Jump to content

Is anyone else getting a bit miffed....


Pharisee
Followers 9

Recommended Posts

As a novice hider (so far only one series out)I am happy that someone is going out and finding them - So at this time, even though I have spent some time researching hides etc., I am not unhappy with what people put on the logs. I don't mind laminate cards, "sent from mobile" or any other such messages even TFTC

(which I didn't realise was a negative comment- I thought it meant thanks for the cache ?) :laughing:

 

As far as I'm aware its not!! I always put TFTC at the end of the log I've written, whether long or short, as it is a simple timesaver.

 

Should get easier when the cache rating system comes in - hopefully anonymous!

 

On the default message side - I assume that means you people hate the little inkpads that say "found by xxx" etc?

 

I was looking into getting one, but given that anything shy of a short story, in gold ink seems to be "dissing" the COs hard work (even though I've taken the time & trouble to find the cache) I don't think I'll bother....

 

C

Link to comment

I think any shortcuts have the ability to come across is disrespectful. The CO will have (hopefully) spent time and effort placing the cache, and it isn't too much to ask to ask for a little effort in return? That includes writing out the physical log by hand and writing out a decently sized online log.

 

A lot of caches don't have much to say about them but even "Nice easy find" is better than nothing.

Link to comment

I think any shortcuts have the ability to come across is disrespectful. The CO will have (hopefully) spent time and effort placing the cache, and it isn't too much to ask to ask for a little effort in return? That includes writing out the physical log by hand and writing out a decently sized online log.

 

A lot of caches don't have much to say about them but even "Nice easy find" is better than nothing.

So a shortcut which said "TFTC" wouldn't be acceptable even though it's what loads of cachers put down on the log? But a default which said "nice easy find" would?

Link to comment

So a shortcut which said "TFTC" wouldn't be acceptable even though it's what loads of cachers put down on the log? But a default which said "nice easy find" would?

 

You misunderstand, I'm not suggesting there be hard and fast rules. But that *any* shortcut real or perceived has the potential to come across as being lazy and disrespectful.

Link to comment

You misunderstand, I'm not suggesting there be hard and fast rules. But that *any* shortcut real or perceived has the potential to come across as being lazy and disrespectful.

I agree.

 

Cacher: "Nice easy find"

 

CO (thinks): "I never meant it to be a grade 5 difficult find, the whole point of me putting it there was to take you on a nice walk and give you some nice views of an interesting place. And all you flippin' care about is how easy it was to find? You have clearly missed the whole point of my cache."

 

So yes, pretty much anything short that you write can be taken the wrong way by a CO if they are so inclined.

 

I have now tried to stop using TFTC and have replaced it with "Thanks very much" or somesuch, but always tagged onto the end of a sentence or two.

It always seems wrong to end a log without saying 'thanks' in some way, but I am aware of how naff TFTC starts to look on log after log. So I try not to use it now.

 

Thinking about a shortcut that may work and not cause offence the best I can come up with is something like "Really enjoyed finding this one, thank you, much appreciated"

 

But I guess someone would take offence and read something else into the words.

Oh, and it's not really that short :laughing:

Link to comment

Drifting a bit off topic...

One of our series consists of 24 LBHs and a Bonus (+ 2 old trads and 2 ECs on the route)

The logs have all been really positive so I was a bit irritated/puzzled when a few months ago someone just put ':(' on half the caches and then the same again on the other half of the series the following day.

 

Although the individual logs hadn't said much, the log on the bonus more than made up for it : :laughing:

 

A totally wonderful two days thanks a lot for this it was a great experience.

 

 

:anibad:;)

 

Mark

Link to comment

I think I'm going to be a bit controversial (nothing new there, then) and start deleting them.

 

It's not a condition of logging to write more than "n" number of words, or that you can't put a full stop, or that you need to write more than "tnlnsl tftc". Deleting finds because you don't like what they wrote is wrong, I think. Just accept that some people write a lot, and some don't (or can't.... for whatever reason).

Haven't read the rest of the thread, but I agree with this. They've still made the find, so it seems churlish to me to delete a perfectly valid find, just because you don't like the style of logging.

 

I have one of these devices and have cached just with it (when the GPS doesn't contain the relevant cache, etc.), but I've never logged using it, as that would muck up my nice GPS list (I manually add the data later). However, I have long since removed the suffix to my e-mails announcing "Sent from my iphone". I think it's poncey!

 

So in short, I sympathise, but don't agree that they should be docked finds because of it.

 

:D

Link to comment

I saw this log yesterday which I thought was a rather topical

It's a 'Sent from my mobile device' found log on their own cache! :D

(I read further down the page...)

 

Now normally I think it's a bit odd if you log a find on your own cache but in this instance, I think it's fair go, assuming they fulfilled all the requirements they're asking of others, as a bit of spadework has to go into achieving them.

 

:D

Link to comment

I fully appreciate cache finders' efforts in writing interesting log entries, and applaud those that take the time. But if they want to log it with ":D" or "TFTC" or whatever then that's perfectly fine, even though I feel (selfishly) that it's a little disappointing to see.

 

Remember that the log entry is primarily an on-line record of what caches have been found by the geocacher for the benefit of the geocacher , with an option to write some text to remind him/herself of the experience.

 

A side effect is that the cache owner gets an e-mail with a copy of the original text. The main reason for this is that the CO will be able to censor any reprehensible wording; including giving away clues to the location, or swearing, or other dubious practices. Or if it's clear that the cache wasn't found, the CO can delete the log so it doesn't mislead other seekers.

 

And this has the further side effect that cache owners sometimes get entertainment and satisfaction from reading the comments.

However, I really think that there should be the option of keeping your comments (if any) hidden from others (including the CO) and posting a simple "Found it", just to record the fact. Perhaps some people love the cache seeking but find the logging a chore; and as far as I'm concerned the heart of the hobby is going out and being taken to interesting places, with a bit of a challenge thrown in. The logging of visits is a secondary task for which enthusiasm is optional.

 

This isn't sour grapes as I'm one of those that always writes something about the cache. But I defend other people's right to be as brief and terse as they see fit.

Link to comment
....with these cache logs that just say "Sent from my mobile device" and nothing else? I think I'd rather they just say "TNLN TFTC" than that as it tells me absolutely nothing.

It would seem that it is a 'default' message as they always appear exactly the same. Is it because these 'mobile devices' (whatever they are) don't have the facility to add any text of is it that the cachers concerned are just too goddam lazy to type in a few characters? :anicute: I think I'm going to be a bit controversial (nothing new there, then) and start deleting them.

I just email the person and ask politely if they would either write a proper log or delete the log. I point out that it does not have to be a long log... just something. It usually works. If not then bye-bye log.

Link to comment
....with these cache logs that just say "Sent from my mobile device" and nothing else? I think I'd rather they just say "TNLN TFTC" than that as it tells me absolutely nothing.

It would seem that it is a 'default' message as they always appear exactly the same. Is it because these 'mobile devices' (whatever they are) don't have the facility to add any text of is it that the cachers concerned are just too goddam lazy to type in a few characters? :D I think I'm going to be a bit controversial (nothing new there, then) and start deleting them.

I just email the person and ask politely if they would either write a proper log or delete the log. I point out that it does not have to be a long log... just something. It usually works. If not then bye-bye log.

 

But then I'd report you to GS for enforcing "Additional Logging Requirements" - which are against the rules - and I would keep putting my log back on.

 

If it carried on then I'd start lobbying GS to stop approving your caches as you obviously weren't playing the GAME by their rules....

 

Extreme case, as mentioned before I alway write a few words, but I think you're taking it too far.

 

Also don't forget that the vast majority of cachers don't read or use these forums and are oblivious to your "pain" so is it fair to penalise them because they don't know that 20 geocachers happen to think that TFTC means "Crap Cache", whereas the rest of us know it means "Thanks For The Cache"

 

Cache ratings will ease, or increase, your pain - will you delete a log if someone writes some polite blurb but indicates that they thought it wasn't a particularly nice location/cache etc?

 

Need to chill out people - mean't to be doing this for fun, I'd hate to play you at Ludo!! :anicute:

 

Chalky

Link to comment
Cache ratings will ease, or increase, your pain - will you delete a log if someone writes some polite blurb but indicates that they thought it wasn't a particularly nice location/cache etc?
I think that you may have missed the point - people aren't complaining here about receiving critical logs, they are complaining about logs where the logger has made no effort whatsoever :anicute: .

 

Rgds, Andy

Link to comment
]I think that you may have missed the point - people aren't complaining here about receiving critical logs, they are complaining about logs where the logger has made no effort whatsoever :anicute: .

 

They've put the effort into finding the cache in the first place. If they wanted to put effort into writing wee stories they could join a Creative Writing class instead.

Link to comment
]I think that you may have missed the point - people aren't complaining here about receiving critical logs, they are complaining about logs where the logger has made no effort whatsoever :anicute: .

 

They've put the effort into finding the cache in the first place. If they wanted to put effort into writing wee stories they could join a Creative Writing class instead.

 

I think the point is many of us like the logs to reflect the state of the cache, I know the guidelines state that caches should be checked monthly but that is often not practical or desirable.

 

I know from my own caches logs such as:

 

Nice big box = someone has taken most the contents.

Found easily = A PAF call enabled me to find it.

 

Plain speaking and truthful logs can only improve the whole caching experience.

 

agentmancuso is biased towards trigs with 600+ visited with very factual logs, I can't anticipate him visiting a trig then leaving an uninformative or meaningless log. Why should geocaching be any different?

Link to comment
]I think that you may have missed the point - people aren't complaining here about receiving critical logs, they are complaining about logs where the logger has made no effort whatsoever :anicute: .

 

They've put the effort into finding the cache in the first place. If they wanted to put effort into writing wee stories they could join a Creative Writing class instead.

 

I think the point is many of us like the logs to reflect the state of the cache, I know the guidelines state that caches should be checked monthly but that is often not practical or desirable.

 

I know from my own caches logs such as:

 

Nice big box = someone has taken most the contents.

Found easily = A PAF call enabled me to find it.

 

Plain speaking and truthful logs can only improve the whole caching experience.

 

agentmancuso is biased towards trigs with 600+ visited with very factual logs, I can't anticipate him visiting a trig then leaving an uninformative or meaningless log. Why should geocaching be any different?

 

A detailed log is "nice" to have, but the point of the game is to hide something for people to find - they then tell you they've found it (or not). Don't forget too - its only recently that people have been able to log finds from things like mobiles - in the past when we were on holiday camping for 2 weeks, it would have to wait until I got back home before I could log all my finds. Best will in the world, it got a bit tedious. I also don't think its unreasonable to put TFTC at the end of the sentance.

 

I also don't see a lot wrong with a log that says "Found it, thanks a lot" or "Picked this one up whilst walking the dog, thanks" - neither are insulting or derogatory, but I do get the impression they wouldn't suit.

 

Would you rather have one that said "been meaning to do this one for a while as its nearby, finally mustered the energy and took the dog with me. Found it no problems. Thanks"

 

Thats a story, not sure if its the story you'd want though.

 

I did 16 along the River Ivel a couple of years ago, got the wife to drop me and the dog off and walked the 14 miles back. The caches got me out of the house and we had a great day, but with the best will in the world, one film cannister next to the Ivel is much the same as another. There were other caches around too to break it up a bit, but I was struggling to vary my logs - I'd written notes for each one as I found it, but if the caches are the same why expect the logs to be different?

 

Really think there's a bit of give and take required, if your aim is to inspire people to get out and see the countryside then you're doing that the minute they put the co-ords in the GPS - as mentioned above, they've put the effort in to go and find the cache in the first place - never forget that.

 

If your aim is to fish for compliments and you're in it for some sort of ego trip then you can expect a bit of disappointment sometimes.

 

Deleting logs seems to be getting fashionable now too, which I find slightly alarming as some of the reasons seem almost unnecessary and quite pedantic, that can be changed though I'm sure...

 

C

Link to comment
They've put the effort into finding the cache in the first place. If they wanted to put effort into writing wee stories they could join a Creative Writing class instead.
1) There is a symbiotic relationship between cache hiders and cache finders - both have to enjoy what they are doing, or not many would do it. It's easy to understand where finders get their enjoyment from. Hiders get their enjoyment almost entirely from one source - the cache logs. If every single log on every cache was just "sent from my phone", or even just "TFTC", far fewer people would hide caches, and this would adversely affect the enjoyment of the finders.

 

2) Quality caching. I'm a proponent of quality caching. We often have discussions about the desirability of quality caches, but this is a discussion about quality logs. Why should we expect hiders to make some effort to hide a good quality cache if we don't expect finders to make some effort to write a quality log when they find them? I believe it's reasonable to expect the effort in writing the log to be commensurate with the quality of the cache. A poor quality cache should not expect the highest quality log, but even then, if you are interested in quality caching overall, it's worth politely explaining in the log just why you thought it a poor quality cache - if everyone did this it might improve quality in general.

 

Rgds, Andy

Edited by Amberel
Link to comment

Great post from Chalky. :anicute: It's meant to be about getting out and about, not feeding the ego of someone who thinks they deserve some sort of reward for indulging in a bit of cache placing.

 

I say again. It's my log, primarily for my records, and the CO has no right to delete it (or even complain) because of some personal preference for the tone or length of the contents. The cache owner looks after the physical cache and listing, and is allowed to police the logs to ensure that they are within the rules as specified by the listing site - that's all.

Link to comment

Is it not just the vast quantity of caches around these days?

 

Back in the 'olden days' of caching, people wrote interesting logs in both the log book and online of their funny antics and experience. These logs not only show appreciation to the hider , but also help future finders decide if the cache is for them, detailed logs also help a future finder if it is a particular tricky hide or terrain as well as alert the hider to any problems.

 

As for quality - new cachers will follow the example we set.

Edited by perth pathfinders
Link to comment

As for quality - new cachers will follow the example we set.

 

Absolutely, and far be it from me to complain about Micros, but most new cachers tend to hide micros or disposable food containers these days for the same reason.

 

I am as guilty as the next person sometimes for putting micros out, but I do also own a couple of ammo cans and a good variety of lock-n-lock type containers.

Link to comment

As long as people have fun hunting/finding my caches, i don't care what they say in the logs.

 

i do enjoy longer logs but i'd never delete any. Also, i love knowing who is caching with their BlackBerry phone since i do as well. Then maybe i can exchange BBM numbers. But smartphones is another hobby of mine...so i really do like the logged from my phone logs whether that's all they say or not.

Link to comment

If I was to do a 'TFTC' or similar log, then I have no record of remembering that particular cache.

 

If I did a short log at least I can recall - ahh yes that was the cache I fell on my *rse in the mud at, or ..... that was the one with the beautiful view of ...., or that was the one beside the view of the local rubbish tip - whatever!

 

If I have been away on a caching weekend and have over 100 to log, then yes my logs will be short, but I don't recall ever doing a TFTC or copy paste, even if I have not enjoyed the cache/power trail something positive can be put in the log - 'seen a lot of this size container today', 'you must have shares in snappy snaps', 'shame about the litter, .... plenty polite ways of letting others know what to expect.

Edited by perth pathfinders
Link to comment
]I think that you may have missed the point - people aren't complaining here about receiving critical logs, they are complaining about logs where the logger has made no effort whatsoever :anicute: .

 

They've put the effort into finding the cache in the first place. If they wanted to put effort into writing wee stories they could join a Creative Writing class instead.

 

you're still missing the point, i suggest reading the thread from the beginning

 

 

I say again. It's my log, primarily for my records,

 

if that is your opinion you're free to create your own db and not log online

 

someone made an effort and spent some money to put out a cache for you to find, all you have to do is show some respect and make a comment in your log, nobody is asking for a novel size log just something showing a bit of appreciation or suggestion or criticism

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

agentmancuso is biased towards trigs with 600+ visited with very factual logs, I can't anticipate him visiting a trig then leaving an uninformative or meaningless log. Why should geocaching be any different?

 

Geocaching is different for several reasons, notably the presupposition of 'permission' - most serious triggers are concerned solely with the practicalities of access, and logs tend to reflect this. Also, trig logs often record physical descriptions of the OS furniture in question, because a handful of committed souls record and process this information for the whole country not just for trigs they have adopted themselves.

 

In any case, many trig logs consist solely of the date - it has never occurred to anyone to object to this as far as I am aware.

 

As Happy Humphrey says:

 

It's my log, primarily for my records, and the CO has no right to delete it (or even complain) because of some personal preference for the tone or length of the contents. The cache owner looks after the physical cache and listing, and is allowed to police the logs to ensure that they are within the rules as specified by the listing site - that's all.

 

Exactly.

Link to comment

If I was to do a 'TFTC' or similar log, then I have no record of remembering that particular cache.

 

If I did a short log at least I can recall - ahh yes that was the cache I fell on my *rse in the mud at, or ..... that was the one with the beautiful view of ...., or that was the one beside the view of the local rubbish tip - whatever!

 

If I have been away on a caching weekend and have over 100 to log, then yes my logs will be short, but I don't recall ever doing a TFTC or copy paste, even if I have not enjoyed the cache/power trail something positive can be put in the log - 'seen a lot of this size container today', 'you must have shares in snappy snaps', 'shame about the litter, .... plenty polite ways of letting others know what to expect.

But Sue - you never DO fall on your *rse in the mud... Do you????

 

:blink:

Link to comment

I say again. It's my log, primarily for my records,

if that is your opinion you're free to create your own db and not log online

Why? Groundspeak have set up a handy logging feature with lots of bells and whistles. In any case, personally I always make comments about caches when I log them. Plus, I said primarily. There are clearly benefits for others to see that the cache has been found. I'm just saying that I defend the right for other people to play the "logging caches online" part of the game differently from me, and that comments are nice but not to be insisted on.

someone made an effort and spent some money to put out a cache for you to find, all you have to do is show some respect and make a comment in your log, nobody is asking for a novel size log just something showing a bit of appreciation or suggestion or criticism

IMO there's no disrespect in a short log. I get many of them, as I have a multitude of caches, but I just take it that some people don't have the inclination to write much. I enjoy a well-written log but I appreciate the cache being found most of all and the comments are an optional extra.

Link to comment
Groundspeak have set up a handy logging feature with lots of bells and whistles. In any case, personally I always make comments about caches when I log them. Plus, I said primarily. There are clearly benefits for others to see that the cache has been found.

the logging feature you're talking about is the online version of the log that's included in the cache. it's a visitor's log. it's there for the cache owner and all the future finders, so they can see who was there and when, and what they had to say if anything. the fact that you can get stats out of the online logs for yourself is merely an added bonus.

Link to comment
someone made an effort and spent some money to put out a cache for you to find, all you have to do is show some respect and make a comment in your log, nobody is asking for a novel size log just something showing a bit of appreciation or suggestion or criticism

Apart from the caches that are quite obviously dumped in a bush purely for rosy glow the CO gets from publication, sure, I'd agree that non-trivial logging is the polite thing to do. Polite but not, unfortunately, mandatory.

Link to comment
Groundspeak have set up a handy logging feature with lots of bells and whistles. In any case, personally I always make comments about caches when I log them. Plus, I said primarily. There are clearly benefits for others to see that the cache has been found.

the logging feature you're talking about is the online version of the log that's included in the cache. it's a visitor's log. it's there for the cache owner and all the future finders, so they can see who was there and when, and what they had to say if anything. the fact that you can get stats out of the online logs for yourself is merely an added bonus.

 

The reason I don't just cache off of a spreadsheet is because its useful to be able to filter my finds out of a PQ, there's no option to log a cache as found without putting a comment. On the other side - if everyone decided to keep their own records & not log online surely that'd be worse for the CO as, unless they trog out & check the log every week they wouldn't even know if the cache is still there?

 

It is a visitors log - to say that the visitor visited!! Same as the visitors log in a museum - some people just sign their name, others will write a paragraph. There isn't a security guard stood next to them who rips the page out if they haven't written enough!!

 

I generally write a sentence or 2, but I can understand people who don't too.

 

[sarcasm] Perhaps it should depend on the size of the physical log? If you've put a dog name cannister out, with a tightly rolled piece of paper in it, why do you expect more than a couple of words? If you've put an ammo tin out with a notebook in it, it stands to reason that people (on average) will write a bigger entry, and thus transfer that online too.... [/sarcasm]

 

I really don't see that it matters, you want people to find your cache, they find it, you know they've found it - end of....

Link to comment

The deleting of online logs seems a bit petty in my opinion. If someone has taken the time to go out and find a cache and sign the logbook, then the cache owner shouldn't delete any online logs just because the length of the log doesn't please them.

 

Caching is a nice hobby, enjoyed by many people, young and old. But it seems that some of the adult cachers need to take a leaf from the kid's book and cache for the simply pleasure of having fun.

 

I think Chalky723 has made some very valid points.

Link to comment

(Apologies for the above: my husband, Seganku, was still logged in, and I did not realise)

 

I've never felt the need to post on this forum until now, but this thread really upsets me, so I won't keep quiet about it.

 

I do not cache as often as I like, as this little thing called Life gets in the way. Whilst I can understand some may dislike terse logs, sometimes, that's all people have time to write, and I know that's often the case for myself; however, I always say TFTC, as the word Thanks does indeed show appreciation for the effort and time going into creating and hiding a cache.

 

Let's put a finer point on it: those of you who say you will or do delete terse logs are no better that those who go out there to destroy or remove caches because they oppose the hobby we love--think about it.

 

I express this with all respect, and I hope people can come to an agreement here. The Groundspeak homepage speaks of a strong sense of community; let's act like one. <_<

Link to comment

the logging feature you're talking about is the online version of the log that's included in the cache. it's a visitor's log. it's there for the cache owner and all the future finders, so they can see who was there and when, and what they had to say if anything. the fact that you can get stats out of the online logs for yourself is merely an added bonus.

As I said, the online log does have benefits for others and is not only for your own purposes. So it's nice to add a few words of praise where deserved.

But that's a side effect of the main purpose, which is for your own records. Your log, your wording, your record - a diary of geocaching, including notes posted, DNFs and so on. Stats might be of interest as well, but not necessarily.

 

(Apologies for the above: my husband, Seganku, was still logged in, and I did not realise)

 

I've never felt the need to post on this forum until now, but this thread really upsets me, so I won't keep quiet about it.

 

I do not cache as often as I like, as this little thing called Life gets in the way. Whilst I can understand some may dislike terse logs, sometimes, that's all people have time to write, and I know that's often the case for myself; however, I always say TFTC, as the word Thanks does indeed show appreciation for the effort and time going into creating and hiding a cache.

 

Let's put a finer point on it: those of you who say you will or do delete terse logs are no better that those who go out there to destroy or remove caches because they oppose the hobby we love--think about it.

 

I express this with all respect, and I hope people can come to an agreement here. The Groundspeak homepage speaks of a strong sense of community; let's act like one. <_<

Absolutely. I hope your choice to keep logs short is treated with the respect it deserves, whatever the reasoning behind it.

 

I disagree with Chalky slightly, that it's like the visitor's book in a museum. The physical log is like that, but the online log is just like your geocaching "journal" which you can read and re-read. That's partly why it's a good idea to write a few words other than TFTC; but if all you're interested in is the date of find then anything will do.

 

But I'm always grateful that someone records a find against one of my caches; if they write something memorable too, then that's even better but I'm certainly not going to insist on it.

Link to comment

Trying hard not to post in this thread again but ...

 

The Groundspeak homepage speaks of a strong sense of community; let's act like one.

 

is so funny! :D

 

This is exactly what those who would like more than "." as a log or "sent from my mobile" are going on about. Exactly how much 'community spirit' do you think "." creates? :P

 

If you read the Groundspeak getting started pages, it also says something about 'write about your experience online'. No one has suggested that War&Peace is required, or that anyone should attend a creative writing course, despite all these exaggerations from those who think "." is ok. All that's required requested is a couple of words - something that shows you actually took 5 seconds to acknowledge your visit, rather than just a completely irrelevant, boring, selfish, pasted, unthoughtful load of ...... (add any other words you like)

 

Had a 4 word log on one of mine in June: "Nice view, trashy contents". This is a great log! From someone with 5 finds, it says quite a lot: they enjoyed the view, so the cache worked; they probably expected 'treasure' so were disappointed by the contents (entirely fair enough). So, now after 4 words I know (can assume) a little bit about them, their experience, the state of the cache, etc. If I meet them I'll have something to chat about, or I could even send them an email welcoming them to the mad hobby and apologising for the normal crud found in caches.

Wow, all that from just 4 words - see how easy it is! :anibad:

 

It's not hard to 'write' a log that says the merest something about the cache or your experience. Not having enough time is the poorest excuse when 3 or 4 words would do. Anyone who logs with "." or just "sent from my mobile" either doesn't know how the app works, or is just entirely self-centred and not playing the game how it should be played. Again, exactly how many caches does anyone think would be out there is the only feedback the setter got was "."

 

Go on : everyone try and write at least 4 words on every log - it's that easy! <_<:D:D

(Of course, thankfully, most people do write good logs.) :P

 

PS. while I'm here, anyone who writes TFTC as an insult is just slightly crazy and ought to come up with something else as it's just confusing. If you mean, "only write TFTC" on rubbish caches, well perhaps, but just a hint more honesty might help. Saying thanks when you don't mean it is just daft.

Link to comment

PS. while I'm here, anyone who writes TFTC as an insult is just slightly crazy and ought to come up with something else as it's just confusing. If you mean, "only write TFTC" on rubbish caches, well perhaps, but just a hint more honesty might help. Saying thanks when you don't mean it is just daft.

 

We did a not so interesting cache and my other said out loud (the full version) "..and TFTFC" as she dated/signed the log.

 

I couldn't move from laughing for about 5 minutes!

Link to comment

Trying hard not to post in this thread again but ...

 

The Groundspeak homepage speaks of a strong sense of community; let's act like one.

 

is so funny! <_<

 

What I'm talking about, as far as acting like a community, is not deleting other peoples' finds if the cache owner finds fault with the posts. Please remember that I also said, I express this with all respect, and I hope people can come to an agreement here.

Link to comment

Hmm.....been following this thread with interest.

 

I have hid 60 odd caches, and in that lot I have a series of 25 roadside caches, all with the same small container, and some have numbers in, leading to a 26th cache, which is on a short but nice walk, with half decent views. I don't expect much in the logs on the 25, but it's nice that most cachers have put more in the 26th, saying they have enjoyed the whole lot, blah-blah. I have four caches set for kids, some have nice logs, some have short logs. I wouldn't delete any, for sure.

 

I know a caching team that generally put the same short log. They absolutely hate writing up the logs. That is what they do. But they do enjoy going out and finding caches. At the moment, I like hiding caches......when I get the time! <_<

Link to comment
....with these cache logs that just say "Sent from my mobile device" and nothing else? I think I'd rather they just say "TNLN TFTC" than that as it tells me absolutely nothing.

It would seem that it is a 'default' message as they always appear exactly the same. Is it because these 'mobile devices' (whatever they are) don't have the facility to add any text of is it that the cachers concerned are just too goddam lazy to type in a few characters? :D I think I'm going to be a bit controversial (nothing new there, then) and start deleting them.

I just email the person and ask politely if they would either write a proper log or delete the log. I point out that it does not have to be a long log... just something. It usually works. If not then bye-bye log.

 

But then I'd report you to GS for enforcing "Additional Logging Requirements" - which are against the rules - and I would keep putting my log back on.

 

If it carried on then I'd start lobbying GS to stop approving your caches as you obviously weren't playing the GAME by their rules....

 

Extreme case, as mentioned before I alway write a few words, but I think you're taking it too far.

 

Also don't forget that the vast majority of cachers don't read or use these forums and are oblivious to your "pain" so is it fair to penalise them because they don't know that 20 geocachers happen to think that TFTC means "Crap Cache", whereas the rest of us know it means "Thanks For The Cache"

 

Cache ratings will ease, or increase, your pain - will you delete a log if someone writes some polite blurb but indicates that they thought it wasn't a particularly nice location/cache etc?

 

Need to chill out people - mean't to be doing this for fun, I'd hate to play you at Ludo!! :)

 

Chalky

It helps to read the text you are quoting before you get in a twist. As you say, it is supposed to be fun.

Link to comment
....with these cache logs that just say "Sent from my mobile device" and nothing else? I think I'd rather they just say "TNLN TFTC" than that as it tells me absolutely nothing.

It would seem that it is a 'default' message as they always appear exactly the same. Is it because these 'mobile devices' (whatever they are) don't have the facility to add any text of is it that the cachers concerned are just too goddam lazy to type in a few characters? :D I think I'm going to be a bit controversial (nothing new there, then) and start deleting them.

I just email the person and ask politely if they would either write a proper log or delete the log. I point out that it does not have to be a long log... just something. It usually works. If not then bye-bye log.

 

But then I'd report you to GS for enforcing "Additional Logging Requirements" - which are against the rules - and I would keep putting my log back on.

 

If it carried on then I'd start lobbying GS to stop approving your caches as you obviously weren't playing the GAME by their rules....

 

Extreme case, as mentioned before I alway write a few words, but I think you're taking it too far.

 

Also don't forget that the vast majority of cachers don't read or use these forums and are oblivious to your "pain" so is it fair to penalise them because they don't know that 20 geocachers happen to think that TFTC means "Crap Cache", whereas the rest of us know it means "Thanks For The Cache"

 

Cache ratings will ease, or increase, your pain - will you delete a log if someone writes some polite blurb but indicates that they thought it wasn't a particularly nice location/cache etc?

 

Need to chill out people - mean't to be doing this for fun, I'd hate to play you at Ludo!! ;)

 

Chalky

It helps to read the text you are quoting before you get in a twist. As you say, it is supposed to be fun.

 

I read it, you quite clearly say that if the log doesn't reach your requirements then its "bye bye" - I just said that I'd challenge it & keep replacing the log.......

 

:laughing:

 

C

Link to comment

....with these cache logs that just say "Sent from my mobile device" and nothing else? I think I'd rather they just say "TNLN TFTC" than that as it tells me absolutely nothing.

It would seem that it is a 'default' message as they always appear exactly the same. Is it because these 'mobile devices' (whatever they are) don't have the facility to add any text of is it that the cachers concerned are just too goddam lazy to type in a few characters? :P I think I'm going to be a bit controversial (nothing new there, then) and start deleting them.

 

I saw a great one today. It was a Needs Maintenance log that just said "Sent from my mobile device". No indication what was wrong with the cache, no indication of what actions might be required, just "needs maintenance".

 

If ever there was a requirement to post something meaningful I think NM and NA log types qualify.

Link to comment

I've noticed 3 seperate occasions this weekend where a newbie has not only logged a find as "Sent from my mobile device" , but then logged it again with a few words.

That'll increase their numbers quicker than a Dr can say 17000! :P

 

Some caches I do get a long log - when the cache was especially good, or interesting, or I fell into a hole and couldn't get out. But recently, SimplyPaul and I did the Just Northhamptonshire series (well, some of it). We did about 100 drive-bys, and there really wasn't much to say about most of them. On the other hand, at the same outing, we did the Four Counties, and that was pure magic under a full moon, and got a big write up. And I did the three London museums caches yesterday, which was also very special.

 

So it's horses for courses, really.

Link to comment

I came across what must be the ultimate insult regarding cache logs a while back. The cacher had done a series and also, as often happens, found a few nearby caches that weren't par of the series and were, indeed, hidden by a different cacher from the the series setter. Identical cut and paste logs were written for all the caches in the series and the exact same log was put on the ones which weren't part of the series. The logs even thanked the series setter by name! I thought what a nice feeling the setters of the non-series caches must have had :)

Link to comment

I came across what must be the ultimate insult regarding cache logs a while back. The cacher had done a series and also, as often happens, found a few nearby caches that weren't par of the series and were, indeed, hidden by a different cacher from the the series setter. Identical cut and paste logs were written for all the caches in the series and the exact same log was put on the ones which weren't part of the series. The logs even thanked the series setter by name! I thought what a nice feeling the setters of the non-series caches must have had :wub:

Without hesitation I'd delete a log like that on my cache... :)

Obviously hasn't found it, and just doing copy/paste on any/all caches in the area! :wub:

 

:)

Link to comment

I came across what must be the ultimate insult regarding cache logs a while back. The cacher had done a series and also, as often happens, found a few nearby caches that weren't par of the series and were, indeed, hidden by a different cacher from the the series setter. Identical cut and paste logs were written for all the caches in the series and the exact same log was put on the ones which weren't part of the series. The logs even thanked the series setter by name! I thought what a nice feeling the setters of the non-series caches must have had :wub:

Without hesitation I'd delete a log like that on my cache... :)

Obviously hasn't found it, and just doing copy/paste on any/all caches in the area! :wub:

 

:)

Disagree here. They may well have found it, but with the multitude of others by the series cacher, may have forgotten that it wasn't part of the series. Dunno about you but if I've had a busy day caching in a series, I don't always pay attention to the cache setter's name when I'm writing all the logs later. I would give them the benefit of the doubt and call it plain carelessness, but agree that I'd feel pretty narked if they grouped it with another series. I have a series out in West Lothian, and there's another one very close to a couple of them; hopefully no-one finding my set does a "TFTC for the Sherbet Fountains" on that one too!

 

Then again, I always put SOMETHING (usually too much, so equally well, people are probably yawning at my logs!).

 

TFTP :)

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 9
×
×
  • Create New...