Honesty In Logging

[+PaRacers]

We recently visited a cache next to a dump and although it wasn't really disgusting I just couldn't see why anyone would choose this spot to place a cache. My log went something like this, "Don't CITO here unless your cachemobile is a dump truck!"

[+arpegio]

If this site exists mainly for people to exclusively compliment each other, then why even have a free form text field? You could just give each user a series of pre-fab checkboxed, complimentary answers for each log.

 

You mean, kind of like Ebay feedback?

 

Ha ha - touche'

[+LostMontanan]

We recently visited a cache next to a dump and although it wasn't really disgusting I just couldn't see why anyone would choose this spot to place a cache. My log went something like this, "Don't CITO here unless your cachemobile is a dump truck!"

 

See, now that is funny. Something like that COULD have been used in this case, but alas, he had to do it by other means.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

We recently visited a cache next to a dump and although it wasn't really disgusting I just couldn't see why anyone would choose this spot to place a cache. My log went something like this, "Don't CITO here unless your cachemobile is a dump truck!"

 

See, now that is funny. Something like that COULD have been used in this case, but alas, he had to do it by other means.

 

Yes it is.

For what it's worth I don't think he meant to insult you, he just didn't see whatever it is that you like about that spot. That's why 99% of the time when I type a note like that I delete it without posting, harsh words are hard to take back, best to get you point across in a friendly, helpful and humorous manner.

Also, if he wanted opinions about the note he should have asked before he sent it, bit late now.

OK, back to my seat.

[+LostMontanan]

OK, here are the pics. Admittedly, there were a few pieces of trash lying about, but not to the point of being a "dump", or as nasty of place as what's his name is trying to make it out to be, it is Oklahoma after all... Also, I can confirm there is a dog in the road, about 100 yards AROUND the corner and out of site from the cache, oh....let me reiterate....the dog was NOT THERE in May when I placed the cache, OK? Also took pics of the super scary cemetery...I rushed home to see if I could find any "orbs" or UFO's or floating apparitions, or serial killers lurking about, but alas, it wasn't to be...anyway, enjoy the pics....a couple of the pics are rather humorous....but I'll let the pics do the talking...

[+headybrew]

Or perhaps the hider simply deletes all the bad logs and leaves the nicey-nice ones. ??

 

Nah, I am above that. I didn't know you could do that anyway. If you look through all of my 85 or so finds and 3 hides, this guy is the only one who has even thought about dragging me through the mud. I'd say 99% of everyone in this area are great, everyday people. I guess you can figure out who I left out.

 

Ok. I like this thread, so far. Well, I like the first half of it, because I learned something. And I think it's been a good example for me personally, of my efforts to have a nice conversation in these forums without saying things that I will later regret. It's not easy, but I'm learning to do that.

 

So then comes the last half (so far) of the thread... Tensions are rising. I'd love to go away at the end of the day and think, "gee the thread turned out good, just the way that the logs in that example cache did."

 

For that to happen, we all have to realize that both the OP and the cache owner are people, and the the truth often lies in the middle. People percieve things different ways, and two different stories about something doesn't mean that either of them are lying or intentionally being a jerk.

 

LostMontanan says that the site was nicer when he first placed the hide. That may very well be true. And while it sounds wierd that it's a place where some people dump trash and shouldn't, we really haven't seen the site, and many other posters didn't complain.

 

OTOH:

The OP says the place is truly aweful. And nothing he said has been factually disputed. ie: trash, cameras, dead dog, etc... And it is entirely possible that the posters are being "nicey-nice" and thatys why nobody complained. It's also true that if a place is truly nasty, then a finder who says so in the logs is doing a service to those who come after.

 

So we have 2 sides to this...

 

Now let me mention my perception of the participants. (this is my perception only, not intended to offend).

 

The OP comes across to me as someone trying hard to do the right thing, although perhaps a bit heavy handed in the beginning. He has thoughtfully revised what he first posted to take the name out and keep it anonymous. He as removed the dog picture that some found offensive. he's trying to do good.

 

LostMontanan sounds a bit PO'd. And I don't blame him. People take their caches very personally, and that's a measure of the passion that they bring to the table. But he's also shouting (ALL CAPS STUFF) and being sarcastic and hurling insults... So perception-wise, he comes across (to me) as not very nice and perhaps not so concerned with doing the right thing.

