Ragnemalm

I have one of those too, in a cave. It had only four online logs in over a year, for something this nice. When visiting it, I found over 30 names in the log book! It was being treated as a kind of guest book. Fine with me! Speaking if log book materials, there are three kinds that I know: Paper. Works if the container is really safe, like a petling, but it is enough that it hangs upside down and it will take in water. Once a paper log is wet, it will soon turn to pulp. Cheap, works well as long as you maintain it well. RITR. This works very well even when wet, but will turn dark, grey-brown, if it is too wet. Synthetic paper. This is the most expensive solution, and hardest to find, but it will last. Maybe too good, since it is not degradable, it will eventually turn into microplastics, like most containers. Hard to write on with pencil.

How about "throwdown logs" or logging in the wrong place when you don't find the log? That has happened to me and several COs that I know. Didn't find the log, put in a replacement. Didn't find the log, logged on the paper that stated that you should search some more. Found an irrelevant piece of paper on the ground, logged on that. Yes, in all cases there was a log. They just didn't find it.

OK, thanks. Not quite as common as the traffic sign caches IMHO (do they have an abbreviation too?) but yes, they are standard solutions. Preferrable for mystery or multi in my book. Not interesting enough for a trad. My favorite abbreviation is FTFTF. That's when someone gets their first FTF on one of my hides.

I think you need to clarify LPC and GRC to me. I never heard those abbrevations before (despite being in the hobby for 9 years). There are many abbreviations in this hobby.

I think one reason is the poor organization. If I am in a group. I get everything in a jumbled flow. If I want to discuss something that is a niche thing in the group, 90% of the members are not in the niche, and some of them take offense because they are not interested in the topic. So I need to make another group for that particular niche! There is almost no structure in that, just "global" or "group". In a forum like this, there is a solid organization on sub-topics, in multiple layers. This is far superior. The sections that don't interest me, I skip. Threads that don't sound interesting, I only see the title from. Nobody needs to get angry because someone makes more than one post (or even thread) about a subject thet feel is relevant. I think that could be a reason why FB works so badly. But why are then everybody there...? Yes I am longing for the old days but it is not just nostalgia.

Is it really? On Facebook, and most likely Twitter and similar, you are thoroughly analyzed and your behavior is up for sale for directed advertizing. And the are ads everywhere, even scams masquerading as "news", everywhere in the flow, not to mention cherry-picked "news" posted as political propaganda. I can't see this as a "good thing". Maybe the limited traffic here is why the tone seems much nicer than in Facebook, but I don't really think so. I have been forced to go "lurker" in major Facebook geocaching forums because people seem to take offense to anything but "look at the Petling I found on Gran Canaria". As soon as you want to discuss anything, people get offended. That happened in the good old forums as well but why does that seem worse at Facebook?

I agree with you, but it does widen the question of "equipment". What is T5 equipment, and what is not? It is clear that a boat or climbing gear is T5. No question about that, and the tweezers, as well as a flashlight, a piece of wire or a magnet are not insignificant "equipment". For the latter, I say that they are ordinary things that fit in your pocket. But how about a ladder, or a long rod? They are big, but rather ordinary, not "specialized equipment". Both are rated about T4 here (T3 for shorter rods and possibly for climbs when a short ladder works). This is not very obvious. Also, a long ladder (sa 10 meter or more) can be quite hard to bring and is more dangerous to use than climbing with climbing gear. I am not stating right or wrong, just mentioning the gray area. Speaking of boats, I only rate a T5 when it is too long to swim, or swimming is dangeous in other ways at the location, or the cache can't be reached without the boat. If swimming is clearly an option, it is a T4.5. That's my grading. And then we have tree climbing. I can say a lot about that... some other time.

It is bad enough to hide something close to an electrical box, especially if it is easy to open. That is dangerous.

Correct! However, there are some caches that you can't adopt, most notably virtuals. But ordinary caches, trads, mysts and multis, etc, can be adopted. Really nice and popular caches are good candidates for adoption. Also, caches in areas with few caches. Ordinary caches in saturated areas, I would just archive and bring in, leaving the location for someone who can use it better than me. You decide. I have adopted something like three caches (plus two that I made for a mega event that was really made by me in the first place so the adoption was planned beforehand). Apart from the mega caches, I can't say I am very happy about doing so. Yes, I do maintain them, but if they are not popular, they feel like a burden (should I waste time on maintaining a cache that isn't popular?), and since they are not made by me, I am not likely to prioritize them.

If the equipment is provided, it doesn't count to T. It is not a T5. If you go by a boat that regularly visits an island, it is not a T5, but if you must bring your own, it is. Then, using the equipment may drive up the T, but not to 5. The issue of D or T is subject for much discussion. Is it T3/T4 or D3/D4 to pick down a cache hanging high using a rod? It can be physically demanding, and may require you to bring equipment, but your feet don't move much when handling it. Spotting it is often easy. In my area, it raises the T, but I don't claim that that is necessarily correct.

