Recently there was a debate on the forums about whether a state historic marker category should change to allow "official" and "unofficial" markers so that only one category is needed, or whether a second category should be created to manage waymarks that are unofficial. At first I thought the state historic marker categories (SHM's) were being rigid and uptight. It seemed so silly to have yet another SHM category. Now, I still think that there is an overabundance of non-global categories and that waymarking should shy away from the creation of another 20 or so "unofficial" SHM categories. There are too many of them already. But I now see that it was easy for me to ask the "official" SHM categories to change because I had no investment in the categories. I didn't value the markers. They all seemed the same to me so why not put them in one big category and be done with them? Now all of you historic marker lovers out there need to just calm down and read the rest of this before you get your panties all in a bunch. Although I haven't changed how I feel about SHM categories, I do have a lot more sympathy for the leaders who wanted to limit their categories to something very specific.
Some of you know that I love vintage neon signs. They are my favorite thing to waymark and when I helped as an officer during the creation process of the neon category I wanted to limit the category to only the great old neon of the past. I didn't want a bunch of boring everyday neon that is easy to find. I wanted great old signs like the cowboy sign above - signs that did more than say "open" or "Bob's Market". You know the ones. The category was approved in peer review with the requirements that the waymarks posted be "unique" and "creative". The officers embarked in a rough ride of what the group definition of "unique" is. I grimaced everytime a simple, modern, neon text sign was approved, thinking "why would people even bother to take the time to waymark that? Why would they want their name on a waymark like that?" Several times the wording of the posting requirements was altered to try to better explain what type of signs the category was looking for. It didn't work. Eventually a rift grew in the officers and now no one knows what to accept or deny.
The result of this rift is that a second neon category is being formed to create a place for the "Neon Lights" rejects. It stopped me cold because I realized that exactly what I had railed about in the SHM categories was happening here. Some people wanted to limit the category, others wanted to expand it, and the result of the officer's not bending resulted in the current push for a second neon sign category. So here I sit, trying to decide which is more important to me: restricting the category and have a second category for the more basic neon signs, or to ask for the category to evolve into something more inclusive. I'm a hypocrite if I push to keep the neon category restricted to unique, creative signs. That's exactly what I was frustrated with during the SHM debate. At the same time, if the requirements are loosened the incredible vintage signs like the one above will get lost in a watered down category.
In the end, I have to side with letting the category evolve. I won't enjoy wading through the waymarks to find vintage neon, but I still believe that it is better that the category evolve than having two categories for a subject that really only needs one. Maybe a drop-down list variable could be added to differentiate between vintage and modern, textual, and the more elaborate neon "pictures". If the site had the functionality to filter waymarks by a drop-down variable it would make the decision easy. I would value this functionality far beyond being able to download GPX files because it would slow down the creation of redundant categories.
Sorry that this is so long, but it's a topic that I'm struggling with right now and I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Thanks.
Happy Waymarking!
- Hikenutty
Posts