 

I'm not trying to insult him or anyone. I'm thinking through in my own head, why this thread suddenly got filled with tension, what I can learn from that personally, and what I might be able to say to help it all come to a good conclusion.

 

Both sides are sincere, I'm sure of that. Both have genuine reasons for saying what they have to say. So, as a third person observer, I'll try to learn what I can from this. For example, relax and don't yell and insult people. Listen to what others have to say, and then ask what they think you could do to improve the situation. Explain to them calmly what your side of it is...

 

Am I on the wrong track???

 

(oh brother, why did I write this? I sure hope it isn't taken the wrong way... better get my asbestos boxers.)

[+LostMontanan]

Or perhaps the hider simply deletes all the bad logs and leaves the nicey-nice ones. ??

 

Nah, I am above that. I didn't know you could do that anyway. If you look through all of my 85 or so finds and 3 hides, this guy is the only one who has even thought about dragging me through the mud. I'd say 99% of everyone in this area are great, everyday people. I guess you can figure out who I left out.

 

Ok. I like this thread, so far. Well, I like the first half of it, because I learned something. And I think it's been a good example for me personally, of my efforts to have a nice conversation in these forums without saying things that I will later regret. It's not easy, but I'm learning to do that.

 

So then comes the last half (so far) of the thread... Tensions are rising. I'd love to go away at the end of the day and think, "gee the thread turned out good, just the way that the logs in that example cache did."

 

For that to happen, we all have to realize that both the OP and the cache owner are people, and the the truth often lies in the middle. People percieve things different ways, and two different stories about something doesn't mean that either of them are lying or intentionally being a jerk.

 

LostMontanan says that the site was nicer when he first placed the hide. That may very well be true. And while it sounds wierd that it's a place where some people dump trash and shouldn't, we really haven't seen the site, and many other posters didn't complain.

 

OTOH:

The OP says the place is truly aweful. And nothing he said has been factually disputed. ie: trash, cameras, dead dog, etc... And it is entirely possible that the posters are being "nicey-nice" and thatys why nobody complained. It's also true that if a place is truly nasty, then a finder who says so in the logs is doing a service to those who come after.

 

So we have 2 sides to this...

 

Now let me mention my perception of the participants. (this is my perception only, not intended to offend).

 

The OP comes across to me as someone trying hard to do the right thing, although perhaps a bit heavy handed in the beginning. He has thoughtfully revised what he first posted to take the name out and keep it anonymous. He as removed the dog picture that some found offensive. he's trying to do good.

 

LostMontanan sounds a bit PO'd. And I don't blame him. People take their caches very personally, and that's a measure of the passion that they bring to the table. But he's also shouting (ALL CAPS STUFF) and being sarcastic and hurling insults... So perception-wise, he comes across (to me) as not very nice and perhaps not so concerned with doing the right thing.

 

I'm not trying to insult him or anyone. I'm thinking through in my own head, why this thread suddenly got filled with tension, what I can learn from that personally, and what I might be able to say to help it all come to a good conclusion.

 

Both sides are sincere, I'm sure of that. Both have genuine reasons for saying what they have to say. So, as a third person observer, I'll try to learn what I can from this. For example, relax and don't yell and insult people. Listen to what others have to say, and then ask what they think you could do to improve the situation. Explain to them calmly what your side of it is...

 

Am I on the wrong track???

 

(oh brother, why did I write this? I sure hope it isn't taken the wrong way... better get my asbestos boxers.)

 

Excellent post brother....you got me down pretty good...I am POed, and have every right to be. I'll be danged if some dude is going to bring my name and my cache to the public, and drag me through the mud, just because he is scared of some serial killer who happened to be in the area 7 years ago...not my problem. As I said before, nobody FORCED him to leave the safety of his car and look for the cache. Nobody. If he doesn't have the sense to bypass a "questionable" area, then there is nothing I can do for the boy. Anyway...

[+BlueDeuce]

I apologize. (You think I would learn by now not to believe everything I read on the internet.)

 

But hey whoa, nobody said anything about donkeys.

 

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Or perhaps the hider simply deletes all the bad logs and leaves the nicey-nice ones. ??

