Write a story or you're being disrespectful?

[+flask]

anyone want to know how my neighbor's cat is doing?

[+Team Noodles]

Seek first to understand, if you wish to be understood.

Good advise. Maybe you ought to take it.

 

I know this is throwing out another cliche, but the elitism in these forums sometimes reaches a level that is nausiating.

What you see as elitism is the attempt to keep a certain level of quality to the hobby that has been enjoyed up until recently. There has been a slow decline to the hobby into the lowest common denominator (something you're mentioned in a different context.) Yes, actions that we're talking about having been happening for a long time. There was no switch to flip, but it's been a slow infiltration of a certain type of hobbyist who is moving the hobby away from the way it was played years ago. Yes, you're one of the one's I'm talking about. Quite frankly, if those like you had never showed up on the scene this hobby would be better off.

 

How? Look at your own profile to garner a little insight. More than half your cache placements are micros--mostly in places that could support a much larger cache. Only one regular. Can't tell from the list the quality of the hide--time is short. From your finds you rather find a micro or small and definitely would rather find a traditional. Now I haven't done a whole lot of research to see if that's all that is available to you, but on first blush this tells me you're lazy. Place easy, cheap hides and like to maximize your smilie to effort ratio. Now, you're in a thread about log size and cut-n-paste.

 

Are you lazy? I don't know. Maybe your style of caching is all you know. You might not have ever had the chance to experience caching the way us old timers have. You know, (well, you wouldn't, never mind) the chaff-to-wheat ratio very low. Today, in order to get the wife out caching I have to hand pick caches for her. She'd rather not go when she used to be rabid about caching. Yes, it's that different.

 

I don't know, it could be you're defending short or cut-n-paste logs because you feel that's all your caches are getting and you think that's a measure of your caches. Guess what, it is.

 

Anyway, the elitism you see is actually you looking up to a standard many of us have seen exist and would like for that to continue.

let me know when your next class of : "how to act like a twit" is so i know when to stear clear of the area.

thanks.

Edited November 29, 2009 by Ryuchan

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

anyone want to know how my neighbor's cat is doing?

We have a new cat (6 months), a Russian Blue my daughter found living in an abandoned car at a convenience store.

 

I can't tell if it's just too stupid to take care of itself or if it is absolutely trusting... there's a fine line!

 

It sleeps on my bed. It weighs maybe 2 pounds. I weigh 270. No matter what I do it lays there. One of these days I am going to roll over and crush it.

 

When I am in my wheelchair its favorite place is rubbing or nestled at my foot. I can't see her down there under the chair so I am always scared to roll around. One of these days my wheel is gonna get her.

 

I live in fear of those things. She needs to learn the difference between blind faith and common sense!

 

It is nice but un-nerving to have something so thoroughly trust my every move.

 

Or maybe it's just stupid.

[+Team Noodles]

anyone want to know how my neighbor's cat is doing?

We have a new cat (6 months), a Russian Blue my daughter found living in an abandoned car at a convenience store.

 

I can't tell if it's just too stupid to take care of itself or if it is absolutely trusting... there's a fine line!

 

It sleeps on my bed. It weighs maybe 2 pounds. I weigh 270. No matter what I do it lays there. One of these days I am going to roll over and crush it.

 

When I am in my wheelchair its favorite place is rubbing or nestled at my foot. I can't see her down there under the chair so I am always scared to roll around. One of these days my wheel is gonna get her.

 

I live in fear of those things. She needs to learn the difference between blind faith and common sense!

 

It is nice but un-nerving to have something so thoroughly trust my every move.

 

Or maybe it's just stupid.

I've found that the animals we rescued usually display an immense amount of trust, tis a good thing really

they just always wanna be close for some reason.

 

we rescued a foxhound a few years back, and she pretty much slept on my shoulder whenever she could till she passed.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

See? This is much more fun than fighting over some silly game. Thanks flask for the break!

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

See? This is much more fun than fighting over some silly game. Thanks flask for the break!

 

Well I don't know about the "silly game" part but I liked CoyoteRed's put-down so much, that I decided to add it to my forum sig.

 

I think everyone should know it's me, and those like me, who have destroyed their precious game!

[Motorcycle_Mama]

This is an official warning/reminder that posting personal attacks and insults is not in compliance with the forum guidelines.

 

If you have something to add to the discussion of the topic, please do so.

 

If you desire to posts attacks of others or insults, people do so somewhere else.

 

Thanks.

[+briansnat]

Wow, you've met hundred's of people... you think that's really a lot of people? And of those millions thousands hundreds, the percentage, outside of your social cliques, who have verified they think the same as you?

 

We're talking the geocaching world here. There aren't millions of geocachers - yet.

[Mr.Yuck]

Ah yes. We haven't seen a "You're all a bunch of losers, back away from the keyboard, go outside and get some fresh air" post around here in ages.

 

Of course I've seen it before on every message board on every subject on the entire internet.

 

Not bad though, I give it a 7.5.

 

 

Well, since you're a good sport, and see the humor in it, I'll raise it to an 8.5!!!

[Mr.Yuck]

What you see as elitism is the attempt to keep a certain level of quality to the hobby that has been enjoyed up until recently. There has been a slow decline to the hobby into the lowest common denominator (something you're mentioned in a different context.) Yes, actions that we're talking about having been happening for a long time. There was no switch to flip, but it's been a slow infiltration of a certain type of hobbyist who is moving the hobby away from the way it was played years ago. Yes, you're one of the one's I'm talking about. Quite frankly, if those like you had never showed up on the scene this hobby would be better off.

 

How? Look at your own profile to garner a little insight. More than half your cache placements are micros--mostly in places that could support a much larger cache. Only one regular. Can't tell from the list the quality of the hide--time is short. From your finds you rather find a micro or small and definitely would rather find a traditional. Now I haven't done a whole lot of research to see if that's all that is available to you, but on first blush this tells me you're lazy. Place easy, cheap hides and like to maximize your smilie to effort ratio. Now, you're in a thread about log size and cut-n-paste.

 

Are you lazy? I don't know. Maybe your style of caching is all you know. You might not have ever had the chance to experience caching the way us old timers have. You know, (well, you wouldn't, never mind) the chaff-to-wheat ratio very low. Today, in order to get the wife out caching I have to hand pick caches for her. She'd rather not go when she used to be rabid about caching. Yes, it's that different.

 

I don't know, it could be you're defending short or cut-n-paste logs because you feel that's all your caches are getting and you think that's a measure of your caches. Guess what, it is.

 

Anyway, the elitism you see is actually you looking up to a standard many of us have seen exist and would like for that to continue.

 

I'll admit, that just knocked me for six. I didn't think this was going to degrade into a discussion on my own finds and caches placed....

 

It's pretty obvious you've never lived in England. I came back from being introduced to caching in Canada to find that the majority of caches hidden here are micros and small - not that I'm complaining.

 

Generally our countryside is flatter than yours, I don't live 5 minutes from any mountains, so terrain tends to be no more than a 3.

 

 

Hey, your first two hides are nano's, and are listed as micros. This deviates from the norm of tens of thousands of nano's all over the world being listed incorrectly, and no one seems to care about it. So that's OK by me.

 

Very nice historical write-ups on your caches, by the way.

 

But with the other two little paragraphs I'm quoting, I think there may be some local Geocaching cultural issues here. I really don't think you've seen over there in the UK the sort of caches that the original poster was logging with logs such as "TFTC", or "One of 111 today with ______, TFTC". These are mostly caches in store parking lots that you can drive to within 5 feet of, and they're hidden in the same spot every time. Often times the cache pages themselves will contain no more than 10 words, and Muggles and Stealth are two of them. Is there even any where in the UK that someone could find 111 caches in a day?

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

What you see as elitism is the attempt to keep a certain level of quality to the hobby that has been enjoyed up until recently. There has been a slow decline to the hobby into the lowest common denominator (something you're mentioned in a different context.) Yes, actions that we're talking about having been happening for a long time. There was no switch to flip, but it's been a slow infiltration of a certain type of hobbyist who is moving the hobby away from the way it was played years ago. Yes, you're one of the one's I'm talking about. Quite frankly, if those like you had never showed up on the scene this hobby would be better off.

 

How? Look at your own profile to garner a little insight. More than half your cache placements are micros--mostly in places that could support a much larger cache. Only one regular. Can't tell from the list the quality of the hide--time is short. From your finds you rather find a micro or small and definitely would rather find a traditional. Now I haven't done a whole lot of research to see if that's all that is available to you, but on first blush this tells me you're lazy. Place easy, cheap hides and like to maximize your smilie to effort ratio. Now, you're in a thread about log size and cut-n-paste.

 

Are you lazy? I don't know. Maybe your style of caching is all you know. You might not have ever had the chance to experience caching the way us old timers have. You know, (well, you wouldn't, never mind) the chaff-to-wheat ratio very low. Today, in order to get the wife out caching I have to hand pick caches for her. She'd rather not go when she used to be rabid about caching. Yes, it's that different.

 

I don't know, it could be you're defending short or cut-n-paste logs because you feel that's all your caches are getting and you think that's a measure of your caches. Guess what, it is.

 

Anyway, the elitism you see is actually you looking up to a standard many of us have seen exist and would like for that to continue.

 

I'll admit, that just knocked me for six. I didn't think this was going to degrade into a discussion on my own finds and caches placed....

 

It's pretty obvious you've never lived in England. I came back from being introduced to caching in Canada to find that the majority of caches hidden here are micros and small - not that I'm complaining.

 

Generally our countryside is flatter than yours, I don't live 5 minutes from any mountains, so terrain tends to be no more than a 3.

 

 

Hey, your first two hides are nano's, and are listed as micros. This deviates from the norm of tens of thousands of nano's all over the world being listed incorrectly, and no one seems to care about it. So that's OK by me.

 

Very nice historical write-ups on your caches, by the way.

 

But with the other two little paragraphs I'm quoting, I think there may be some local Geocaching cultural issues here. I really don't think you've seen over there in the UK the sort of caches that the original poster was logging with logs such as "TFTC", or "One of 111 today with ______, TFTC". These are mostly caches in store parking lots that you can drive to within 5 feet of, and they're hidden in the same spot every time. Often times the cache pages themselves will contain no more than 10 words, and Muggles and Stealth are two of them. Is there even any where in the UK that someone could find 111 caches in a day?

 

Thanks, I know they are nano's but I worked hard to dig up the history and really, it's to bring people there to see it, not necessarily to find a container full of toys.

 

In answer to your second question:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/map/default.aspx...;zm=13&mt=m

 

They're all small containers, I think, with a final bonus of a regular container. Dr Solly, who set them up is a well respected cacher round our parts, he's done some excellent puzzles.

 

ETA: Most of those, if not all, are 1-2 terrain / 1-2 difficulty. We haven't done this power trail yet, but when we do (and we'll attempt in one day) my stats are going to look even poorer on the terrain/difficulty side - which obviously upsets the terrain-whores and makes me ULTRA LAZY. But the bonus is a 5/5 so I guess it's worth it - not many of those around.

 

And be assured, if I lived within 5 miles of a mountain, I'd be up there finding and hiding.

Edited November 29, 2009 by _TeamFitz_

[djhobby]

I try to write unique logs for every cache because, as a cache owner, I know how important logs are to the cache owning experience. ....

 

Shared experiences and a sense of community are a large part of the reason this sport has taken off the way it has and the logs are the key to fostering that sense of community. I can't count the times that a conversation with another cacher started with "I saw your log for..." and soon two people who were strangers moments ago are chatting like old friends.

 

I understand that some people just don't have it in them to write lengthy logs, but it wouldn't kill them to write something unique for each cache. Things like "Found it. Enjoyed the view" or "Cool sculpture, TFTC" is enough.

 

No, I wouldn't call cookie cutter logs disrespectful, but they are disappointing.

 

Very well said.

 

To me it's about being respectful to my fellow cacher. They spent time and money hiding a cache for no other reason than to make my day more enjoyable so I try to thank them with some sort of a pat on the back with my log.

 

I didn't always think this way, I used to just post logs with just smileys or TFTC, but after hiding a few caches and just getting those same logs in return it started to annoy me a little, so I've tried to change my ways. A few months ago I went on a cache run in your neck of the woods and found 47 in one day. I think it took me longer to post all of my logs then it took to find them. The benefit of this was that after posting all of my stories (most of them lies) I started a good rapport with some of the cache owners, and now I call those people friends.

 

As briansnat said we are a community. For the most part we are our online faces and we don't get to meet the people behind our geocaching names outside of our logs. I have met you at a few different events, although too briefly, and know you to be a nice guy. But if you came up to me and said TFTC and walked away I would be a little put off.

 

All that being said, would I admonish someone for posting a cut paste log? Absolutely not. How you play the game is up to you and you only. I know not everyone has the time, the will or the skill to post an interesting online log.

[+Hildy Boys]

The way I look at it, the 2 minutes it takes for me to write a couple sentences is the least I can do for the effort the the CO put forward in hiding it. And I have never had a hard time coming up with a little something to say, each find is a new experience! That is why I love this sport!

 

My kids and I are new to the sport and thinking about doing a couple hides. I think that reading the logs will be my favorite part of it all.

[Clan Riffster]

Why is it whenever someone who is fairly new starts posting and they are disagreeing with some of the people who are oldtimers (and by that I mean people who have been on these boards for years)comes in the forums barking like an attack dog, treating folks with not even a minimum of common courtesy they get called a "troll"?

Fixed it for ya!

Folks who behave poorly in forums will often be called unflattering names... such as trolls.

Edited November 30, 2009 by Clan Riffster

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

Why is it whenever someone who is fairly new starts posting and they are disagreeing with some of the people who are oldtimers (and by that I mean people who have been on these boards for years)comes in the forums barking like an attack dog, treating folks with not even a minimum of common courtesy they get called a "troll"?

Fixed it for ya!

Folks who behave poorly in forums will often be called unflattering names... such as trolls.

 

I think your definition of troll is wrong. I have not been baiting and have said so in response to a courteous poster. I since toned down my responses, but was subject to a vicious personal mauling myself, by someone who didn't even have the time to look into my locality, the effort I put into my logging or my caches.

 

What's your term for people who tell others that they basically don't belong in geocaching?

[Clan Riffster]

I've never met someone who tells others that they don't belong in geocaching.

If I ever do, I may come up with a term that describes them.

[+StarBrand]

Geocaching is as much about finding caches as it is sharing with others. You share with others largely through your logs. Seems like such a simple concept. See this pae: http://www.geocaching.com/about/ - sharing is as promently mentioned as finding

 

While I would never belittle another cacher for thier short or cookie cutter logs personally - I think they are highly disrespectful of the time and effort put in by the cache owner.

 

Mention the weather, the condition of the cache, the time of day, who was with you, why you were at my cache, what you thought of the scenery, your journey, time it took to find the cache - just say something unique.

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

Wanna hear something really ironic?

 

I spend a lot of time writing long logs and making sure there's something for the CO to read and appreciate.

 

This thread just makes me want to log TFTC on every cache and be done with it.

 

 

It's my own fault - once again, spending too long on the forums sucks all the fun out of geocaching for me.

 

I think I'm going to try to readdress the balance between my find count and my post count because I just don't think it's healthy.

[+spektrum2]

Wanna hear something really ironic?

 

I spend a lot of time writing long logs and making sure there's something for the CO to read and appreciate.

 

This thread just makes me want to log TFTC on every cache and be done with it.

 

It's my own fault - once again, spending too long on the forums sucks all the fun out of geocaching for me.

 

I think I'm going to try to readdress the balance between my find count and my post count because I just don't think it's healthy.

 

No! dont do that,just play the way that is the best statement of you.Ive noticed from July to now a

different tone for lack of a better word in the forum,also alot less new people posting lately.I think

its because its been so intense in here lately and the hot debates and overall tone lately is keeping

the newest members from sharing here it seems,or maybe its just the way it cycles here...I hope

the hot topics are not the reason.....I've seen a big difference since July.

[+flask]

i give it a 5.

 

the east german judge probably gives it a 6.

[+spektrum2]

i give it a 5.

 

the east german judge probably gives it a 6.

 

Well there ya go.....I'm a 5 or 6 everyone...whos next?

[+ThePetersTrio]

Why is it whenever someone who is fairly new starts posting and they are disagreeing with some of the people who are oldtimers (and by that I mean people who have been on these boards for years)comes in the forums barking like an attack dog, treating folks with not even a minimum of common courtesy they get called a "troll"?

Fixed it for ya!

Folks who behave poorly in forums will often be called unflattering names... such as trolls.

 

Sorry, but aside from calling new people "trolls" when they have a difference of opinion and express it vociferously is only slightly more rude than altering other people's posts.

 

I would never intentionally alter another person's posts on this board. I find that to be the height of arrogance and it is an extremely rude thing to do. Ironically, you are accusing someone of lacking common courtesy and yet you apprently lack it yourself. Pot, meet kettle....

Edited November 30, 2009 by ThePetersTrio

[Clan Riffster]

Sorry you feel that way. I can't recall a single post of yours that I didn't find insightful, and I would hate for you to walk away from this thinking that rudeness is my forte. In these forums, altering another's post is a time honored way of poking a little fun at someone, while addressing their post. It is not intended as a slight, and I apologize for it coming across that way.

 

My non-post-altering response would be more to the effect of:

Teamfitz entered the thread espousing vitriol. Many folks, including me, reacted to his angst.

Most noobs come in here sans shoulder mounted chips.

Teamfitz opted to make a different entrance, and reaped what he sowed.

[CoyoteRed]

Well I don't know about the "silly game" part but I liked CoyoteRed's put-down so much, that I decided to add it to my forum sig.

That's cool.

 

Still, you missed the whole point of my post. It was in the last line. It addressed your nausea over the "elitism" in these forums. Maybe if you go back and read it you might get it. The rest of my post was to illustrate where you are in terms of what has been seen before. You don't have to like it, think it right, or whatever. I'm just saying.

Edited November 30, 2009 by CoyoteRed

[CoyoteRed]

Why is it whenever someone who is fairly new starts posting and they are disagreeing with some of the people who are oldtimers (and by that I mean people who have been on these boards for years) they get called a "troll"? Does that mean you cannot debate or discuss the issue reasonably with this person and so you call him/her a troll as a way to make yourself feel superior without having to do any of the work of actually engaging in the discussion?

Like has been mentioned, it depends on how it is presented. When a newcomer comes it and starts spouting "how it should be done" of course they're going to be slapped down. Newcomers come to the forums all the time and ask what, how and why. They ask in a reasoned and respectful manner, they get reasoned and respectful responses. Us "old-timers" have seen it time and again, and on numerous subjects. So when someone comes in and starts spouting off about the "elitist attitudes" of well respected cachers who are simply trying to maintain a certain amount of decorum in the hobby, what do you expect?

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

Well I don't know about the "silly game" part but I liked CoyoteRed's put-down so much, that I decided to add it to my forum sig.

That's cool.

 

Still, you missed the whole point of my post. It was in the last line. It addressed your nausea over the "elitism" in these forums. Maybe if you go back and read it you might get it. The rest of my post was to illustrate where you are in terms of what has been seen before. You don't have to like it, think it right, or whatever. I'm just saying.

 

OK CoyoteRed, it's your turn for some analysis of your profile.

 

Since the topic is the problem with short logging, I notice the last 5 logs you wrote with your wifes joint account were incredibly short, 3 lines or less:

 

Forgot to log this one from over a year ago. The journal says TNLNSL. Thanks.

 

Nice area. SLTNL P-38 can opener. Of course, Sissy had to climb the tree. Thanks for the cache!

 

Brought Sissy out to find this one. She found it pretty quickly. It's in good shape. TN Left P-38 can opener. SL. Thanks!

 

Sissy found before I could catch up with her. TNLNSL. Thanks!

 

Brought Sissy out to find. She did and in very little time to boot. SL again.

 

It's short lazy logs like these, hardly more effort than a cut n' paste, which made me think in the beginning that writing longer logs is not required.

 

Thankfully now I write longer logs, and I've been at this game a lot less longer than you have, as has been noted.

 

So why do you write such crappy logs if a newbie like me can sometimes write up to 700 words? Try looking through my logs for cut n' paste beyond my first months caching.

 

I'm wondering why someone who considers themselves so important and amongst the elite of geocaching just doesn't put any effort at all into his logs.... could it be you are lazy? I don't know, but then let's analyse your overall history of geocaching.

 

In the 7 years you've been a member, you've found 832 caches, yet you've posted to the forums 6835 times - not including your joint account. The majority of those times you've posted have been after you QUIT geocaching.com back in 2003, disgruntled with TPTB, vowing never to use the site again (or words to that effect)!

 

Yet 2 months later, you were back posting again?!

 

So what do these things tell me? You spend more time with your little shop and posting on the forum than geocaching... all talk and not so much action. You also don't seem to be good at following through with your commitments or promises.

 

You seem miserable about geocaching and it seems like it didn't start with the arrival of me, it started back in 2003, you probably enjoy spreading the misery too, which is why you post in the forums so much.

 

That's pretty much all I have to say now... I have more posts than caches found, but not in the excesses of our red friend here. I'm checking out at this point, let my find count build up.

Edited November 30, 2009 by _TeamFitz_

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I'm checking out at this point...

Thank you.

[+redsox_mark]

My view on this (and several others have made similar points) is that Geocaching is based on the goodwill of others. The goodwill to hide caches for others to find; the goodwill to share experiences in a log; to do equal or better swaps, to help trackables on their mission, etc.

 

So back to the original question on this thread - personally, I try to write "interesting*" logs; as a CO I also appreciate those taking the time to write a log which tells me about the experience they had finding my cache. But I would never call someone out for leaving a cut and paste log, or just "TFTC". It is up to each individual how much they can "give" to this game and how they go about doing it. Some hide great caches; some write wonderful logs...

 

If seeing detailed logs is important to you, by all means set an example by doing it yourself. If you like hids of a particular type/standard, then set an example there too.

 

Mark

 

* Of course it is a matter of opinion if my logs are interesting or not; but what I mean is I try to share how I felt about the cache, and the experience I had. To some this may be boring, and they may have preferred that I had written just "TFTC"!

[+briansnat]

...Since the topic is the problem with short logging, I notice the last 5 logs you wrote with your wifes joint account were incredibly short, 3 lines or less:

 

Forgot to log this one from over a year ago. The journal says TNLNSL. Thanks.

 

Nice area. SLTNL P-38 can opener. Of course, Sissy had to climb the tree. Thanks for the cache!

 

Brought Sissy out to find this one. She found it pretty quickly. It's in good shape. TN Left P-38 can opener. SL. Thanks!

 

Sissy found before I could catch up with her. TNLNSL. Thanks!

 

Brought Sissy out to find. She did and in very little time to boot. SL again.

 

It's short lazy logs like these, hardly more effort than a cut n' paste, which made me think in the beginning that writing longer logs is not required....

 

Despite all your bluster it's obvious that you've totally missed the point trying to be made by many here. The topic is not about short logs, it's about cut and paste logs. There is a huge difference. If you actually read through what CR, Flask, me and others were saying, it has nothing to do with writing longer logs. It had to do with writing logs unique to each cache. The logs you quote above are exactly the kinds of logs we meant to encourage when we said it doesn't take much effort to write a unique log.

 

I'd feel the same way about a 4 paragraph cut and past log as I would about a two word one.

[+AZWheeler]

There's one cacher in my area that invariably always writes "we are found it"

[+terrkan78]

What you see as elitism is the attempt to keep a certain level of quality to the hobby that has been enjoyed up until recently. There has been a slow decline to the hobby into the lowest common denominator (something you're mentioned in a different context.) Yes, actions that we're talking about having been happening for a long time. There was no switch to flip, but it's been a slow infiltration of a certain type of hobbyist who is moving the hobby away from the way it was played years ago. Yes, you're one of the one's I'm talking about. Quite frankly, if those like you had never showed up on the scene this hobby would be better off.

I am a relative newbie. I enjoy park and grabs. I get a kick out of seeing my numbers go up. I am thankful when someone else puts out a new uninspired park and grab. I've written "TFTC" logs before. I think this probably makes me one of those "certain type" of hobbyist whom you believe to be defiling your hobby. I have to say, that attitude does sound elitist to me. Maybe some consider that sort of elitist attitude to be good (keeping the game pure, like it was in the good old days, etc.), but I can't agree that any elitist attitude is good. It hurts.

 

Wouldn't it be better to say, "Hi there newbie. I see you like film canisters behind dumpsters. Why don't you come along with me next Saturday as I go on a X-mile hike up Mt. X - there's a ammo can cache up there that will blow you away." Maybe the newbie will become a convert? (I have to say I've been blown away by some hikes I've taken recently for caches--I've lived here since the day I was born but had never set foot in any of these hills before now, and I wouldn't be getting off my hind end and hiking up them now if it weren't for the caches up there.) Then again, maybe the newbie will say something rude and keep hiding/finding film canisters behind dumpsters. You tried.

 

Back on topic. I think a "TFTC" log could be considered impolite, but at least some people (possibly a lot of people) use it without meaning to be impolite. Taking someone to task for their "TFTC" log is downright rude. Telling an entire branch of newbies (who play the game differently than you) that they are unwelcome, unwanted and are defiling the sport is so far beyond rude that I can't come up with the right word.

[+flask]

.Since the topic is the problem with short logging, I notice the last 5 logs you wrote with your wifes joint account were incredibly short, 3 lines or less:

 

 

i don't think you actually do understand what the thread is about.

 

i don't think anyone here insisted on long logs, but decent logs; logs that contain a few words about the cache or the hunt and as such are sterling examples of good, decent logs that are not cheap cut'n' pastes now are they made entirely of acronyms.

 

as i think a number of us have said earlier, short logs are just fine, thank you, and the logs you quote are fine examples of nice short logs.

 

i can't recall whoever called what's-his-nose angst filled, but "angst" means "deep anxiety or dread" i think it's less angst and more petty little annoyance.

[+ThePetersTrio]

Sorry you feel that way. I can't recall a single post of yours that I didn't find insightful, and I would hate for you to walk away from this thinking that rudeness is my forte. In these forums, altering another's post is a time honored way of poking a little fun at someone, while addressing their post. It is not intended as a slight, and I apologize for it coming across that way.

 

Thank you for the apology. I appreciate that. I wasn't aware that altering someone's post was considered "poking a little fun" - and while I always enjoy having fun, this seemed to be a somewhat serious topic and has evolved into an even more serious topic, IMHO. Sorry if I over-reacted to your intention with changing my post.

[+sbell111]

Sorry you feel that way. I can't recall a single post of yours that I didn't find insightful, and I would hate for you to walk away from this thinking that rudeness is my forte. In these forums, altering another's post is a time honored way of poking a little fun at someone, while addressing their post. It is not intended as a slight, and I apologize for it coming across that way.

 

Thank you for the apology. I appreciate that. I wasn't aware that altering someone's post was considered "poking a little fun" - and while I always enjoy having fun, this seemed to be a somewhat serious topic and has evolved into an even more serious topic, IMHO. Sorry if I over-reacted to your intention with changing my post.

Yup. "Fixing" a post happens all the time. Truth be told, it bugs me one someone does it to me because if it is further quoted it could appear that I was making a different point than I actually did. To get beyond this, I always try to remember to remove the original poster's name from the 'fixed' post's tag.

[+ThePetersTrio]

Like has been mentioned, it depends on how it is presented. When a newcomer comes it and starts spouting "how it should be done" of course they're going to be slapped down. Newcomers come to the forums all the time and ask what, how and why. They ask in a reasoned and respectful manner, they get reasoned and respectful responses. Us "old-timers" have seen it time and again, and on numerous subjects. So when someone comes in and starts spouting off about the "elitist attitudes" of well respected cachers who are simply trying to maintain a certain amount of decorum in the hobby, what do you expect?

 

Of course they are going to be slapped down?

 

Ok. Respect must be paid to the forum regulars in order to be allowed to have and share a point of view here. That is considered "decorum". Got it.

 

[+sbell111]

All hail old people.

[+briansnat]

.Since the topic is the problem with short logging, I notice the last 5 logs you wrote with your wifes joint account were incredibly short, 3 lines or less:

 

 

i don't think you actually do understand what the thread is about.

 

i don't think anyone here insisted on long logs, but decent logs; logs that contain a few words about the cache or the hunt and as such are sterling examples of good, decent logs that are not cheap cut'n' pastes now are they made entirely of acronyms.

 

as i think a number of us have said earlier, short logs are just fine, thank you, and the logs you quote are fine examples of nice short logs.

 

i can't recall whoever called what's-his-nose angst filled, but "angst" means "deep anxiety or dread" i think it's less angst and more petty little annoyance.

 

Hey you made it look like I wrote that.

[+briansnat]

Like has been mentioned, it depends on how it is presented. When a newcomer comes it and starts spouting "how it should be done" of course they're going to be slapped down. Newcomers come to the forums all the time and ask what, how and why. They ask in a reasoned and respectful manner, they get reasoned and respectful responses. Us "old-timers" have seen it time and again, and on numerous subjects. So when someone comes in and starts spouting off about the "elitist attitudes" of well respected cachers who are simply trying to maintain a certain amount of decorum in the hobby, what do you expect?

 

Of course they are going to be slapped down?

 

Ok. Respect must be paid to the forum regulars in order to be allowed to have and share a point of view here. That is considered "decorum". Got it.

 

 

When you walk into a new situation, whether it is a new job, a new circle of friends, a new club or an internet forum with both guns blazing, hurling insults, invective and criticism and making broad generalizations you really shouldn't be surprised if you are not warmly welcomed.

Edited November 30, 2009 by briansnat

[+flask]

.Since the topic is the problem with short logging, I notice the last 5 logs you wrote with your wifes joint account were incredibly short, 3 lines or less:

 

 

i don't think you actually do understand what the thread is about.

 

i don't think anyone here insisted on long logs, but decent logs; logs that contain a few words about the cache or the hunt and as such are sterling examples of good, decent logs that are not cheap cut'n' pastes now are they made entirely of acronyms.

 

as i think a number of us have said earlier, short logs are just fine, thank you, and the logs you quote are fine examples of nice short logs.

 

i can't recall whoever called what's-his-nose angst filled, but "angst" means "deep anxiety or dread" i think it's less angst and more petty little annoyance.

 

Hey you made it look like I wrote that.

 

sorry.

 

i certainly wouldn't want to represent you that way.

[knowschad]

Boy, has this thread ever veered away from the topic!!!

 

 

A few points I'd like to make about logging that have not yet been brought up:

 

 

1) Your logs are part of your geocaching history. Maybe everybody doesn't care about that, but I personally get enjoyment out of going back and reading my old logs and (sometimes!) reliving the experience. Cut & paste logs don't really work for that.

 

 

2) Your logs is one of the main ways that your local geocaching community gets to know you. Really saying something unique in your logs isn't just for the cache owner, it is for anybody that is reading your log.

 

 

3) Whether we want to admit it or not, most of us will refer back to previous logs for hints on occasion. Copy & paste logs, no matter how short or how long, are useless as a research tool.

[+bflentje]

Boy, has this thread ever veered away from the topic!!!

 

 

A few points I'd like to make about logging that have not yet been brought up:

 

 

1) Your logs are part of your geocaching history. Maybe everybody doesn't care about that, but I personally get enjoyment out of going back and reading my old logs and (sometimes!) reliving the experience. Cut & paste logs don't really work for that.

 

 

2) Your logs is one of the main ways that your local geocaching community gets to know you. Really saying something unique in your logs isn't just for the cache owner, it is for anybody that is reading your log.

 

 

3) Whether we want to admit it or not, most of us will refer back to previous logs for hints on occasion. Copy & paste logs, no matter how short or how long, are useless as a research tool.

 

I am in 100% agreement. I also don't believe that the skirt lifter I did in the Park Rapids, MN Walmart on Saturday deserves more than a TFTC.

[Clan Riffster]

All hail old people.

In that case, I expect a phone call from the Pope telling me I've been canonized.

[+ThePetersTrio]

When you walk into a new situation, whether it is a new job, a new circle of friends, a new club or an internet forum with both guns blazing, hurling insults, invective and criticism and making broad generalizations you really shouldn't be surprised if you are not warmly welcomed.

 

I think my point is being missed entirely.

 

[edit] To expand a little more. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that responding to name calling with name calling or denouncing the "elitist" label while posting what can be seen as an elitist response is not only hypocritical but really just reinforces the problem.

 

The forum regulars can earn respect much more readily by showing themselves to be above the petty insults and flame wars. Demanding respect when one's own actions are disrespectful isn't going to get the job done. We (and I'd like to think I am included in this statement) ultimately can be ambassadors of this game/sport/hobby. But how we handle ourselves on this board can be a double-edged sword to that end.

 

Responding to insults with insults will get one result. Responding to insults with calm, even-tempered and rational replies will ultimately get another. One option takes next to no special skills and can provide instant gratification for one's anger or hurt feelings. The other takes much more skill, time, effort, and patience but can provide long term results that actually result in the improvement of (insert particular issue being discussed here).

 

Ultimately it is a choice. I know which one I want to choose and while no one is perfect, certainly, with a quick scan of this board it wouldn't be hard to ascertain which choice is the more frequently used one.

Edited November 30, 2009 by ThePetersTrio

[+Keith Watson]

I personally place caches to be found. If a finder wants to write a nice story, that is nice. I certainly don’t expect long logs just because I think I deserve them.

 

What I do find disrespectful is placing only +1 in a log and nothing else as has been done with one of my caches. This is not only disrespectful, it also show a great deal about the finder that did it.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I have to admit I often use TFTC because I am lazy. To me TFTC expresses "thanks for the cache" and is a heartfelt thanks to the cache owner.

 

However, I rarely cache alone, more often than not I'm with several others, and I know that they will post a lot longer log, so I let it go at that.

 

When I do cache alone I usually post more than that.

 

For the first few years I wrote epistles, sometimes having to use two or even three posts because I exceeded the post word count.

 

I think I quit doing that around the time I got involved in CacheLeague, an international team numbers competition where my seven team members would get in a group and go find hundreds of caches in some distant city in an exhausting few days to compete with other teams. It wasn't all about the numbers, it was about the experiences, but the competition itself was pure numbers. I was usually the driver / navigator and didn't even keep track of the caches we found, I would wait until the team logged them then use their logs as a record of where we had been.

 

I still do that today. When we go out I go out for the socialization and fun, I enjoy the caches but at the end of the day I couldn't tell you the names of the caches we visited. I start out every time marking them found as we come to them in my PDA or laptop, but then get distracted and quit even trying to keep records.

 

Since I rarely log any online nowadays it is not an issue, but when I do, especially if I know that others who were with me will, I don't write much unless something truly interesting happened.

[+bflentje]

I personally place caches to be found. If a finder wants to write a nice story, that is nice. I certainly don’t expect long logs just because I think I deserve them.

 

What I do find disrespectful is placing only +1 in a log and nothing else as has been done with one of my caches. This is not only disrespectful, it also show a great deal about the finder that did it.

 

Disrespect? Pu-lease.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I personally place caches to be found. If a finder wants to write a nice story, that is nice. I certainly don’t expect long logs just because I think I deserve them.

 

What I do find disrespectful is placing only +1 in a log and nothing else as has been done with one of my caches. This is not only disrespectful, it also show a great deal about the finder that did it.

 

Disrespect? Pu-lease.

"This cache sux and I really resent your wasting my time" is disrespectful, "+1" is simply an acknowledgement tha they found your cache. Any disrespect you read into "+1" is your own interpretation.

 

What if they put an exclamation mark behind it? Would "+1!" express their excitement and pleasure in finding your cache?

[+sbell111]

.Since the topic is the problem with short logging, I notice the last 5 logs you wrote with your wifes joint account were incredibly short, 3 lines or less:

i don't think you actually do understand what the thread is about.

 

i don't think anyone here insisted on long logs, but decent logs; logs that contain a few words about the cache or the hunt and as such are sterling examples of good, decent logs that are not cheap cut'n' pastes now are they made entirely of acronyms.

 

as i think a number of us have said earlier, short logs are just fine, thank you, and the logs you quote are fine examples of nice short logs.

 

i can't recall whoever called what's-his-nose angst filled, but "angst" means "deep anxiety or dread" i think it's less angst and more petty little annoyance.

Hey you made it look like I wrote that.

I had to go back to the referenced post when I saw that because I knew that BS wouldn't have posted that one.

Boy, has this thread ever veered away from the topic!!!

 

A few points I'd like to make about logging that have not yet been brought up:

 

1) Your logs are part of your geocaching history. Maybe everybody doesn't care about that, but I personally get enjoyment out of going back and reading my old logs and (sometimes!) reliving the experience. Cut & paste logs don't really work for that.

THis is true, but as you say, everyone does not care about that.

2) Your logs is one of the main ways that your local geocaching community gets to know you. Really saying something unique in your logs isn't just for the cache owner, it is for anybody that is reading your log.

Some people are not as social as you. They may not really care if the local geocaching community gets to know them. Similarly, some people are so much different in written correspondence than face-to-face for various reasons.

3) Whether we want to admit it or not, most of us will refer back to previous logs for hints on occasion. Copy & paste logs, no matter how short or how long, are useless as a research tool.

I think that most cache owners would agree that it isn't preferable for every finder to leave hints in his log.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

3) Whether we want to admit it or not, most of us will refer back to previous logs for hints on occasion. Copy & paste logs, no matter how short or how long, are useless as a research tool.

I think that most cache owners would agree that it isn't preferable for every finder to leave hints in his log.

In fact many COs will delete logs with hints, or ask that they be modified.

Edited November 30, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[knowschad]

3) Whether we want to admit it or not, most of us will refer back to previous logs for hints on occasion. Copy & paste logs, no matter how short or how long, are useless as a research tool.

I think that most cache owners would agree that it isn't preferable for every finder to leave hints in his log.

In fact many COs will delete logs with hints, or ask that they be modified.

I wasn't neccessarily referring to obvious spoilers. There are still many hints that can be gleaned by carefully reading logs. And it may not even be a hint... it may be something like, "found the cache almost 60 feet east of GZ".