Poor logs deleted

[Unhban]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Unhban

[Mushtang]

Don't delete logs just because you think they're "poor". This is messing with other people's record keeping, and will upset a LOT of them.

[knowschad]

Yes, don't delete the logs... but do send a nice friendly letter explaining the issue. Ask them to please edit their log, and if they appear to be new to the activity, you may want to explain (or offer to explain) how to edit a log.

 

I do agree that bad logs beget bad logs. A newcomer sees TNLN, TFTC in a log, they assume that's the norm and that's what they will post on their finds.

Edited June 16, 2009 by knowschad

[+Entropy512]

So the log has to be "interesting" or you will delete it?

 

Sounds like an ALR to me.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

Edited June 16, 2009 by Entropy512

[+bittsen]

So the log has to be "interesting" or you will delete it?

 

Sounds like an ALR to me.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

Definately an ALR.

"You must have an interesting log or you will be deleted"

 

I can't imagine this person would be allowed to do this for long.

[+sTeamTraen]

I sympathise with your frustration at reading some not-very-exciting logs, but you shouldn't ever delete one unless you have good reason (that typically means, having checked the log book, twice, including turning it back to front) that the finder wasn't really there.

 

Online logs are first and foremost for the seeker's own record keeping. For example, many finders will log in their own language rather than the cache's language or English; that's up to them.

 

I try to write an individual log about every cache I find, even if I have to resort to describing the strange dent in the car which was parked next to the guard rail , but I know that when you get back from a 20-cache day without field notes, it can be hard to remember all of the details. If my log was turned down because it was too short, I'd probably write two sentence of platitudes and resubmit it. Nobody wins.

[+StarBrand]

I don't enjoy reading such logs in the least but I would never delete them. As an owner of over 120 active caches, I want to know what you thought of the location - tell me how my container is doing, what was the weather like, how did you come to be there. Say something. However, deletion doesn't make anybody more friendly or willing to write something of interest. Even some of my remote, well loved caches that usually see nice write-ups will occasionally get a TNLN log. I shake my head and just move on with life.

[+ReadyOrNot]

So how would you feel if someone determined your cache to be "Un-interesting". Should they remove it and send you an email to put out a more interesting hide in the future?

[+on4bam]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

I fail so see what's wrong with a short log. The cachers found your cache, signed paper log and signed online log. If there's something memorable about a cache I write more in the online log, if I found a bunch of them on the same day and don't have a lot of time to spend logging them I write just a few words. If I find a micro on a guardrail next to the road I may not even remember the location by the time I sit down to log in the evening. Everyone is different, some can write page after page other just say they liked/disliked the cache. No difference, they found it, it should show up in their count.

 

Maybe you could make a note on your cache pages: "write at least xx words or your log will be deleted"

Edited June 16, 2009 by on4bam

[+tozainamboku]

You would have thought the new guidelines that cache owners could no longer delete logs based on additional logging requirements would have sent a message to cache owners not to delete logs for any reason other that the log appears to be bogus, counterfeit, or off-topic. Instead it seem to have invited people to come out of the woodwork with all kinds of schemes to justify deleting peoples logs. Don't like the reason you looked for my cache - delete. Don't like that you thought my cache was lame - delete. Don't like logs that don't use complete sentences - delete. Don't like that a person adds their current find count to the log - delete.

 

I've always like the fact that Geocaching.com give the cache owner the responsibility to maintain the online logs. Most cache owners are understanding that some people just don't have the time or the skill to compose a great log for every cache they visit. Some people are simply using the online logs to keep track of what they found. Some would probably prefer they didn't have to type anything at all in the online log. Just check off they found the cache. This of course is disappointing to the cache owner who would really like to hear all about the experiences that cachers had at the cache. Even a log describing a disappointing experience might be better than an TNLNSL or a #12 of 51 found today. But requiring a particular level of log writing is a bit unreasonable IMO.

[+bittsen]

So how would you feel if someone determined your cache to be "Un-interesting". Should they remove it and send you an email to put out a more interesting hide in the future?

 

If that was how the game was played, 75% of the caches would disappear.

[+flask]

oh, man.

 

bad idea. bad, bad idea.

 

you do NOT get to delete logs because they suck. you just don't.

[+wimseyguy]

How incredibly arrogant of you. There is nothing in the guidelines, Terms of Use, or anything else official that supports your position. If they find the cache, and sign the log, they get the smiley. If you feel that their writing skills aren't entertaining enough, read a book.

 

I know several cachers who are very nice in person, but write crappy logs. I'm glad they have fun finding my caches. I enjoy hearing their stories when we meet up on the trails or at events. I suspect the cachers whose logs you have deleted won't enjoy meeting you at an event.

Edited June 16, 2009 by wimseyguy

[+Isonzo Karst]

to the original poster, my condolences, unfortunately, neither this forum, nor, more importantly, the listing guidelines under which your cache was published, support log deletion of "poor" logs.

 

There are many people who didn't get involved in geocaching to write essays, blogs, or any other kind text. They got involved to go outside and play. Their online logs are mostly for their own record keeping. Some of them just want a numbers record, "#3 of 8" other just want a smiley, "TFTC".

 

If you can think of your cache as a gift, given freely, without expectation of thanks it will be easier, and then, when some one thanks you by writing a nice log, .

[knowschad]

I know several cachers who are very nice in person, but write crappy logs.

 

And vice-versa.

[+BlueDeuce]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

TFTP

[+buttaskotch]

So how would you feel if someone determined your cache to be "Un-interesting". Should they remove it and send you an email to put out a more interesting hide in the future?

I second that!

Should a cacher go to admin to ask that your caches be archived because they find it to be uninteresting?

 

Half the time that I log my finds I struggle with things to say. What can you say really about your 400th LPC.

I try to stay positive, but if there is nothing to say about a cache, I say "headed out today and had a great time, TFTC."

I don't see anything wrong with that, and I have plenty of folks that say far less on my caches.

 

Writing an essay is not a prerequisite of caching! And what you are doing is an ALR, ALRs are gone so get over it.

You can ASK the loggers to change their caches, NOT demand.

 

But in the grand scheme of things, why give other cachers cr*p? Its a game. Its supposed to be FUN.

[+buttaskotch]

double post

Edited June 16, 2009 by buttaskotch

[+Kit Fox]

Their are two large cache series near me, one is called the "NOCLUE" series, and the other is called the Tarot card series. Power cachers frequently visit our area to find over a 100 in a day. My easy caches often get lumped in their finds. Nearly every log mentions the series, and they never mention any unique details about my caches.

 

I actually sent an email to one of the "lazy power cache loggers" and was surprised how nasty her response was to me. She even threatened to turn me into Groundspeak for harrassment. I sent her a polite email about her log, and gave her a link to the The lost art of logging Laziness or "monkey see, monkey do"?

 

I guess she thought I implied she was a lazy monkey?

 

I've never deleted a crappy log unless it contained spoilers. My solution was to hide more caches that "power cachers" avoid. Those that take more than three minutes to find, and those that require hiking all day. I would rather read two five paragraph logs per year on a single cache versus 100 "TFTC" logs.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Kit Fox

[+ScoutingWV]

To the OP - You assume there is something about your cache(s) that will compel someone to write more than a simple, direct, log.

 

Do you just want something of interest to you? How is a visitor to the cache going to know what your interests are? What if someone took some time to write a few paragraphs of prose that just didn't interest you - would that also be deleted?

 

I would suggest you simply be happy that someone took the time and effort to visit your cache.

[+Walkworthy & Wife]

This kind of logging bothers me too. But I once saw that was the way that many other cachers posted logs and wanting to fit in, I started doing the same. But now I try to write a personal log about each cache. No copying and pasting the same log for every cache either. Now, the most caches I have found in a day has been 15 so I can do it without any trouble. I can't imagine people that have had number runs spending that kind of time when logging each cache. If everyone starts writing their logs in longhand instead of all the abbreviations it might catch on

[+bflentje]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

Sorry, I think this practice is childish.

[+Snoogans]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

I'm sort of an Anglophile when it comes to caches. The English blokes (and blokettes) are awefully chatty about caches that are worth chattin' about. Take the above messages to heart and examine your cache from a different perspective other than that of proud owner.

 

If you start deleting logs, your cache is gonna disappear quick.

 

Mark my words. Seen it happen I have, yessss.

[+DarkZen]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

Sorry, I think this practice is childish.

You misspelled trollish.

[+DarkZen]

My solution was to hide more caches that "power cachers" avoid. Those that take more than three minutes to find, and those that require hiking all day. I would rather read two five paragraph logs per year on a single cache versus 100 "TFTC" logs.

True dat.

[+bflentje]

Their are two large cache series near me, one is called the "NOCLUE" series, and the other is called the Tarot card series. Power cachers frequently visit our area to find over a 100 in a day. My easy caches often get lumped in their finds. Nearly every log mentions the series, and they never mention any unique details about my caches.

 

I actually sent an email to one of the "lazy power cache loggers" and was surprised how nasty her response was to me. She even threatened to turn me into Groundspeak for harrassment. I sent her a polite email about her log, and gave her a link to the The lost art of logging Laziness or "monkey see, monkey do"?

 

I guess she thought I implied she was a lazy monkey?

 

As crappy as getting lame logs is (I own 100+), I even think contacting a lame logger is almost as tasteless as deleting the log. Why do you feel compelled to ruin someone's day?

[CoyoteRed]

So how would you feel if someone determined your cache to be "Un-interesting". Should they remove it and send you an email to put out a more interesting hide in the future?

You caused a major belly laugh and I spewed coffee out my nose!

 

[+RonnieGeo]

 

 

Sorry, I think this practice is childish.

You misspelled trollish.

 

That is sort of what I was thinking

 

I do happen to have an extra 2 cents laying around, so here goes...

 

I hate "TNLN" logs, but just ignore them and get on with my day. I agree with the OP's desire to see better logs, but it just isn't going to happen, and his idea to delete logs is going to be met with nothing but negativity from all sides (I think he may have known that).

 

BTW - in the beginning I think I did some "TNLN" logs because I thought that is how it was done, and then a cache in our area that required some log other than "TNLN" made me think about it (its probably gone now due to the "ALR" rule).

 

Now, if I leave a "TNLN" log it is because I am following the rule from the Bambi movie - "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all"

 

Last bit of advice for the OP - make hides that force them to comment more. The really good ones have good logs because people can't help but comment on the quality of the hide, or beauty of the area, etc. (If you build it, they will log!)

[+Unkle Fester]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

TFTP

ROFL!

 

But to the OP, If I had a log deleted for any reason besides not finding my name in the physical log in the cache, I'd be pretty upset. I wouldn't care if it was an LPC, GRC, TPC or NRV. I found it and signed the log.

 

I try to write something witty each time, but usually end up logging mine, my wife's, daughter's and son's logs too. If we hit 25 on a saturday at the coast, that's 100 logs. I usually do theirs as cut and paste but detail mine, if there is any detail to be had... some do look like this:

 

"Gee, another LPC, TFTC"

 

But I'm not going to write:

 

"The scenery of this particular store's front parking lot was quite exquisite, the blacktop looked like it was paved yesterday and the stripes were so pretty all in a row, looked like an angel laid them down from on high... You could hardly notice where the truckers park overnight despite the trash strewn about, and if you can hold your gag reflex, the odor of something dying under the bush next to GZ is hardly a distraction. The muggles were a real surprise but we cleverly used the georig as cover...Thanks for bringing me to this special and unique place"

 

If it was a memorable experience, I'll let you know. Just as I fully expect others logs to reflect the same of mine. I have a number of dash and cache hides and don't expect very much, but also have some clever ones that not only get the paragraph of frustrated relief they found it, but then get a TFTC right next to each other. Everyone with hides ends up with "TFTC" at some point. Honestly, I would not be surprised if Vinney had people log his phycho urban caches that way (somehow I doubt that, but it would be funny)

 

LPC = Light Pole Cache

GRC = Gard Rail Cache

TPC = Telephone Pole Cache

NRV = No Redeming Value

[+The Ravens]

Thanks for the acronym decipher .

[+piper28]

I geocache to get out and have fun. Quite honestly, spending lots of time coming up with long, rambling posts seems somewhat counterproductive to that. Now, I try not to make them as simple as TNLN, but quite frankly, I'm not a writer, I've never wanted to be a writer, and geocaching isn't going to make me start being a writer.

[+Xaa]

 

Half the time that I log my finds I struggle with things to say. What can you say really about your 400th LPC.

 

Easy... "my 400th LPC. Oh my... what have I been doing?! I now solemnly swear that this was the last LPC I will ever find. Thanks for the eye opener"

[knowschad]

I geocache to get out and have fun. Quite honestly, spending lots of time coming up with long, rambling posts seems somewhat counterproductive to that. Now, I try not to make them as simple as TNLN, but quite frankly, I'm not a writer, I've never wanted to be a writer, and geocaching isn't going to make me start being a writer.

 

Congratulations on your first ever writing!! You did pretty darned well, I must say.

 

Nobody is asking for anything more than a sentence or two that shows that you cared about the cache. It sounds to me as though you're probably doing that.

 

[edited to add:]

Just checked a couple of your recent finds. Your logs are awesome!! You write just fine.

 

May 23 by piper28 (135 found)

Ended up driving right by this one while we were out doing some caches. Since that one was close, decided to backtrack and hit this one. Saw a couple of deer just down the road from here.

 

May 23 by piper28 (135 found)

Had to work carefully because there were people on the other side of the cemetery. Memorial day weekend probably not the best time to do cemetery caches .

 

April 25 by piper28 (135 found)

Our first cache of the day, ended up being the last. The skies just kinda opened up right after we found this cache.

Edited June 16, 2009 by knowschad

[DarthJustice]

Yeah, I can understand where you're coming from but deleting logs because they don't live up to your standards is silly. If people have something interesting to share, they'll share. Besides, they found the cache. Whatever they want to write is what they want to write. They found it. They deserve the smiley if they want to sign the online log.

[+Renegade Knight]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

Why punish them for logging? Even a "found your stupid cache" tells you the cache is alive, doing well, and perhaps even living up to the purpose for which you placed it.

 

Yes it's nice to get nice logs. However some folks flat out don't have anything more to day than. TFTC and you would make them get stage fright to test their writing skills by saying something even remotely interesting about your cache.

[+Steve&GeoCarolyn]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

Why punish them for logging? Even a "found your stupid cache" tells you the cache is alive, doing well, and perhaps even living up to the purpose for which you placed it.

 

Yes it's nice to get nice logs. However some folks flat out don't have anything more to day than. TFTC and you would make them get stage fright to test their writing skills by saying something even remotely interesting about your cache.

 

I thought you supported deleting logs. Or is it only if the cache is found for the wrong reason?

 

Carolyn

[Andronicus]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

Looking at several of your caches, I did not see a single XYZ or TFTC log. Not sure what you are complaining about.

 

That said, an XYZ log would be rather brutal It is even worse than nothing. I would definatly contact the cacher to ask him/her to improve the log.

 

This log is prety bad (Logged from my phone using the Geocache Navigator by Trimble. Nice short walk. easy find.). Who cares that you loged it from your phone. I log all mine from my phone too, but I don't post that garbage. But in the end, it is his/her log, so if you don't like it, don't read it.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Andronicus

[+Crow-T-Robot]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm sure that this will have been mentioned before on the forum, but as the geocaching season here in the UK is now in full swing with a number of new users it cannot harm for them to know this....

 

Unh.

 

Looking at several of your caches, I did not see a single XYZ or TFTC log. Not sure what you are complaining about.

 

That said, an XYZ log would be rather brutal It is even worse than nothing. I would definatly contact the cacher to ask him/her to improve the log.

 

I don't see the point of contacting a finder and asking (demanding) them to edit their logs to make them more "interesting". As a cache owner, my job is to create a cache that will inspire better logs. If all I get is TFTC and XYZ logs, then that's what my cache is worth. Trying to force better logs from finders by making some silly requirement or by email is going to land you on a lot of ignore lists. At least then you won't have all those "brutal" logs to ruin your day.

 

Bruce

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

So how would you feel if someone determined your cache to be "Un-interesting". Should they remove it and send you an email to put out a more interesting hide in the future?

[+Castle Mischief]

 

This log is prety bad (Logged from my phone using the Geocache Navigator by Trimble. Nice short walk. easy find.). Who cares that you loged it from your phone. I log all mine from my phone too, but I don't post that garbage. But in the end, it is his/her log, so if you don't like it, don't read it.

 

I've just assumed that Trimble's Geocache Navagator added that little bit of text to the logs by default as I've seen it pretty often.

[Clan Riffster]

My solution was to hide more caches that "power cachers" avoid.

Kit, I like the way you think.

If you hide a P&G, expect P&G type logs.

If you hide something that requires actual effort to get to, you will likely be rewarded with longer logs.

It's been working for me for years.

[+wandrlust]

 

But I'm not going to write:

 

"The scenery of this particular store's front parking lot was quite exquisite, the blacktop looked like it was paved yesterday and the stripes were so pretty all in a row, looked like an angel laid them down from on high... You could hardly notice where the truckers park overnight despite the trash strewn about, and if you can hold your gag reflex, the odor of something dying under the bush next to GZ is hardly a distraction. The muggles were a real surprise but we cleverly used the georig as cover...Thanks for bringing me to this special and unique place"

 

LPC = Light Pole Cache

GRC = Gard Rail Cache

TPC = Telephone Pole Cache

NRV = No Redeming Value

 

I love this! Too freakin' funny.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

1. DO NOT DELETE!!

2. Write a polite e-mail to all those you find not interesting asking if they will edit their log.

 

You can see by the above replies that this is proper.

[aniyn]

I hate TFTH logs as much as the next owner, but I would never dream of deleting them. To say that these logs aren't worthy of your cache is incredibly arrogant.

That being said, I've left a few of those logs myself. And do you know why? Because when I sat down to write the log I couldn't think of anything that stuck out about the cache to write about. I'm not going to dither on pointlessly. Mediocre caches get mediocre logs, that's just how it works.

 

And besides, hassling people pointlessly is good way to get your caches thrown in a river.

[+bittsen]

 

And besides, hassling people pointlessly is good way to get your caches thrown in a river.

 

AMEN!!

[+9Key]

My solution was to hide more caches that "power cachers" avoid.

Kit, I like the way you think.

If you hide a P&G, expect P&G type logs.

If you hide something that requires actual effort to get to, you will likely be rewarded with longer logs.

It's been working for me for years.

I agree with both of you, but what frustrates me (and what spurred me to write the post that Kit linked to) is when you have a fantastic cache, one of the best in your area, and you get the "Found with Lunkhead. TFTC".

[+bittsen]

My solution was to hide more caches that "power cachers" avoid.

Kit, I like the way you think.

If you hide a P&G, expect P&G type logs.

If you hide something that requires actual effort to get to, you will likely be rewarded with longer logs.

It's been working for me for years.

I agree with both of you, but what frustrates me (and what spurred me to write the post that Kit linked to) is when you have a fantastic cache, one of the best in your area, and you get the "Found with Lunkhead. TFTC".

My question is....

 

So what?

[+J-Way]

Looking at several of your caches, I did not see a single XYZ or TFTC log. Not sure what you are complaining about.

Possibly because they've already been deleted?

 

And about the Trimble thing, I always assumed that text was automatically added as well. None of the phone-loggers I know would ever bother to type that entire sentence in every single time they post a log.

[+WebChimp]

I seem to be getting a number of poor logs e.g. Found with XYZ, or Found It! I've decided to delete these but do send a polite message saying why it's been deleted and they're welcome to resubmit with a log that includes interest.

 

I'm not going to read the replies that follow this OP, I'm sure they've been pretty dissident to your train of thought.

 

Short logs that don't praise your cache are more the norm than the exception, so try to get used to it.

 

I've got some caches that usually get pretty good logs, some of them very verbose logs. I enjoy those. Then along comes a cacher who writes "sl" for every one of my caches he finds. That's fine by me. He found it, made note that he signed the log, and that's A-OK. Anything written beyond that is gravy.

 

Lighten up, enjoy the reports of found caches, and don't sweat the small stuff.

[+9Key]

My solution was to hide more caches that "power cachers" avoid.

Kit, I like the way you think.

If you hide a P&G, expect P&G type logs.

If you hide something that requires actual effort to get to, you will likely be rewarded with longer logs.

It's been working for me for years.

I agree with both of you, but what frustrates me (and what spurred me to write the post that Kit linked to) is when you have a fantastic cache, one of the best in your area, and you get the "Found with Lunkhead. TFTC".

My question is....

 

So what?

You've not hidden a cache, so I guess you really wouldn't know what is like, huh?