 

Nah, I am above that. I didn't know you could do that anyway. If you look through all of my 85 or so finds and 3 hides, this guy is the only one who has even thought about dragging me through the mud. I'd say 99% of everyone in this area are great, everyday people. I guess you can figure out who I left out.

 

Ok. I like this thread, so far. Well, I like the first half of it, because I learned something. And I think it's been a good example for me personally, of my efforts to have a nice conversation in these forums without saying things that I will later regret. It's not easy, but I'm learning to do that.

 

So then comes the last half (so far) of the thread... Tensions are rising. I'd love to go away at the end of the day and think, "gee the thread turned out good, just the way that the logs in that example cache did."

 

For that to happen, we all have to realize that both the OP and the cache owner are people, and the the truth often lies in the middle. People percieve things different ways, and two different stories about something doesn't mean that either of them are lying or intentionally being a jerk.

 

LostMontanan says that the site was nicer when he first placed the hide. That may very well be true. And while it sounds wierd that it's a place where some people dump trash and shouldn't, we really haven't seen the site, and many other posters didn't complain.

 

OTOH:

The OP says the place is truly aweful. And nothing he said has been factually disputed. ie: trash, cameras, dead dog, etc... And it is entirely possible that the posters are being "nicey-nice" and thatys why nobody complained. It's also true that if a place is truly nasty, then a finder who says so in the logs is doing a service to those who come after.

 

So we have 2 sides to this...

 

Now let me mention my perception of the participants. (this is my perception only, not intended to offend).

 

The OP comes across to me as someone trying hard to do the right thing, although perhaps a bit heavy handed in the beginning. He has thoughtfully revised what he first posted to take the name out and keep it anonymous. He as removed the dog picture that some found offensive. he's trying to do good.

 

LostMontanan sounds a bit PO'd. And I don't blame him. People take their caches very personally, and that's a measure of the passion that they bring to the table. But he's also shouting (ALL CAPS STUFF) and being sarcastic and hurling insults... So perception-wise, he comes across (to me) as not very nice and perhaps not so concerned with doing the right thing.

 

I'm not trying to insult him or anyone. I'm thinking through in my own head, why this thread suddenly got filled with tension, what I can learn from that personally, and what I might be able to say to help it all come to a good conclusion.

 

Both sides are sincere, I'm sure of that. Both have genuine reasons for saying what they have to say. So, as a third person observer, I'll try to learn what I can from this. For example, relax and don't yell and insult people. Listen to what others have to say, and then ask what they think you could do to improve the situation. Explain to them calmly what your side of it is...

 

Am I on the wrong track???

 

(oh brother, why did I write this? I sure hope it isn't taken the wrong way... better get my asbestos boxers.)

 

After posting on various forums for several years now, let me add a couple of words of advice to your excellent post, 1. Never say you are leaving a thread, because you will almost always come back within a day.

2. After you have stated your position you may as well leave (without saying you are leaving), because when someone challenges your position you will find yourself repeating it, in every possible way, over and over and over, and they never will "get it", so save yourself the trouble and resist the impulse to answer it from the start.

Less posting/more reading= more Forum enjoyment

[+headybrew]

Hmmm... Well those pics are worth thousands of words, now aren't they. It doesn't seem like that bad a place to me. I get the humor now of the "No Dumping" thing. "Serveillance Camera" ???? Oh please! Where did they hide the camera, inside the donkey's A**?

[+Kiamichi Muskrat]

LostMontanan, if you re-read my note, you will see that I never called the area a "dump." I said it is a trash-strewn, filthy road beside a cemetery where a serial killer dumped a body. All of that is correct. Your photos admittedly show the nice parts of the area, but what about the little creek area in the corner? That is where the bulk of the trash is. But I guess it really doesn't matter. What matters to me is this:

1. There are a million better places to hide a cache than this.

2. It is a pill bottle wrapped in black tape stuck behind a telephone pole in plain sight. Even if there were "four foot high weeds" there are one point, who wants to hunt a cache in four foot high weeds?

3. Never did I attack your integrity, call you stupid or rake you over the coals. I have no idea what kind of person you are. I do take issue with the cache placement and the way your meager description says nothing of the area in which it is in.

Read the sign yourself: there is enough dumping going on here to warrant a "we have you on camera!" threat. Show a photo of the cemetery gates and how there are "no trespassing" signs on a cemetery. A cemetery! For many years this has been a drug haven. I would never, ever encourage people to bring their kids out here.

That being said, I am glad that other posters have noticed that I am trying to do the right thing. I have indeed deleted information from my posts to make them more civil. After Mopar's post, I deleted the rotten dog photo, knowing that yes, it was a disturbing image. I am trying to accomplish two goals here, but unfortunately, they are mutually exclusive: (1) Try not to anger you and (2) convey my honest thoughts about the cache so that others are fairly warned about the area.

I wish you no ill will. I have called you no names. I have not promised to leave the thread. I hope you can see that I have good intent.

[+LostMontanan]

OK. Here goes. You may have had good intent. Wrong delivery. If you would have just emailed your concerns to me I would have been totally cool with you. Instead, you bring it to a forum? Obviously you are backtracking now, trying to make up for lost ground. Whatever. Who made you the Geocaching police anyway? Who are you to come on a public forum and in MY cache log and warn others about the area? Are you that scared that something else will happen out here? STAY AWAY from it then. Don't bring your kids, I don't care. And I would imagine that most other people in the area don't care either. I just don't understand why you have to take it upon yourself to be the caretaker of my cache. I will say this again. When I originally hid the cache almost 2 months ago, it was covered in deep weeds and had leaves and other items on top of it. It was not "in plain site" as you put it. Should I have gone out and checked on it more often to make sure it was still hidden to your specs? Sure. Is it your job to berate my cache and the location I chose? Absolutely not. God forbid I stumble across one of your caches that does not meet my criteria. No wait, I'm above revenge. Now for a review of your "points"

 

1.

There are a million better places to hide a cache than this.

 

Once again, who are you to declare where and how people put caches out?

 

2)

I do take issue with the cache placement and the way your meager description says nothing of the area in which it is in.

Read the sign yourself: there is enough dumping going on here to warrant a "we have you on camera!" threat. Show a photo of the cemetery gates and how there are "no trespassing" signs on a cemetery. A cemetery! For many years this has been a drug haven. I would never, ever encourage people to bring their kids out here.

 

Of course, the sign. People can decide if they want to travel here, have a picnic, pee on the sign, whatever they want. It is not up to you to decide for them. This is the dumbest thing you have said all day.

 

I don't know you, and don't care to know you. But in my humble opinion, you sound like a self centered person that always has to know right from wrong, and make sure people agree with you and only you. This cannot be tolerated. Since you didn't apologize for your mudslinging nor shall I. Have a good night.

[+headybrew]

Of course, the sign. People can decide if they want to travel here, have a picnic, pee on the sign, whatever they want. It is not up to you to decide for them. This is the dumbest thing you have said all day.

 

I don't know you, and don't care to know you. But in my humble opinion, you sound like a self centered person that always has to know right from wrong, and make sure people agree with you and only you. This cannot be tolerated. Since you didn't apologize for your mudslinging nor shall I. Have a good night.

 

My opinion, for what it's worth, (which isn't much) is:

 

a) This mess could have been avoided if the cache description said more about what one might find here. People can't decide if they don't have any info.

The OP is justified in describing what he found for others to have even more info to decide.

c) The OP should have excercised more restraint in that though.

d) It's not really usefull to call people 'self centered' and such.

 

and

 

e) I'm often guilty of not excercising restraint myself... So I should just shut up.

 

 

edit to add: Hmm... my letter b comes out as a smiley...

Edited July 15, 2006 by headybrew

[+Mule Ears]

The OP's log is entertaining. That makes it better than most logs. The OP found the cache to be exceptional and memorable. Even the cache owner seems to be having fun with this. All good.

[+briansnat]

OK, here are the pics. Admittedly, there were a few pieces of trash lying about, but not to the point of being a "dump", or as nasty of place as what's his name is trying to make it out to be, it is Oklahoma after all... Also, I can confirm there is a dog in the road, about 100 yards AROUND the corner and out of site from the cache, oh....let me reiterate....the dog was NOT THERE in May when I placed the cache, OK? Also took pics of the super scary cemetery...I rushed home to see if I could find any "orbs" or UFO's or floating apparitions, or serial killers lurking about, but alas, it wasn't to be...anyway, enjoy the pics....a couple of the pics are rather humorous....but I'll let the pics do the talking...

 

I dunno. After seeing the pics, I can honestly say I've seen caches hidden in far, far worse places. From a personal standpoint, I doubt I'd consider placing a cache there and if I found it, my log probably wouldn't be filled with glowing praise, but I really don't think it deserves the scathing log the OP left.

[+IV_Warrior]

OK, here are the pics. Admittedly, there were a few pieces of trash lying about, but not to the point of being a "dump", or as nasty of place as what's his name is trying to make it out to be, it is Oklahoma after all... Also, I can confirm there is a dog in the road, about 100 yards AROUND the corner and out of site from the cache, oh....let me reiterate....the dog was NOT THERE in May when I placed the cache, OK? Also took pics of the super scary cemetery...I rushed home to see if I could find any "orbs" or UFO's or floating apparitions, or serial killers lurking about, but alas, it wasn't to be...anyway, enjoy the pics....a couple of the pics are rather humorous....but I'll let the pics do the talking...

 

I dunno. After seeing the pics, I can honestly say I've seen caches hidden in far, far worse places. From a personal standpoint, I doubt I'd consider placing a cache there and if I found it, my log probably wouldn't be filled with glowing praise, but I really don't think it deserves the scathing log the OP left.

 

Yeah, what he said. Although, honest, after I was done laughing when I saw the sign, I'd probably stand around looking for the camera, just to see if it was an empty threat or not....

[+denali7]

THAT'S it? hilarious! definitely not the second worst cache in history. Edited July 15, 2006 by denali7

[+Team Neos]

Well I am disappointed! I honestly expected the OP to come back and apologize for overreacting because he'd had a really rotten day and was expecting something much nicer from the logs that had been written and the other caches he had seen by the cache owner, and though he still thinks it was a really disappointing cache, he would love to get together with the cache owner sometime and plan some joint caches over a couple of brewskies, etc. etc. etc. I guess I am just too naive.

[+headybrew]

Well I am disappointed! I honestly expected the OP to come back and apologize for overreacting because he'd had a really rotten day and was expecting something much nicer from the logs that had been written and the other caches he had seen by the cache owner, and though he still thinks it was a really disappointing cache, he would love to get together with the cache owner sometime and plan some joint caches over a couple of brewskies, etc. etc. etc. I guess I am just too naive.

 

He He! What if we issued a challenge for these two cachers to go ahead and meet someplace and have a brewski together, then go hide 2 caches together. Each one would chose one location.

 

[+Team Torque]

I think if everyone was more honest like this in their logs the micro spew problem would be much less of a problem. It is what it is a bad cache. I also would be grateful to read this so I don't waste my time.

[Clan Riffster]

It is what it is, a bad cache.

I would assume from this post that you've actually found this cache? If not, how can you possibly judge it's merits, or lack thereof? Seems like a bunch of folks found this cache to be sufficient, whilst only one took exception to it. Mathematically speaking, I'd say the odds favor this being a good cache, not a bad cache.

 

I've often been accused of having a dry, almost British sense of humor. I like places that get a chuckle out of me, regardless of where I find them. That sign, suggesting surveillance, way out in the middle of nowhere, just tickles the tar outta me. I would thank the hider for bringing me to such a place.

 

Thanx for the hide, (and the chuckles), Brother!

[+fresgo]

Whenever I see a negative log like that on my caches I place a cache just for the person or team that posted the log. That might explain why I have so many hides. I never thought of that - oh well based on the pictures my caches must suck big time.

 

This discussion is somewhat like saying "my caches are better than your caches, nener nener nener!!!"

Edited July 16, 2006 by fresgo

[+LostMontanan]

Whenever I see a negative log like that on my caches I place a cache just for the person or team that posted the log. That might explain why I have so many hides. I never thought of that - oh well based on the pictures my caches must suck big time.

 

This discussion is somewhat like saying "my caches are better than your caches, nener nener nener!!!"

 

Aw well....it's all over with. The OP went and found my other 2 hides and complimented them both so all is good to go. (Still don't wanna drink a beer with him though... )

[+usafknine]

Well I knew there was a reason for moderators... Just never knew.. J/k (please don't Geo slap me) I was just wondering how you got all that written into the little log book in a medicine bottle. My hat goes off to you "mr. writesrealsmallguy"

 

"YES" added yet another number to my small total of forum posts.... only a few more to go and I will catch up with briansnat... WOW now thats some posting... you the man!

