less need for a take over. If you want better stats, then create your own, new Waymarks!

Edited July 25, 2014 by fi67

[+Manville Possum]

Is there a way to adopt a waymark from a player that is not longer participating?

 

From what I can tell waymarks are listed here forever once published, even when they no longer exist.

[+jhuoni]

I asked this question back in January. BruceS, replied - the answer is no.

 

Original Message from JHuoni 01-01-2014

 

For what reason would you want to "adopt it"? It isn't like a geocache that has been abandoned and needs someone to take over the upkeep.

 

If you have any changes that you see should be made you can do that without having "ownership". I recently submitted a complete overhaul of a waymark description, the group officers approve or deny the changes. Another option - IF you are a group officer in the group you can make changes to the waymark.

 

Once it is posted, it is owned by the user - regardless if they are active or not.

[+DougK]

You could try making a new waymark (for the same category) at the same spot, ignore the warning that there is already one there, and then put something in the note to the reviewer about your waymark taking over in place of the old waymark (and indicating why the old waymark needs replaced).

…

 

Then both waymarks will show up in searches. Duplicates. (Even if you archive the first one).

…

 

I once spotted a waymark that had a single picture that was obviously taken in the early 1900's, and culled from the web. Since this picture was clearly not taken by the poster, this waymark was invalid. I visited the place, took coordinates and pictures and filed a new waymark, explaining the situation. The other waymark was declined, mine was accepted and the other no longer shows up in a search.

[+silverquill]

As usual, BruceS has given an accurate reply, which is in line with the others.

 

I am curious about the reasons someone would want to adopt a waymark. Is it to get a new icon, increase stats, or to work on it to make it better?

 

Waymarking can be viewed as a collaborative effort. Once a waymark has been published it remains under the name of the person who created it. Unless, as in the case DougK cited, there is a valid reason to disqualify a waymark, it should not be deleted or replaced. Following on Bruce's suggestions, there are several ways to modify an existing waymark.

 

1. The easiest is simply by adding photos to the waymark's photo gallery. This, in fact, is what happens frequently when people post visit logs and upload a photo.

 

Changes to any other part of the waymark -- title, quick description, detailed description or variables can be made by using the feature to suggest an edit to the waymark. You could include HTML to insert a photo, add or change description, provide web links, etc. These all go to an officer for review -- a system that has its flaws, but still provides an element-by-element review of the suggested changes. I probably wouldn't approve one that significantly changed the original. If I had some substantial changes I would probably prefer to leave the original intact and than append the new information. And, as a reviewer, I would welcome the new contributor to include their identifying information, such as: The following paragraph(s) provided by .....

 

Also, as an officer, although I COULD make substantive changes, I would do so only when I could preserve the integrity of the original waymark.

 

We don't really OWN waymarks once they are published, in the sense that is true of geocache listings. See the terms of service on this one.

[+MountainWoods]

I can think of a really simple reason to adopt a waymark because it happened here in SW Missouri:

 

The Waymark poster is promoted to look for Waymarks in the beyond.

 

Now there are hundreds of Waymarks that should still be his, but which may need updating from time to time. Yes, I have updated my own Waymarks when I noticed that circumstances changed. One could do the same for someone else's with an edit request, and 99% of the time that would be good enough. But there are some Waymarks that are intended to be more dynamic. I think that ISS sightings are dynamic, although I'm not sure about that specific category. Anyway, dynamic Waymarks might become a pain in the neck to update through edit requests.

 

So, No, there is not a really large reason to adopt Waymarks; but Yes, there is a very small reason to adopt certain dynamic Waymarks. Yes, doing so would change 2 people's statistics, unless some kind of "additional editor" role could be developed (Ha! Not in our lifetimes) But Waymarking is not geocaching. It's not about the numbers in Waymarking. It's about documenting things that would be worth other folks' visiting, no matter who does it.