Get premium. You already have that. Go into "Member features" Check out "Instant Log Notification Feature" Create a new notification and configure it for where and what.

Like others said, can be a lot of things: Online jigsaw puzzle as mystery Jigsaw puzzle in a box as part of a multi-cache Any kind of mystery Any kind of field puzzle (multi, gadget cache...) On my area, there are so many online jigsaw puzzles (usually JiGiDi), even a big geo-art saying PUZZLE, that I would never put the word puzzle in the title on anything else that the jigsaw kinds. Two of the caches are missing since I have solved them but not logged.

If you had many DNFs, maybe they were under-rated or something like that, so the visitors searched in the wrong place? If it is D1.5, I won't search for very long and only in the reasonably obvious places. If it is a T1, I won't try reaching high up. If it doesn't have attributes like wading or tree climbing, I won't search in those places. So, ratings, attributes and descriptions can affect the DNFs quite a bit. Does any of that apply to you? Also, I have seen that interest goes up with quantity. Maybe not by going from 10 to 20, but from 1 to 3 or 5 makes a big difference. Then it is worth the trip, because if you make a DNF on the toughest one, you will still go home with a few finds. A single cache far away is a bit scary, the risk of going home without a find may be disturbing. I wish quantity wasn't an issue, but that's the way it is. Many hunt cache-of-the-day, fill the calendar, or just want their count to go up.

Very true, we can express ourselves in an upset way which makes it more offensive to the reader. I think I made some other not so elegant logs when I was a beginner. Or maybe it was just before I learned who the sensitive CO is. But that is one side of the coin: Expect beginners to have rough edges. They will not have found all the etiqette expected in the hobby. Your example of a bad case, which I hope not to ever see, is one where we could be tempted to reply impolitely. I would do my best to be gentle when replying, but not accept it is a found.

I always use my own. I print them on my laser printer. (Do not use inkjet!) In containers where some water problems are expected, I use water safe paper (like Rite-in-the-rain that Jimrky mentioned, which works very well). At one time, I even cut them into small pages, but since nobody cared about that, I have resorted to rolling or folding it (depending on size). My logs are clearly marked with a geocaching logo, brief instructions and space for GC code and name. However, I have seen caches with just a piece of blank paper, cut from some standrd notebook. No GC code, no name, nothing that says that it is a geocache. I understand if a CO want to keep the GC code and name secret for a mystery final, but not even saying "this is a geocache"... that is taking it a bit too far in my eyes. So, like most things in this hobby, there is great variation. Choose what feels right to you (and change if many complains about it).

Thanks for your extensive comments! I appreciate it even though we don't agree on everything. Yes, I do like that "complaint", but no, I don't often immediately change for one single opinion. I don't have to agree, but I can listen, and if a lot of people see a problem, then I might change. Most other people are happy, so it is fine, but I still don't mind that he disagrees. Some see complaints an whining, I see reflections and feedback. Same things with difficuly and containers. I don't have to change, it is just an opinion, not a command. One voice out of several. If that parrot is a good idea, that is something I will judge, it was a reflection, a possibility. So many good ideas will be lost if people don't dare to share their ideas. But, too many COs can't handle them, as the thread shows.

I just thought about what I think about "potentially offensive logs". What can I expect, what have I seen? I think the T is a bit high/low. Strongly considered, often reacted upon. I am very happy to get these. I think the D is a bit high/low. Even better. D is really hard to judge as CO. I love them! You forgot to include the parking available attribute. Oops, thanks very much! Did you see that better hiding spot 10 meter to the left? Oh, I didn't see that. Wonderful! I might move there. Considering this location, how about making the cache a bit more thematic because of the (for example) zoo nearby. Maybe a (for example) little parrot in that tree there? How could this offend me? An idea for a better, more fun cache suitable for the location! I can make a better cache without figuring it all out myself! What could be better? Oh, just a lock&lock clone in a typical place. Not as positive, but good information, whatever point I saw with the place was not noticed, or the place is not interesting enough. Bring them on! I want to know! Bad container, this kind takes in water. Another log I definitely don't want to live without. Too close to a house, the people living there seemed disturbed. What can be more important? Deactivate, check out how to handle it. Did you need to have tree climbing on the final too? This one I did get once, and although I don't quite agree, I fully respect the cachers opinion and would not want to be without the opinion! Your vote counts! Does it have to be so hard? Don't you want many logs? This one I also got, and understand. And I consider the ratio easy/hard in the neighborhood and question my judgement. Again, I don't necessarily change but the vote counts and makes me consider alternatives. Well, actually, I did react to it a bit, but making some caches with lower T but a bit higher D instead. Not super easy because those are amny enough but some with different D/T balance. So you encouraged me/reminded me to be more diverse, thanks! The log is full. NM. (To connect with the thread.) Of course you should post that! So I love them all. Anything that tells me something more than TFTC or copy-paste. However... We logged 200 caches today and this was one of them. OK, this one makes me irritated if it is on a highly original, more or less custom built cache maybe in a very special place. Am I a very odd person who takes these comments (except the last one) as positive things? Someone did tell me about ideas, feelings, problems... Yes, I know that too many people can not take these too well, as seen in this thread. I try to teach them by showing my own attitude to getting such logs by asking for them. Maybe that is all I can do. Is there any other way? Padding opinions with text about my opinions being only my personal reflections and not demands, or something like that?

Some people indeed think you try to give them orders just by voicing an opinion, a reaction to the caching experience. Maybe I need to specify the difference before writing the reflection? Case in point: A cache required some rock climbing, so I suggested that a bit higher T would describe it better than T2. A simple adjustment suggested by what it felt like for me. That was enough to offend him. I often make special note in my cache descriptions that opinions and suggestions are welcome. And I mean all kinds.

Great example of why we need pretty good margins as well as good coordinates for caches. We can't place it 10 meters from someone's garden and hope that nobody distubs the people living there. They need to know why people are searching in their bushes. Consider where someone with bad precision may go. I found one cache, with low ratings, only some 5 meters from a steep cliff. Super dangerous to search for at night, especially since the rating was so low and no other warnings!

Some people are insanely easy to offend. I know at leats one CO, who made good caches, who stopped because people had opinions. Over-reacting on NM is a similar thing. It is sad when you can't point out a problem or even suggest an improvement without these people taking it as a personal insult. I try to remember who these are and tiptoe through my logs. Just write about the weather... Of course I want people to make new caches, but it is so sad when they openly refuse to maintain them, like the people mentioned in this thread. Even worse, they are 99% certain to leave their caches out there when they are archived. Just abandon them. Solution? Be so nice to them that they decide to actually go out and replace the full and wet logbooks? Is it possible? I never wanted to offend anyone but some people can't take a problem report.

Bring back webcams! Bring back locationless caches! And we need more APE caches! Why? Because they are all listed in the list of cache types and the zero in those fields are annoying! Not to mention that there are badges for APE and webcam in project-gc! And I must have that diamond badge! I want a tight trail of super easy APE and webcams! (Note: irony.) Isn't that the "problem"? I am really not that eager to stand before a slow webcam and wait until it takes a really poor photo with me down in the corner, if I didn't do it for the "many types in one day" badge. Is there any other reason for virtuals? What do they do that a multi-cache or a Wherigo can't do? The solution is not to bring back a cache type that didn't turn out well and was removed, the solution is to tidy up the lists and taking out some old history, moving them to some out-of-the-way place.

This is easy to us, but not to a beginner. The beginner needs to understand what "wheelchair accessible" means. Yes, you can get there with a wheelchair. No, you can't reach it, but the location is still accessible. There are many often misunderstood phrases like this in the hobby. "Found" really means "signed the log book", not "I saw it 6 meters up and couldn't reach it". "Needs archived" really means "a reviewer should have a look at this". "Did not find" means "I think it is gone".

For me, FPs are recommendations, not some kind of gift to the CO, not a "thank you", but a "check this out, it is pretty good". Of course I am happy when I get FPs but I want to deserve them, I want the cache to be worth the recommendation. To me as CO, the FP is part of the feedback. Good location, good puzzle, interesting construction: All positive things, they get FPs if I have any left. First, last or random cache in a trail as "Thank you for the trail": never. That is noise in the FP system.

Nothing to climb on, even worse. But I guess that is the confusion between the location and the path there. Grading is tricky.

Bad D/T rating is a nuisance. I have often been tricked to search in the wrong place due to bad ratings. Missing or incorrect attributes can also mess things up. In general, my opinion is that it is better to over-rate (slightly) than under-rate. Over-rating makes us bring a little too much equipment while under-rating makes us go home without finding it. The unreachable T1 is a great example. If it had been a bit over-rated, then I guess it could have been T4! From what you describe, T3 sounds pretty appropriate for it. Rating is hard but T1 on that is so clearly wrong. Should I correct by placing it according to the rating? Only if I notify the CO about it. One correctly placed T1 here got a "corrected placement" without notification some half a meter too high, well out of reach for wheelchairs. The cacher probably just wanted to help by placing it in a safer place, but then the rating was wrong so the cache got hard to find. One thing that may cause similar problems is that the official application doesn't show anything above 2 so COs who want meny visits put a maximum at 2. This gives us a lot of very hard D2s, in my area many hard mystery caches.