-CJ-

Again, you take some situation (perhaps rather typical in your area) and expands it to all possible cases. I regret that such COs are most common in your area

Are you judging other's geocaches' future based on your "knowledge of the area"? This is exactly what I experienced here in my area. People were sure they knew the situation well enough to retrieve my geocaches.

In my example it was the case when the community members were locals, not out-of-towners. They just didn't think there could be someone playing another game. Their game was "bigger". I definitely agree with you in this point. This is what I started to do with my geocaches published first at our national website, then at geocaching.com. When I archived some geocache I always put a line telling that the cache was active and available now at (hyperlink). Maybe. However "vast majority" is not enough for me to make such decisions upon a particular cache. Then the difference between our approaches is very simple. I suggest first asking, then acting, You suggest first acting, then asking. Who (or what) prevents you from sending an email message before picking someone's container up? If I say "please put it back" will you be happy with the necessity of traveling to the same location again to replace the cache? Is this trip less time consuming then a brief email request? What if you spoil my plans to go to the site the same day to retrive the container by myself? And if this cache is still active at some other website (exception, right), how about people who will fail to find it there because you grabbed it? There was a discussion in this forum when a newbie asked about whether he could help maintaining some geocaches in his area. Some people hurried to advise him not to do this. "It's the responsibility of COs, not yours", - they said. I opposed to this approach. If one has intention to do some good for a cache but isn't sure the best first step would be to contact the CO and ask questions. One more question relates to the ownership and regulations. As far as I understood, the CO must be responsible for his/her cache. If the cache is archived, does this mean that the cache is not owned by anyone? If yes, then your approach fits into the guidelines. If not, then your actions violate the guidelines: the ownership wasn't cancelled and what you suggest is to move the cache from its original location without any prior approval from its owner.

I decided to change the type of the cache. It was traditional and I archived it; then re-published it with similar description but different tasks as a puzzle cache. The container was the same. Now imagine that someone can see traditional geocaches (and he visited this particular cache earlier, before archiving) but doesn't see its new puzzle replacement. (E.g. he doesn't like puzzles and filter them out in his PQs). He passes the place by, checks the hiding place, finds a box there and says: "Hey, I know it was archived so it must be litter now! I should take care of it and pick it up".

Sorry, but your scenario doesn't not necessarily work for the whole world. Here in Russia if you leave Moscow and go to the country you will see much, much more geocaches listed at the national website then at geocaching.com. No, this game is not the biggest one. At the same time, we (geocachers) are in the rather complex period when some caches are published at one site, some caches at another site, some are archived there and moved here, and vice versa. If you go to the Ukraine you may probably notice there's one more prominent geocaching website in this country with its own database. While geocaching.com surely dominates in western regions of the country it cannot compete in its eastern regions. I cannot imagine that someone could seriously speak about picking up someone's recently archived cache without even asking any questions to the CO. I just gave you an example of people discussing such geocop actions at the different geocaching resource: "The cache was archived here so we can just go and pick up containers". No thoughts about any possibility of these caches being involved in some different game. No ideas about them being significantly changed/revised/transferred. No attempts to call me and ask a question. Why, our game is the biggest one. Maybe such approach lacks respect but who cares. And yes, there are some chances this action could be considered as stealing a geocache but these chances aren't so high. From my point of view, if this situation bothers you then first ask questions, then take actions. You may just don't have enough facts. One short conversation may make situation crystal clear. Maybe the CO will even thank you for your assistance in retrieving his boxes.

You're not alone. When geocaching by my own and walking to the country I usually don't care about food too. Neither about water (we don't have deserts around here so I can easily find water if needed). With longer trips (when I have to spend at least one night in wilderness) it's different of course. And this approach is definitely no good for kids, they need to eat/drink more often. Our portions is then well-balanced, e.g. cheese, cookies, nuts, sweets, etc. Everything fits into one tupperware plastic box that we use for hiding geocaches normally

And I've marked no caches with favourites. To me it sounds like a question "Which writer do you like most?" Geocaches are so different, I sometimes just cannot compare them to each other.

Good point. I had similar experience with a series of geocaches that I've archived at the other geocaching website. Some of them have been published at geocaching.com already. Some of them are still out of the game, mostly because I need to check them, or to change them so they are completely within the gc.com guidelines, and for all of them I need to provide translation into English (since they were originally in Russian language only). Thus, I have some geocaches archived. Almost immediately folks at that website's forum started discussion whether I had taken my containers away or they could just take them, move them, etc. "because they were archived already". It took me some time to persuade the most active local "geocops" that their website was not the only geocaching resource in the whole world. Please mind that there may also be different situations with archiving of geocaches. I know at least one case when a cache was archived because there started a long-term construction works in the area and the access to the GZ was closed. That meant that the CO could not access it anymore too. Or, there might be a situation when a CO archives a geocache with intention to publish a new cache of other type using the same container, e.g. a puzzle cache instead of a traditional cache. There might be different stories. So, if I'm in shoes of the OP I will most probably not write to the COs at all or send them questions instead of suggestions/demands. What if a person needs help with his/her geocache rather then my advice not to litter anymore? The letter says "recently archived". Not "half a year ago".

Oh, I didn't realize that armchair logging has been so widespread. Numerous evidences. The worst thing of course would be to wrongly accuse anyone of being a bogus logger. It's such a delicate question, I'm not sure how should I personally handle this. On the other hand, armchair logging (or, as one of you said, bot logging) is rather simple and checking caches for offline logs is a huge task that definitely cannot be done if different COs are involved and the territory is big enough. I think I could check some of my caches and delete some false logs but that doesn't solve the problem. It's not good not only because I cannot monitor lost caches effectively (as I said). It's also may lead to confusion for cache finders who may be encouraged by a smiley after a couple of DNFs and rush to a cache which has been actually muggled. If was also interesting how armchair loggers explained their actions. As far as I understood, they just didn't care. Thank you all for your replies.

I put a smiley at the end of my phrase... Of course I don't mind when people write about weather, blueberries, broken legs, etc. No, seriously, it's all about how they got to the cache, their adventures, it's interesting. Sometimes I'm happy to read them on my way to the cache or after I replaced the container. Actually, I'm from that geocaching community where people used to publish much longer and more detailed logs then it has been practiced at geocaching.com. This thread was about copy-pasted logs only. I respect that you published this disclaimer here but when I open a listing of some geocache (whether I'm at the cache site, at home, at work, on the road, anywhere) I usually don't know how I'm expected to read someone's logs. I just read them all "as is".

Did he complain to you or appealed to Groundspeak as well?

"Your cache sucks" is a log about this particular cache while "the weather was good" is not

I was in Kiev a couple of months ago and visited some caches. The previous finder left identical logs to almost all hides that I found. However his logs were missing from the paper logbooks in containers. In my practice I can remember several cases of this sort but not in so many listings on one day. After half a month I discovered that many of geocaches in Moscow were simultaneously logged online as found by the same person. (Identical logs again). Many of these caches were those I owned. Some were not that easy and located in different districts so it would be really difficult to find them alltogether in one day. I wrote a polite question to the guy but got no answer. I wrote a question to the cache owner in Kiev, the most active geocacher in the city that I know, to find out what was his experience. He replied he had no information to add - not even an idea. Indeed, I could just forget about this (probable) online logger. It's his business and I'm not a geocache purist to wipe out his (probably) false logs. However there's one issue. There's a huge problem with disappearing (stolen) caches in my city so I have to monitor them all the time. User logs help me greatly to understand if the cache is OK or not. The mentioned online logs spoiled this monitoring. Not good. My question is: how often have you encountered massive online (false) logging of caches that you own and what were your actions once you understood the situation?

I haven't thought about this from educational perspective in this thread. At the same time, my logs are always more then just TFTC and one of the reasons is that I simply write logs of the sort I'd like to see at my own geocaches. Sadly, I don't see if it works. Most logs are more than TFTC but still not informative. I would add that many people don't even pay attention to the place/area. Another hide, another find. Of course they have not much to recall. Not necesasrily on the same day. Then we probably have different approaches. I don't use geocaching.com as my diary. Good. The hobby you just described is called hiking here in my country. Geocaching is more about treasure hunting and I feel it's important for this game to be more developed here. This is why if a logbook is wet or a trackable is missing I feel I need to write about this. Not only because it is suggested by some guidelines but to make the game better - so yes, it's about being a beta tester to some (little) extent If I had the same motivation as you I won't need geocaching at all. OK, I undestood that's your style.

Some (many?) people think that posting only "TFTC" indicates that the cache deserves no other good words. Maybe. Then pasting 50 identical logs for 50 different caches from one template is even worse. The author camouflages his "TFTC practice" with additional general sentences. So, it looks like that he believes I'm stupid enough not to understand this (if I'm a CO). With a single "TFTC" log he looks at least more honest and straightforward Yes. Good example. I also cannot accept the arguement "he's probably so busy and visited maybe 100 caches per day so he just cannot say anything special about each one". Writing logs IMHO is a very important part of the game itself. It's not just about getting smileys; it's about feedback and sharing of experience. Exactly. I may wish to find out if anyone met any problems with it recently. Where are trackables that are listed? Did anyone take them and haven't logged them yet? Am I the only one who found the container in a different place then it was suggested by the hint? (Did I read the hint wrongly or the cache had been moved?) Has anyone found better way then the muddy path I just used to approach the GZ? So many things to say. Instead, there is a story about someone's journey to several European countries enjoying nice views, good food, parties and geocaching. The story I've read 10 times already. 2all: sorry for not quoting every answer/opinion that I think deserves quoting. I'm just glad that (it seems to me) I reached a good level of understanding within the community.

Neither are cache descriptions. When I was in Finland this summer I simply ommitted caches with descriptions in Finnish language and no translation. (Once I tried and managed to find one but it was a typical 1/1 magnetic nano and I still think that I found it by luck and with some experience maybe). So, I haven't bothered with translating these Finnish texts into English or Russian to understand them and it was highly unlikely that I would leave any logs at these caches at all. I mean that it's very rare practice when some cache with description in Russian language needs to be translated into English and we know about this need from a log of some cacher who found it. However I understand there can be exceptions when some cacher who speaks no Russian travels with a Russian-speaking friend.

You didn't I start thinking that people around here believe that short and simple TFTCs are poor practice, lazy way of logging, as you just said. So any copy-pastes, any templates seem to be better then "TFTC" - because anything is better.

Oh, good example. Thank you. I didn't notice you're from Europe - Norway, right? So, we both are from countries where English-speaking cachers are mostly tourists coming from abroad. In your example a cacher who writes his log in English gives you motivation to translate your cache description from Norwegian into English (if I understood you correctly). So, it looks like that the cache was in Norwegian only (initially) and that the English-speaking tourist was skilled enough to translate it from Norwegian into English or find it without neither description nor hints, just with his GPSr. Are such situations common in your country?

Is this an idioma or what? Seriously, I cannot understand this. "TFTC" stands for "thanks for the cache", this is what a visitor says when he/she enjoyed it. Copy-pastes I'm talking about are TFTCs plus 50 words that does not relate to your caches. Why do you call one instance "I know he enjoyed it" and another one "I know nothing"?

I enjoyed staying in your country. The weather was great and we had very nice time here. We've done many geocachers, thanks to their owners. Some of these caches we didn't find. Actually, it was a sudden idea to come to your country for vacations and we didn't have enough time to prepare for geocaching around here. We think that we should come again once and find more caches! Imagine this text being pasted to 10 of your caches (of different age, d/t, in different places, standard-small-micro-nano, all). Please give an idea how you use this text in your next hide.

Isn't it nice that so many people say "I don't leave cut-and-paste logs but as a CO I prefer them to simple TFTC"? I would love to listen to someone who will say "I used to leave cut-and-paste logs but as a CO I believe they are not good". This would add some volume to the discussion Let me add some explanation - yesterday I was too tired after so much walking I would drive your attention that I wrote "please" so it was a polite request, not a proposal to change the world You see, the first issue is actually that long copy-pastes take time to read. English is not my first language. Sometimes I cannot understand at a first glance that this is another copy-paste log. I have to read it to understand this fact. It's not so nice. It's even less nice when it's raining or your device has sucked almost every per cent of your batteries. However I still hope that this log may mean something, there could be some useful information in it. Please take into account that some copy-pasters and cunning enough to change their text sometimes according to the situation, e.g. "...the container was found at the other side of the fence and we left it as it was...". It's rare but it happens. This is why I don't "just skip them" as some of you suggested. Second, as people said, logs should be about geocaches. Sadly, in some copy-pasted messages I saw not so much about geocaches (and nothing about this or that particular geocache) but long stories about how people decided to go to this city, their business, their plans, etc. It's great as an addon to something about the cache. But if there's nothing about the cache, only those general words about how they liked the country and their trip... As a CO I see no difference between a "TFTC" and a long story with the same amount of information (let's say, nothing) about the cache. They both have no relation to my hide. With a long copy-pasted story the author shows he/she has not enough time or willingness to say anything about the cache I made. However he's glad to multiple texts about himself I clearly see that this is a copy-pasted text quickly used for a number of geocaches. Just because someone believes that 50 words about nothing are more valuable then 1 TFTC.

I'm in Budapest now on vacations. Already managed to find some caches and continue this business. Each time I open my Android application to see logs of previous visitors I run into postings like that: "Out family spent four days in Budapest. The weather was fine and we found many geocaches here. I would like to thank all cache owners in the city for giving us such a great opportunity..." and so on. A template. One for 10, 20, 50, 100 logs. Sometimes such copy-paste logs are of two paragraphs size. I'd like to address to all people who practice this. Please don't. If you're too tired, or too busy, or your language is poor, or you feel that this cache doesn't deserve a short review, anything - please leave "TFTC" only. Your log will take less space on our screens. If you didn't find the cache you should not use the same template adding "though this cache was among those we failed to find". Just write "DNF". Thank you.

Will never photolog. If asked, won't allow photologs at my geocaches. Including those situations when a log is missing or unreadable/unwriteable. Why? Just for the same reason. If a log is missing, one doesn't sign it and leaves a photolog, the second one is doing the same, etc. - telling that the CO should do maintenance. I should. But you should not photolog. Because it's a part of the game. You might be very experienced geocacher but not necessarily people who will come after you have the same experience. They may easily think that photologging is OK every time one faces any problem. The next step after "the logbook is missing" is "I spotted the cache but decided not to grab it because there were muggles almost at the GZ". Then "I saw it on the tree but didn't climb because ...". It's easy. Just give a start. If a logbook is missing or has turned (as it was said) into pulp, put a new logbook inside, sign it and log this cache as found without any hesitations.

When we are as socially networked as geocachers from other countries I mentioned, I think that a conversation about events at geocaching.com may lose its meaning

I would add that very few geocachers here read newsletters published in English language only and telling mostly about events in the US and Western Europe. Perhaps it works for the US but doesn't work here. There's no Facebook group about geocaching in Russia. There are a couple of local forums but they are in Russian language so I doubt that people from abroad will feel comfortable there. This forum? Maybe next year or later, but nowadays I appear to be the only Russian geocacher active here. So, it happens that the only way to know about a short event for a visitor today is to follow the map at (or download a pocket quiery from) geocaching.com. Since evets are limited in the way we know, there are no chances left for people to attend there events. What I say is that the local policy of the site seems to push cachers towards Facebook and other media.