Deleting Logs On Virtual Caches

July 25, 2005

I just had to delete my first log. Someone did one of my earthcaches and didn't post a photo. The instructions clearly stated that to do the cache, you must post a photo, but if you didn't have a camera, check with me on instructions for how to log it without a photo (I have since changed the instructions in an attempt to make this even more clear).

I let it go for a couple days, then I sent them this (hopefully) polite note:

<<<Do you have a photo to upload for "Hanging Rock - Madison?"

It wouldn't be fair for me to allow you to log it without one, when I required one of everyone else.

If you have no way to upload pictures, let me know and I will send you instructions on what to do to log it without a photo.

Thanks!>>>

I was planning on being pretty lenient, since I figured they might not want to travel back down to Madison just to log this one cache. Here is the reply I got:

<<<No. I don't have a picture...not really worried about

the log...wasn't that exciting anyway.>>>

What would your reaction be?

*Daphne*

Mysteries Inc.

P.S. Just for the record, this person has been caching for over a year with 42 finds and no hides.

Edited July 25, 2005 by Daphne of Mysteries Inc.

July 25, 2005

P.S. Just for the record, this person has been caching for over a year with 42 finds and no hides.

I love elitism.

It makes me feel sooo superior.

2.2k · July 25, 2005

You were fair and gave them the opportunity to post the required photo. Since they told you outright that there was no photo, I'd delete it too.

July 25, 2005

P.S. Just for the record, this person has been caching for over a year with 42 finds and no hides.

I love elitism.

It makes me feel sooo superior.

Gee, thanks for your input. How encouraging. I wasn't trying to be superior (me with my measly 452 finds?), just pointing out that they were of limited experience.

July 25, 2005

I vote for deleting the log, it's your cache and the finder didn't follow your instructions. I had one of my virt logs deleted because I didn't take the proper picture (one with me in it). I was a little miffed but eventually I logged it properly. Also I would delete it because of the snide comment "not that exciting anyway".

July 25, 2005

Sorry Daphne .

You did the right thing and gave them plenty of notice to correct their actions.

I have this compulsive sarcasm thing which my mother says started as soon as I was born.

No hard feelings, I hope.

July 25, 2005

Yeah, I would have done the same thing. You gave the person a chance to log it properly, and they not only refused to do so, they insulted you, too.

Pth. Who needs that?

July 25, 2005

Sorry Daphne .
You did the right thing and gave them plenty of notice to correct their actions.

I have this compulsive sarcasm thing which my mother says started as soon as I was born.

No hard feelings, I hope.

Thanks - no hard feelings!

5.3k · July 25, 2005

The log is deleted and they don't care about it. Sounds like the whole event is over and done with.

July 25, 2005

The log is deleted and they don't care about it. Sounds like the whole event is over and done with.

Good grief! Now I remember why I don't post on the forums much.

24.7k · July 25, 2005

You were fair and gave them the opportunity to post the required photo. Since they told you outright that there was no photo, I'd delete it too.

Exactly. They can always log it later with a photo if they choose. The sour grapes are theirs and theirs alone.

July 26, 2005

I think it's kinda funny that you expect other people to take a photo of this waterfall and upload it, when you just copped one at Google images. :laughing:

You didn't write the text, you didn't take the photo, another geocache/virtual that sucks. :unsure: :laughing:

http://www.vintageviews.org/vv-3/scenic/pages/sec08_003.html

Edited July 26, 2005 by jimmyreno

38.2k · July 26, 2005

I think it's kinda funny that you expect other people to take a photo of this waterfall and upload it, when you just copped one at Google images.

You didn't write the text, you didn't take the photo, another geocache/virtual that sucks.

http://www.vintageviews.org/vv-3/scenic/pages/sec08_003.html

I don't see what that has to do with the price of tea in Poland. Where is it written that a cache owner has to do anything more than provide good coords when submitting a page? I've seen dozens of pages (including several of my own) that have text and photos that aren't the original work of the owner.

July 26, 2005

I think it's kinda funny that you expect other people to take a photo of this waterfall and upload it, when you just copped one at Google images.

You didn't write the text, you didn't take the photo, another geocache/virtual that sucks.

http://www.vintageviews.org/vv-3/scenic/pages/sec08_003.html

I guess I should take this as fair warning:

Don't post a problem on the forums if you don't want to be attacked yourself.

Thanks for the insight -- I'll be sure to give due credit to vintage views. (Actually, I found that postcard at several different places on the internet, including eBay, and I don't know which one I ended up using; so maybe I won't.)

So glad to hear you think my earthcache sucks, when you haven't even been there. Too bad the people at GSA didn't agree; then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

(I do want to give an honest "Thank you" to brainsnat for his reply.)

*Daphne*

Mysteries Inc.

P.S. So how else are people supposed to log a virtual when there's no logbook to sign? I offered her an option to log it without the photo, but she wasn't interested.

1.6k · July 26, 2005

Disregard the buffoonery of some of our forum patrons - you did the right thing. Follow directions or your log will be deleted.

July 26, 2005

I guess I should take this as fair warning:

Don't post a problem on the forums if you don't want to be attacked yourself.

Although a newcomer to GeoCaching, I am well through all the ups and downs of forums, mailing lists and even good old USENET.

I think not only did you have the right to delete the log, you had to delete it.

That said, it seems (to me) that all you were seeking here in posting was confirmation from others that it was right to do. Well, surprise, different people have different opinions. Some people have opinions you might not like. If you don't want to hear them, don't ask for them. And if you ask for opinions, expect some of them to be not as well worded and polished as you would like them to be. In other words, grow thicker skin.

Jan

July 26, 2005

That said, it seems (to me) that all you were seeking here in posting was confirmation from others that it was right to do. Well, surprise, different people have different opinions. Some people have opinions you might not like. If you don't want to hear them, don't ask for them. And if you ask for opinions, expect some of them to be not as well worded and polished as you would like them to be. In other words, grow thicker skin.

Yes, everyone has different opinions and I expect that many of them will be different from my own. However, I was hoping to get opinions on the actual question I asked, not inviting attacks on my cache or personality. Those I look for from local cachers who have actually done the cache and/or have met me.

July 26, 2005

Daphne, you are underestimating the human condition.

We all rise to a challege in different ways.

Please don't give up on posting your questions and views. This free speech stuff is very important to our culture even though it is sometimes uncomfortable to be on the receiving end.

July 26, 2005

That said, it seems (to me) that all you were seeking here in posting was confirmation from others that it was right to do. Well, surprise, different people have different opinions. Some people have opinions you might not like. If you don't want to hear them, don't ask for them. And if you ask for opinions, expect some of them to be not as well worded and polished as you would like them to be. In other words, grow thicker skin.

Yes, everyone has different opinions and I expect that many of them will be different from my own. However, I was hoping to get opinions on the actual question I asked, not inviting attacks on my cache or personality. Those I look for from local cachers who have actually done the cache and/or have met me.

Then perhaps be more cautious is the way you word things. I have been caching for over a year and only have 52 finds does that make me inexperienced? keep in mind that I spent 6 of those months in Afghanistan and had other things on my mind, also not everyone views this game as the only thing that matters. Take a look at my cache finds one was not found for over six months, I really don’t care about numbers but don’t like being considered inexperienced because I don’t have a couple of hundred finds. But to answere you question, only you can answere if you did the right thing, if you stated you had to post a picture and they didnt then delet the log, would you delet the log if they used the same type of phote you did though?

July 26, 2005

Then perhaps be more cautious is the way you word things. I have been caching for over a year and only have 52 finds does that make me inexperienced? keep in mind that I spent 6 of those months in Afghanistan and had other things on my mind, also not everyone views this game as the only thing that matters. Take a look at my cache finds one was not found for over six months, I really don’t care about numbers but don’t like being considered inexperienced because I don’t have a couple of hundred finds.

In the beginning, all I did was state a fact, and left it open to interpretation of the reader. But yes, I consider someone with 42 finds (or 52 finds) of "limited experience," whether it was over the course of one year or one month. I considered myself of limited experience when I had 50 finds, and still of limited experience when it comes to some types of caches. Maybe I should have pointed out that this person had no experience in finding virtuals or earthcaches.

I don't expect others to view this game as the only thing that matters; I certainly don't. But whether you spent six months in Afghanistan or on your couch in front of the television, if you weren't caching, you weren't getting any more experienced at it, were you? That's not an opinion, it's a plain and simple fact. I don't consider being of limited experience to be a put-down and it wasn't meant as such.

July 26, 2005

would you delet the log if they used the same type of phote you did though?

I purposely used a picture postcard with a drawing of the falls so no one would try to use my photo for their log. Besides, I asked them to include their GPSr in at least one picture. So yes, if they uploaded an old postcard drawing of the falls, I would delete their log. Now if someone actually drew a picture for me themselves, I would certainly have to reconsider my request for photos, especially if they included their GPSr in their drawing.

9.4k · July 26, 2005

My reaction would be, "hmm kayy"

And I'd get a beer from the fridge.

2k · July 26, 2005

After checking out your cache page I have to say that this looks like a really cool virtual. It's to bad that it is a bit off my caching path.

July 26, 2005

My reaction would be, "hmm kayy"

And I'd get a beer from the fridge.

The sage has spoken.

I believe I'll do just that. Only I'll make it a Big Red Vanilla Float.

Thanks Jeremy! I needed that. . .

6.5k · July 26, 2005

That said, it seems (to me) that all you were seeking here in posting was confirmation from others that it was right to do. Well, surprise, different people have different opinions. Some people have opinions you might not like. If you don't want to hear them, don't ask for them. And if you ask for opinions, expect some of them to be not as well worded and polished as you would like them to be. In other words, grow thicker skin.

Yes, everyone has different opinions and I expect that many of them will be different from my own. However, I was hoping to get opinions on the actual question I asked, not inviting attacks on my cache or personality. Those I look for from local cachers who have actually done the cache and/or have met me.

so I head off topic will you follow?

July 26, 2005

so I head off topic will you follow?

Sure, go ahead! I'm up for a journey.

It's too hot around here to go caching right now anyway. We have a heat advisory until 8PM with heat indices from 105° to 110° -- but I'm digressing, and I was going to let you do that. . .

9.4k · July 26, 2005

so I head off topic will you follow?

Sure, go ahead! I'm up for a journey.

It's too hot around here to go caching right now anyway. We have a heat advisory until 8PM with heat indices from 105° to 110° -- but I'm digressing, and I was going to let you do that. . .

It's raining here. The perfect day to Google answers to virts...

Oh yeah, I don't log virts

July 26, 2005

Oh yeah, I don't log virts

You don't do virts??? You miss so much. . .

July 26, 2005

I don't see what that has to do with the price of tea in Poland. Where is it written that a cache owner has to do anything more than provide good coords when submitting a page? I've seen dozens of pages (including several of my own) that have text and photos that aren't the original work of the owner.

How wonderful, a web site of plagiarists.

We're all Clintons here.

Is it too much to give credit to the people who actually create something?

9.4k · July 26, 2005

Oh yeah, I don't log virts

You don't do virts??? You miss so much. . .

I used to log them, but the kids really enjoy actually finding something hidden at the final coords, and so do I. With a virt, you're just showing off something that was already there.

38.2k · July 26, 2005

I don't see what that has to do with the price of tea in Poland. Where is it written that a cache owner has to do anything more than provide good coords when submitting a page? I've seen dozens of pages (including several of my own) that have text and photos that aren't the original work of the owner.

How wonderful, a web site of plagiarists.

We're all Clintons here.

Is it too much to give credit to the people who actually create something?

They're cache pages, not freakin' theses.

July 26, 2005

If ever there was a time to lock a thread...this may be it!

BTW, Daphne, I read your profile and links....interesting stuff! Way to go!

July 26, 2005

I don't see what that has to do with the price of tea in Poland. Where is it written that a cache owner has to do anything more than provide good coords when submitting a page? I've seen dozens of pages (including several of my own) that have text and photos that aren't the original work of the owner.

How wonderful, a web site of plagiarists.

Is it too much to give credit to the people who actually create something?

If I were going to quote the Bible (or Shakespeare), what would be better: If I opened it up and read to you straight from it, or if a paraphrased it, possibly giving it my own twist?

When you have something well-written, why mess with it by trying to put it in your own words? I was trying to "create" an informative cache page, not do a book report. That was best done by quoting my source directly. I have to admit, I didn't know beans about the Saluda Formation till I wrote to the geology department at Hanover College and asked for information. After I had what I needed, why mess it up trying to interpret it myself?

(If you will look at my other cache pages, you will see that I have done this frequently and always try to give credit where it is due. I thought that was the honorable way to go about it. . . )

July 26, 2005

If ever there was a time to lock a thread...this may be it!

BTW, Daphne, I read your profile and links....interesting stuff! Way to go!

WishOnAStar:

You're probably right, but I'm actually beginning to enjoy this thread.

Thank you for your nice comments on my profile!! By the way, I looked at your profile too -- welcome to geocaching! We're practically neighbors. I'll look forward to reading your logs for the caches I'm watching in the northern part of your state.

*Daphne*

Mysteries Inc.

July 26, 2005

Daphne...

#1 lesson of forums...thick skin.

#2 lesson: you did the right thing

#3 lesson: after the first 10 or so posts, the point is moot.

6.5k · July 26, 2005

so I head off topic will you follow?

Sure, go ahead! I'm up for a journey.

It's too hot around here to go caching right now anyway. We have a heat advisory until 8PM with heat indices from 105° to 110° -- but I'm digressing, and I was going to let you do that. . .

don't worry the rain's heafding east to bring little (tempory) relief

10.1k · July 26, 2005

Oh yeah, I don't log virts

You don't do virts??? You miss so much. . .

I used to log them, but the kids really enjoy actually finding something hidden at the final coords, and so do I. With a virt, you're just showing off something that was already there.

I'm still of mixed emotions on Virts. I recently completed a wlking tour of the Mall in DC. I completed ten virtual caches. One was spectauclar! Three were very interesting. The other six were a waste of time. Oh, well. Then again, I might run a similar rate on regular caches.

Required information was e-mailed to owners. (That's what this thread is about isn't it?)

Daphne, I've done one Earthcache so far. It required visiting two spots in each of the five geological areas of New Jersey, and posting one picture from each geological zone. It took two days, and a few hundred miles of driving, and we loved it!

As to deleting posts: I have a rather tough webcam. It refreshes four times an hour, and cell-phone reception can be very bad. This is all noted on the cache page. One cacher posted a find with "I could not get a picture from the cam, so I took a picture of the cam." Good try! Could you change that to a note. And it was changed to a note. Easy fix.

Yup, you did the right thing.

6.4k · July 26, 2005

I'm still of mixed emotions on Virts. I recently completed a wlking tour of the Mall in DC. I completed ten virtual caches. One was spectauclar! Three were very interesting. The other six were a waste of time.

Not to get too far OT, but I'm curious. No need to name the bad ones, but was this the spectacular one?

9.5k · July 26, 2005

I don't see what that has to do with the price of tea in Poland. Where is it written that a cache owner has to do anything more than provide good coords when submitting a page? I've seen dozens of pages (including several of my own) that have text and photos that aren't the original work of the owner.

How wonderful, a web site of plagiarists.

We're all Clintons here.

Is it too much to give credit to the people who actually create something?

They're cache pages, not freakin' theses.

With a little ketchup, I'll bet the newb will crunch like a french fry.

10.1k · July 26, 2005

Mopar, you hit it on the head! I rather suspected what we would be looking for. When we found it, I was VERY impressed that it was worked into the site!

