Write a story or you're being disrespectful?

[+StarBrand]

.... 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".

Very true - often the really subtle hints give great information. Things like "got my hand poked real good as I pulled the cache out" or "spent 20 minutes searching the obvious spot before I realized where I would have hidden one".

[+flask]

even the absence of any information about a cache can give you a hint if the writer takes the time to make a real log.

 

if they tell you on other cache logs that they found it before they got out of the van, or that they spent a LONG time looking and then there's a log with no information, you can make some guesses that it's a standard hide that is neither instantly found nor very difficult.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Wow, just checked the logs on The Homeless Bathtub... sure enough someone recently logged T4TC

 

On that epic cache T4TC should get you deleted if not banned!

Edited December 1, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+briansnat]

Wow, just checked the logs on The Homeless Bathtub... sure enough someone recently logged T4TC

 

On that epic cache T4TC should get you deleted if not banned!

 

Logs like that make me wonder if the person actually was there. Simple cut and past logs on epic caches have alerted me to fake finds in the past. Of course it doesn't mean the find is necessarily a false one, but but those logs do raise my "phony antenna".

[+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.

 

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?

 

I guess I should have explained that up here +1 is a sign of disrespect. Is says “your cache means nothing to me other than to increase my find count”.

[+sbell111]

Wow, just checked the logs on The Homeless Bathtub... sure enough someone recently logged T4TC

 

On that epic cache T4TC should get you deleted if not banned!

It's a liar's cache. I can only assume that they were lying when they said 'Thanks'. After all, a liar's cache in a filthy area 100 feet from a grocery store isn't for everyone.

 

BTW, my log from 2003 was 100% truthful.

Edited December 1, 2009 by sbell111

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

BTW, my log from 2003 was 100% truthful.

It's a tough cache, it sure gave us trouble in 2004.

Edited December 1, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+sbell111]

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?

 

I guess I should have explained that up here +1 is a sign of disrespect. Is says “your cache means nothing to me other than to increase my find count”.

Perhaps a bit of introspection is in order.

[+Smurf]

Wow, just checked the logs on The Homeless Bathtub... sure enough someone recently logged T4TC

 

On that epic cache T4TC should get you deleted if not banned!

It's a liar's cache. I can only assume that they were lying when they said 'Thanks'. After all, a liar's cache in a filthy area 100 feet from a grocery store isn't for everyone.

 

BTW, my log from 2003 was 100% truthful.

 

 

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

 

I'm all in favour of "playing the game", and enjoy a liars cache and much as many on here, but this should surely now be a "request", NOT a "demand"

Edited December 1, 2009 by Smurf

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

That's the nice thing about being grandfathered, new guidelines don't always apply.

 

Beside that, if you read the logs he doesn't delete any that don't comply... though he could if he wanted.

 

The owner being one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game you won't find any guideline flaws with his caches!

[+Smurf]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

That's the nice thing about being grandfathered, new guidelines don't always apply.

 

Beside that, if you read the logs he doesn't delete any that don't comply... though he could if he wanted.

 

The owner being one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game you won't find any guideline flaws with his caches!

 

Thanks for that info ( i don't mind being proved wrong )

I wasn't aware that ALRs had grandfather rights

[knowschad]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

That's the nice thing about being grandfathered, new guidelines don't always apply.

Beside that, if you read the logs he doesn't delete any that don't comply... though he could if he wanted.

The owner being one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game you won't find any guideline flaws with his caches!

Thanks for that info ( i don't mind being proved wrong )

I wasn't aware that ALRs had grandfather rights

Actually, if my memory serves me right, they were not grandfathered. I believe the cache owners were givin a period of time to remove the ALR criteria, but it wasn't indefinate.

[+sbell111]

ALRs are not grandfathered. That was made very clear.

 

The question becomes, how should a person log a liar's cache if they do not wish to lie? If they give an honest description of the hunt, people will get bent. Therefore, they go with short and simple. Still, some people complain.

