Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Snoogans

Common Misconceptions That Lead to ANGST!

Recommended Posts

Indeed. Not every cache has to be accepted by everyone with open arms. But if you don't like the gift, there's someone else that will, and there's no reason to try to keep them from enjoying it.

 

Go find the gifts that you enjoy, and embrace those.

 

But, based on my earlier post, I have difficulties finding those particular caches that I would enjoy.

So if you can't filter out the finds you don't like, you'd rather they didn't exist? Even though you knew other people did enjoy them?

 

There's no solution that will allow everyone to enjoy every cache that gets placed. There will always be a lot of caches that a lot of people don't like. You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

 

The only thing that comes close is CoyoteRed's solution of walking up to a cache, realizing it's not one he consider's worthy of his continued efforts, and he walks away. He's filtering out the caches that HE thinks are lame that way. It's not as efficient as using GSAK to remove all micros, or 1/1s, or whatever, but he keeps the baby and loses the bathwater.

Share this post


Link to post

BTW- I'd be willing to bet the folks in these very forums that allow themselves to actually get irritated at an internet discussion group revolving around a HOBBY probably get annoyed at the lines at the grocery store, traffic, rap music, or any other number of inane issues. Most people who feel angst LIKE being in that state of mind, and will help you feel that way too- if you let them.

Not sure I would say "most", but certainly "many".

 

It is my firmly held opinion that one makes his own attitude. Things happen- good, bad, and indifferent. We cannot control much of our external circumstance. How we react however, is entirely within our own control.

 

The bottom line is, we get upset because we ourselves allow it to happen. Some even go out of their way.

 

People deliberately misread these posts and utilise them to fuel their angst. To others, even the obvious "digs" just roll off like water on a duck.

 

Darn, I wish I could be the latter! :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

So if you can't filter out the finds you don't like, you'd rather they didn't exist? Even though you knew other people did enjoy them?

 

I did not say that, nor would I ever. Instead, I'd like to lobby for a better system.

 

The only thing that comes close is CoyoteRed's solution of walking up to a cache, realizing it's not one he consider's worthy of his continued efforts, and he walks away. He's filtering out the caches that HE thinks are lame that way. It's not as efficient as using GSAK to remove all micros, or 1/1s, or whatever, but he keeps the baby and loses the bathwater.

 

But since one of my most precious commodities is time - that's already been wasted in that scenario.

 

I'm not full of angst over anything except being mislead or people wasting my precious time. Since I've already wasted too much time trying to get my point across, I guess I'll stop.

Share this post


Link to post

a thought to maybe help...

 

you can buy large tins of chocolates with various types in them.

 

some people like the soft centres, some the hard and some will eat all because they have chocolate on them.

 

but would anyone think to ban the sale of the tins becuase not everyone likes all the chocolates inside?

 

eat the ones you like and give the others to the people who like them. then we're all happy. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

 

but would anyone think to ban the sale of the tins becuase not everyone likes all the chocolates inside?

 

eat the ones you like and give the others to the people who like them. then we're all happy. :laughing:

 

Ah, but will anybody want the crunchy frog ones?

Share this post


Link to post
While an obscure method of doing so, I consider this a personal attack (or "Uzani, his army with fists closed" if you need it spelled out). Especially since the Wikipedia reference translates this as: "cluelessness, possibly unwillingness to understand"

 

Is that TRULY what you are saying to me?

Cluelessness, certainly not. However, I do think your post is a perfect example of purposefully ignoring the points that disagree with your argument. In other words, being unwilling to understand the counterpoint. I don't believe that to be a personal attack, since it was in response to your post in this thread, not any off-topic issue or personal characteristic.

 

BTW, my position regarding wiki is clearly documented and is supported by this very conversation, since different sites give different translations for the phrase I posted. Interestingly (or not), you took the most aggressive definition. Also, the wiki you referenced defines your quote 'Uzani, his army with fists closed' as 'to lure the enemy in and attack'. This is certainly not what happened in this thread. You made a statement that ignored positions that were inconvenient to your point of view and I called you on it. There was certainly no lure involved. In fact, I would also argue that there was no attack.

 

No back to the angsty thread, already in progress...

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post

Snoogs, I've got to hand it to you- you created a thread to discuss the roots of angst, and in doing so CREATED ANGST! Brilliant!

 

This is quite civil IMO. :)

 

I'm still holding to my original point about angst- it stems from people being unaware that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people. If I'm playing golf by myself, and want to score it any ol' way, it doesn't truly affect anyone else. I can play "my game, my way." So what if I use the little cheat codes when I play video games. I'll play "my game, my way."

 

Geocaching isn't like that, though. Just about every action connects to another person. Hiding, finding, moving trackeables ALWAYS connects to one or more parties. It's this disregard ("my game, my way") that is at the root (or is the fertilizer) of angst. Now do I think it SHOULD cause angst? Heck no! I would never let a game affect me like that.

 

Hmmmm, I'm one of the many who stands firmly on "My game. My way." Wow, I never considered it on those terms before..... :D

 

The ground feels a little less firm now, but is by no means shakey. :D That certainly is food for thought. :D

Share this post


Link to post
So if you can't filter out the finds you don't like, you'd rather they didn't exist?

This seems to be a recurring theme amongst the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame. I've even been accused of having such thoughts myself. I just re-read all 6 pages, and I can't find anyone calling for a ban of lame caches. Many of the folks who prefer well thought out caches have mentioned their distaste with lame caches, but that is a far stretch from wanting them banned. Just wanted to clarify my views.

Share this post


Link to post
So if you can't filter out the finds you don't like, you'd rather they didn't exist?

This seems to be a recurring theme amongst the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame. I've even been accused of having such thoughts myself. I just re-read all 6 pages, and I can't find anyone calling for a ban of lame caches. Many of the folks who prefer well thought out caches have mentioned their distaste with lame caches, but that is a far stretch from wanting them banned. Just wanted to clarify my views.

 

I certainly perceive that slant from the way many people word their statements on what things cause them angst whether it is written or not. :)

 

This thread is about angst and the causes. There are numerous threads that call for the banishment of perceived lameness in whatever form was in fashion to slam at the time. Micros seem to be the most popular/recurring whipping boy though.

Share this post


Link to post
So if you can't filter out the finds you don't like, you'd rather they didn't exist?
This seems to be a recurring theme amongst the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame. I've even been accused of having such thoughts myself. I just re-read all 6 pages, and I can't find anyone calling for a ban of lame caches. Many of the folks who prefer well thought out caches have mentioned their distaste with lame caches, but that is a far stretch from wanting them banned. Just wanted to clarify my views.

It's even worse than you say here. Expressing a desire that lame caches didn't exist is immediately (and dishonestly) conflated with a desire to eliminate them via further rules. Let me be clear: I wish that lame hides did not exist. But I do not advocate their elimination via further rules or changes in geocaching.com policy.

 

Look: I wish that slow checkout lines at the store didn't exist. I hate slow checkout lines. But I don't think there needs to be a law against slow checkout lines.

 

I would much rather foster a geocaching culture where good hides are celebrated and lame hides are looked down upon. In this, I differ with the Staunch Defenders of Everything Lame, who say we should lavish great praise upon all hides, no matter how yucky.

 

I can live with that difference of opinion; adults can disagree on many things and remain perfectly civil.

 

What I cannot abide, however, is the dishonesty of those who intentionally misconstrue arguments or try to put words into the mouths of other people. It's that dishonesty that causes the angst, not the legitimate differences of opinion.

Edited by fizzymagic

Share this post


Link to post

I would much rather foster a geocaching culture where good hides are celebrated and lame hides are looked down upon.

 

Let me change your statement a bit and make it mine:

 

I would much rather foster a geocaching culture where good hides are celebrated and lame hides are privately looked down upon, or for the most part completely ignored, unless the negative input is more or less constructive.

 

Ask me at an event, or on the phone, what caches, cachers, etc., I perceive to be lame and you will get an ear full. :D Plausable denyability is a good thang. :)

 

You have to leave entitlement behind to be constructive. The tree of angst would be stunted/one-sided if it grows at all in this scenario. :D

 

In this, I differ with the Staunch Defenders of Everything Lame, who say we should lavish great praise upon all hides, no matter how yucky.

 

Wait just a durn minute...... Does that mean I can't be in SDEL anymore? Oh wait, I never was. :D

 

Nawwww, I guess I'm still in PSDEPL. :D

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

Let me change your statement a bit and make it mine:

 

I would much rather foster a geocaching culture where good hides are celebrated and lame hides are privately looked down upon, or for the most part completely ignored, unless the negative input is more or less constructive.

Amen. You said it better than I did. I really don't advocate public humiliation. Except in some extreme cases. :)

 

The Bay Area has a good culture that is taking root and growing. But it doesn't happen overnight. I have long thought that there are some things that Groundspeak could do to encourage better hides, but , for whatever reason, they don't see that as part of their role. That's OK; I can respect that.

 

As a result, it tends to fall on local geocaching groups to think of positive ways to encourage better hides. IMO (and this is only my opinion) repeatedly intoning the mantra that "everybody likes different things" is not helpful to that goal.

Share this post


Link to post

As a result, it tends to fall on local geocaching groups to think of positive ways to encourage better hides. IMO (and this is only my opinion) repeatedly intoning the mantra that "everybody likes different things" is not helpful to that goal.

 

I'm starting to see the real truth of that after considering Googling Hrpty Hrrs' wise post I quoted a few posts ago:

 

I'm still holding to my original point about angst- it stems from people being unaware that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people. If I'm playing golf by myself, and want to score it any ol' way, it doesn't truly affect anyone else. I can play "my game, my way." So what if I use the little cheat codes when I play video games. I'll play "my game, my way."

 

Geocaching isn't like that, though. Just about every action connects to another person. Hiding, finding, moving trackeables ALWAYS connects to one or more parties. It's this disregard ("my game, my way") that is at the root (or is the fertilizer) of angst.

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post
It's even worse than you say here. Expressing a desire that lame caches didn't exist is immediately (and dishonestly) conflated with a desire to eliminate them via further rules. Let me be clear: I wish that lame hides did not exist. But I do not advocate their elimination via further rules or changes in geocaching.com policy.

 

... In this, I differ with the Staunch Defenders of Everything Lame, who say we should lavish great praise upon all hides, no matter how yucky. ...

Do you see the irony in your post?

 

On one hand, you chide those that misrepresent your position that lame caches are bad, but still should have a right to exist. On the other hand, you misrepresent the position of others. I don't remember anyone stating that 'we should lavish great praise upon all hides, no matter how yucky'. In fact, the contrary argument seems to be about the same as Snoogans' restatement of your position. If all of the lame-haters agree with his restatement, there really is nothing to argue about as both sides basically agree.

Share this post


Link to post

It's even worse than you say here. Expressing a desire that lame caches didn't exist is immediately (and dishonestly) conflated with a desire to eliminate them via further rules. Let me be clear: I wish that lame hides did not exist. But I do not advocate their elimination via further rules or changes in geocaching.com policy.

 

Look: I wish that slow checkout lines at the store didn't exist. I hate slow checkout lines. But I don't think there needs to be a law against slow checkout lines.

 

I would much rather foster a geocaching culture where good hides are celebrated and lame hides are looked down upon. In this, I differ with the Staunch Defenders of Everything Lame, who say we should lavish great praise upon all hides, no matter how yucky.

 

I can live with that difference of opinion; adults can disagree on many things and remain perfectly civil.

 

What I cannot abide, however, is the dishonesty of those who intentionally misconstrue arguments or try to put words into the mouths of other people. It's that dishonesty that causes the angst, not the legitimate differences of opinion.

Dude, how can you expect anyone to take you seriously? You act offended that anyone would suggest that "wishing lame caches didn't exist" is a call for them to be eliminated via rules. You even used the word "dishonestly" for that equation.

 

1) Link me to a quote where anyone that you call a SDOEL said that we thought those against lame caches was also calling for a rules change. We (or at least I) don't think you've ever called for a rule change against lame caches, but I do think that wishing they didn't exist is a wish that they'd never been hidden. There's a HUGE difference. And accusing us of accusing you of calling for a rules change is dishonest.

 

2) The biggest issue here. After that rant, you then procede to claim that anyone has ever said "we should lavish great praise upon all hides, no matter how yucky". Link me to where someone said that too. I challenge you.

 

Now, WHO is the one being dishonest in this thread?

 

Snoogans, this is a cause of angst for me. People claiming other people said stuff that was never said in order to make a point. Where on the tree does this live?

Share this post


Link to post

Somewhere as a leaf on the tree should be that awful picture of Briansnat with the squid. That was the cause of angst for many people...... :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

As a result, it tends to fall on local geocaching groups to think of positive ways to encourage better hides. IMO (and this is only my opinion) repeatedly intoning the mantra that "everybody likes different things" is not helpful to that goal.

 

I'm starting to see the real truth of that after considering Googling Hrpty Hrrs' wise post I quoted a few posts ago:

 

I'm still holding to my original point about angst- it stems from people being unaware that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people. If I'm playing golf by myself, and want to score it any ol' way, it doesn't truly affect anyone else. I can play "my game, my way." So what if I use the little cheat codes when I play video games. I'll play "my game, my way."

 

Geocaching isn't like that, though. Just about every action connects to another person. Hiding, finding, moving trackeables ALWAYS connects to one or more parties. It's this disregard ("my game, my way") that is at the root (or is the fertilizer) of angst.

 

Two good thoughs captured.

Share this post


Link to post

As a result, it tends to fall on local geocaching groups to think of positive ways to encourage better hides. IMO (and this is only my opinion) repeatedly intoning the mantra that "everybody likes different things" is not helpful to that goal.

 

I'm starting to see the real truth of that after considering Googling Hrpty Hrrs' wise post I quoted a few posts ago:

 

I'm still holding to my original point about angst- it stems from people being unaware that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people. If I'm playing golf by myself, and want to score it any ol' way, it doesn't truly affect anyone else. I can play "my game, my way." So what if I use the little cheat codes when I play video games. I'll play "my game, my way."

 

Geocaching isn't like that, though. Just about every action connects to another person. Hiding, finding, moving trackeables ALWAYS connects to one or more parties. It's this disregard ("my game, my way") that is at the root (or is the fertilizer) of angst.

 

Two good thoughts captured.

 

Yep! The outcome of this thread has been very interesting so far.

 

My next summary might take awhile. Our Tree of Angst visualization is really starting to come into focus.

 

I found this picture when I realized that my internal visualization seemed to be coming from imagry related to the HBO series Carnivale:

 

ep13_tree.jpg

 

75c3b6cf-b0ad-44e1-ba20-1f3d3194c5b2.jpg

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

a thought to maybe help...

 

you can buy large tins of chocolates with various types in them.

 

some people like the soft centres, some the hard and some will eat all because they have chocolate on them.

 

but would anyone think to ban the sale of the tins becuase not everyone likes all the chocolates inside?

 

eat the ones you like and give the others to the people who like them. then we're all happy. :mad:

I would ban the sale of the tins because the contents always get wet when left out in the woods. <_<

 

I can live with that difference of opinion; adults can disagree on many things and remain perfectly civil.

 

What I cannot abide, however, is the dishonesty of those who intentionally misconstrue arguments or try to put words into the mouths of other people. It's that dishonesty that causes the angst, not the legitimate differences of opinion.

Hear hear!

Edited by Confucius' Cat

Share this post


Link to post

I can live with that difference of opinion; adults can disagree on many things and remain perfectly civil.

 

What I cannot abide, however, is the dishonesty of those who intentionally misconstrue arguments or try to put words into the mouths of other people. It's that dishonesty that causes the angst, not the legitimate differences of opinion.

Hear hear!

 

Here is one of the things I agree with! I have a hard time understanding why some people choose to fabricate things to post and then expect others to believe them... Ex Cacher has posted that they only like hunting more difficult terrain caches and only hide them too... Yet the stats prove otherwise.

 

Cacher in question A.

 

73 of 960 3 or higher terrain .076 Finds

28 of 90 hides over 3 terrain... .311 Hides the hides column surprise surprise has more than a couple 1/1 micros! :)

Hardly a majority

 

This is just one of the more vocal persons too...

 

 

DISCLAIMER Names were removed to preclude construing a "personal attack" These stats are accurate, but just one person selected at "Random" to test a theory.

Share this post


Link to post
  • "This thread has gotten way too heated!"
  • "This thread has gone way too long!"
  • "Can't we all just get along?"
  • "This is spinning out of control!!!"
  • "This thread has stopped being happy happy bunnies-and-kittens and should be locked!!!"

Surely folks won't quote other's out of context to make a point, would they?

:ph34r::wub:

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler

Share this post


Link to post

I would ban the sale of the tins because the contents always get wet when left out in the woods. :ph34r:

 

 

but...but... they work just fine here in the desert. lets just all get behind the banning of gladware. ^_^:wub::D

Share this post


Link to post

I think the best answer is that gedocaching can and is different things to different people. Some want it to be different contest: first, most, hardest and others want to get out and get some exercise and see places they have not seen before. I am new at the game or sport or contest, whatever it is to you, and have enjoyed it veryh much. Finding some and having to go back a few times as I have learned more to finds one I could not the forst time I looked. Some I have not found.

 

You are what you eat!!!!!! :ph34r::D^_^:D:wub::D

Share this post


Link to post

I tried but I just couldn't bring myself to read every post in this thread. That said, and this may have already been brought up, it really is too bad that there isn't some form of "Rate this Cache" when you log a visit to the cache. Some thing more than the logs. It takes too long to read through all of the logs on the older caches and form a conclusion without taking extensive notes.

 

If a cache had a simple description but 100 people had given it a 5 out of 5 rating I would probably be more inclined to look for that than the cache with an extensive, exciting, great sounding description that had a 1 out of 5 rating.

 

It would be great to see the rating of a cache and how many have rated it. Maybe "Stars" like the difficulty with a number of people that have rated it next to the stars. If a cache has had many visitors but only one person has rated it, at say "2 stars", I may still go see for myself. On the other hand if 500 people have rated it, I can feel pretty comfortable that the cache has had a thorough review.

 

Besides all of that, if the angst of the forums is to much for you. Don't visit the Forums just go GeoCaching and have fun.

Share this post


Link to post

I guess my angst stems from the need of certain people to objectify a subjective matter. Maybe the guildelines set by geocaching.com are in fact brilliant in their simplicity. How else can you take a novel concept and make it appealing to millions of participants across a plethora of barriers such as location, language, age, physical abilities, etc., yet still leave it open to evolution.

 

Personally I think the constant cry to quantify everything (# hides, # finds, rating caches, finds vs hide ratios) and the push for more guidelines (what/how to trade, where/how/what to hide) is a detrement to caching. Eventually the indivdual elements that make caching so unique will be gone, as there will only be one cache and we'll know the hunt and we'll know the discovery, because that's all that's available.

Share this post


Link to post

A common misconception that leads to angst it that there is an average cacher. And moreover, that the poster is the average cacher. If you recognize that diffent people cache for different reasons and like different kinds of caches you'll be better off.

 

It would be great to see the rating of a cache and how many have rated it. Maybe "Stars" like the difficulty with a number of people that have rated it next to the stars. If a cache has had many visitors but only one person has rated it, at say "2 stars", I may still go see for myself. On the other hand if 500 people have rated it, I can feel pretty comfortable that the cache has had a thorough review.

 

If 500 people rated the cache, I probably wouldn't look for it since it would either be a lamppost micro or really lame grandfathered virtual. Caches that get that many visits are really easy to get to and really easy to find and I prefer a challenge. The cache that I would look for would have only a few ratings and while some will rate it high others would give it a low rating because it was too hard or it took too long. Every cacher likes different caches. I wouldn't mind ratings on specific attributes such as camouflage, interesting/scenic location, muggle factor, bushwhacking factor, etc.; as these are some what less subjective than how much one enjoyed the cache. That probably has more to do with what other caches they did that day and what specific experience they may have had looking for that cache on that day.

Edited by tozainamboku

Share this post


Link to post
I guess my angst stems from the need of certain people to objectify a subjective matter. Maybe the guildelines set by geocaching.com are in fact brilliant in their simplicity. How else can you take a novel concept and make it appealing to millions of participants across a plethora of barriers such as location, language, age, physical abilities, etc., yet still leave it open to evolution.

 

Personally I think the constant cry to quantify everything (# hides, # finds, rating caches, finds vs hide ratios) and the push for more guidelines (what/how to trade, where/how/what to hide) is a detrement to caching. Eventually the indivdual elements that make caching so unique will be gone, as there will only be one cache and we'll know the hunt and we'll know the discovery, because that's all that's available.

 

 

WHOA. I had to check your profile to see if we were related or possibly separated at birth. I probably have an unknown brother and/or sister in Thailand. My father was stationed there for several years during the war. :laughing::P:huh:

 

 

I hear ya, although I don't totally agree. Some folks neeeeed to feel better than others, or to have some drama. Including me. It's natural and darned entertaining when not personally envolved.

 

 

With that attitude, you'll leave here feeling smugly superior more often than not. It's like a drug. :blink::huh:

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

Time to trot this tired old horse back out. There's just too much of the same old angst this week.

 

Anyone care to continue the discussion? :D

 

To summarize our "Geocaching Tree of Angst" so far:

 

We have an atmosphere rich with CO2 that is represented by one atom of "Entitlement" ( C ) and two atoms of "Expectation." (O2) B)

 

We have a rich medium for the growth of angst in our soil, which is represented by a common/general, "unawareness that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people." B)

 

The water (H2O) that nourishes the tree is either actual or perceived (H2) negative interaction (O) between geocachers. :D

 

Our tree is furtilized by misconception, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding (MMM) whether actual or deliberate. B)

 

The roots of our tree are based in actual participation and experience in geocaching as an activity.... Hiding, finding, & moving trackables. :D

 

The trunk of our tree emerges over time. It is actually just individual experience that expresses itself in this way, "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about." B)

 

From there our "Tree of Angst" branches out in many directions. Some branches sprout from the trunk and some branches think they are attacking the trunk from the other side, but are seemingly unaware that they are part of the same tree. B)

 

The named branches of our tree so far:

 

The Theory of Geocaching Evolution

 

Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF ;)B)

 

Perceived Staunch Defenders of Everything Perceived Lame (P.S.D.E.P.L.)

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

Time to trot this tired old horse back out. There's just too much of the same old angst this week.

 

Anyone care to continue the discussion? :D

 

To summarize our "Geocaching Tree of Angst" so far:

 

We have an atmosphere rich with CO2 that is represented by one atom of "Entitlement" ( C ) and two atoms of "Expectation." (O2) B)

 

We have a rich medium for the growth of angst in our soil, which is represented by a common/general, "unawareness that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people." B)

 

The water (H2O) that nourishes the tree is either actual or perceived (H2) negative interaction (O) between geocachers. :D

 

Our tree is furtilized by misconception, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding (MMM) whether actual or deliberate. B)

 

The roots of our tree are based in actual participation and experience in geocaching as an activity.... Hiding, finding, & moving trackables. :D

 

The trunk of our tree emerges over time. It is actually just individual experience that expresses itself in this way, "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about." B)

 

From there our "Tree of Angst" branches out in many directions. Some branches sprout from the trunk and some branches think they are attacking the trunk from the other side, but are seemingly unaware that they are part of the same tree. B)

 

The named branches of our tree so far:

 

The Theory of Geocaching Evolution

 

Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF ;)B)

 

Perceived Staunch Defenders of Everything Perceived Lame (P.S.D.E.P.L.)

 

Continue that by 5 words or just change one letter? ;)

Share this post


Link to post

I felt like raising the forum angst level by reviving this great thread.

 

You just raised mine by having to look at that naked guy hottie avatar in the post above yours, which I believe I haven't seen in about 6 months. :D

Share this post


Link to post

:D:D

 

Oh, just thought I would add that I really dislike the word angst, makes us sound like a bunch of whiney teenagers, where majority of the posters here are 40+, angst does not really apply

 

I propose a change to start using GOF instead of angst

Edited by bogleman

Share this post


Link to post

I felt like raising the forum angst level by reviving this great thread.

 

You just raised mine by having to look at that naked guy hottie avatar in the post above yours, which I believe I haven't seen in about 6 months. :D

 

Adblock took care of that image a loooooooonnnnnggggg time ago. :D

Share this post


Link to post

People giving me the "it's not you, it's me" routine? I invented "it's not you, it's me". Nobody tells me it's them not me, if it's anybody it's me.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post

Hey gang, I finally identified another branch on the "Geocaching Tree of Angst!" It's bolded down at the bottom. :laughing:

 

To summarize our "Geocaching Tree of Angst" so far:

 

We have an atmosphere rich with CO2 that is represented by one atom of "Entitlement" ( C ) and two atoms of "Expectation." (O2) :ph34r:

 

We have a rich medium for the growth of angst in our soil, which is represented by a common/general, "unawareness that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people." :laughing:

 

The water (H2O) that nourishes the tree is either actual or perceived (H2) negative interaction (O) between geocachers. :lol:

 

Our tree is furtilized by misconception, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding (MMM) whether actual or deliberate. :blink:

 

The roots of our tree are based in actual participation and experience in geocaching as an activity.... Hiding, finding, & moving trackables. :lol:

 

The trunk of our tree emerges over time. It is actually just individual experience that expresses itself in this way, "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about." :lol:

 

From there our "Tree of Angst" branches out in many directions. Some branches sprout from the trunk and some branches think they are attacking the trunk from the other side, but are seemingly unaware that they are part of the same tree. :laughing:

 

The named branches of our tree so far:

 

The Theory of Geocaching Evolution

 

Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF :lol::)

 

Perceived Staunch Defenders of Everything Perceived Lame (P.S.D.E.P.L.)

 

Geocaching was so much better way back when

 

Okay, I was gonna call that branch "Geocaching was so much better way back in the BEFORE time. Bonk! Bonk! Bad kid cacher for ruining it!" But, I didn't know how many folks would appreciate the obscure Star Trek: TOS reference. B):laughing::rolleyes:

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post
Hey gang, I finally identified another branch on the "Geocaching Tree of Angst!" It's bolded down at the bottom. B)
Geocaching was so much better way back when

Okay, I was gonna call that branch "Geocaching was so much better way back in the BEFORE time. Bonk! Bonk! Bad kid cacher for ruining it!" But, I didn't know how many folks would appreciate the obscure Star Trek: TOS reference. :ph34r::):rolleyes:

You probably should word it a little different. There was a smaller percentage of trache back then. GPS have gotten better. Tools have gotten better. The overall quality of caches has gotten worse. So...

 

"The caches were so much better back then."

Share this post


Link to post

Hey gang, I finally identified yet another branch on the "Geocaching Tree of Angst!" It's bolded down at the bottom. :D

 

To summarize our "Geocaching Tree of Angst" so far:

 

We have an atmosphere rich with CO2 that is represented by one atom of "Entitlement" ( C ) and two atoms of "Expectation." (O2) :)

 

We have a rich medium for the growth of angst in our soil, which is represented by a common/general, "unawareness that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people." :D

 

The water (H2O) that nourishes the tree is either actual or perceived (H2) negative interaction (O) between geocachers. :rolleyes:

 

Our tree is furtilized by misconception, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding (MMM) whether actual or deliberate. :rolleyes:

 

The roots of our tree are based in actual participation and experience in geocaching as an activity.... Hiding, finding, & moving trackables. :rolleyes:

 

The trunk of our tree emerges over time. It is actually just individual experience that expresses itself in this way, "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about." :rolleyes:

 

From there our "Tree of Angst" branches out in many directions. Some branches sprout from the trunk and some branches think they are attacking the trunk from the other side, but are seemingly unaware that they are part of the same tree. :angry:

 

The named branches of our tree so far:

 

The Theory of Geocaching Evolution

 

Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF :rolleyes::)

 

Perceived Staunch Defenders of Everything Perceived Lame (P.S.D.E.P.L.)

 

Geocaching was so much better way back when

 

The Theory That It's the "OTHER GUY" Who Is Just Sucking the Fun Out of Geocaching

Share this post


Link to post

Speaking of angst; <cue creepy music>

 

Did you know that Snoogans hates puppies? And sunshine?

 

Did you know that Keystone sets beautiful flowers ablaze just for fun? He once said that he opposes newborn babies and little kitties.

 

These guys just don't reflect our values. Vote against them this Tuesday.

<music scratches needle across record>

 

Sorry, that was last week. Guess the election crap I'm seeing on the DVR during episodes of House is getting to me.

Share this post


Link to post

The "Geocaching Tree of Angst" is probably the best piece of writing I have read on these forums. Anytime I get self righteous and want to pontificate around here, I will remember that Snoogans lurks in the shadows, ready to graft my banalities onto the tree.

Share this post


Link to post

The "Geocaching Tree of Angst" is probably the best piece of writing I have read on these forums. Anytime I get self righteous and want to pontificate around here, I will remember that Snoogans lurks in the shadows, ready to graft my banalities onto the tree.

 

Awww shucks. :)

 

Thanks for the compliment. I just call the spades as I see 'em. If it's pointy, has a handle, and might be good for digging.... Guess what you have?

Share this post


Link to post

Speaking of angst; <cue creepy music>

 

Did you know that Snoogans hates puppies? And sunshine?

 

Did you know that Keystone sets beautiful flowers ablaze just for fun? He once said that he opposes newborn babies and little kitties.

 

These guys just don't reflect our values. Vote against them this Tuesday.

<music scratches needle across record>

 

Sorry, that was last week. Guess the election crap I'm seeing on the DVR during episodes of House is getting to me.

 

Get it right. Snoogans hates chinldren. :)

 

503cb793-5ca2-4f4d-8956-3f0a74c14194.jpg

Why else would he dress his own this way?

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...