[+fresgo]

Whenever I see a negative log like that on my caches I place a cache just for the person or team that posted the log. That might explain why I have so many hides. I never thought of that - oh well based on the pictures my caches must suck big time.

 

This discussion is somewhat like saying "my caches are better than your caches, nener nener nener!!!"

 

Aw well....it's all over with. The OP went and found my other 2 hides and complimented them both so all is good to go. (Still don't wanna drink a beer with him though... )

Did someone say Beer?

[rocketmann]

I would say just log your find and then post a needs to be archived log and explain whats wrong with it there and let the reviewers take care of it

[wheetree]

edit: dup post

Edited July 16, 2006 by wheetree

[+Harry Dolphin]

Well, I am not noted for posting glowing logs, or even non-commital ones, for caches that I think are in horrible places. That was, of course, the OP's question: whether is it acceptable to post your honest opinion of the area in which the cache is hidden, whether or not the opinion is valid.

I tell it like I see it (and have at least one local cache hider mad at me). I once posted "This is the second ugliest place I've found a cache." The cache hider found this hilarious, and wanted to know what the worst was! (For the record, the worst was in an area of decaying docks along the Hudson River, just north of the NYC Sanitation Pier. A homeless person had taken up residency a few feet away, ad the rats here were larger than many dogs. The views across the river, however, were spectacular!) (I logged a DNF.)

I did not care for the caches: 1 ) in a pile of brownstone debris, next to the adult book store, with large quantities of broken beer bottles. 2 ) in the dump for concrete slabs from a highway project. or 3 ) (a recent one) The hike through the construction area for a golf course. A short part of the hike along a river was refreshing, but most of the hike was pathetic.

I tell it like I see it. If you hear glowing praise from me, you know that it is a great cache. On the other fin, if I think the area is terrible, and I wisht I hadn't tried to find the cache, I will tell you that too.

OP may have been wrong in his opinion, but I will agree with his right to log his opinion of the cache.

[vhs07]

Thanks for posting the pictures.....I felt this was over exagerated from the start. As with a lot of threads, most always take the OP's side, never concidering that theres another side to the story.

I would be glad to hunt for it if I lived closer.

[+Team Neos]

OP may have been wrong in his opinion, but I will agree with his right to log his opinion of the cache.

I think almost all of us here agree that we have the right to post our opinion, even if we are wrong, about a cache. If you go back through this thread you will notice that most of the people who didn't care for the log merely commented on the way it was done. You can be honest without being unkind. It's possible to give good criticism without being critical. It's easy to go a bit overboard without meaning to (or to sound that way) when you are posting in this faceless electronic medium.

[+LostMontanan]

In my defense, I've been saying all along that I didn't care that the OP stated an opinion...the way he did is what got to me....if he would have just emailed me and said, "hey look, some clown killed a couple kids over there, this place isn't safe", or "the police patrol this area alot, it's not safe", or whatever, I would've been cool with it and probably archived the cache. But he took it public and didn't really use any tact whatsoever. But anywho, it's done and overwith and perhaps the OP will return to this thread and lock it up.

[+pghlooking]

the way he did is what got to me....if he would have just emailed me and said, "hey look, some clown killed a couple kids over there, this place isn't safe", or "the police patrol this area alot, it's not safe", or whatever, I would've been cool with it and probably archived the cache. But he took it public and didn't really use any tact whatsoever.

I didn't agree with how he came across but that's just my opinion, and it is his log in his words. I think what's most interesting to me is your last statement. IF he would have approached you in the right way, you would have archived it based on the info. OK so he got the info to you, albeit in a different manner than you would have liked, but none the less you have the same info. Does this mean you intend to achieve the cache now?

 

I don't mean this question or comment to come off as antagonistic at all and can easily be viewed as such. Please don't. I truly am interested in this. We have a cache in our area placed at a memorial, that has caused some grief by their less then sensitive naming of the cache. The owners are aware of it, and from my understanding are even kind of uneasy with the naming of it now. They refuse to change the name out of pride since they would feel "we won" by getting the name changed, rather than look at the big picture which would be respect to the victims and their families rather than an us versus them mentality.