 

That, of course, is a basic tenet of these forums. No matter what happens, someone will complain.

Edited December 1, 2009 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

That's the nice thing about being grandfathered, new guidelines don't always apply.

 

Beside that, if you read the logs he doesn't delete any that don't comply... though he could if he wanted.

 

The owner being one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game you won't find any guideline flaws with his caches!

You realize that the very statement cited by Smurf would be considered a guidelines violation, right?

[+wimseyguy]

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".

 

Very true- after 10+ minutes of searching for a very tough micro we stopped and read the previous logs and saw 'it really hurts to get gored by your own bull.' My caching partner had found a very hard one that the previous logger hid a few years back, and that tiny sliver of info allowed us to limit the search area and make the find a few minutes later. I like subtle seemingly innocent hints like that, and even put them in the text of my own cache pages on occasion.

Edited December 1, 2009 by wimseyguy

[+briansnat]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

That's the nice thing about being grandfathered, new guidelines don't always apply.

 

Beside that, if you read the logs he doesn't delete any that don't comply... though he could if he wanted.

 

The owner being one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game you won't find any guideline flaws with his caches!

 

Thanks for that info ( i don't mind being proved wrong )

I wasn't aware that ALRs had grandfather rights

 

They don't.

[+Smurf]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

That's the nice thing about being grandfathered, new guidelines don't always apply.

 

Beside that, if you read the logs he doesn't delete any that don't comply... though he could if he wanted.

 

The owner being one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game you won't find any guideline flaws with his caches!

 

Thanks for that info ( i don't mind being proved wrong )

I wasn't aware that ALRs had grandfather rights

 

They don't.

 

So the CO being (and i quote)

 

"one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game"

 

may need a slight ................... NOPE ,, NOT going there

[ThomasFamily102]

Since you had 111 finds in one day and had to go home to log all those finds I would prolly do the same thing after a while. If it was a lightpost cache in a walmart parking lot...what story can you say about that. You would have to put something along the lines of "Pulled into parking lot, headed towards light pull, pulled up the light skirt...walah found it." What kinda story could you tell about a lightpost cache in a parking lot. But the really cool ones we try to write a little summary as to make the hidder feel like it was a cool cache and we appreciate them hiding the cache there. I don't see a reason you couldn't just put TFTC and that be it.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

So the CO being (and i quote)

 

"one of the most respected Reviewers ever in the game"

 

may need a slight ................... NOPE ,, NOT going there

Good, because if you actually read the posts you would see that he deletes none of them. Therefore no ALR, and you are making up something to fuss about.

 

Should he delete the threat from the cache listing to satisfy you? No, as long as he doesn't actually do it the statement is just a request.

[knowschad]

Since you had 111 finds in one day and had to go home to log all those finds I would prolly do the same thing after a while. If it was a lightpost cache in a walmart parking lot...what story can you say about that. You would have to put something along the lines of "Pulled into parking lot, headed towards light pull, pulled up the light skirt...walah found it." What kinda story could you tell about a lightpost cache in a parking lot. But the really cool ones we try to write a little summary as to make the hidder feel like it was a cool cache and we appreciate them hiding the cache there. I don't see a reason you couldn't just put TFTC and that be it.

Sometimes, writing the log is the only fun part of the experience:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...4e-ca4b3a54c0c3

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...41-e5100de38cf2

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...3d-a8e6f12724aa

 

And then, there are these three, all for the same LPC:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...de-72afd264ba16

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...a7-a7ab3288506b

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...9b-a46ef2047bcb

 

I could continue...

Edited December 1, 2009 by knowschad

[+flask]

i think i'm going to let my neighbor's cat write some of my logs...

 

i'm currently working on the 46th lof of a 102 find day, nevermind the DNFs.

 

i believe my neighbor's cat might have something interesting to say.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

i think i'm going to let my neighbor's cat write some of my logs...

 

i'm currently working on the 46th lof of a 102 find day, nevermind the DNFs.

 

i believe my neighbor's cat might have something interesting to say.

[+timberdoodlehunter1]

I try to write a little something when I find a cache. However what about the people out there who have trouble spelling? Or typing? My dad likes to find caches but is a terrible speller and also has trouble finding his way around a keyboard, so he just posts online tftc. That is enough if you know his situation. So I say to each his own, but I do enjoy reading nice logs when people find my caches. I also like to check logs out for caches I will be searching for to see if they mention anything. Such as one cache we went looking for the previous finder said they were surprised by an opossum hiding in the hollow tree next to the cache. Well thankfully I read the nice log so I could use a stick to poke in that hollow tree and not get my hand bitten.

[+L0ne.R]

... what about the people out there who have trouble spelling? Or typing? My dad likes to find caches but is a terrible speller and also has trouble finding his way around a keyboard, so he just posts online tftc.

 

It might be better to type Thanks instead of tftc (only 2 more keystrokes required) because TFTC, for many, has become code for -- Your cache was lame. You made no effort to provide a decent caching experience and I, in return, have made no effort to provide a decent log.

Edited December 1, 2009 by Lone R

[djhobby]

 

It might be better to type Thanks instead of tftc (only 2 more keystrokes required) because TFTC, for many, has become code for -- Your cache was lame. You made no effort to provide a decent caching experience and I, in return, have made no effort to provide a decent log.

 

Exactly what I think too.

 

I wrote this earlier in another post but it's just as fitting here so I'll bring it out again:

 

For a lot of my logs I'll type a little blurb about the weather, or the area, or what ever I remember about the cache, and then finish with TFTC TNLNSL. Which is another way of saying:

 

Thanks for placing this cache here in this creepy cemetery, I didn't take anything out of the cache because McDonalds toys don't interest me anymore because I'm a grown man. And since I didn't take anything, I'm not going to leave this cool LED flashlight that I've been carrying around for a month. I did however sign the log, with my own pen because the one in the cache is broke and dried up. Also the log was also full and pretty damp.

 

 

Imagine how laborious that would be to type that 20 time a week. So to even shorten my logs even further, because I'm all about efficiency, I have come up with few more acronyms for things that I am always typing in my logs.

 

GABARC - I got attacked by a rabid coyote

IHTKIWMP - I had to kill it with my pocketknife

IWWCTL - I wonder what coyote tastes like

 

Hopefully someday, these will get adopted by the whole geocaching community.

 

Sometimes on caches I find of cachers who have signed TFTC on my caches I will sign GABARCIHTKIWMPIWWCTL. So far no one has asked what it means.

[+niraD]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

Given the nature of a liar's cache, I would expect the threat to delete non-compliant logs to be part of the fiction, not an actual ALR. But maybe that's just me...

[+sbell111]

"Inside the cache box besides the trinkets are SPECIAL login instruction,

if you do not follow the instruction I will DELETE your find."

 

Surely an ALR and as such against the guidelines/rules

Given the nature of a liar's cache, I would expect the threat to delete non-compliant logs to be part of the fiction, not an actual ALR. But maybe that's just me...

If that cache page was submitted for listing today, it would be denied.

[+DanOCan]

I guess I should have explained that up here +1 is a sign of disrespect. Is says “your cache means nothing to me other than to increase my find count”.

 

I would interpret it the same way.

 

Around here you know someone is making a subtle comment about a cache's quality when you see something like "Thanks for the smiley." It basically comes down to "I'm not thanking you for the cache because I didn't enjoy it but I did it anyway because I wanted the smiley."

[+deercreekth]

Hey, a familiar name. I just found some of the Evansville area caches you logged on your power run, and noticed the logs. I tend to get pretty wordy in my logs, yet I couldn't find much to say about some of those caches either. I probably wouldn't be able to come up with much if I had found 111 in the same day, so I think that's totally understandable.

 

I agree that the online log is mostly for yourself. I write as much as I can so I can use the log later to try to remember the cache. I've had a couple of cache owners thank me for my logs. But you can do what you want with your logs.

 

I noticed that you used labels in the cache logs. That made me think of something I do think could be seen as disrespectful. I think the size of the labels you used is perfect. It doesn't take up much space, and does the job. But I've recently seen some labels that were probably an inch tall and three inches long placed in micro logs. They were placed vertically, and in some cases took up 1/4-1/2 of the available log space. Taking up 24+ signature lines for one signature is a bit excessive. Again, I'm not talking about your labels.

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

 

GABARC - I got attacked by a rabid coyote

IHTKIWMP - I had to kill it with my pocketknife

IWWCTL - I wonder what coyote tastes like

 

 

 

I know I said was taking time out from posting but I couldn't resist - yep sometimes this happens so GABARC works for me!

[+L0ne.R]

I noticed that you used labels in the cache logs. That made me think of something I do think could be seen as disrespectful. I think the size of the labels you used is perfect. It doesn't take up much space, and does the job. But I've recently seen some labels that were probably an inch tall and three inches long placed in micro logs. They were placed vertically, and in some cases took up 1/4-1/2 of the available log space. Taking up 24+ signature lines for one signature is a bit excessive. Again, I'm not talking about your labels.

 

Sometimes that's a form of protest. I haven't done it myself but have been sorely tempted when I open up a small or larger cache that could hold a notepad and find a piece of paper with 200 tight lines, barely enough room for a date and trailname, if you write with a micro finepoint pen. To me it says the owner doesn't want to have to come back to maintain the cache for at least a couple of years.

Edited December 2, 2009 by Lone R

[+sbell111]

I noticed that you used labels in the cache logs. That made me think of something I do think could be seen as disrespectful. I think the size of the labels you used is perfect. It doesn't take up much space, and does the job. But I've recently seen some labels that were probably an inch tall and three inches long placed in micro logs. They were placed vertically, and in some cases took up 1/4-1/2 of the available log space. Taking up 24+ signature lines for one signature is a bit excessive. Again, I'm not talking about your labels.

 

Sometimes that a form of protest. I haven't done it myself but have been sorely tempted when I open up a small or larger cache that could hold a notepad and find a piece of paper with 200 tight lines, barely enough room for a date and trailname, if you write with a micro finepoint pen. To me it says the owner doesn't want to have to come back to maintain the cache for at least a couple of years.

A rude protest, perhaps.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I noticed that you used labels in the cache logs. That made me think of something I do think could be seen as disrespectful. I think the size of the labels you used is perfect. It doesn't take up much space, and does the job. But I've recently seen some labels that were probably an inch tall and three inches long placed in micro logs. They were placed vertically, and in some cases took up 1/4-1/2 of the available log space. Taking up 24+ signature lines for one signature is a bit excessive. Again, I'm not talking about your labels.

 

Sometimes that a form of protest. I haven't done it myself but have been sorely tempted when I open up a small or larger cache that could hold a notepad and find a piece of paper with 200 tight lines, barely enough room for a date and trailname, if you write with a micro finepoint pen. To me it says the owner doesn't want to have to come back to maintain the cache for at least a couple of years.

A rude protest, perhaps.

I find myself constantly amazed by the things we choose to take offense to, and if given the chance to interpret will choose to interpret in the negative!

[+Renegade Knight]

...Two instances lately, one directed at me have brought this to my attention. First, someone was harassed for posting a short log on a cache locally on the cache page. Second, I was doing a power cache run, and upon logging all 111 of my days finds with *gasp* the same log, I was contacted by one owner who thought my action was disgraceful, and an insult to cache hiders everywhere.

 

Some of us, myself included just aren't in to typing out essay like logs for every cache we find, EVEN the cool ones! It used to be, "TFTC!" sufficed to tell the owner that you appreciated the find. I find writing, and reading (to be honest) these long winded logs to be about as interesting as watching paint dry....

 

The answer is in the middle.

 

1 of 111 for the day, TFTC is actually less exiting to read than TFTC.

 

However some folks are pretty much out of words with Thanks for the cache.

 

Clearly you can post a nice rant though so it's not an allergy to words that stops you from writing a short blip.

 

Nice Park TFTC

Great weather today, TFTC

Saw 3 muggles. TFTC.

My left shoe was untied for this one. TFTC.

Did a little CITO on the way out. TFTC.

 

Even a smidgen of detail makes a differece.

[+Renegade Knight]

...I wasn't aware that ALRs had grandfather rights

 

The listing doesn't. Howver the owner gets put in the position of having enforced the ALR for the orginal finds, is now not allowed to do so for future ones. It creates two classes of finders. Those who earned the find, and those who as an option (and who will normally opt out) may have, but likely didn't do the work.

 

To keep it fair the owner either has to force the ARL issue (and have their cache archived on them as a result) or archive the cache and start over with the new ALR rules. The third way (but not as good) is to email every person who had to log a DNF and invite them to log. That way doesn't change the work the ones who did follow the ALR did.

[Clan Riffster]

IWWCTL

Even after extensive marinading, it's very gamey. Add to that bitter taste the fact that the meat is quite stringy, it's just a few steps better than dying of starvation.

[+L0ne.R]

I noticed that you used labels in the cache logs. That made me think of something I do think could be seen as disrespectful. I think the size of the labels you used is perfect. It doesn't take up much space, and does the job. But I've recently seen some labels that were probably an inch tall and three inches long placed in micro logs. They were placed vertically, and in some cases took up 1/4-1/2 of the available log space. Taking up 24+ signature lines for one signature is a bit excessive. Again, I'm not talking about your labels.

 

Sometimes that's a form of protest. I haven't done it myself but have been sorely tempted when I open up a small or larger cache that could hold a notepad and find a piece of paper with 200 tight lines, barely enough room for a date and trailname, if you write with a micro finepoint pen. To me it says the owner doesn't want to have to come back to maintain the cache for at least a couple of years.

A rude protest, perhaps.

 

Well if you think about it, it's a similar issue. We are discussing how online logs through the years have been reduced to acronyms (tftc), and may be interpreted as a disrespectful or rude practice. And then there's the logbook in the cache. It too has been reduced, thus not allowing those of us who are 'old school', the satisfaction of contributing more than initials and dates to the paper logbook. It too feels a little rude of the CO to be force finders to leave as little as possible in the paper log. It depreciates the total experience for some of us.

Edited December 2, 2009 by Lone R

[+Printess Caroline]

I'm someone who feels a bit insulted when a finder can only bring themselves to write "TFTC", but today I saw an even worse log. While looking through logs of caches I am considering, I saw a log that consisted of " * " today. To me, that is shorthand for, "All that matters is my smilie."

[Clan Riffster]

I saw a log that consisted of " * " today. To me, that is shorthand for, "All that matters is my smilie."

I would translate that to read "Clan Riffster, your cache was pathetic. So much so, that I am going to use only a hint of virtual ink in my online log."

[+Printess Caroline]

I saw a log that consisted of " * " today. To me, that is shorthand for, "All that matters is my smilie."

I would translate that to read "Clan Riffster, your cache was pathetic. So much so, that I am going to use only a hint of virtual ink in my online log."

 

" . " is the worst insult then, I guess.

[+flask]

 

" . " is the worst insult then, I guess.

 

oh, man... there's a guy who caches near me and he left that as a log at a cache i saw recently and then i went and looked up his other logs. yep, mostly all the same: "."

 

the few that he wrote more than that were tftc.

 

ahhhh, ahhh, it burns!

[knowschad]

" . " is the worst insult then, I guess.

oh, man... there's a guy who caches near me and he left that as a log at a cache i saw recently and then i went and looked up his other logs. yep, mostly all the same: "."

the few that he wrote more than that were tftc.

ahhhh, ahhh, it burns!

Does the same guy log his DNFs with "?" ?

[+flask]

" . " is the worst insult then, I guess.

oh, man... there's a guy who caches near me and he left that as a log at a cache i saw recently and then i went and looked up his other logs. yep, mostly all the same: "."

the few that he wrote more than that were tftc.

ahhhh, ahhh, it burns!

Does the same guy log his DNFs with "?" ?

 

i've never seen a DNF log from him.

[djhobby]

" . " is the worst insult then, I guess.

oh, man... there's a guy who caches near me and he left that as a log at a cache i saw recently and then i went and looked up his other logs. yep, mostly all the same: "."

the few that he wrote more than that were tftc.

ahhhh, ahhh, it burns!

Does the same guy log his DNFs with "?" ?

 

i've never seen a DNF log from him.

 

There you elitist go again... Assuming we all know your acronyms... What is DNF????

[+flask]

 

There you elitist go again... Assuming we all know your acronyms... What is DNF????

 

it's actually shortened from DNFWM.

[djhobby]

 

There you elitist go again... Assuming we all know your acronyms... What is DNF????

 

it's actually shortened from DNFWM.

 

I think that would be a +2?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

 

There you elitist go again... Assuming we all know your acronyms... What is DNF????

 

it's actually shortened from DNFWM.

I thought it was short for DNFTFT - Did Not Find The Freakin' Thing!

[+sbell111]

 

" . " is the worst insult then, I guess.

 

oh, man... there's a guy who caches near me and he left that as a log at a cache i saw recently and then i went and looked up his other logs. yep, mostly all the same: "."

 

the few that he wrote more than that were tftc.

 

ahhhh, ahhh, it burns!

One wonders if there is a backstory there. Perhaps someone contacted him early on about spoilers in a log or something similar and he has changed his logging method in response.

 

ETA: I just took a peak at your recent finds and located the cacher that I think that you might be referring to. It appears that he only logged this way for the event that he attended on 11/8 and the four caches that he found that day. I wonder if someone didn't pee in his wheaties at the event.

Edited December 2, 2009 by sbell111

[+deercreekth]

I noticed that you used labels in the cache logs. That made me think of something I do think could be seen as disrespectful. I think the size of the labels you used is perfect. It doesn't take up much space, and does the job. But I've recently seen some labels that were probably an inch tall and three inches long placed in micro logs. They were placed vertically, and in some cases took up 1/4-1/2 of the available log space. Taking up 24+ signature lines for one signature is a bit excessive. Again, I'm not talking about your labels.

 

Sometimes that's a form of protest. I haven't done it myself but have been sorely tempted when I open up a small or larger cache that could hold a notepad and find a piece of paper with 200 tight lines, barely enough room for a date and trailname, if you write with a micro finepoint pen. To me it says the owner doesn't want to have to come back to maintain the cache for at least a couple of years.

A rude protest, perhaps.

 

Well if you think about it, it's a similar issue. We are discussing how online logs through the years have been reduced to acronyms (tftc), and may be interpreted as a disrespectful or rude practice. And then there's the logbook in the cache. It too has been reduced, thus not allowing those of us who are 'old school', the satisfaction of contributing more than initials and dates to the paper logbook. It too feels a little rude of the CO to be force finders to leave as little as possible in the paper log. It depreciates the total experience for some of us.

 

The simple solution to that is don't search for micros. I wasn't referring to micro logs in ammo cans. I'm referring to micro logs in magnetic key boxes, small match containers, film canisters, etc.

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

I wonder how many cachers don't place caches anymore because of logger attitudes.

 

I personally know of one cacher who archived all of her cachers because of one or more cachers attitudes. She had caches that were above the usual run of the mill caches.