Jump to content

Maybe need to be a little more thick skinned


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Maybe I shouldnt let it get to me but doesnt it really wind you up when a cacher makes a stupid critical comment about one of your caches. One of mine which has been successfully visited over 110 times had a comment 'What a rubbish hiding place' in the log yesterday. Why is it always people who have zero caches hidden themselves. End of the day without people placing caches there would be no geocaching (even the 'rubbish' ones) Sorry....hit a nerve!

Link to comment

Oh, I know what you mean! I had a DNF log on one of my caches which referred to the previous DNFs and basically implied I'd neglected it. What they'd failed to notice (and the reason I'd not been to check it) was that all of the previous DNFs had had to give up searching due to bad weather, darkness or flat GPS batteries. I took some small pleasure in checking the (perfectly safe) cache and writing a log implying that they should look a little harder next time.

Link to comment

I think you are right to be miffed......I just had a look at their online log. The way I read the cache page, was, that there are pollarded trees there.....I didn't see anything saying the cache was hidden in one.......they obviously looked at the description in a different way?

 

Just stay thick skinned......you know it is a good cache from all the positive logs :laughing:

 

Gaz

Link to comment

A cache we found yesterday had a note in it:

"We've found over 600 caches and this is by FAR the worst we've ever found. What WERE you thinking?"

Not got the decency to actually SIGN the log. And either changed their mind once they've got home, decided to make no mention of it on the online log or not logged online at all.

 

Now, being fair, the cache hiding place (behind public loos) wasn't the best I've come across, but it was better than many I've found and some I've not even bothered looking for once I've got near the hiding place. But there is a HUGE saving grace that the cache is on the front at Grange, which is a lovely place for a sunny afternoon wander. I've not quite found 600, but I'd certainly not say it was anywhere near the worst cache I've found.

I'd say I've got a worse one (Micro in Hawthorn) which I'm thinking of archiving.

 

I'd ignore it. Some people are only happy when they're moaning.

Link to comment

Politeness costs nothing, and this sport runs on good will.

 

Also, people have different reasons for geocaching and get different things out of the sport. Some people's idea of a rubbish cache is totally different to another's. I'd say ignore those tactless posters - sometimes stuff comes out the wrong way or people post when in a bad mood and don't think to re-read or edit what they have written.

Link to comment

Maybe I shouldnt let it get to me but doesnt it really wind you up when a cacher makes a stupid critical comment about one of your caches. One of mine which has been successfully visited over 110 times had a comment 'What a rubbish hiding place' in the log yesterday. Why is it always people who have zero caches hidden themselves. End of the day without people placing caches there would be no geocaching (even the 'rubbish' ones) Sorry....hit a nerve!

This isn't a comment on your cache, nor on the log you are referring to, I haven't even seen that. I have a couple of observations, though:

 

1) if I get an uncharacteristic adverse log, I still try to understand the poster's point of view, just in case I can use it to improve the cache. If I can't, and I think the cache has merit, I'll not lose any sleep over the comment.

 

2) I wouldn't want never to pass a critical comment simply because "without people placing caches there would be no geocaching (even the 'rubbish' ones)". That would disallow all criticism of all caches, and I think it is right to comment appropriately if you think a cache really is poor.

 

Rgds, Andy

Edited by Amberel
Link to comment

If your comment "the vast majority seem to appreciate that Cache owners try to place interesting, scenic or otherwise hides plus have the ongoing battle (and cost) of maintaining them." was meant to imply that I didn't, you have quite misunderstood my own post.

 

I've hidden 3 times as many caches as you have on Groundspeak alone, plus loads more on other listing sites. This is not intended to be a boast, merely to demonstrate that I am also famliar with both sides of the game.

 

The comments on your cache may have been inappropriate, in which case yes, you will enjoy caching more if you can grow a slightly thicker skin. But your posts appear to me to be implying that placing caches should make us immune from criticism, and it is that with which I am disagreeing.

 

Rgds, Andy

Link to comment

You can please all cachers some of the time, and some cachers all of the time, but you can't... I've seen worse things left in caches (not yet the 'log' we all dread though!) than a few unkind words. As Harry Callahan said in The Dead Pool, "Opinions are like a____s, everyone's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks." - Try to focus on the positive feedback and ignore criticism that's not constructive. Cache hiding can be a thankless task but it is the thing which keeps the game growing and developing.

Link to comment

As Harry Callahan said in The Dead Pool, "Opinions are like a____s

 

OK Mr SP, is this one of your cunning quizzes? What is a_____s?_

As a starter for ten my answer is......

 

"Opinions are like a(n) ALGORITHM"

 

A puzzling question for all. :wub:

Edited by currykev
Link to comment

As a relative noob, with 32 found and 3 hidden, I wouldn't dream of digging someone out if I couldn't find their cache. It doesn't mean that their cache is rubbish or badly hidden. Usually, it's the person searching just not looking in the right place, misinterpreting the clues or they expect to be able to find it really easily. Maybe they just get the hump when a cache suddenly vexes them and maybe they feel a little embarrassed?

 

I was trying to find a church micro on Friday and spend about an hour searching for it. At first I thought the coords might have been off but there were plenty of other successful logs a couple of days before. Then I thought my GPS might have been inaccurate? No. Got home and checked ALL of the previous logs (which admittedly I hadn't done before I left) to find out there were plently of clues listed.

 

I felt stupid for not doing so and realise it was my own fault. I'm now charged with excitment at returning for another go!

Link to comment
Just like in the real world, I find cache owners cannot handle negative comments.

 

Probably true. An element of euphemism is the best way to get across a criticism without appearing unduly negative.

 

A while back I found a cache I thought was very poor - broken glass, litter, barbed wire and prowling junkies all contributing to the pointlessness of a nano hanging on a rusty fence in a grubby urban alleyway. Maybe some people like that sort of thing, but to me it was a very poor cache. But there's no point getting in to a slagging match about it, so on the log rather than giving my blunt opinion "what possible enjoyment could anyone get from this cache? "I just said "the area appears to have gone downhill since the cache was placed". Benefit of the doubt and all that.

Link to comment
Just like in the real world, I find cache owners cannot handle negative comments.

 

Probably true. An element of euphemism is the best way to get across a criticism without appearing unduly negative.

 

A while back I found a cache I thought was very poor - broken glass, litter, barbed wire and prowling junkies all contributing to the pointlessness of a nano hanging on a rusty fence in a grubby urban alleyway. Maybe some people like that sort of thing, but to me it was a very poor cache. But there's no point getting in to a slagging match about it, so on the log rather than giving my blunt opinion "what possible enjoyment could anyone get from this cache? "I just said "the area appears to have gone downhill since the cache was placed". Benefit of the doubt and all that.

I think the important thing to note is that we do this for fun and the love of it. If people didn't place caches, there would be nothing to find.

 

I'm getting a bit sick of people who have nothing better to do than act as the cache police, criticising caches, complaining when maintenance isn't quite what it should be. Rather than troll on people's caches, get out and do some! I swear if some people spent more time actually finding caches than criticising and moaning they'd have a much happier life.

 

As the OP says, we all maybe need a bit thicker skin. Thing is though, for most of us, it's a hobby.

If you don't like a cache, post a polite log and move on. If it's dangerous or seriously off-track that it might damage someone's land then say so.

 

But think about it - before we go and bemoan someone's cache, think about how you would feel about it if someone said the same thing to you!

Link to comment

JC_goodpost.gif

 

Totally agree, let's just be grateful that some people are hiding caches for us to find, whether they be Nanos, Micros, Small boxes, Mediums boxes, Large boxes or even rusty old ammo boxes. Have done some decnt circular walks where the steer has used film pots but has also included medium sized clip boxes for at least quarter of the hides. Not everybody can afford to spend a couple of quid for each of 10 caches in a series.

 

Although I must agree that some thought needs to go into locations.

 

edited to add last paragraph.

Edited by DrDick&Vick
Link to comment
I think the important thing to note is that we do this for fun and the love of it. If people didn't place caches, there would be nothing to find.
But we are a LONG way past the point at which caches are so few and far between that a poor cache is better than no cache. I get (a lot) more fun from finding a clean, dry, imaginative, well hidden and well maintained cache in an interesting location than I do from finding tat in an unpleasant location. The more we accept rubbish as being the norm, the more rubbish we will get.

 

I'm getting a bit sick of people who have nothing better to do than act as the cache police, criticising caches, complaining when maintenance isn't quite what it should be. Rather than troll on people's caches, get out and do some!
It seems to me that in order to comment on a cache you have found, you must HAVE been out caching :laughing: .

 

But think about it - before we go and bemoan someone's cache, think about how you would feel about it if someone said the same thing to you!
First of all, I try to look at it objectively - is the criticism valid, in full or in part? I'm not saying all my caches are fantastic in every way, but what I try to do is explain why it's set and why someone may or may not want to do it. If their criticism suggests it didn't come up to their expectation based on that description, I might change the cache or change the description. If they are criticising something about the cache that the listing already describes accurately, yet they still did the cache despite that, that is their fault and I don't lose any sleep over it.

 

What I refuse to accept is that cache setters should be immune to all criticism simply by virtue of having set the cache. I'm saying that as a cache setter just as much as a finder.

 

Rgds, Andy

Link to comment

Hi im a newbie and im so addicted already, as far as i am concerned there isnt such thing as a bad cache, a cache is a cache and if people wasnt hiding them then this great hobby wouldnt be anymore, so ignore the moaners and carry on hiding :laughing:) i havent hid any myself yet but got a micro and a clip box with camo bag ready to do so.

Link to comment

It horrifies me to see the term Cache Police, as a large amount of the time it's aimed at those who are trying to actively improve the quality of Geocaching in the UK.

 

Definition of Geocaching Quality: A container which is not damaged and will not fall apart after a short period. Dry Log books and cache swaps if any, Locations free of Litter and sharps. Anything else is personally subjective for each person.

 

By placing a cache the owner agrees to Maintain that cache within a reasonable period, the UK Reviewers initially take that to be within 8 weeks, that period is severely reduced if a Cache Owner has been ignoring their responsibilities. Without a genuine reason to do so.

 

Up to recently the UK was in a situation where we had 1,300 caches Long Term Disabled. Some going back to 2008. That's now down to a few hundred. But that means there were a Large number of UK cache owners not maintaining their caches.

 

Definition of Long Term Disabled: A cache which has been Temporarily Disabled over 8 weeks.

 

The community as a whole could have avoided this if they had been prepared to use the appropriate Tools. That is Needs Maintenance and Needs Archiving Logs. But due to a prevalent attitude within the UK Community, any person who appropriately uses these logs is branded Cache Police. And has a high risk of being on the receiving end of abuse! This in turn leads to situations where people end up using Sock accounts, to avoid this abuse being directed directly at them [A Sock Account can just be thrown away].

 

So instead of attacking people who you refer to as Cache Police, why not stop and think about how they are trying to improve the community as a whole Geocaching Experience. Please also think that this attitude is creating a ethos in the UK, where it is common for Members to abuse other Members!

 

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

Link to comment

But think about it - before we go and bemoan someone's cache, think about how you would feel about it if someone said the same thing to you!

Well I think I can sum that up for you?

 

I had a cache that was enjoyed by everyone who completed it, but I got this log one day.

 

On holiday in Penicuik for a few days, from Leyland, Lancashire. Found the Priors of Sion earlier in the day, then had an excellent snack at The Munch Box in Loanhead, so thought a nice, easy walk round the Cemetery would be just the job. Did that part OK,(we think), then shorly afterwards found ourselves grovelling round a muddy, litter strewn grot spot in a dark chasm under tons of steelwork. After half an hour we decided there must be better ways to spend a lovely, sunny afternoon. This one was more a case for Inspector Rebus - the grimier side of the outskirts of Edinburgh. So carried on to find Reclaimed, Caiystane and Under High Voltage - very enjoyable. Citizen Smith.

 

So I disabled the cache with this note

 

On the 15th of October 2005 I was going to remove and archive this cache, but as my log says I decided to leave it due to other peoples logs being of a positive nature.

 

After reading ****** online log I have decided that it is time to call it a day with this cache. I do not like being taken to unsavoury places myself therefore I won't knowingly take others to one. I would like to thank ****** for being honest in his log and I apologise for it being an unpleasant experience.

 

If you wish to bag this for the numbers then I suggest you do it sooner rather than later, as the cache will be removed as soon as I can get down there.

 

HH

 

So a week later I managed to get to the location and decided to remove the cache and archive it with this note.

 

Now gone for good. I'm going to use one or two of the contents for a new cache, and I will also be able to re-use the rest of the logbook for a future cache too.

 

Thanks to everyone who has visited, there are some good comments in the logbook. Personally I don't think there was a lot of rubbish about, but there was obviously enough for people to feel uncomfortable whilst searching. I'm sorry to see this go, and I hope someone else will place another cache here in the future.

 

HH

 

I looked at the DNF log as constructive criticism, I have even had a cacher say to my face that he didn't like one of my caches, I very calmly asked him why. His excuse raised a few eyebrows, so I just dismissed his opinion on that occasion, but he didn't know I dismissed him, as I stayed polite as he was entitled to his opinion.

 

I am a person that says if he thinks a cache location isn't really worth visiting as I did at this cache just the other week. You just need to read the logs from my DNF to the logs dated the 18th April to see that it isn't worth rushing back out to find.

 

So can anyone honestly say that in the case's of my own cache and the one I have had the recent DNF on that it wasn't better to be honest rather than just a quick note saying whether you found it or not? For it is only when a location is filthy and isn't worth being taken to that I make such comments.

If that makes me a cache copper then tough, I guess you'll be a bit upset if I don't like any of your cache locations?

Link to comment

 

So instead of attacking people who you refer to as Cache Police, why not stop and think about how they are trying to improve the community as a whole Geocaching Experience. Please also think that this attitude is creating a ethos in the UK, where it is common for Members to abuse other Members!

 

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

 

I don't disagree with this and I think we all agree that the job you guys do is very important to our caching. know personally I've had a couple archived because I didn't keep on top of them. I've a couple in the disabled queue right now which rightly need maintenance. Unfortunately due to work situation, I've found it increasingly hard to keep on top although I have every confidence I will be back up to speed very shortly.

 

I have removed all the offending logs, but I had a cache which had been out of action for 5 days. I hadn't realised that previously someone had complained that the cache log was damp and needed replacing.

 

I'll take that fully on board. I hadn't been reading the logs properly.

 

However, a "Needs Maintenance" log was put onto the cache after someone DNFed it. That's fine. That person appears to live locally and quite rightly logged that the log book needed replacing. Personally, if I passed the same place every day, I would have done someone a favour (as I did last week) and replaced the soggy log book. But I appreciate everyone plays the game differently.

 

A completely different cacher (who might I say isn't particularly local but hasn't found it) put a note on that said

"Owner is not prepared to Maintain so needs Archiving!"

This is what the above post is talking about - I should have just ignored this and moved on, but I couldn't.

 

That is totally unacceptable for a cache which has been missing for exactly 5 days

 

This is what I'm talking about - that was offensive and unnecessary. I'm not talking about people who go out, find a cache is waterlogged, or the log is full or something similar. I have broad enough shoulders to take this.

Link to comment

As a relatively new cacher I appreciate all the efforts of those who hide the caches. However, I have written one comment about a cache which was a box wrapped in a bin liner under a bush. It looked like it was unpleasant rubbish. I thought the idea of caching was that it did not spoil the environment and encouraged people to explore areas of interest. I was not rude in my comment but tried to be constructive. The people hiding it had only found 5 caches of their own so I felt that maybe they had not got enough experience of what a cache should be like. I don't like to see rubbish and had i not been with my daughter who prodded the bag I would not have even looked into it, as it just looked like it had been abandoned. I am not sure of the guidelines given to hiders of caches as I have not yet hidden one. I presume somewhere it mentions that this hobby should not damage the environment and placing caches which look like rubbish surely does this? This a great hobby. thanks to all of you out there who are keeping me fitter and healthier by planting the caches!

Link to comment

For a cache to be published on geocaching.com it has to follow the Cache Listing Requirements and Guidelines but in the UK there are also the additional GAGB Guidelines to be considered. You will see that they address some environmental concerns and one of them states

 

"Cache containers should not be placed inside a polythene bag."

 

The reviewers have no way of knowing that a cache has been placed in some sort of plastic bag unless another cacher tells them about it. A cache container should be of good enough quality to keep out rain without having a plastic bag wrapped around it - If anything the bags tend to hold wetness in the folds and creases and become a squelchy damp home for slugs and snails.

 

MrsB

Link to comment

For a cache to be published on geocaching.com it has to follow the Cache Listing Requirements and Guidelines but in the UK there are also the additional GAGB Guidelines to be considered. You will see that they address some environmental concerns and one of them states

 

"Cache containers should not be placed inside a polythene bag."

 

The reviewers have no way of knowing that a cache has been placed in some sort of plastic bag unless another cacher tells them about it. A cache container should be of good enough quality to keep out rain without having a plastic bag wrapped around it - If anything the bags tend to hold wetness in the folds and creases and become a squelchy damp home for slugs and snails.

 

MrsB

As a relative Newbie to both finding and hiding I read this thread with interest. The FTF of my first cache made some suggestions which I took on board and edited the description, I didn't get upset in any way as it was constructive. One of the comments from another finder concerned the clue - Phone(y) tree. The cache is concealed in the treeline infront of the most bizarre mobile phone mast you have ever seen - It is "disguised" as a fir tree !! All you have to do is a. read the title of the cache, and b. look up. Maybe it was a little obtuse for some - but I do like to put a bit of a cryptic clue in! Anyway I find it great when someone finds one of mine and like the polititian said Any publicity is good publicity!! :lol::lol:

Link to comment

MrsB

As a relative Newbie to both finding and hiding I read this thread with interest. The FTF of my first cache made some suggestions which I took on board and edited the description, I didn't get upset in any way as it was constructive. One of the comments from another finder concerned the clue - Phone(y) tree. The cache is concealed in the treeline infront of the most bizarre mobile phone mast you have ever seen - It is "disguised" as a fir tree !! All you have to do is a. read the title of the cache, and b. look up. Maybe it was a little obtuse for some - but I do like to put a bit of a cryptic clue in! Anyway I find it great when someone finds one of mine and like the polititian said Any publicity is good publicity!! ;):o

 

Hi MrsB

 

We 'think' we have one of these near us in North Wales, We drove past it yesterday as we were in a rush to get to Caernarfon. EVERYBODY who drives past it notices it and comments, We had a giggle when we realised there was a cache there... 150ft afat from a massive horrible metal mast!

 

Anyhow... It's called 'Mobile' Tree and part of the description says 'Stopped you here to see a 'special' tree. Great game to play when you are driving past - spot the tree.' along with thedetails it is a layby, slow dowon on the brow of the hill just incase etc...

 

We think it is great to point out the obvious as you see it 'obviously' driving passed, Not exactly rocket science :blink:

 

SCMP

Link to comment

You mean that there is more than one of them ?? We thought ours was pretty weird but due to the very strict planning laws in the Cotswolds they wanted it to "blend in" (some hopes!!) Also weird that another Cacher had the same idea as us by putting a cache in the vicinity - Deja Vu all over again

cheers ;)

Link to comment

You mean that there is more than one of them ?? We thought ours was pretty weird but due to the very strict planning laws in the Cotswolds they wanted it to "blend in" (some hopes!!) Also weird that another Cacher had the same idea as us by putting a cache in the vicinity - Deja Vu all over again

cheers ;)

 

Oh, they get much weirder.

 

Have a look at these 6!

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/gal...ree-photographs

 

The Cactus and the Palm Tree are unbelievable!

Link to comment

Thick skinned - yes - got stung by nettles on recent cache-hunting!

 

As for the mobile phone mast one - my other half says that people stop at the lay-by to take a leak... so we haven't done this one!

 

Found a cache - pill/vitamin pot in a plastic food bag - presumably placed in it because the toy car placed with it didn't fit in the pot. Hole in bag (tied it up) and evicted snails. I only logged it as a find - should I also write an additional log for needs maintenance?

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...