Long Log = Deleted Log

[+racer2814]

 

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.

 

 

Unfortunately a lot of these cache hides felt like copy+paste hides. Nano on guardrail(too many times). Nano on Fire Hydrant(prob. 10 x's). Bison tube in ledge at bus stop (at least 6 times). Nano on sign post(too many times). Caches PNG just off ROW, not much to see, not much can happen.

 

As a society are we really too lazy to "scroll". Sorry this doesn't cut it as a reason.

[+Lil Devil]

I'll admit I only read the first few posts in this thread, because I got tired of the controversy, but I will say you're welcome to find any of my caches then leave as long of a log as you like. The longer the better.

[4wheelin_fool]

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.

 

 

If that is the reason, you could write a SL for your log, and then edit it to the 4000 character length after a few other people find it, and he will probably never notice.

[+MutherAndSun]

If he's singled you out, is there a reason why?

If he has singled me out does that make it acceptable?? If he or anyone had a problem with a log, how about a cordial email explaining their position. Not an email that says:

I will wait a couple hours before I begin to delete them to give you time to clean these up. You are basically performing the equivalent of a huge oil spill on my cache logs

To be honest, I had never used a PDA prior to that time. Now I have one, use it, and found this little scroll bar on the side that does amazing things.

As a society are we really too lazy to "scroll". Sorry this doesn't cut it as a reason.

Amen! Sister.

If he has singled me out it appears that it occurred before any C&P regardless of length. From his original email:

I understand trying to be funny, but many people manage to do it in much, much less space. I didn't say anything when I saw this seed of overwriting growing on the Galesburg event cache with these long, long, "horse race" descriptions (which really weren't funny either, at least not after every post someone else made), because it wasn't my cache.

I informed him that the owner of this cache encouraged me to "call the race" and enjoyed it, so I obviously complied.

Being someone with terrible memory I try and put as much discription as possible to my logs just to help "Me" remember.

Amen! Brother. To be honest, I write the logs for my own entertainment and to help me remember which caches I visited. I even keep a bookmark list of those logs to be able to find them again easily.

No one's getting paid by the word.

Why didn't you tell me that 3000 finds ago! I'm still waiting for the check!

[+Corp Of Discovery]

 

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.

 

 

Unfortunately a lot of these cache hides felt like copy+paste hides. Nano on guardrail(too many times). Nano on Fire Hydrant(prob. 10 x's). Bison tube in ledge at bus stop (at least 6 times). Nano on sign post(too many times). Caches PNG just off ROW, not much to see, not much can happen.

 

As a society are we really too lazy to "scroll". Sorry this doesn't cut it as a reason.

 

The flip side to this part is: As a cacher am I really too lazy to write a unique log for each cache?

 

If the caches you are finding aren't worth writing a unique log for, however long or short it may be, you may want to cache in a different manner. If the cache is worth it for you to drive to, find and log- the least you can do is say something unique about your experience. Or is it just all about the numbers?

[+MutherAndSun]

Or is it just all about the numbers?

Well of course, Duh!

I'm trying to get a smiley for my finds.

My intention in this thread is to find out if it is acceptable to delete a cacher's find on the basis that the owner "doesn't like" the log. If I signed the logsheet placed by the owner, and there is no ALR, did I not find it?

[+Jackalgirl]

I'm a newbie. I only have two hides so far. I wanted to chime in, tho, and say that I'd be delighted with long logs in my caches.

 

One of the things I like most about geocaching is the idea that a cache should be hidden in an interesting place, so that cachers have an opportunity to find something neat they might not have found without the incentive. The view is the treat for the finder.

 

For me, long logs are the flip-side of the equation: a long, well-written story is the treat for the hider.

 

Having said that, though, I too would be less appreciative of a CNP log pasted to all of my caches (though, like many others here, I probably wouldn't delete them).

 

Might I suggest an alternative? Set up a blog somewhere (there are scads of free blogging sites available). There, write out the narratives that cover the whole day (or days) of caching.

 

Then, in the individual log, write what you thought was interesting or cool about that specific cache. Mention the "ueberstory" and post its link -- I don't know if you can post actual links in logs (that is, with the <a href...> code), but you can at least post the URL.

 

If you are feeling extremely ambitious (or have a LOT of spare time), go back to the original blog and list the individual caches, with links to the cache log page. Or maybe just list the caches that touched you the most.

 

Make sure you link to this blog on your own profile page, too. It's your caching history document.

 

Having said that, I agree (as much as that's worth) with the notion that an ALR is proper for this instance. You found the cache. You signed the physical log. If the owner deletes your log (i.e., your online record of the find) because you didn't log the way he/she prefers, that is an ALR. I'd be curious to find out if the reviewer in that area agrees.

Edited December 29, 2007 by Jackalgirl

[+ShmilyNMe]

I'm going to chime in with the "I like long logs" group. When someone writes a nice descriptive log it makes me feel as if I helped them to have a memorable experience. But then that's just my 2 cents...

 

[+joranda]

"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.

 

 

Right on! They going to burn the flag next!

[+joranda]

 

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.

 

 

Unfortunately a lot of these cache hides felt like copy+paste hides. Nano on guardrail(too many times). Nano on Fire Hydrant(prob. 10 x's). Bison tube in ledge at bus stop (at least 6 times). Nano on sign post(too many times). Caches PNG just off ROW, not much to see, not much can happen.

 

As a society are we really too lazy to "scroll". Sorry this doesn't cut it as a reason.

 

The flip side to this part is: As a cacher am I really too lazy to write a unique log for each cache?

 

If the caches you are finding aren't worth writing a unique log for, however long or short it may be, you may want to cache in a different manner. If the cache is worth it for you to drive to, find and log- the least you can do is say something unique about your experience. Or is it just all about the numbers?

 

Why is copy and paste called lazy. When I'm out caching all day after 40/50/more caches, I'm tired, but still want to log my finds while they are fresh in my head. So am I a lazy cacher too when I copy and paste my logs? Why should that hurt any one? Or am I just reading this all wrong?

[+mini cacher]

Can he delete your log? yes

Can you re-log the same thing? yes

Can he delete it again? yes

Can you re-log the same thing? yes

Can he delete it again? yes

Can you re-log the same thing? yes

Can he delete it again? yes

Can you re-log the same thing? yes

Can he delete it again? yes

Can you re-log the same thing? yes

Can he delete it again? yes

(this could go on for a long time.... )

[+racer2814]

 

The least you can do is say something unique about your experience. Or is it just all about the numbers?

 

No, its not always about the numbers but sometimes it is. And yes I enjoy the long hikes and nice hides deep in the bushwhack and multis and great views and unique experiences.

 

I also have a great time on a day long numbers run with my best geo-buddy. When its cold, wet and snowy, I like PNGs. When you string 100 PNGs together that had only a few variations and not much to see, The real story and experience here is the day you spent with a friend. And that is the same for every cache. Again, I try to think of something unique but I dont take notes usually and sometimes I forget 1 or 2. Just because I cant remember or think of something creative doesn't mean I didn't have fun hunting it.

 

And copy+paste is not really any faster, at least not for me, so I don't see how that is lazy. It takes me longer to log than it does to find usually. I'm still logging our finds from the other day with a 50% c+p ratio. Apparantly I have shortened it enough that I'm not under threat of deletion any more.

 

Sitting at a computer typing all day is lazy. Going out geocaching is getting your bootie moving. I do understand why a lot of cachers don't log, I'll never ask why not, ever again.

[jholly]

Yeah, I've been asked to change my log. I wrote up a nice log on how clever the cache was and how I enjoyed finding it. I made a comment that where the cache was there was a fresh coat of paint, including the cache. The owner was upset because I gave away the location. Well, duh, the thing in my hand did a pretty good job of that. (it was a large wooden sign in a park. The area around the sign was grass. The needle pointed right at the sign. Where do you think the cache was hidden? A pico disguised as a blade of grass?) So I changed my log to "SL". Got a note back that I didn't have to do such a drastic job on the editing. Well, the SL doesn't give away anything, so whats the problem? Also had another note or two from owners upset about my logs. "TFTC SL" is much easier and doesn't get any requests for edits. So if you get more than a short sentence or two feel fortunate.

 

Jim

[+The Herd]

I'm going to chime in with the "I like long logs" group. When someone writes a nice descriptive log it makes me feel as if I helped them to have a memorable experience. But then that's just my 2 cents...

 

 

I agree, the long logs are nice...however, it's not really a memorable experience, when it was repeated cache after cache after cache for over 100 caches.

As far as "as a society are we too lazy to scroll" comment...I have to ask...as a society, are we too close minded to not be able to enjoy a single thing about an area, even if it's just a "pretty flower" nearby???

[+PJPeters]

I have recently started increasing my log-length. It's not something I started conciously, but now that I've noticed how much better I like them, I will admit to 'fluffing' my online logs a little, sometimes. Mostly, I just tell a bit about the find, area, my journey, whatever's relavent.

I've also put a cache out that 'strongly recommends' that finders take a few moments to write something in the logbook and online. There's only been one or two one-liners on that cache. I like it. It's way more interesting to read a good log than 'TFTC".

I will also admit to being a non-appreciator of cut-and-paste, or form logs. Fortunately, they aren't too common around here.

[+PJPeters]

::hiccup::

Edited December 30, 2007 by PJPeters

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Or is it just all about the numbers?

Well of course, Duh!

I'm trying to get a smiley for my finds.

My intention in this thread is to find out if it is acceptable to delete a cacher's find on the basis that the owner "doesn't like" the log. If I signed the logsheet placed by the owner, and there is no ALR, did I not find it?

As a rule, no- it's not generally acceptable. From what I've seen of some of your logs tho I'd say that it's not entirely unreasonable.

 

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

It won't be more useful but it's as useful as a cut & paste log.

 

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

I haven't but I'm pretty sure someone, somewhere has.

 

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

Because it's off topic and doesn't have anything to do with that cache.

 

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

Each cache owner interprets those criteria differently.

 

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

Yes, since it's their cache they have the ultimate control over the logs on it.

 

6. Am I missing something here?

Quite possibly.

[+CSpenceFLY]

I would relog it over and over again just to torqe this guy off.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Why is copy and paste called lazy.

Because it is?

 

When I'm out caching all day after 40/50/more caches, I'm tired, but still want to log my finds while they are fresh in my head.

With memories that fresh why not write unique logs? Alternatively- why not find only 20-30 caches and write unique logs for each one?

 

So am I a lazy cacher too when I copy and paste my logs?

If copy and paste is being lazy and you copy and paste a lot....

 

Why should that hurt any one?

It doesn't hurt anyone, but it could be construed as a wee bit disrespectful. Perhaps that's how the owner has taken it.

 

Or am I just reading this all wrong?

You just might be.

 

Note: edited to close an open tag.

Edited December 30, 2007 by Corp Of Discovery

[+Trucker Lee]

A good cache deserves far more than SL or TNLNSL. The story of the hunt is what I read logs for, and I occasionally will get a bit verbose telling of unusual circumstances or experiences I had getting to a cache. If that owner has a problem with your logs, then just ignore his caches or like you mention, just SL and let him lose out.

[+TrailGators]

A good cache deserves far more than SL or TNLNSL. The story of the hunt is what I read logs for, and I occasionally will get a bit verbose telling of unusual circumstances or experiences I had getting to a cache. If that owner has a problem with your logs, then just ignore his caches or like you mention, just SL and let him lose out.

I agree. I always make it a point to write a nice log for a cool cache. On the flip side, it's fine by me to cut and paste on a blah cache or better yet not log it at all. I typically cut and paste the names of the people that I went caching with. What's the point of typing each name over and over? So now you know...

[+Parabola]

Why cut and paste when I can type faster?

 

I've never used the cut and paste method. I don't like it and think it's quite disrespectful. I look at it as this, if someone has taken the time to hide, and maintance a cache than the least I can do is try and give them nice write up on the log. I've done 68 in a day and had them all logged that night, and not once copy and pasted a thing.

 

I have give out some bad logs for some reason or another. My best suggestion is just leave a Found it log, or ignore this person's caches altogether. That's my 2 cents.

[+racer2814]

So are cachers that don't log at all disrespectful too?

 

Yes you took the time to hide it and maintainance it.

 

And I took the time to drive to your city 3hrs each way and took the time to find it. Now some people stop there. But no, I took the time to write a log, albeit only 50% original. I find that more respectful than TNLNSL.

 

I have a lot of hobbies and have set most aside to have fun with this one. Everyone plays the game their own way. Why some feel like ruining it I don't understand. I'm not as creative as Muther so I love reading her logs. Hubby even gets excited when I read them to him.

 

Not to get off topic but, I got a log today that many owners would delete. It said "Found it but couldn't sign it because it was frozen in place". Well if that's the way he wants to play, fine by me. If I don't sign it, I don't log it, return in warmer weather. We had a few of those the other day.

[+Wadcutter]

Long logs are OK as long as they pertain to the cache and finding the cache. However, no one wants to read a long winded log about someone's life history. Some people when writing their logs think anyone cares about their great-grandmother's old boyfriend who use to make film canisters or worked for a lamp post skirt manufacturer or how the weather was so much nicer 5 years ago in the summer when the water was higher.

[+tabulator32]

"One time...at band camp..."

[+geomann1]

This whole thread is rather humorous in light of previous threads on people not writing enough.

 

I hate to think there are people out there who have the Goldilocks mentality; I will delete a log if its too short or too long, it must be just right.

 

Personally, I would not dream of deleting anyones log, unless it was abusive, obscene, or a spoiler.

[+MutherAndSun]

Long logs are OK as long as they pertain to the cache and finding the cache. However, no one wants to read a long winded log about someone's life history. Some people when writing their logs think anyone cares about their great-grandmother's old boyfriend who use to make film canisters

Really? You knew my great-grandmother's old boyfriend? The cannisters were made of cardboard then, but please, share your story!

 

No one makes you read the long winded non-humorous oil spill verbal diarrhea. But it is there for those who do want to read it, and I have had several people at events or those I meet at caches tell me they enjoy the stories.

 

Back to the issue at hand. If the owner doesn't like the log, why does he have the right to delete the find? Isn't a log:

: a record of performance, events, or day-to-day activities.

Finding the cache and recording the events leading to the discovery of the cache are two different things. I did indeed find his caches. I signed his logsheets. And my log recorded the day's events which included the discovery of his cache. When did cache owners become literary critics?

 

And Racer, funny thing, I had someone log a find for Booger who didn't sign the log. What to do, what to do.

[+KJcachers]

Long,entertaining descriptions of a great day of caching belong here on the forum not in a cache log. Logs should only pertain to the actual cache you are logging. Not a sermon, just a thought...

[+TrailGators]

Personally, I would not dream of deleting anyones log, unless it was abusive, obscene, or a spoiler.

Ditto.

[+Parabola]

So are cachers that don't log at all disrespectful too?

 

Yes you took the time to hide it and maintainance it.

 

And I took the time to drive to your city 3hrs each way and took the time to find it. Now some people stop there. But no, I took the time to write a log, albeit only 50% original. I find that more respectful than TNLNSL.

 

I have a lot of hobbies and have set most aside to have fun with this one. Everyone plays the game their own way. Why some feel like ruining it I don't understand. I'm not as creative as Muther so I love reading her logs. Hubby even gets excited when I read them to him.

 

Not to get off topic but, I got a log today that many owners would delete. It said "Found it but couldn't sign it because it was frozen in place". Well if that's the way he wants to play, fine by me. If I don't sign it, I don't log it, return in warmer weather. We had a few of those the other day.

 

Just settle down a bit there. I never said I agreed with the deleting of the logs. I just think it's cheesy and lazy and yes disrespectful to type the same log and use it over and over and over again. But I wouldn't delete a log because of it. Ya, I would have a bunch of e-mails to delete without reading.

 

Did this cache owner e-mail you at all to tell you his or her intent??

If these logs are a month old why are they deleting it now??

I don't live in the area in which your cache finds are being deleted and not sure which person is deleting your logs but off the top of my head it's one of three people.

 

I have read some of muther's logs and enjoyed some of them. I was at the Galsburg event and got a kick out of her postings. But that was on one cache page not on 100 cache pages.

[+MountainMudbug]

Long,entertaining descriptions of a great day of caching belong here on the forum not in a cache log. Logs should only pertain to the actual cache you are logging. Not a sermon, just a thought...

 

First time I've heard that.

[+racer2814]

 

Did this cache owner e-mail you at all to tell you his or her intent??

If these logs are a month old why are they deleting it now??

I don't live in the area in which your cache finds are being deleted and not sure which person is deleting your logs but off the top of my head it's one of three people.

 

 

Sorry, I did NOT specifically mean "your" city. I meant the city where the cache hider's hides were.

 

The original deletion's were last month of Muthers logs as she states in her OP because they were too long. She was allowed to relog SL.

 

This time it was our finds from just 2 days ago. I guess what really torqued us off was that we received an email from another hider, before we were even finished caching and hadn't even started logging to please not make such long logs. Well I had no idea 125 words was too long and I began logging. Then I was told to shorten them, keep the orig. stuff, the c+p had to go and please dont put 1 of whatever, 2 of etc. Then I was told I was taking up too much space on the logs and if I persisted I would be deleted.

 

Just stating the facts and enjoying the discussion.

[+MutherAndSun]

Did this cache owner e-mail you at all to tell you his or her intent??

The original email from the cache owner gave me "a couple of hours" to edit the logs to his satisfaction. I of course didn't see the email for several hours, by then he had deleted everything.

Edited December 30, 2007 by MutherAndSun

[+Parabola]

Did this cache owner e-mail you at all to tell you his or her intent??

The original email from the cache owner gave me "a couple of hours" to edit the logs to his satisfaction. I of course didn't see the email for several hours, by then he had deleted everything.

 

That right there sucks. You would think every geocacher out there would know that not everyone is on the net every second of the day. At the very least he should have sent you a e-mail with his intent and wait a few days to hear back from you.

 

I think this cacher is handling this whole thing pretty poorly. It would have been a better route to just send you an e-mail saying please don't leave this type of log on one of my caches again.

 

Good luck with the outcome of this situation.

[+benh57]

After reading the OP i was mad at the owner, then reading the whole thread, cache owner is totally correct here, those Motherandsun C+P spam logs are silly. Just say No to copy and paste. livejournal.com: free blog. The cachemate reason is wrong though, so that is kinda funny.

 

This thread is a great example of how you need to hear both sides of any story!

 

Anyway, it would be a great feature for gc.com to have a 'trip report' feature. Basically like the mini blog that people mentioned, but integrated with the cache logs. You could automatically link each log to a 'trip report' which you fill out on your experiences for the whole day, then put cache-specific details in the cache log.

It could work similarly to iPhoto's events feature, where pictures from the same session are automatically grouped.

[+briansnat]

So am I a lazy cacher too when I copy and paste my logs?

 

Yes

[CoyoteRed]

So are cachers that don't log at all disrespectful too?

I'm not sure if you're referring to cachers who never log any cache or those who choose to not log based on a cache to cache basis.

 

Yes you took the time to hide it and maintainance it.

I say, no.

 

If someone chooses to not ever log a cache online, then fine. That's their prerogative and I hold absolutely nothing against them as long as what they do doesn't adversely affect others in any way. Not logging a cache, in itself, does not adversely affect a cache owner.

 

OTOH, not logging caches on a cache by cache basis is what we do. If a cache owner did not put out enough effort to place an enjoyable cache then why should we put out the effort to log it? Sometimes it seems logging "TNLNSL" takes more effort than some folks took in placing the cache! Justification for this? Gotta sign the log to claim the smilie, right? What makes me sign the log when I've got the logbook in my hand? Who going to make me go online and log the cache if I make my mark in the logbook? Answer: no one.

 

Additionally, as an owner, I get more out of reading the logbook where someone said they enjoyed it, but never logged online than I do the entries of "Team XYZ" and log "TFTC #56 of 78 for the day." In many cases "TFTC" is an inaccurate acronym for "Thanks For The Smilie." Smilies is not what I placed the cache for. My caches are not an excuse to increment find counts. My caches are for the enjoyment of others and stand on its own merits. Online logs are not required for that.

[+Wadcutter]

No one makes you read the long winded non-humorous oil spill verbal diarrhea. But it is there for those who do want to read it, and I have had several people at events or those I meet at caches tell me they enjoy the stories.

Not addressing yours but some posts I've read over the years have been way way out there. It was obvious the poster thought themselves some kind of novelist. Altho I've found several of your caches I have to be honest and admit I seldom read other people's logs.

And then you can't always believe what people tell you either. Some just are being kind or trying to give a hint.

Edited December 30, 2007 by Wadcutter

[+tabulator32]

If geocaching.com actually had a rule concerning log length, it would be the simplest thing in the world for Groundspeak to place a character counter and a maximum limit on the text window for log entries. There may be a maximum limit but it may be in the hundreds or thousands of characters and I have never met it.

 

Perhaps another premium member feature would be the ability to set the maximum number of log entry characters. People like the cache hider mentioned in this thread could pay for the ability to control that particular factor if it makes them feel better. The "default" setting would be 5000 characters or so. The log window for the finder placing a log would have a reminder blurb at the top of the text window saying "xx characters remaining."

 

Another possibility would be the cache hider seeking diagnosis and properly prescribed medication. This would almost certainly cost more than a Groundspeak premium membership but there may be additional benefits to it as well which could be worth the extra expense.

[+nittany dave]

I wouldn't delete the logs although from what I've read in this thread I probably wouldn't care for them again and again and would find no use in them, but still I would not delete them because I can scroll past them and in no time at all they would disappear from the recent logs.

 

Seems like this is just one or two people. If it were me, I'd just log TFTC on their caches and something else on others.

 

You're probably not going to change their habit here. If you fear that it will be a growing issue for you locally, why not discuss it on your local group or at local events so that new cachers can understand the issue and make informed decisions regarding how they treat logs on their own caches. I really can't imagine that this will spread to many more cache owners unless there is more than is being said and it isn't just about the logs but has something to do with the relationship between the 2 or 3 of you.

[+HaLiJuSaPa]

As someone who has done a few long logs, I am disappointed someone would do this. One of my logs lamented at the state of a park with a cache that was pristine in my younger days, and generated some interest in a CITO event (that unfortunately didn't happen). It is a shame that he/she deleted you log, but as you said, just keep your logs on those caches short and write your story on the others. Good luck!

[+Ambrosia]

If geocaching.com actually had a rule concerning log length, it would be the simplest thing in the world for Groundspeak to place a character counter and a maximum limit on the text window for log entries. There may be a maximum limit but it may be in the hundreds or thousands of characters and I have never met it.

 

Perhaps another premium member feature would be the ability to set the maximum number of log entry characters. People like the cache hider mentioned in this thread could pay for the ability to control that particular factor if it makes them feel better. The "default" setting would be 5000 characters or so. The log window for the finder placing a log would have a reminder blurb at the top of the text window saying "xx characters remaining."

 

Another possibility would be the cache hider seeking diagnosis and properly prescribed medication. This would almost certainly cost more than a Groundspeak premium membership but there may be additional benefits to it as well which could be worth the extra expense.

There is a character limit of 4000 for cache logs. I've run up against it several times, and continued the post as a note.

[+joranda]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

[+koneko]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

 

wait, so because briansnat doesn't have 1000 caches in one weekend, that means he's lazy??

 

have you ever looked at the caches he's found or placed?

[+racer2814]

The part I copy+paste usually consists of 3 things.

 

1. The find # and who I found it with.(The find # is for my reference, I know you dont care about that)

2. Something about the weather(which can be helpful). (Lets people know if it can still be found in the snow or flood conditions or only when its dry)

3. And Thanks for placing and maintaining the hide so that we could enjoy the hunt and the day together.(I always say Thanks even if it was crappy)

 

THIS IS THE SAME FOR THE WHOLE DAY

 

Even if I typed every single log, I would still type those 3 things and they would be identical on every cache that day.

Since I'm not a fast typer and there are only so many ways to say thanks for the cache, I still don't see the big deal if I C+P a few sentences that I would end up typing anyway.

[+joranda]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

 

wait, so because briansnat doesn't have 1000 caches in one weekend, that means he's lazy??

 

have you ever looked at the caches he's found or placed?

 

Have you looked at mine? Who was saying names anyways?

[+Mopar]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

 

wait, so because briansnat doesn't have 1000 caches in one weekend, that means he's lazy??

 

have you ever looked at the caches he's found or placed?

Oh, this is gonna get ugly!

Gotta wonder how many of those 2400 caches require a 10-15 mile hike like many of the 641 caches Briansnat's done?

[+racer2814]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

 

wait, so because briansnat doesn't have 1000 caches in one weekend, that means he's lazy??

 

have you ever looked at the caches he's found or placed?

 

Have you ever looked at the caches Joranda has found? If it were up to him, they would all be on islands or 30+ ft up a tree, or on the side of a mountain. Joranda is definitely not a lazy cacher. Mr. MOGA champion can Copy+paste all he wants.

[+koneko]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

 

wait, so because briansnat doesn't have 1000 caches in one weekend, that means he's lazy??

 

have you ever looked at the caches he's found or placed?

 

when did this thread change topics to number whoring?

 

this is why when i meet new cachers that are worried about only have X number of caches, i make a point to remind them that one of the great things about geocaching is being able to go at YOUR OWN PACE. you don't have 1000 caches in a weekend? it's okay - you don't have to do that!

 

 

this thread is about cache logs, NOT the amount of caches you have or have not found and why.

 

edited to apologize for the double post. - you guys were busy while i was adding! []

Edited December 30, 2007 by koneko

[+Mopar]

Kind of bold to call me a lazy cacher with over 2400 find when you have 641 cache finds since 2001. Who's calling who? The caches are out there, go get them.

 

wait, so because briansnat doesn't have 1000 caches in one weekend, that means he's lazy??

 

have you ever looked at the caches he's found or placed?

 

Have you ever looked at the caches Joranda has found? If it were up to him, they would all be on islands or 30+ ft up a tree, or on the side of a mountain. Joranda is definitely not a lazy cacher. Mr. MOGA champion can Copy+paste all he wants.

Actually, I did look, since he's nice enough to post all his stats on his profile. 70% (1679 out of 2412) of his cache finds are 1.5 terrain or lower, and only 2% (56 out of 2412 finds) are 3.5 terrain or higher.

That's not even taking regional differences into consideration. I've cached with a few people from that area, and you don't exactly have much in the way of terrain out there. One of your high terrain caches would be considered almost a park and grab where 'snat lives.

 

Edited December 30, 2007 by Mopar