PEOPLE CAN'T READ

June 20, 2010

You know you write things in the cache description on your hide and add attributes for a reason. Some people just don't take a moment to look at them. I can put not kid friendly and they complain it is not a good place for kids. Um, no kidding that's why I put that attribute on there and put it in the description. First line of the description can say it is near private land be sure not to trespass and what do they do? Yes, trespass. you just can't win.

4.8k · June 20, 2010

~pat pat on the back~

There, there. Now you have it all out of your system. Don't you feel better for being able to vent?

2.3k · June 20, 2010

Some people can't read the descriptions if they just download the cache into their GPSr due to limited space. Not everyone has a fancy GPS for paperless caching and not everyone goes online and reads all those descriptions.

6.7k · June 20, 2010

You know you write things in the cache description on your hide and add attributes for a reason. Some people just don't take a moment to look at them. I can put not kid friendly and they complain it is not a good place for kids. Um, no kidding that's why I put that attribute on there and put it in the description. First line of the description can say it is near private land be sure not to trespass and what do they do? Yes, trespass. you just can't win.

Cool, you're learning that we don't all cache the same way!

I load a PQ into m y GPS and hit 'Next Nearest' and bounce from cache to cache.

I don't pull up the cache listing on my Blackberry unless I have hunted the cache and cannot find it.

Knowing that, maybe you might consider in your hides that many folks will be looking without having read the listing and place your hide either so that cachers don't need to know special considerations or hide in places such that special considerations are obvious.

Or put something in the title like "Billybob's Privet Cache (Read Listing)" that tells me to read the listing before searching the privet hedge.

4.2k · June 20, 2010

Some people can't read the descriptions if they just download the cache into their GPSr due to limited space. Not everyone has a fancy GPS for paperless caching and not everyone goes online and reads all those descriptions.

if that's the case they should not complain in their logs

June 20, 2010

Some people can't read the descriptions if they just download the cache into their GPSr due to limited space. Not everyone has a fancy GPS for paperless caching and not everyone goes online and reads all those descriptions.

if that's the case they should not complain in their logs

seconded.

6.7k · June 20, 2010

Some people can't read the descriptions if they just download the cache into their GPSr due to limited space. Not everyone has a fancy GPS for paperless caching and not everyone goes online and reads all those descriptions.

if that's the case they should not complain in their logs

True, but I think his issue was more with access violations and special instructions in the listing not being read or heeded.

Special instructions are not going to be read by those of us who don't read cache listings first.

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

2.3k · June 20, 2010

I agree they shouldn't complain. But the owner shouldn't complain either when trespassing happens in an area that is not clearly marked "no trespassing" as well knowing that not everyone can see the description in the field.

1.7k · June 21, 2010

Some people can't read the descriptions if they just download the cache into their GPSr due to limited space. Not everyone has a fancy GPS for paperless caching and not everyone goes online and reads all those descriptions.

if that's the case they should not complain in their logs

True, but I think his issue was more with access violations and special instructions in the listing not being read or heeded.

Special instructions are not going to be read by those of us who don't read cache listings first.

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

How does this explain them checking off the "children friendly" with the x in it? It would save them a whole lot of issue, this is why there are attributes for pocket query's.

2.3k · June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

+1

19k · June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

Agreed. Even back when I started caching, the hard-core cachers ignored the cache page. They bragged about (pre-paperless days for most of us) to only write down the D&T ratings. As if that somehow made them better cachers. Hey, sometimes there is some important information in those cache page writeups! There's nothing macho about refusing to read the cache page.

June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

Agreed. Even back when I started caching, the hard-core cachers ignored the cache page. They bragged about (pre-paperless days for most of us) to only write down the D&T ratings. As if that somehow made them better cachers. Hey, sometimes there is some important information in those cache page writeups! There's nothing macho about refusing to read the cache page.

And then there are those who complain about a poorly written cache page with little or not enough information.

I have yet to hunt for a cache that I have not read the cache page.

Admittedly, I have very few finds but I don't plan on changing my strategy any time soon.

19k · June 21, 2010

And then there are those who complain about a poorly written cache page with little or not enough information.

Well, that's a problem, too.

June 21, 2010

I am not necessarily advocating this, but when cachers really should read the cache page because important information is stated there, the cache can be made a mystery/puzzle cache with the actual coordinates typed in the cache description area.

Not a really elegant solution, but that's the first idea that came to mind. I like using baseball bats to chase gnats.

June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

+1

+ Another 1!

June 21, 2010

You can't win. I have a cache placed that in itself is jut a lame magnetic key holder guardrail cache. However, if you read the cache page it gives you directions where you can see a smiling tree.

I state specifically on the the cache page where to safely park, where to walk. on which side of the street to walk and where to look for the payoff. It seems too difficult for many cachers to actually read a cache page. All they seem to be interested in are the numbers. It takes all kinds I guess.

FYI: The cache listing is "Have a Nice Day" in the 02347 area code.

June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

+1

+ Another 1!

And another +1. Really. And thanks and appreciation to those who take the time to include useful information on their cache pages.

June 21, 2010

What's the point of having cache pages if no one's going to read them? I bet Groundspeak could save a ton of money by taking down the website and just maintaining an email list of random coordinates if that's all people are interested in.

People and their silly numbers. What's the fun of the game if all you care about is getting numbers?

6.7k · June 21, 2010

What's the point of having cache pages if no one's going to read them? I bet Groundspeak could save a ton of money by taking down the website and just maintaining an email list of random coordinates if that's all people are interested in.

People and their silly numbers. What's the fun of the game if all you care about is getting numbers?

For the vast majority of caches coordinates are all that is needed. I found my first 500+ caches with a basic eTrex Yellow and no access to listings. Now I use a Blackberry for PQs and if I can't find it in say 15 minutes I do read the cache listing, clue, past logs, whatever is available.

If I am planning a numbers run, a thing I have done several times over the years but certainly not my normal style of caching, I do read the cache listings to select target caches along the route.

Normally I just follow the GPS from cache to cache and rarely need to read the listing.

The knee-jerk response which appears in so many of these threads that if we don't cache your way then we're only in it for the numbers is pretty silly when addressed to cachers like myself who don't log their finds online. It's hard to be a "numbers cacher" when you haven't logged 80% of your finds in the last 2+ years. The fun of my game has nothing to do with numbers, or cache types, or sizes. It's all about the experience of getting out there and having fun with friends.

On the few occasions when it IS all about the numbers, however, you have to read the listings, it's far easier to find it when you know something about what you're looking for, so the case is made that "numbers cachers" need the listings much more than others!

Edited June 21, 2010 by TheAlabamaRambler

June 21, 2010

I agree, but in all fairness, I don't always see the description. If I go caching with just my Blackberry, I can see the names of the caches and the distance from me. It's a few extra steps to view the description, and sometimes I am unable to read them at all because it times out when trying to retrieve the data from the website. The descriptions are not "pre-loaded" onto my blackberry.

June 21, 2010

You know you write things in the cache description on your hide and add attributes for a reason. Some people just don't take a moment to look at them. I can put not kid friendly and they complain it is not a good place for kids. Um, no kidding that's why I put that attribute on there and put it in the description. First line of the description can say it is near private land be sure not to trespass and what do they do? Yes, trespass. you just can't win.

since when are lamp post caches not a "good place for kids"?

June 21, 2010

There's nothing macho about refusing to read the cache page.

-1

what is wrong with you? it is completely macho to go caching without all the info. it is akin to putting something together without the instructions...

June 21, 2010

Cachers come in all shapes and sizes and I for one am not going to build my hides to target the lowest common denominator. If they don't read it, they are missing out on half of the experience. I write my listings to provide extra info about the location. If a cacher wants to go in blind, not enjoy the location and the history, and then spend 5 minutes doing copy-n-paste TFTC logs for the 50 caches they did today, then I don't have the time of day for them.

They will ignore posted signs at the cache site as well. I have one cache at a DOT viewpoint that overlooks a "national critical infrastructure" location. The access road to the viewpoint is a couple hundred yards up the highway. The highway has "no parking" signs every hundred feet due to the nearby "infrastructure". My listing says don't park on the road, take the access road up to the viewpoint where you can park legally. There is even a child waypoint for the access road. But guess what? Idiots still park on the edge of the highway and climb up the hill to the viewpoint. I've had logs stating that they figured out there was an access road after climbing up to the cache. Duh.

I'm proud to say I've never hunted a cache without reading in advance what the CO took the time and effort to say about the cache and location. Even if I'm on the road, there is plenty of time between caches to read the next description in the Palm Pilot. That's what PQ's are for... you get the entire description along with the coordinates. Then you can load all of that into a $20 pocket computer. There is no excuse for not having access to the listings.

June 21, 2010

I don't have paperless caching capabilities, so most of the time I only have the coordinates to go by and usually have no idea what size or type of cache I'm looking for. I don't do it that way to be 'macho' and I'm definitely not a 'numbers' cacher. I do get some DNFs, probably from not having the description with me to see a hint or some other clue in the writeup, but that's okay too. Actually, I do have the capabilities for paperless caching, I just haven't learned how to use it yet; but I'll probably still just rely on the coordinates, seems to make it more fun for me. And I don't do a lot of 'city' caching, so rarely have to worry about trespassing and will only cross a fence if I know it is to attain access to public lands. But, I can appreciate what you are saying.

June 21, 2010

I don't have paperless caching capabilities, so most of the time I only have the coordinates to go by and usually have no idea what size or type of cache I'm looking for.

I don't get it. Why is not having 'paperless' capabilities an excuse for not reading the cache page. I have never hunted a cache without reading the page and I did not have paperless capability until after I was caching for over a year. I simply printed the important bits of the cache descriptions to take with me. The opposite of 'paperless caching' is 'caching with paper' is it not?

I guess the real difference here is that it seems many people don't do any planning before going out caching. They just go out with a list of coordinates and kind of stumble from cache to cache using the next nearest (which is VERY inefficient IMHO). I am someone who prefers to plan (using the six P's theory, Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance) and go out after a set of caches for which I have chosen. Part of that planning includes reading the cache descriptions.

1.9k · June 21, 2010

You know you write things in the cache description on your hide and add attributes for a reason. Some people just don't take a moment to look at them. I can put not kid friendly and they complain it is not a good place for kids. Um, no kidding that's why I put that attribute on there and put it in the description. First line of the description can say it is near private land be sure not to trespass and what do they do? Yes, trespass. you just can't win.

since when are lamp post caches not a "good place for kids"?

they never were!

theres LIVE WIRES going up in there.

push that altoids tin against the wires and ZZZZZZZZZzap!

June 21, 2010

I don't have paperless caching capabilities, so most of the time I only have the coordinates to go by and usually have no idea what size or type of cache I'm looking for.

I don't get it. Why is not having 'paperless' capabilities an excuse for not reading the cache page. I have never hunted a cache without reading the page and I did not have paperless capability until after I was caching for over a year. I simply printed the important bits of the cache descriptions to take with me. The opposite of 'paperless caching' is 'caching with paper' is it not?

I guess the real difference here is that it seems many people don't do any planning before going out caching. They just go out with a list of coordinates and kind of stumble from cache to cache using the next nearest (which is VERY inefficient IMHO). I am someone who prefers to plan (using the six P's theory, Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance) and go out after a set of caches for which I have chosen. Part of that planning includes reading the cache descriptions.

No where did I say I didn't read the cache page before loading the coordinates. You assumed too much. What I did say is that I don't have that information in the field with me, just the coordinates. And you also assumed that I do not plan where I am going, but stumble around aimlessly. I map all the caches I am going after in an orderly fashion. Perhaps you might not try to read too much 'between the lines' before you post a response.

2.2k · June 21, 2010

Maybe I'm weird, but I don't even load the cache up until after I read the cache page. How else will I know if I want to go find the cache or not?

And yes, it just goes to show how different we all are

6.8k · June 21, 2010

I am not necessarily advocating this, but when cachers really should read the cache page because important information is stated there, the cache can be made a mystery/puzzle cache with the actual coordinates typed in the cache description area.

Of course that cane be done - one also could try to set up a multi cache which might be safer as in the case of mystery caches many just store the coordinates obtained from the puzzle into their GPS-r and once again do not care about what is said in the description. In any case I am not happy about finding disguised traditional caches among other cache types which have been introduced for other purposes just because there are cachers who are ignoring the descriptions for some cache types.

Incidents like here

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...64-630660beeff1

where cachers who did neither read the description which explains the access to the starting point very clearly nor did read the prohibition signs on the way while navigating caused troubles, are extremely annoying.

Those who like to search for caches by using only the coordinates whould restrict themselved to those caches which have been designed that way. In order to be able to filter the remaining ones out, I really

would welcome the introduction of an icon "cache description needed". I would set it on all my caches.

Cezanne

June 21, 2010

Puzzles... I just love it when someone posts a DNF log on a puzzle saying they searched all over and couldn't find it. So they not only don't read the listing, but they don't even pay attention to the cache type. I have no sympathy whatsoever.

June 21, 2010

Maybe I'm weird, but I don't even load the cache up until after I read the cache page. How else will I know if I want to go find the cache or not?

And yes, it just goes to show how different we all are

Ditto!

I always read the cache page before deciding to hunt for it or not, in my opinion if you're just downloading co-ords you're missing part of the fun of geocaching. Most of my cache pages have information on the cache site and local area, history, landmarks etc etc. The world is a wonderful place full of history and cutlure and interest, it's a shame that to some people it's reduced to a container and some numbers.

1.1k · June 21, 2010

A local cache requires someone to know a couple of surveying terms, specifically the terms rods and links. The cache references Lincoln's time as a surveyor. The given coords take you to a specific location and then the cache description tells you to go so many rods and so many links in a certain direction which places the cache about 100 ft from the given coords.

Recently a cacher with about 2000 finds complained that the coords were about 90 ft off and that the cache owner should update the coords. Obviously they didn't read the cache page.

Several have complained they couldn't find the cache and that they had looked all around the item where the given coords take a person so obviously they didn't read the cache description either.

Another cacher with over 7000 finds got rather indignant that he did not see it was an off set until he went to log the find and it was then he read the cache description which tells people the cache is so many links and so many rods in a certain direction from the given coords. He complained the cache description should be written more clearly so people understand the cache is not at the given coords. Guess he could not understand the written instructions on the cache page. Had he read the cache page before he would have read the instructions that said

"He might direct you to the cache as follows: "From the point of beginning, (the above listed coordinates) go thence West a distance of 6 rods and 14 links to an iron box. Thence North 90* a distance of 5 links to the cache."

It appears those who complained the most were those with the high find numbers. Appears too many of them don't take the time to read the cache page to see what they're actually looking for.

Edited June 21, 2010 by Wadcutter

5.3k · June 21, 2010

A local cache requires someone to know a couple of surveying terms, specifically the terms rods and links. The cache references Lincoln's time as a surveyor. The given coords take you to a specific location and then the cache description tells you to go so many rods and so many links in a certain direction which places the cache about 100 ft from the given coords.

Recently a cacher with about 2000 finds complained that the coords were about 90 ft off and that the cache owner should update the coords. Obviously they didn't read the cache page.

Several have complained they couldn't find the cache and that they had looked all around the item where the given coords take a person so obviously they didn't read the cache description either.

Another cacher with over 7000 finds got rather indignant that he did not see it was an off set until he went to log the find and it was then he read the cache description which tells people the cache is so many links and so many rods in a certain direction from the given coords. He complained the cache description should be written more clearly so people understand the cache is not at the given coords. Guess he could not understand the written instructions on the cache page. Had he read the cache page before he would have read the instructions that said

"He might direct you to the cache as follows: "From the point of beginning, (the above listed coordinates) go thence West a distance of 6 rods and 14 links to an iron box. Thence North 90* a distance of 5 links to the cache."

Is this cache listed a a "Traditional" cache?

4.2k · June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

i disagree, the only ones that should not complain are the cachers if they don't read the page

surely you are free not to read the cache description, same as you are free not to read all the Terms and Conditions and just blindly click "i agree" in so many instances, but once you did you have lost your right to complain

i really appreciate it when CO's take the time to put details in their description where they are of significance

there are way too many this days that almost have a blank page in their listing

A local cache requires someone to know a couple of surveying terms, specifically the terms rods and links. The cache references Lincoln's time as a surveyor. The given coords take you to a specific location and then the cache description tells you to go so many rods and so many links in a certain direction which places the cache about 100 ft from the given coords.

sounds to me like a Letterbox cache

1.2k · June 21, 2010

Cool, you're learning that we don't all cache the same way!

I load a PQ into m y GPS and hit 'Next Nearest' and bounce from cache to cache.

I don't pull up the cache listing on my Blackberry unless I have hunted the cache and cannot find it.

Knowing that, maybe you might consider in your hides that many folks will be looking without having read the listing and place your hide either so that cachers don't need to know special considerations or hide in places such that special considerations are obvious.

<snip>

I stewed on this overnight, I generally find TAR's response well thought out and logical. This one, however, made me say, "Huh?". It seems you are saying he should alter his hiding style to suit those in the community that don't make use of the information made available to them. This seems diametrically opposed to your "live and let live" geocaching philosophy.

6.7k · June 21, 2010

I stewed on this overnight, I generally find TAR's response well thought out and logical. This one, however, made me say, "Huh?". It seems you are saying he should alter his hiding style to suit those in the community that don't make use of the information made available to them. This seems diametrically opposed to your "live and let live" geocaching philosophy.

It's always hard to state how I do things without making it sound like I am telling others how they should do things. I need to work on that.

What I meant to convey is that I take cachers who do not have advanced GPS receivers or paperless caching capabilities (which neither I nor anyone else had for years and many still don't) into consideration when I hide a cache.

I try to find an interesting location with some compelling reason to attract cachers to that place, and try to tell them why in the cache listing. A couple of my cache listings do contain special access instructions. Rambler's Evil Micro tells people that they do not have to go inside the cemetery fence, for example. Irondale Pit Stop's listing gives my contact info and dead give-away location info to help cachers feel more comfortable hunting a cache in a residential neighborhood.

Nevertheless any cacher can find my caches just with the coordinates, no other info needed. I do not want reading the cache listing to be a requirement to find my caches.

June 21, 2010

Simply put, I love my Oregon 200, take the cache pages with me.

6.8k · June 21, 2010

What I meant to convey is that I take cachers who do not have advanced GPS receivers or paperless caching capabilities (which neither I nor anyone else had for years and many still don't) into consideration when I hide a cache.

At least for me what you say here is a completely different message than the one you conveyed in your previous posting. I am still caching with a very basic GPS-receiver and I eirther take a printout of the cache description with me or I memorize the important parts. This old-style way of caching does not lead to situations which happen regularly all over the world and are caused by cachers who neither read the

cache descriptions nor do they apply common sense and respect while searching.

I try to find an interesting location with some compelling reason to attract cachers to that place, and try to tell them why in the cache listing. A couple of my cache listings do contain special access instructions. Rambler's Evil Micro tells people that they do not have to go inside the cemetery fence, for example.

So, how would you feel if you get several logs stating that the cemetery has been entered and people searched around there respectlessly or even climbed the fence (I do not know how the fence looks like) or

other visitors even report that the actions of these cachers caused troubles with local people?

Nevertheless any cacher can find my caches just with the coordinates, no other info needed. I do not want reading the cache listing to be a requirement to find my caches.

The most annoying situations are not those when a cache cannot find a cache (DNFs do not hurt), but rather the effects caused when cachers enter areas which they are not supposed to enter, search around where they are not supposed to search around and dismantle objects and cause damage (although e.g. the cache description is telling them that nothing should be dismantled or nothing needs to be opened), park their cars where they are not supposed to park etc.

I agree with you that the hider also has some responsability, but there is a limit to that. For example, I would dare to hide cache 40 m from a bird house/Nest box (with a comment excluding this place to be on the perfectly safe side) and would not expect the cachers to just open that box just because there exist caches that are hidden at such places.

Some cachers do not watch out for anything else than their GPS-unit while searching for a cache. So they often overlook even signs that prohibit certain things.

Cezanne

Edited June 21, 2010 by cezanne

June 21, 2010

Finders who choose to not read descriptions should not complain if the relevant information is already in the description.

The descriptions often have useful information that will make finding the caches much easier and faster -- leaving more time to find more caches. See the June 19, 2010, log for GC1YAHE (Legend Woods - The Bears Den):

"Found it!! Although we made this much harder that we should have!! We park at the church camp - bad idea!! First we had to do a lot of bushwhacking and came to a really steep cliff that we need to go down and then back up!! On our way our we realized that we had gone thru private property that abutted state land. Should have studied the links to figure our were the trails were located!! Anyhow, we found it, what a cool cache!! We even found the orange trail on our way back! We took two of our friends with us, and wore them out!!"

Reading recent log entries also helps. Some caches are in bad shape, yet there are log entries that say, to the effect of: "The cache is a mess. If I had read the recent logs, I wouldn't have bothered searching for this cache."

Creating a mystery/puzzle cache is an option, but it seems that these caches (like multicaches) do not get as many visits as traditional caches. I think many people just ignore them -- even people who do read descriptions.

19k · June 21, 2010

Simply put, I love my Oregon 200, take the cache pages with me.

I have my Nuvi loaded with the cache page info, too. But that doesn't mean that I always read it before seeking the cache. I'm guessing that you probably don't, also.

3.3k · June 21, 2010

True, if we don't read the listing we can't complain about not knowing something, but by the same token a hider who puts special access info in the listing can't complain when we don't read them.

Where do you suggest a hider put that information?

Just because someone doesn't bother to read the listing doesn't mean they shouldn't be reading them.

+1

+ Another 1!

And another +1. Really. And thanks and appreciation to those who take the time to include useful information on their cache pages.

+1

There are so many ways to read the cache description. Lost of the new GPSr units can display them. Your computer can display them, your old dumb cell phone can display them (wap.geocaching.com), your smart phone. Not vieing the cache page is just lazy. Don't make any excuses, just admit that you are too lazy.

19k · June 21, 2010

Don't make any excuses, just admit that you are too lazy.

Or in too much of a hurry. Or busy talking with your caching buddies. Or too busy enjoying the view. Or too busy watching where you're stepping. Many reasons besides being too lazy.

4.1k · June 21, 2010

Not viewing the cache page is just lazy. Don't make any excuses, just admit that you are too lazy.

I appreciate well-written cache pages and work hard on the those for the ones that I place. But the last time I was out caching, many of the caches had descriptions like "I noticed this spot did not have a cache so I placed one here." Admittedly, most of these caches were done simply because I happened to be driving past on my way to some of the caches that I really wanted to do that day. Yet, I don't feel too bad (or too lazy) because I did not stop to read them.

I will generally read cache descriptions if there might be some historical or educational reason; if the title of the cache makes me want to read more; if there might be something that would help with a difficult find;or if the trail or parking spot does not seem obvious. There are some cachers I know who will always be entertaining or informative; some who I know will be neither. And a drive up -- or even a cache along a nice trail where there are a number of other caches -- may not attract my attention until I go to log the cache online. Most of the time, I read the description after the fact to help me remember the find when I log it online. Like knowschad stated, even with nice caches, the view or the friends may take priority.

Edited June 21, 2010 by mulvaney

June 21, 2010

Or in too much of a hurry. Or busy talking with your caching buddies. Or too busy enjoying the view. Or too busy watching where you're stepping. Many reasons besides being too lazy.

Some of the people with those "reasons" for choosing not to read the descriptions have time to complain in their logs -- perhaps with complaints that are just as long as, if not longer, than the description.

If there's time to complain, there's time to read.

2.2k · June 21, 2010

Puzzles... I just love it when someone posts a DNF log on a puzzle saying they searched all over and couldn't find it. So they not only don't read the listing, but they don't even pay attention to the cache type. I have no sympathy whatsoever.

Now that's funny...

8k · June 21, 2010

Simply put, I love my Oregon 200, take the cache pages with me.
I have my Nuvi loaded with the cache page info, too. But that doesn't mean that I always read it before seeking the cache. I'm guessing that you probably don't, also.

I might not look at the description before heading to the cache, but having it at hand means I'm likely to look at it if anything is out of the ordinary.

Certainly if I have trouble finding the cache I will use the description, hint, and often the recent logs to help. But I'll also check the cache page if the cache appears to be on private property or requires me to bushwhack off trail before I will attempt it. And if I am having trouble finding a place to park, I check the description to see if it has any instructions. Perhaps I might miss the cool description of the history in the area or the neat sculpture the cache owner is pointing out nearby, but if there if there is something important I need to find the cache, the paperless route works well.

June 21, 2010

You know what? Untill last week I have been caching with a basic etrex. No cache pages on it, only co-ords.

So I have a bsic gps without paperless capabilities.

I still read the page.

The co-ords had to get on my gps somehow, they didn't just appear there. I had to go onto geocaching.com and load them. In the prossess I came across the cache pages, wich I read. Every time.

Yes, there were a few times when I got to GZ, but found myself rapidly aproaching what appeared to be private proporty, and with no immidiate cache page to reference and not always being able to remember the full details, as all I had were my notes, I'd LEAVE. I'm not going to violate terms, or search a cache that is too difficult because the cache page didn't say not to.

Guess what I'm saying is that we are all responsible for ourselves, cache page or no cache page. So if someone approached GZ with a stroller only to find it wasn't stroller friendly, that isn't the CO's problem and a complaint is out of line IMHO.

2.2k · June 21, 2010

Maybe I'm weird, but I don't even load the cache up until after I read the cache page. How else will I know if I want to go find the cache or not?

And yes, it just goes to show how different we all are

Ditto!

I always read the cache page before deciding to hunt for it or not, in my opinion if you're just downloading co-ords you're missing part of the fun of geocaching. Most of my cache pages have information on the cache site and local area, history, landmarks etc etc. The world is a wonderful place full of history and cutlure and interest, it's a shame that to some people it's reduced to a container and some numbers.

I agree!! Honestly, that's why I cache, so I can learn about interesting or beautiful places, and yes, the cache page is where I find that out most of the time.

For example, in Denver there is a 1/1 micro in a parking lot. The hide itself is very simple and not exactly overly inspired; but since we read the cache page, we knew that this parking lot was a part of history! Read for yourself here: GCTMR2 If we hadn't read the page, we would have never known...

4.2k · June 21, 2010

Guess what I'm saying is that we are all responsible for ourselves, cache page or no cache page. So if someone approached GZ with a stroller only to find it wasn't stroller friendly, that isn't the CO's problem and a complaint is out of line IMHO.

that is absolutely right, but the problem is people don't want to take responsibility for their lack of common sense and judgment so they need to blame someone else for it

whatever the attributes are or the description, once you get to GZ is each person's responsibility to exercise common sense and decide if they can do it or not, unfortunately common sense is not so common

Edited June 21, 2010 by t4e

PEOPLE CAN'T READ

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment