Would you delete this log?

[+traildad]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

 

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

I would delete that log.

[knowschad]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

Delete it, and send an email requesting the cacher to re-log without the profanity. But you already knew that, I suspect.

 

Oops!! I see now that it wasn't your cache. In that case, you could ignore the log (probably the best bet) or email the cache owner with your objections and leave it up to them. But essentially it seems to me to be pretty much the same as seeing an objectionable (to you) bumper sticker on the car ahead of you. You just shake your head and keep driving.

Edited March 2, 2010 by knowschad

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Reading your OP, do you mean that the owner of the Cache has not logged in? I would report it. In fact, you'll likely get an email very soon asking you to give a moderator the waypoint so they can address it.

Edited March 2, 2010 by WRITE SHOP ROBERT

[+bittsen]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

Delete it, and send an email requesting the cacher to re-log without the profanity. But you already knew that, I suspect.

 

Oops!! I see now that it wasn't your cache. In that case, you could ignore the log (probably the best bet) or email the cache owner with your objections and leave it up to them. But essentially it seems to me to be pretty much the same as seeing an objectionable (to you) bumper sticker on the car ahead of you. You just shake your head and keep driving.

The OP doesn't own the cache...

 

Just report the cache log to the reviewer and call it a day. Let the reviewer handle it.

[knowschad]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

Delete it, and send an email requesting the cacher to re-log without the profanity. But you already knew that, I suspect.

 

Oops!! I see now that it wasn't your cache. In that case, you could ignore the log (probably the best bet) or email the cache owner with your objections and leave it up to them. But essentially it seems to me to be pretty much the same as seeing an objectionable (to you) bumper sticker on the car ahead of you. You just shake your head and keep driving.

The OP doesn't own the cache...

Yup... that's what I meant by "Oops!! I see now that it wasn't your cache."

[+bittsen]

Yup... that's what I meant by "Oops!! I see now that it wasn't your cache."

 

Pretty interesting how the quote changes when it's edited in middle quote.

[+thedeadpirate]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

 

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

 

The title/subtitle are a bit misleading. If you aren't the owner, then your only choice is to report the cache.

[+Touchstone]

Report it to the Local Reviewer as a TOU violation. If it's someone just messing around and not active anymore, it will get consigned to the ether where it belongs. If it's an active account it will probably get passed up to contact@ for a gentle reminder from the Frog about logging expectations in the future.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

 

The title/subtitle are a bit misleading. If you aren't the owner, then your only choice is to report the cache.

Maybe a little, but not entirely. They are not asking what they should, but what we would do.

 

as a cache owner, if I saw that log on my Cache, I'd delete it.

as a player who saw it on another Cache, I'd ask the Cache owner to delete it.

since the Cache owner may be missing, I'd report it to someone who can deal with it.

 

I see that just reading the title might mislead you, but once you know that they do not own the Cache, and then read the question again, it's easy to understand it in another context

[+simpjkee]

If I got a log like that, I would be tempted to just leave it. Afterall, it only makes the person who wrote it look like an idiot. Then again, I doubt I would get a log like that because my caches don't blow

[+WindingPath]

I agree with simpjkee. Leaving the log there would make the person who posted it look like a total idiot. But, it probably would be best to let your local reviewer know about it so they can deal with it... since geocaching is intended to be a family-friendly sport.

[+bflentje]

Delete it. Why involve a reviewer for such a no brainer?

[+thedeadpirate]

Delete it. Why involve a reviewer for such a no brainer?

 

Because he's neither the person who wrote the log nor the owner of the cache in question. That's why the title is a little misleading.

 

He really has only 2 options. Ignore it or report it.

 

I would probably ignore it since it's not my cache.

[+traildad]

It is hard to express the whole question in the title. I figured most would read the post and understand my point. The cache owner has been missing for almost a year. The logger was fairly new to caching. I am curious about what you would do if you found the log on your cache. I am also curious what you would do if you read the log on a cache with a missing owner.

[+BlueDeuce]

It is hard to express the whole question in the title. I figured most would read the post and understand my point. The cache owner has been missing for almost a year. The logger was fairly new to caching. I am curious about what you would do if you found the log on your cache. I am also curious what you would do if you read the log on a cache with a missing owner.

 

Own - Delete. Not Own - Report.

[knowschad]

It is hard to express the whole question in the title. I figured most would read the post and understand my point. The cache owner has been missing for almost a year. The logger was fairly new to caching. I am curious about what you would do if you found the log on your cache. I am also curious what you would do if you read the log on a cache with a missing owner.

OK, missing cache owner, so he isn't going to delete the log. Newbie finder posted the log... he might fix it if you emailed him, I'm guessing not, though. Last option: point it out to the reviewer and let him/her deal with it while you kick back and get your pocket query ready for your next trip.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I'd file an SBA. We don't need caches lingering that are not maintained by an active owner, which includes maintaining the logs.

Edited March 2, 2010 by TheAlabamaRambler

[Clan Riffster]

I would probably ignore it since it's not my cache.

Those are my thoughts as well. There is no profanity in what you posted. Since it's gentle enough for the forums, I can't imagine it would raise that many eyebrows buried in a cache log. I've seen much worse on bumper stickers and somehow resisted the urge to dial 911. (though I've responded to 911 calls regarding bumper stickers ) I would think the reviewers have enough to do without having to respond to Gladys Kravitz and the language police every time someone's delicate sensabilities are bruised by text that is not in violation of the TOU.

[+Walts Hunting]

I have to agree with the ignore part. People shouldn't go around policing other peoples caches. If the CO let it slide who are you to impose your views on him.

[Keystone]

here is no profanity in what you posted. Since it's gentle enough for the forums, I can't imagine it would raise that many eyebrows buried in a cache log.

Don't assume this is the case and that it's OK to post m.f. in a bunch of forum threads so long as you misspell it. The only reason I didn't edit the potty language out of the OP is because that's the subject of the thread, and it would make less sense without the quoted language.

I would think the reviewers have enough to do without having to respond to Gladys Kravitz and the language police every time someone's delicate sensabilities are bruised by text that is not in violation of the TOU.

We don't mind helping to keep the website family friendly. In my review territory, I can count the number of complaints about bad language in logs over the past year on one hand. On my other hand I can count the examples I've stumbled across on my own while reading cache logs.

 

Incidentally, this is one very narrow area where reviewers are empowered to be the "log constables." We don't quite rise to the level of "police." Also, Groundspeak recognizes that standards of good taste will vary from one part of the world for another. Reviewers are well-situated to take that into account.

[Clan Riffster]

Incidentally, this is one very narrow area where reviewers are empowered to be the "log constables."

Since there was no profane language, perhaps a better label would be "Minister of Taste"?

That could make for a good Monty Python skit...

[+Too Tall John]

"Minister of Taste"? Wouldn't that give them autority to judge the "Wow Factor" again? "Log Constables" seems well chosen.

[+Touchstone]

It is hard to express the whole question in the title. I figured most would read the post and understand my point. The cache owner has been missing for almost a year. The logger was fairly new to caching. I am curious about what you would do if you found the log on your cache. I am also curious what you would do if you read the log on a cache with a missing owner.

 

Thanks for clarifying.

 

Cache I own: Delete and email cacher to relog without the "potty language". I've had to do this on one of my own caches and it worked out fine.

 

Cache I don't own: Report it either to the Local Reviewer or contact@ for action.

 

I'd be curious to know if this particular cacher with the expressive log entries, had similar Find Logs on other Listings? My experience tells me that once an individual cultivates that sort of online persona, they usually don't fall out of character and suddenly become more eloquent. The recidivism rate is usually pretty high, from what I've seen.

 

Ignoring them, usually just emboldens them.

[Clan Riffster]

"Minister of Taste"? Wouldn't that give them autority to judge the "Wow Factor" again?

Good taste has nothing to do with "Wow".

Judging by Keystone's post, the issue is one of poor taste, not one of violating TOU.

Ministry of Taste seems like a perfect title.

[+larryc43230]

Since there was no profane language, perhaps a better label would be "Minister of Taste"?

CR, I have to disagree with you for a change. Deliberately misspelling a profanity, especially one as strong as that one, doesn't decrease its profanity level. I, for one, find the misspelled rendition just as offensive as the real deal, and I'm no prude.

 

It's still a profanity, and IMHO reviewers and TPTB have every right, and obligation, to deal with it appropriately.

 

--Larry

[+Castle Mischief]

Since there was no profane language, perhaps a better label would be "Minister of Taste"?

CR, I have to disagree with you for a change. Deliberately misspelling a profanity, especially one as strong as that one, doesn't decrease its profanity level. I, for one, find the misspelled rendition just as offensive as the real deal, and I'm no prude.

 

It's still a profanity, and IMHO reviewers and TPTB have every right, and obligation, to deal with it appropriately.

 

--Larry

 

I agree with Calvin. The weight of the word isn't in the exacting placement of the individual letters. I'm no prude either, but language should be appropriate for the venue and the venue holders have clearly defined what is and isn't acceptable in this case.

[knowschad]

"Minister of Taste"? Wouldn't that give them autority to judge the "Wow Factor" again? "Log Constables" seems well chosen.

Language Czar?

[Clan Riffster]

It's still a profanity

I think you're right. I was under the impression that a lame attempt at misspelling would render a word from profane to not profane, thinking that the focus was on the actual word, but Webster's proved me wrong, stating that the focus is on intent.

 

Language Czar?

 

I'm liking it!

 

The world needs more Czars.

[hoosier guy]

Delete it like a shot.

[+Touchstone]

It's still a profanity

I think you're right. I was under the impression that a lame attempt at misspelling would render a word from profane to not profane, thinking that the focus was on the actual word, but Webster's proved me wrong, stating that the focus is on intent.

 

Language Czar?

 

I'm liking it!

 

The world needs more Czars.

 

I think there could only be one Czar, but the Czar could have many Mystics at his/her disposal

[+Castle Mischief]

Delete it like a shot.

 

...and if the cache isn't yours and you can't?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

It's still a profanity

I think you're right. I was under the impression that a lame attempt at misspelling would render a word from profane to not profane, thinking that the focus was on the actual word, but Webster's proved me wrong, stating that the focus is on intent.

 

Language Czar?

 

I'm liking it!

 

The world needs more Czars.

 

I think there could only be one Czar, but the Czar could have many Mystics at his/her disposal

I'm sure Obama meant to mention my appointment already, he's just been busy I guess.

 

As soon as it is announced I will be looking for some Mystics, never had one of them before.

[knowschad]

It's still a profanity

I think you're right. I was under the impression that a lame attempt at misspelling would render a word from profane to not profane, thinking that the focus was on the actual word, but Webster's proved me wrong, stating that the focus is on intent.

 

Language Czar?

 

I'm liking it!

 

The world needs more Czars.

If I were language Czar, the first thing I would do would be to eliminate silent letters.

[+bflentje]

Delete it. Why involve a reviewer for such a no brainer?

 

Because he's neither the person who wrote the log nor the owner of the cache in question. That's why the title is a little misleading.

 

He really has only 2 options. Ignore it or report it.

 

I would probably ignore it since it's not my cache.

 

In that case, I agree, make sure the cache owners knows about it and then move on and ignore it. No need to further involve your self.

[+sbell111]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

Delete it, and send an email requesting the cacher to re-log without the profanity. But you already knew that, I suspect.

 

Oops!! I see now that it wasn't your cache. In that case, you could ignore the log (probably the best bet) or email the cache owner with your objections and leave it up to them. But essentially it seems to me to be pretty much the same as seeing an objectionable (to you) bumper sticker on the car ahead of you. You just shake your head and keep driving.

The OP doesn't own the cache...

 

Just report the cache log to the reviewer and call it a day. Let the reviewer handle it.

yup

[+StarBrand]

It is hard to express the whole question in the title. I figured most would read the post and understand my point. The cache owner has been missing for almost a year. The logger was fairly new to caching. I am curious about what you would do if you found the log on your cache. I am also curious what you would do if you read the log on a cache with a missing owner.

 

Own - Delete. Not Own - Report.

As usual - the blue one has summed it up nicely in just a few words.

[Clan Riffster]

Mtn-Man could've done it in less.

Just sayin...

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Since there was no profane language, perhaps a better label would be "Minister of Taste"?

CR, I have to disagree with you for a change. Deliberately misspelling a profanity, especially one as strong as that one, doesn't decrease its profanity level. I, for one, find the misspelled rendition just as offensive as the real deal, and I'm no prude.

 

It's still a profanity, and IMHO reviewers and TPTB have every right, and obligation, to deal with it appropriately.

 

--Larry

Especially since the misspelling was most likely added to place an accent on the words, so they would sound more "Street" and "Thug"

[knowschad]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a m...f....if you know what i mean

So, have you done anything about it yet? Or do you not plan to? Edited March 2, 2010 by knowschad

[GermanSailor]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

 

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a mutha fuka....if you know what i mean

Sombody wrote "mutha fuka" in a log?

 

Maybe that's not the end of the world. Reminds me a little about those comedy clips.

 

Don't panic!

 

GermanSailor

[+chachi44089]

Poor taste for sure.I could just hear my kid saying it,then i yell at them,and they explain to me that it is not profane because it is not spelled correctly.hehe..I dont think so.Profanity is profanity no matter how you diguise the spelling.If you cant read it out loud at the dinner table then it doesnt belong on here.Just my opinion.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Well, it's actually an obscenity, rather than a profanity. Definitely offensive. And I am quite shocked that OP had the audacity to quote it here! Not appropriate for a family oriented forum board. And Keystone should have edited it!

[+popokiiti]

Report it. Inappropriate. IMHO.

[+traildad]

I have to agree with the ignore part. People shouldn't go around policing other peoples caches. If the CO let it slide who are you to impose your views on him.

Well as I am sure you read in the original post the CO has not logged in for many months. Does that count as letting it slide?

[+traildad]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a m...f....if you know what i mean

So, have you done anything about it yet? Or do you not plan to?

I haven't yet. I was waiting for some more feedback. I find it interesting that Keystone commented on it, but did not offer an opinion on the question at hand. Thanks for the opinions.

[knowschad]

I was reviewing some old caches I have found, and came across a questionable log entry. The owner has not logged in for almost a year. I found that the log was not in keeping with the "family friendly" ideals that are expressed by the frog. What would you do?

excerpt from the log.

anyhow we wrote this cache blows on the log and we meant it, this was a m...f....if you know what i mean

So, have you done anything about it yet? Or do you not plan to?

I haven't yet. I was waiting for some more feedback. I find it interesting that Keystone commented on it, but did not offer an opinion on the question at hand. Thanks for the opinions.

After 40 some replies, I'd think you'd have some idea. I think the majority have said, report it to the reviewer and move on. Isn't that what you've gotten from the replies, too? Edited March 3, 2010 by knowschad

[+traildad]

Well, it's actually an obscenity, rather than a profanity. Definitely offensive. And I am quite shocked that OP had the audacity to quote it here! Not appropriate for a family oriented forum board. And Keystone should have edited it!

Maybe we should close the topic to reduce the chance that someone else will be shocked or offended. I have enough input to answer my question. Thanks, and I apologize to all that were subjected to such coarse language.

[Clan Riffster]

Can I send you the bill for my counseling?

[+traildad]

Can I send you the bill for my counseling?

No, but you can come over and I will give you some free "counseling".