6.4k · July 26, 2005

Mopar, you hit it on the head! I rather suspected what we would be looking for. When we found it, I was VERY impressed that it was worked into the site!

I thought so. One of my faves as well. Notice that it was listed AFTER the crackdown on virtuals; I think that cache is a perfect example of what a virtual cache should be.

You pretty much needed a GPS to find it.

You can't hide a physical cache anywhere within a reasonable distance of the spot.

The main object is WOW all in itself, but the verification part just puts it right over the top.

Whenever I see that virt, I can't help thinking that because of geocaching I saw some cool extra part that the other 10,000 people a day never get to experience.

July 26, 2005

Notice that it was listed AFTER the crackdown on virtuals; I think that cache is a perfect example of what a virtual cache should be.
You pretty much needed a GPS to find it.

You can't hide a physical cache anywhere within a reasonable distance of the spot.

The main object is WOW all in itself, but the verification part just puts it right over the top.

Whenever I see that virt, I can't help thinking that because of geocaching I saw some cool extra part that the other 10,000 people a day never get to experience.

Thank you for the example.

I am very happy to finally get some real information on this subject.

And suitably impressed.

( usually lasts about 3 seconds )

July 26, 2005

I used to log them, but the kids really enjoy actually finding something hidden at the final coords, and so do I. With a virt, you're just showing off something that was already there.

I'm into photography, so with the good virtuals, there is something at the end for me, especially if it was at a place I was formerly unaware of.

Not to say that I don't understand and respect your viewpoint. I do.

(I know this is going to open a whole argument on what makes a "good" virtual, so let me just say that, like all other caches, it's in the eye of the beholder.)

July 27, 2005

If I were going to quote the Bible (or Shakespeare), what would be better: If I opened it up and read to you straight from it, or if a paraphrased it, possibly giving it my own twist?

If possible, Shakespeare please! This evil bible-thing probably contains more wonders, miracles and curses than the latest Harry Potter episode, and everyone who reads it will most surely go to HELL.

Jan

1.8k · July 27, 2005

Whoa boy...can't wait to see where this train derails...

7.3k · July 27, 2005

Mopar, you hit it on the head! I rather suspected what we would be looking for. When we found it, I was VERY impressed that it was worked into the site!

I thought so. One of my faves as well. Notice that it was listed AFTER the crackdown on virtuals; I think that cache is a perfect example of what a virtual cache should be.

You pretty much needed a GPS to find it.

You can't hide a physical cache anywhere within a reasonable distance of the spot.

The main object is WOW all in itself, but the verification part just puts it right over the top.

Whenever I see that virt, I can't help thinking that because of geocaching I saw some cool extra part that the other 10,000 people a day never get to experience.

And that was the only virt that I managed to dnf on the mall. Did not understand it at all. I think that we didn't have all the info from the cache page, so we wandered around for a long time looking for nothing. Got a lot of good pics, though!

July 27, 2005

One of my faves as well. Notice that it was listed AFTER the crackdown on virtuals; I think that cache is a perfect example of what a virtual cache should be.
You pretty much needed a GPS to find it.

You can't hide a physical cache anywhere within a reasonable distance of the spot.

The main object is WOW all in itself, but the verification part just puts it right over the top.

Whenever I see that virt, I can't help thinking that because of geocaching I saw some cool extra part that the other 10,000 people a day never get to experience.

I've been looking for an excuse to tour D.C. This sounds like as good a reason as any other I could think up.

Shaggy, pack your bags! (Please? )

July 27, 2005

Whoa boy...can't wait to see where this train derails...

Oh Boy! I really needed a good laugh -- thank you so much, Team Perks!

I agree. . .

July 27, 2005

Whoa boy...can't wait to see where this train derails...

There has to be some way to get this topic locked, no?

Jan

5.3k · July 27, 2005

Whoa boy...can't wait to see where this train derails...

There ya go.

Deleting Logs On Virtual Caches

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment