Long Log = Deleted Log

[+MutherAndSun]

Last month I had an owner delete my finds because he accused me of leaving "verbal diarrhea" on his cache page. Upon returning to the same area this month, it appears this same owner has persuaded another local cacher into the same practice.

 

He claimed that:

As you probably know many cachers, myself included, download cache files to GSAK or Easy GPS for paperless caching, and we refer to the logs for hints when we are onsite. Something as large as this monstrous post of yours will eliminate several logs being downloaded for each cache.

 

Even if I use the 4000 characters allowed for a single log, I am not aware of that interfering with GSAK or Cachemate.

 

He also instructed me to:

Just shorten them up - if you look at all the other posts on any other caches, you'll see what is appropriate length and content

 

Again, I wasn't aware that there was an "appropriate length." As far as content, there is never anything derogatory about any cacher or any other inappropriate content or offensive language.

 

Furthermore, he said my logs are:

huge, overblown, and truthfully not even that humorous" and it "deprives people trying to find my caches from being able to read the logs of others who actually have something to say.

 

And if I wanted to re-log I could, but it had to be short or:

If that's not possible, a simple "SL TFTC!" is just fine

.

 

I decided that for his caches I would simply leave "SL" But as I first mentioned, it appears he has persuaded another rather Newbie cacher into this same practice.

 

When I contacted the local reviewer for advise I was referred to the guidlines: http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#maint

The responsibility of your [cache owner] listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.

 

My questions are:

1. How "TNLNSL" can be all that more useful when searching for a cache?

2. Has anyone else ever been deleted by an owner for logs being too long?

3. If the owner hasn't added a logging requirement to limit log length, how can the deletion be justified?

4. How is "bogus, counterfeit, off topic" to be interpreted?

5. Should an owner be able to delete a find because he doesn't enjoy the log?

and finally

6. Am I missing something here?

[+egami]

My questions are:

1. How "TNLNSL" can be all that more useful when searching for a cache?

2. Has anyone else ever been deleted by an owner for logs being too long?

3. If the owner hasn't added a logging requirement to limit log length, how can the deletion be justified?

4. How is "bogus, counterfeit, off topic" to be interpreted?

5. Should an owner be able to delete a find because he doesn't enjoy the log?

and finally

6. Am I missing something here?

 

Let me skip to 6. Log owners have final say, period. It sucks because you probably wrote a very well, thought out note, but at the end of the day they can delete as they see fit. I would just ignore it and move on because it will likely never change.

 

Sorry to hear that.

[+tabulator32]

I don't think I would delete someone's find because of the length of their log.

 

If it was filled with sarcastic diatribe, continuous profanity or just pure garbage (random characters, whatever) I would delete it, however, if it were the true sentiment or observations of the finder, I see no reason to delete it.

 

My first reaction is to think the cache owner might be a bit too selective about the logs but its their cache and their inclination. If you really want to log the cache for the find, just go back to that one and do as the cache owner said and log it as SL and go on.

 

You can probably get away with being more descriptive in the next log you compose.

 

I always enjoy reading a bit of detail about what is going on around my caches.

[+briansnat]

I think most cache owners enjoy long logs. To me it usually means someone really enjoyed my cache and I'm thrilled when I get one.

 

Apparently you ran into someone who not only doesn't like them, he is also a control freak. The funny thing is that there are also control freaks who threaten to delete logs if you don't write enough.

 

I suppose your only choices are leaving TNLNSL logs when you find this clown's caches, or putting his caches on your ignore list. Personally I'd do the latter. I don't have time to deal with childish cache owners.

[+webscouter.]

Man, I hope I never have to find this persons caches!!!

 

There sure are a lot of caches to ignore, too bad we can't ignore a cacher.

[+briansnat]

I just looked at a few of your logs and if they are indicative of the kinds of logs that were deleted, then it's the cache owner who has a problem, not you. Your logs are perfectly fine from what I see.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

In the end, cache finders have the power to ignore any cache hider who places rules on thier caches the finders dislike. I love reading the long descriptive logs, and I try to leave good, long descriptive logs for the good caches, short logs for the mediocre. But if a placer ever deletes one of my logs for such a frivolous reason I will never honor his caches with my presence again.

[+joranda]

It is sad to see that there is too much power control issues o all sides of geocaching. Why not leave God, god, and everyone else just be normal. Too many power trips here.

[+The Leprechauns]

Like the OP, I enjoy writing long logs. It helps tell the story of how I spent my caching day, and it lets the owner know what kind of experience I had, why I was there, what I liked and didn't like, etc.

 

As has been stated, the owner has the absolute right to delete any log. The cache reviewer quoted the correct section of the guidelines to you. It's an issue between the log owner and the cache owner.

 

So, you either comply with the owner's demands or lose your smiley. I would likely put all the owner's caches on my "ignore" list if it happened to me. So far, I've gotten nothing but "thank you's" for writing logs that are longer and more interesting than "TNLNSL, TFTC."

 

Has this cache owner logged finds on any of your caches, Muther and Sun? If so, consider writing back and informing him that you are imposing a 200 word minimum on his logs, and the content needs to be high-quality, creative, and cache-specific.

 

I can only recall a few instances where creative loggers had their logs deleted. flask is one example; she would write about things that had little to do with the geocache, and some owners didn't like that. I think her logs are works of art.

[+FireRef]

I agree that this is rather silly - I really like it much better when I receive descriptive logs on my caches. There are several cachers in my area who do nothing but post THANKS FOR THE HIDE. (yes, it's all caps) - makes for some really boring reading. Sometimes there just isn't much to write about some of the caches, but there is always something interesting you can say.

 

To delete logs, if they are related in some way to caching and don't give away stuff the owner doesn't want, simply because they are too long or descriptive, seems a little silly. The rules of the website allow this, but it doesn't make it right...

[+TrailGators]

I would likely put all the owner's caches on my "ignore" list if it happened to me.

So would I! I have been asking for that feature!

[+tozainamboku]

All of this cache owners caches should be changed to mystery/unknown as he seems to have a additional logging requirement. I know of one cacher who said that he would delete any TNLNSL or TFTC logs on his cache. He was required to change his cache to a mystery/unknown type as this was deemed an additional logging requirement. A requirement that limits logs to a certain length would seem to be an ALR as well.

[+MutherAndSun]

I would likely put all the owner's caches on my "ignore" list if it happened to me.

 

I did that after the initial deletions, but since I was caching with a partner this time, I didn't want my friend to pass on the caches, so I thought what the heck, I'll log them too.

 

Has this cache owner logged finds on any of your caches, Muther and Sun? If so, consider writing back and informing him that you are imposing a 200 word minimum on his logs, and the content needs to be high-quality, creative, and cache-specific.

 

LOL This is a good idea. I have a "Do Not Find This Cache" which requires finders to log at least 30 words, and that one is fun to read.

 

If you really want to log the cache for the find, just go back to that one and do as the cache owner said and log it as SL and go on.

Funny, when I write short logs people ask "what's wrong with that cache?"

[+Parabola]

It seems this cache owner must have a problem with logs or something. Maybe they should get out of the habit of looking at others logs and find caches on their own. I run GSAK and it always has the last four logs for me no matter how long they are. I would just suggest don't hunt this person's caches anymore or just leave them a log that says SL.

[+MaplessInSeattle]

I agree with

... should be changed to mystery/unknown as he seems to have a additional logging requirement. A requirement that limits logs to a certain length would seem to be an ALR as well.

about the ALR for this cache hider. If he's requiring specific logs, according to the rules it should be Mystery cache.

 

Also, as a cache owner, and a newbie, I and my wife REALLY enjoy longer posts. It means a lot to us, especially when they include feedback, both the positive and the negative. It lets us know what we're doing right(Great camo, love the fresh ideas, thanks for getting me back into caching, etc), and what we're doing wrong(MIS you usually have good coordinates but these sucked, your magnets broke, Your camo broke).

IF we just got XNSL, or TFTC all of the time, we would have stopped hiding after our first cache.

 

Different strokes for different folks.

Edited December 29, 2007 by MaplessInSeattle

[+PhxChem]

huge, overblown, and truthfully not even that humorous" and it "deprives people trying to find my caches from being able to read the logs of others who actually have something to say.

 

New logging requirement: Must be humorous!?

 

Is it just me, or did the cache owner's explanation...I don't know...."huge, overblown, and truthfully not even that humorous"?

[+Nurse Nanna]

Boy would that owner ever hate my logs!

I have a reputation for long logs, and for admitting the funny things that happened on the way. I sometimes relate it to some similar situatiions, or refer to some thing that the cache reminded me of in the past.

I have had folks tell me since day one that they love my logs and would rather read a story, then just see a few capitalized letters with nothing else.

 

How sad. Perhaps that person has a reading problem and just can't admit it.

 

Or a control problem.

 

There are very few caches I avoid, but I would not want to do these. It would just be a real disappointment to have a good time finding a cache, then not be able to share the story. It is a log of events, not just a signature of a find.

 

Too bad. He doesn't know what he is missing.

 

anne

[+Snoogans]

Like the OP, I enjoy writing long logs. It helps tell the story of how I spent my caching day, and it lets the owner know what kind of experience I had, why I was there, what I liked and didn't like, etc.

 

As has been stated, the owner has the absolute right to delete any log. The cache reviewer quoted the correct section of the guidelines to you. It's an issue between the log owner and the cache owner.

 

So, you either comply with the owner's demands or lose your smiley. I would likely put all the owner's caches on my "ignore" list if it happened to me. So far, I've gotten nothing but "thank you's" for writing logs that are longer and more interesting than "TNLNSL, TFTC."

 

Has this cache owner logged finds on any of your caches, Muther and Sun? If so, consider writing back and informing him that you are imposing a 200 word minimum on his logs, and the content needs to be high-quality, creative, and cache-specific.

 

I can only recall a few instances where creative loggers had their logs deleted. flask is one example; she would write about things that had little to do with the geocache, and some owners didn't like that. I think her logs are works of art.

 

Yep. What he said for the most part.

 

I tend to get wordy about a good cache. I've started to write less and less on event pages though, because I've literally said it all a hundred times over.

 

I hide caches in order to get long thoughtful logs. You don't see too many TNLNTFTC logs on my better executed caches.

 

Whomever is deleting your logs has control issues and a serious lack of imagination. Pity the foo.

[+JohnnyVegas]

Last month I had an owner delete my finds because he accused me of leaving "verbal diarrhea" on his cache page. Upon returning to the same area this month, it appears this same owner has persuaded another local cacher into the same practice.

 

If he ever logs one of your caches, you can delete his log for being to short and not well thought out

Edited December 29, 2007 by JohnnyVegas

[+The Herd]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day. While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over. I like to hear individual accounts of each log, even if it's just a "was really snowing at this one." I, as a hider, really dislike the "copy/paste" logs on caches because you just keep having to read the same thing over, and over, when out hunting caches. Perhaps it is this habit that has upset the people that are deleting your logs. My suggestion to you would be to try to recount something about each cache visited that was memorable. While it may not have anything to do with the cache itself, it is showing a bit of "uniqueness" to each find.

Edited December 29, 2007 by The Herd

[+OzGuff]

I agree with most of what has already been written. And as the owner of more than a few caches I always enjoy reading the lengthier logs, and humor is most definitely a bonus. And as a cache finder who uses GSAK and CacheMate I can't think of an instance where a long log has had a detrimental impact on my caching experiences.

 

Moderator: What follows may need to be spun-off into a separate thread...

 

The guideline quoted by the reviewer -- The responsibility of your [cache owner] listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. -- has the potential to become contentious, and I believe that most geocachers, reviewers, and Groundspeak administrators mis-interpret it.

 

Who owns the cache page? Groundspeak. Cache pages are NOT owned by individual cache "owners"; if they were, then reviewers and administrators could not archive them without "owner" permission. Since my online log is a record of my experience before/during/after the cache discovery process why is it that MY log takes a backseat to the vagaries of the cache "owner"? It is pretty obvious that Groundspeak doesn't want to get in the middle of any online log quality control feuds such as Muther&Sun stumbled upon.

 

I'm not upset about the current situation, but feel that deleting a log for anything other than bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements should not be allowed. And if the cache page includes a statement like, "Online logs that are too long/short/funny/droll will be deleted by the cache owner.", then it should be listed as a Mystery cache due to the ALR. And I would have no problems with online logs being deleted by the cache "owner" assuming they are too long/short/funny/droll.

 

Your thoughts on log deletions would be appreciated.

[+MutherAndSun]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day.

 

Ahh, I thought that too. I even apologize for some C&P that were really lame, but in those instances I thought I was doing a good thing by summarizing the entire adventure, and that each separate owner could see how their cache fell into the mix of things. But what about those who copy and paste TFTC 120 times? Or even those who summarize their day's events in two or three sentences and C&P that again and again? I questioned the cache owner specifically about 2 previous finders whose logs were C&P and also my caching partner who C&P but was not deleted. His email response when I asked for permission to re-log with the original content was:

I have no problem with relogging - just not so dang long....Your caching partner understands that a short log can do the job

emphasis by cache owner in email

 

While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over.

I totally agree with this as a cache owner, but I don't delete those finders who C&P logs in my caches no matter the length. There is an easy solution for annoying C&P logs. Only read the first one.

[+The Herd]

I understand your points. I think that the huge C&Ps would be more annoying as a finder than a hider. As a hider, you can read the first one, and just delete the rest of the email notifications you get. As a hider, you really don't find out about it until you are out in the field, pulling out the palm...looking for a hint in some logs, and WHAMO, there they are, all the long C&Ps.

As an owner, I really dislike the "TNLN" C&Ps as well. Though, I would never delete the finds, either way.I prefer to hear some great memory that they took from the cache hunt. While I know I won't get that from every finder that hunts one of my caches, I as a finder would prefer to have to scroll past those 4 letters than past 3000+ words pasted 175+ times. Hopefully the owner sends you a better explanation soon.

Edited December 29, 2007 by The Herd

[+racer2814]

MutherAndSun's caching partner chiming in here.

 

Now my logs are nowhere near as long(maybe 100 words) and usually only 1/2 copy + paste. I have been told the copy+paste part has to go and please don't put 1 of 44, #2 of 44, etc.

 

First, the copy+paste part is usually the summary of the day's trip. Same day, same experience right? When you drive 3hrs to an area to cache, we try to stay as long as humanly possible and find as many as we can. Gas prices, you know. Anyway, some of them blend together and they are all part of the same experience.

 

I try to write something about each individual one but when you're at the 25th guardrail or 10th fire hydrant signing a nano and nothing happened in the .15mi prior to the cache and nothing happened in the .18 mi to the next PNG, what exactly am I supposed to say? I dislike just TFTC or Found it logs unless it was a really crappy cache.

 

If there are additional logging requirements then they should all be mystery caches.

 

I may have to join the cache owner boycott, which is really sad.

[+racer2814]

Forgot to add- I really hate conforming.

 

FREEDOM OF SPEECH! We do still have that in this country right?

 

3 of my favorite quotes for your reading pleasure.

 

"Without free speech no search for truth is possible... no discovery of truth is useful... Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."

~Charles BRADLAUGH

 

"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power. "

~Frederick DOUGLASS

 

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."

~Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE

[+ironman114]

MutherAndSun's caching partner chiming in here.

 

Now my logs are nowhere near as long(maybe 100 words) and usually only 1/2 copy + paste. I have been told the copy+paste part has to go and please don't put 1 of 44, #2 of 44, etc.

 

First, the copy+paste part is usually the summary of the day's trip. Same day, same experience right? When you drive 3hrs to an area to cache, we try to stay as long as humanly possible and find as many as we can. Gas prices, you know. Anyway, some of them blend together and they are all part of the same experience.

 

I try to write something about each individual one but when you're at the 25th guardrail or 10th fire hydrant signing a nano and nothing happened in the .15mi prior to the cache and nothing happened in the .18 mi to the next PNG, what exactly am I supposed to say? I dislike just TFTC or Found it logs unless it was a really crappy cache.

 

If there are additional logging requirements then they should all be mystery caches.

 

I may have to join the cache owner boycott, which is really sad.

 

If Ihad found 25 guardrail or 10 fire hydrant caches in one day I wouldn't c/p TFTC. I would just c/p "found it".

 

Come to think of it. I wouldn't need to c/p at all, because after the first one I wouldn't do any more.

 

There is a guard rail micro only a mile from me that has been there more than a year and I still haven't looked for it. Never will.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I find what happened to the OP to be bizarre! Personally, I love to find long and well-written logs, including DNFs, on our cache listing pages, and I suspect that over 90% of cachers feel the same way. And, I tend to leave relatively long logs myself, written with lots of tender loving care, even for my DNFs, etc. In fact, I have received lots of compliments about, and thanks for, this habit over the years!

 

However, at this point in time, cache owners do seem to largely have the final say over what goes on their cache listing pages in terms of logs, and so if the cache owner in question wants to be a control freak, I guess that the reality is that she/he is free to exercise that control as they see fit. Privately and personally, I find the viewpoint (about the so-called hazards of long logs) and the nit-picking level of control think to be inane. If it were me, I would simply avoid any caches placed by this hider like the plague!

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Long, interesting log that's unique to a particular cache = good.

Long unique log that has absolutely nothing to do with the cache = can be interesting, but not necessarily good.

Long log that is copy and pasted for every single cache done on that particular day but only a line or two about any single cache = not so good- this is a perfect example of longer logs not always being better logs.

 

Cut the fluff, leave only the comments about the cache you're logging and I don't think you'll have any more complaints.

[+tabulator32]

"Without free speech no search for truth is possible... no discovery of truth is useful... Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."

~Charles BRADLAUGH

 

"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power. "

~Frederick DOUGLASS

 

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."

~Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE

 

This bears repeating.

 

[+webscouter.]

One of my favorite loggers was a cacher by the name of oregone. He wrote the longest, most creative logs that sometimes had something to do with caching. I've spent many a long hour reading his past logs.

 

Sure do miss him.

[+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher]

Geocaching is a perfect mirror of life.

 

Just like life, you have encountered a person whom you perhaps wish you hadn't (taming down my original thoughts to meet forum guidelines). While I haven't been subjected to your problem, I have a couple of cachers whose caches I refuse to hunt. One because of the quality of their hides, another because of their attitude and antics towards other geocachers.

 

This is what the ignore bookmark feature is for. Don't be afraid to use it. When caching with friends who still wish to find and log a cache you are ignoring - go ahead and let them. Have the guts to pass on the smiley. You will be surprised at how good you will feel.

 

I strive never to be so caught up in the numbers game that I compromise my values.

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

[+Harry Dolphin]

5. Should an owner be able to delete a find because he doesn't enjoy the log?

 

Yes. That is the cache owner's prerogative.

 

I am not noted for my verbose logs. I average 42 words (and I'm surprised that it that's that long.)

Other than one cache with certain requirements, I've only deleted two logs. (Both said "Did not sign the log". Hey, if you're stupid enough to tell me that...) I do wonder about some loggers. But if they're wordy, or TNLNSL, that's all fine with me.

 

I have had one log deleted because "You never have anything nice to say about my caches." (Out of two logs deleted of more than 1300.) Hmm... There might be reason for this? Okay, I rub some people the wrong way... But, hey, I know how to ignore a owner's caches, and delete those caches from my GSAK. So, all's right with the world, and there are a lot of other caches out there to find!

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

WOW, sounds like a real bummer. For me, a lot of the fun is in reading all the stories and reflections of the finders, and I have recently been disappointed in the trend of new Cachers to immediatly log with "SL TFTC", even on their FIRST CACHE! That is a fine tag to add to the end of a log that you've written, but I see it as pure laziness and selfishness if that is all that is written.

 

I find a lot of enjoyment in turning even a boring old LPC into a written adventure. On the flipside, I'm seeing boring old acryonyms as logs for Caches that are well placed, creative, and very involved. It's a real pity that some players are missing out on such a big part of the game, and an even bigger pity that some are demanding we do the same. I think they may have mental problems.

Edited December 29, 2007 by WRITE SHOP ROBERT

[CoyoteRed]

Ahh, I thought that too. I even apologize for some C&P that were really lame, but in those instances I thought I was doing a good thing by summarizing the entire adventure, and that each separate owner could see how their cache fell into the mix of things. But what about those who copy and paste TFTC 120 times? Or even those who summarize their day's events in two or three sentences and C&P that again and again?

I don't care for any copy-n-paste logs. I'm not going to delete them, but my opinion is each cache should stand on its own merit for each log. If you loved the cache then by all means write a book. If you didn't and you still want to log it then "TNLNSL" could be all it deserves.

 

The reasoning is some folks judge a cache by the size of the logs. It's fairly easy to judge how well a cache is liked simply by scanning the page for the length of logs. You don't have to read them, just scan them. By having large copy-n-pasted logs then it gives a bit of a false impression is this respect.

 

Additionally, I don't really care about the order in which you found my cache. I'm simply not interested.

 

With that said, I've long thought it would be a nice feature for there to be a "forward" and "back" button on the logs to show the next cache that person logged and the previous one, respectively. Not that I'd use it very often if ever, but it would certainly expand the idea of the logs being a history of an individual's caching past.

 

To expand that idea further, a page could be created so the logs are shown in order of logging much like on our lists for logs in the past month. This would create a better feel of the one's caching activity.

 

Personally, I'd prefer that each log is individualized for each cache. If TNLNSL or TFTC is all it deserves then by all means do it. But I don't really care to read about the other caches you found that day on this cache. I want to know your thoughts on this cache and it doesn't matter to me how long it is.

 

BTW, I'm a PDA user, too. Length of log doesn't bother me.

[+briansnat]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day. While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over. I like to hear individual accounts of each log, even if it's just a "was really snowing at this one." I, as a hider, really dislike the "copy/paste" logs on caches because you just keep having to read the same thing over, and over, when out hunting caches. Perhaps it is this habit that has upset the people that are deleting your logs. My suggestion to you would be to try to recount something about each cache visited that was memorable. While it may not have anything to do with the cache itself, it is showing a bit of "uniqueness" to each find.

 

 

Good advice!

 

First, the copy+paste part is usually the summary of the day's trip. Same day, same experience right? When you drive 3hrs to an area to cache, we try to stay as long as humanly possible and find as many as we can. Gas prices, you know. Anyway, some of them blend together and they are all part of the same experience.

 

 

I don't see anything wrong with partial C&P logs after a long day of caching. I don't mind someone starting all his logs for a day with things like "I was in the area to visit my in-laws and stepped out for the afternoon to find the nearby caches" as long as he writes something unique about the cache in the rest of his log.

 

I would however be somewhat annoyed by lengthy C&P logs. Looking at some of M&S's logs I see a tendency to do that. Personally though I'd read it and move on. I still don't think deleting them is the appropriate response.

 

This nonsense of owners who try to control every detail regarding their caches, including quality of and length of logs is just that - nonsense. As more people get into geocaching you see more of these control freaks and power trippers masquerading as cache owners.

Edited December 29, 2007 by briansnat

[+joranda]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day. While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over. I like to hear individual accounts of each log, even if it's just a "was really snowing at this one." I, as a hider, really dislike the "copy/paste" logs on caches because you just keep having to read the same thing over, and over, when out hunting caches. Perhaps it is this habit that has upset the people that are deleting your logs. My suggestion to you would be to try to recount something about each cache visited that was memorable. While it may not have anything to do with the cache itself, it is showing a bit of "uniqueness" to each find.

 

 

Good advice!

 

Have you guys not gone on long cache runs, then try and not paste and copy the caches that you have visited. I paste and copy all my long cache runs. It's too hard to type long and different things for all those caches. I just try and bring up highlights for all the caches that I visit.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

... and nothing happened in the .15mi prior to the cache and nothing happened in the .18 mi to the next PNG, what exactly am I supposed to say?...

I find that a lot more can happen in .15 Mi on the way to the next PNG...if I'm not driving to them. I will end up finding fewer caches, but I can easily turn 5 or 6 PNGs into a 3-4 mile hike with plenty happening between Caches. This also leaves loads of opportunity for another pastime (photography), and can turn that short distance into an adventure. I recently logged a DNF on a PLM, but mostly because when I got to the site, I found some really cool things to photograph rather than looking for the Cache. I probabaly got more from NFing that one than most others got from finding it. Who knows what you'll find between Caches if you're on foot (a cool store?, a great coffee shop?, a penny?, something to photograph?, a penny to photograph?, a new friend?, and don't forget, a little gas left in the tank)

 

At the beginning of the day, one must decide if they want 44 identical smiley faces on the website, or 5-6 different individual experiences.(not an attack, just an example)

 

I guess I'm going a little off the topic, but that's the same way I can make an adventure out of a Cache hidden in a parking lot.

[CoyoteRed]

Have you guys not gone on long cache runs, then try and not paste and copy the caches that you have visited.

You mean like go for a week, find a bunch of caches, and then have to log them? Sure, I have. No copy and pasting either. No problems here.

 

Maybe you've reached past your maximum caching speed if you can't individually log each cache? Everyone says that logging is part of the process and I understand that some caches aren't much more than a "copy-n-paste" itself, but if you can't individually log each cache...

 

Yeah, I know. I've even heard folks request a feature of this site where you can bulk log caches. I think when it gets to that point then the logs are no longer about leaving feedback to the owner and your fellow cachers, and is simply about the logger only. Might as well include a new bookmark type that is a hybrid of "found it" and "ignore"--it adds to the count, but doesn't show up in the logs. Why waste a worthy slot in the last 5 logs?

[+scuba dude]

I personally find the actions of the offending log owner to be horrible. When far too many people write "TNLNSL" from pure laziness, a nice long log is a blessing to read. I'm not the greatest writer, nor do I possess the "gift of gab". But I try to at least write several lines for each cache. If I go on a cache run, I may C&P several lines about the entire run in general and then add something about that particular cache cache.

 

My advice to the OP would be to:

 

1: Contact the local reviewer, with copies of email messages and inform him/her of the ALR for these caches.

 

2: Put all of that hider's caches on ignore.

 

3: Move on with your caching, and don't give Mr. control freak a second thought.

 

SD

[+MountainMudbug]

Sounds like that cache owner needs to take a little time off from the anal efficiency task force.

I'd avoid their hides and save myself the annoyance.

[+CYBret]

Being semi-local to the area you're talking about and having received a couple emails about the issue I have to wonder, has he singled you out or is he doing this to all cachers?

 

If he's singled you out, is there a reason why? Are the logs he's talking about anything like this one, which was apparently copied and pasted 138 times in that area. Or this one, which I received several copies of when you were in my area at the beginning of the month.

 

As a cache owner I'm not going to delete a log just for being long, but honestly I can see the frustration. I don't copy and paste my hides. Each cache I have is unique and I really appreciate unique logs on them. On top of that, can you imagine being a cacher in an area where the above log was copied and pasted 138 times? I go back and read local logs. I wouldn't want to have to scroll through all that over and over again and I really would hate to have to scroll through it on my Palm.

 

If you want to tell the day's story why not just start a blog, write your long log there and paste the link in every cache you find that day? After that you could write the information that was relevant to the particular cache in each individual log.

 

I myself have been known for some long winded logs (no really, it's true). I understand the desire to tell the story of your hunt, the story of what happened on the way to your hunt, or even the story of the girlfriend you used to have in the town you found the cache and how she screwed up your life. But every log doesn't have to be a Dickens novel. No one's getting paid by the word.

[+Kit Fox]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day. While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over. I like to hear individual accounts of each log, even if it's just a "was really snowing at this one." I, as a hider, really dislike the "copy/paste" logs on caches because you just keep having to read the same thing over, and over, when out hunting caches. Perhaps it is this habit that has upset the people that are deleting your logs. My suggestion to you would be to try to recount something about each cache visited that was memorable. While it may not have anything to do with the cache itself, it is showing a bit of "uniqueness" to each find.

 

 

Good advice!

 

Have you guys not gone on long cache runs, then try and not paste and copy the caches that you have visited. I paste and copy all my long cache runs. It's too hard to type long and different things for all those caches. I just try and bring up highlights for all the caches that I visit.

 

I've written unique 30 plus words logs, for 25 caches on an all day cache hunt. I jot down simple notes to remember specific details. It is very easy for me.

 

As for the OP, you don't happen to have a copy of the original log? I'd like to see both sides of the debate. If your log was nothing but a "C & P" it might clarify a few things.

Edited December 29, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+hukilaulau]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day. While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over. I like to hear individual accounts of each log, even if it's just a "was really snowing at this one." I, as a hider, really dislike the "copy/paste" logs on caches because you just keep having to read the same thing over, and over, when out hunting caches. Perhaps it is this habit that has upset the people that are deleting your logs. My suggestion to you would be to try to recount something about each cache visited that was memorable. While it may not have anything to do with the cache itself, it is showing a bit of "uniqueness" to each find.

 

 

Good advice!

 

Have you guys not gone on long cache runs, then try and not paste and copy the caches that you have visited. (Yes, some people do exactly that. )I paste and copy all my long cache runs. (That's cuz your stated goals are all about looking at your own numbers.) It's too hard to type long and different things for all those caches. (I've got one word for ya: "Stayfloopy") I just try and bring up highlights for all the caches that I visit. (That is certainly your right. Some folks want to give something back to the hiders that made their big numbers possible.)

[/quo

Edited December 29, 2007 by hukilaulau

[+Mopar]

He claimed that:

As you probably know many cachers, myself included, download cache files to GSAK or Easy GPS for paperless caching, and we refer to the logs for hints when we are onsite. Something as large as this monstrous post of yours will eliminate several logs being downloaded for each cache.

Everyone else has really covered the important parts, but since there are a lot of new cachers this week reading this I want to make this clear for them so they don't make the same mistake.

As far as I remember EasyGPS doesn't store the logs or hints at all (haven't used it in years, maybe this has changed?).

As far as the Pocket Queries(PQ), CacheMate (a program to load cache pages onto a PalmPilot-type device) and Geocaching Swiss Army Knife (GSAK) are all concerned, 1 log counts as 1 log. Doesn't matter if that log is 4 characters long or 4000 characters long, you get the same amount of logs per cache (usually 5, which is the max for PQs). Unless your logs are so long that you have to continue them in a second log (as a NOTE, I would hope!) then the cache owner is mistaken. If that is really his/her main problem with your logs then once they learn they are mistaken they should have no issue with length of logs.

 

On a personal level, I stopped logging online several years ago. One reason is I generally like to write long logs as well. I'm also a horrible typist (I've spent about 15-20 minutes just on this post so far) and I was finding caches faster then I could log them the way I like. So I tried writing short logs like this cache owner asks for. What happened is those cache owners started thinking I didn't like their caches since I didn't write nice long logs for them. So I just stopped. Just goes to show ya can't please everyone, but as you see in this thread *most* cache owners prefer longer logs to shorter ones.

Edited December 29, 2007 by Mopar

[+Kit Fox]

Being semi-local to the area you're talking about and having received a couple emails about the issue I have to wonder, has he singled you out or is he doing this to all cachers?

 

If he's singled you out, is there a reason why? Are the logs he's talking about anything like this one, which was apparently copied and pasted 138 times in that area. Or this one, which I received several copies of when you were in my area at the beginning of the month.

 

 

That explains the "other side" of the story. Man those logs look like they were generated by a robot who kept pushing the "log this cache" button.

[+Mopar]

If he's singled you out, is there a reason why? Are the logs he's talking about anything like this one, which was apparently copied and pasted 138 times in that area. Or this one, which I received several copies of when you were in my area at the beginning of the month.

Wow! Talk about perfect examples of bad and good! The second example seems fine to me. However, if that first log was pasted to every cache I own/watch in my area and I got 138 emails of that in my inbox I'd probably wanna strangle the guy! Still wouldn't delete his log though...........

[+egami]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day. While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over. I like to hear individual accounts of each log, even if it's just a "was really snowing at this one." I, as a hider, really dislike the "copy/paste" logs on caches because you just keep having to read the same thing over, and over, when out hunting caches. Perhaps it is this habit that has upset the people that are deleting your logs. My suggestion to you would be to try to recount something about each cache visited that was memorable. While it may not have anything to do with the cache itself, it is showing a bit of "uniqueness" to each find.

 

I agree with this sentiment. If it's a personal, unique lengthy log it's one thing, but I might be annoyed by and obvious cut and paste repeat as well as a cache owner especially if the content wasn't related directly to my cache location and experience.

 

I see you responded to The Herd already very respectively, so I am not meaning to drag this out, but just to revise my stance knowing a little more about the situation.

[+FireRef]

I've noticed your logs in the past, and with that, I have also noted that you tend to go on some pretty long cache runs. It appears that when you do this, you just write one long log about your days adventures, and use the copy/paste feature to post these to every single cache you found that day.

 

Ahh, I thought that too. I even apologize for some C&P that were really lame, but in those instances I thought I was doing a good thing by summarizing the entire adventure, and that each separate owner could see how their cache fell into the mix of things. But what about those who copy and paste TFTC 120 times? Or even those who summarize their day's events in two or three sentences and C&P that again and again? I questioned the cache owner specifically about 2 previous finders whose logs were C&P and also my caching partner who C&P but was not deleted. His email response when I asked for permission to re-log with the original content was:

I have no problem with relogging - just not so dang long....Your caching partner understands that a short log can do the job

emphasis by cache owner in email

 

While I, as a cache owner, love to get great logs/stories from those that find my caches, I really dislike when all they do is copy/paste the same log over and over.

I totally agree with this as a cache owner, but I don't delete those finders who C&P logs in my caches no matter the length. There is an easy solution for annoying C&P logs. Only read the first one.

 

I've tended to do this somewhat in the past as well. But it was almost always a sentence or two indicating the general information about the run, and maybe some numbers (This was 25 out of 43 for the day), and then something different for each cache. This way, the owner gets to see how they fall into the run of things, and then the specific info about their cache. Never had a complaint.

[+FireRef]

Being semi-local to the area you're talking about and having received a couple emails about the issue I have to wonder, has he singled you out or is he doing this to all cachers?

 

If he's singled you out, is there a reason why? Are the logs he's talking about anything like this one, which was apparently copied and pasted 138 times in that area. Or this one, which I received several copies of when you were in my area at the beginning of the month.

 

As a cache owner I'm not going to delete a log just for being long, but honestly I can see the frustration. I don't copy and paste my hides. Each cache I have is unique and I really appreciate unique logs on them. On top of that, can you imagine being a cacher in an area where the above log was copied and pasted 138 times? I go back and read local logs. I wouldn't want to have to scroll through all that over and over again and I really would hate to have to scroll through it on my Palm.

 

If you want to tell the day's story why not just start a blog, write your long log there and paste the link in every cache you find that day? After that you could write the information that was relevant to the particular cache in each individual log.

 

I myself have been known for some long winded logs (no really, it's true). I understand the desire to tell the story of your hunt, the story of what happened on the way to your hunt, or even the story of the girlfriend you used to have in the town you found the cache and how she screwed up your life. But every log doesn't have to be a Dickens novel. No one's getting paid by the word.

 

Cut and paste or not, I thought both of those were actually pretty cool. If I got one of those on my caches, I'd be pretty happy. If I saw them in the logs that I get emailed to me from the area and noticed they were all the same, I'd just delete the emails after reading a few. But I'd never delete a log for being wordy like that, because they were all relevant to the cache or the cache run.

[+Sarge104]

Being someone with terrible memory I try and put as much discription as possible to my logs just to help "Me" remember. If the cache owner deleted my logs I would be a little hurt but I would move on. It is just a game, a very cool game with some very cool people but a game none the less.