Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of art waymarking but I have a few problems with the new "Seattle Art & Seek" category. Although I like the fact that Seattle is using waymarking to show off its art, having its own special category doesnt' seem to meld with the direction that waymarking has gone. In fact, I remember several months back a new waymarker in the forums had asked about creating a similar category for Denver's public art and the people of the forums overwhelmingly said no. The reason being is that almost any sculpture or artwork can be waymarked in the existing art categories.Seattle has an incredible collection of art and a large community of art patrons that make sure that collection continues to grow. Just look at the Olympic Sculpture Park, a park full of world class sculpture that was almost entirely gifted to the community and unlike most parks of this caliber, you don't have to pay to visit it. But I went to Chicago last year and they have a collection that is equally deserving. I'm just back from D.C. and the sculpture there was awesome. My point is that nearly every large city around the world has a collection of art worth waymarking. Do we really want a category for every city's art collection?
Being fond of filling out my waymarking grid, I can't help feeling bad for the other gridders out there who aren't so conveniently located to Seattle as I am. I would be supremely irritated if say, an "Art of Atlanta" or a "Sculpture of Sydney" category started. I started the abstract sculpture category on waymarking.com and the goal was to see public sculpture around the world. There's already a ton of Seattle art in that category, I know because I waymarked a lot of it. Maybe I would have less of a problem if this special waymarking promotional category were a non-grid category. Leave the grid for the categories that have a more global or at the minimum, a national reach. This sets a precedence that I don't want waymarking to follow, and if you read my last post, you'll remember that precedence in waymarking is something that folks oddly hold sacred.
Lastly, the category seems to have been created by a geocacher. What's with the gps photo requirement, huh? Waymarking has happily moved away from the "prove you were there as a waymarker, not a tourist" attitude and now this? Since the category is already in place, I'm not going to get all uptight and boycott it or anything, however, I won't be able to add much to the category because I don't have gps photos of any of the many sculptures that I have waymarked in Seattle. And I'm not going to waste the time and the gas to drive around getting gps photos of things I've already waymarked. I'm not a caching coin addict, so the waymarking coin is not a big enticement for me. Tacoma News Tribune did a waymarking contest (using existing categories) and I won a book there - much more useful.
So there are three artworks in this weeks list of art that I won't be crossposting thanks to the lack of a gps photo: Seattle Mural, Neototems, and Olympic Iliad. Olympic Iliad is shown above. Next time I happen to be up in Seattle for some reason I'll try to find a sculpture to waymark in the area that I'm visiting, but until then I won't be able to participate. I'm a Washingtonian who lives in a suburb of Seattle. I'd love to hear what you Midwesterners and East Coasters think.
Posts
7 comments:
I have been trying to figure out where I would sound off on the recent waymarking events. You sort of sum up my feeling on the new Seattle art category.
Groundspeak needs to totally rework the whole waymarking game. Not the software that runs the website, but the entire "game" as it is. The entire category approval process lets in horrendous categories. There is no accountability for making category changes. They need to get rid of entirely several categories that are dead and worthless.
It is supposedly community run, but then GS swoops in and unilaterally makes a new local Seattle category.
The idea is good to promote waymarking, but they went about it in entirely a horrible way.
They need to create really strong categories that people would want to create AND visit. There needs to be almost universal visit requirements. Special categories can get their own grid or game waymark type. Since categories can be edited and changed at will after peer review, there is no community oversight. All categories should be required to go through a rigorous review by the active knowledgeable community (forum members). A majority of all of the currently paying premium members should be required to review any new category and receive a majority yea vote of the voting members to pass. Right now a vast minority of premium members review categories in peer review. How is that a valid vote of the community?
That's all that I can think of right now. I didn't word everything correctly, but I'm trying to get my thoughts out there right now.
Waymarking is going downhill and fast. It needs a major rework.
I don't believe that waymarking needs a major rework, but I do believe it needs some attention and thought put into it. Lately it has felt like the site has become the ignored stepchild of Groundspeak.
The accountability issues for category changes needs to be worked on. The recent requirement changes in the Figurative Sculpture category is an example of that. The category would not have passed with a 10 waymark limit. But because it was already accepted there was no accountability for the major change to a 10 waymark limitation that was changed after the peer review.
I think it needs to be more difficult to create a category so that people who tend to add a bunch of commercial categories won't make the effort. That said, I can't see a "weeding" of the grid. What is interesting to me may be a total snore to someone else. In fact I know so because reviewers have told me so when reviewing the categories that I have created. But I'm not going to dis' a category (other than a chain category) just because I'm not interested in the topic. For example, I have very little interest in trains, military equipment, or any of the headstone categories but I think they are good categories for people with those interests.
I do agree with you on universal visit requirements, but most people don't like my take on what they should be. No gps, photo is encouraged but not necessary, just tell us what you thought and add any info that might add to people's visit experience.
I am against policing.
Anyhow, that's my take. For the most part things work but certain issues have grown into bigger problems due to Waymarking.com seeming to be the lowest Website priority over at Groundspeak. Love you guys at Groundspeak, but we're suffering from neglect over here.
Just reading this blog... On my way to work in ten minutes and I need an hour to express all my thoughts ... but, HN, in essence I think that the Seattle Art community and GS is going about this bass-ackwards. There are already waymarks out there - if they want to 'showcase' Seattle Art, why not have a contest for 'visits'? (and if they want to get out there and join and waymark new ones, so much the better!) That would leave the grid untouched, still allow future waymarks to be logged regardless of that GPS requirement (who ever heard of wanting your GPSr included in a picture of ART? C'mon, where's the respect?)
Other cities have actually used waymarking to exhibit/showcase their city's tourist attractions, art, historic buildings, etc. They offer a GPSr to visitors, with existing waymarks programmed and a 'route'... visitors can follow the yellow (gps) brick road, so to speak.
More to follow. One more thing, Anonymous ... be proud of your opinion. That's what it is. :-)
Fishingwishing
I honestly had not even looked at the category until now. Since it is based in Seattle, I knew I wouldn't be able to Waymark anything in it. Not at least for the time being. I would love to visit Seattle, but I know I'm not going to make it out that way for a while. It is interesting that GPS shots are required. Also that the category itself was created it interesting. As you mentioned everything that will go in there already fits into another category. It also lacks global appeal, which is the first item in the "checklist" of category approval.
While I am glad to see the collaboration between Groundspeak, Waymarking, and the Mayor's Office of Arts and Cultural Affairs, I think it could have been handled differently.
As for needing a rework. I also agree with HN. I don't think it needs a total rework, but it does need some more attention. While I understand that GS is busy working on Project Phoenix, it would be nice to see at least some improvements in site performance. Although I suppose that is one of the trade-offs for Waymarking being community run, and not having a large volunteer staff like Geocaching. I personally very much appreciate the Waymarking community, and wouldn't like that change.
I do like the involvement of the Seattle Arts and waymarking and may help get more people involved at least temporarily with waymarking. However, I think this goes along with your previous post on precedence... I think it is a bad precedence. I remember other categories which came up for peer review and were declined by the waymarking community as being too local including Springfield Historic Buildings and Beltrami sites or something like that and I would not want the Seattle Arts category to become some type of precedence for further localized categories. If localized categories which involve some local "authority" are to added they should be handled differently with coordination between the local entity and Groundspeak and not handled like a "normal" category. I also think they should be removed from the grid as they are officially of short duration and is very localized.
(the gps requirement needs to go too... I just love a photo of someones gps being more prominent than the art that is supposed be shown ;-) )
From what little I've seen, Seattle looks like a great city, expensive parking, but a great city. But how many people is this actually promoting waymarking to? Is there a media campaign in the area to promote this? I see no approved waymarks in the category, so we don't know who is participating. I like the idea of a game to log visits to existing waymarks. But they didn't ask me. I guess that's my problem with this one, is how Groundspeak broke their own rules and made up new ones without asking the community. I suppose that's what you can do if you run the business.
I hope that it does not live past the contest as a category.
Well, it looks like there's over 200 in this category now. But it woudl seem to me that one person or group could make the rounds and clean house on this category. I mean Seattle's no tiny town but someone with determination could wipe it all out. Then what? All that would be left is the ability to post visits. Way too local, and yeah, I don't remember voting for it. I'm all for the promoting of Waymarking, but this doesn't get word out beyond Seattle and those of us who are already participating.
Post a Comment