Jump to content

Pet Peave!


Recommended Posts

I don't really get why certain types of cachers are so indignant and obstinate about the way other cachers play the game and insist on deliberately attempting to obstruct how they play that game.

 

You mean, like demanding that everybody cater to the whims of a small minority of cachers who play an unsanctioned side game? Or expecting someone to drop everything and write a short, low quality find log instead of waiting until he/she has time to write an appropriate, thoughtful log? Indignant and obstinate indeed.

Link to comment

Several people have referred to the FTF chase as being a side game, maybe a game within a game and I think that's a good description. But as a side game, played by some, it can be rewarding to those that play it. What's so wrong with a side game? Please don't hate because some of us might like to play this game within the game. Its a bit of a friendly rivalry between cachers in an area. It's something fun to talk about at gatherings, how the guy across the table beat ya by just a few seconds. Then everyone can laugh about it and order another round.

 

That's fine. In return, please don't assume that everybody wants to be part of the side game.

 

I don't. If I did, it would be the game itself, not a side game.

Link to comment

You mean, like demanding that everybody cater to the whims of a small minority of cachers who play an unsanctioned side game? Or expecting someone to drop everything and write a short, low quality find log instead of waiting until he/she has time to write an appropriate, thoughtful log? Indignant and obstinate indeed.

 

There is a difference between "drop everything" and "within a reasonable but short amount of time since you're already spending time on this hobby anyway today so why not spend one or two minutes more and log the cache". The most frustrating thing about this difference of opinion is not that the difference exists, but that the anti-FTF crowd keeps pretending that FTF hounds want you to immediately drop your GPS on the spot and leave your dogs and kids in the woods and drive home to log a cache. I don't think writing a short log that takes about 30 seconds of your time and returning later to write your hand-crafted unique Nobel Prize winning log is such an onerous expectation. There's any number of reasons to do such a thing. For example, "Oh, hey, saw your cache on fire, nobody go hunt it today cause the fire department has it, write more later".

Edited by Gamaliel
Link to comment
I don't think writing a short log that takes about 30 seconds of your time and returning later to write your hand-crafted unique Nobel Prize winning log is such an onerous expectation.
Yes, writing a short FTF log like that (to let FTF hounds know that the cache has already been found) would be a nice thing to do. But it's just that: a nice thing to do that's above and beyond the call of duty.

 

All that can be expected is that someone logs their FTF normally, the way they log all their other finds. If they are logging all their other finds a week later, then that's just the way it is.

 

On the other hand, when someone deliberately waits to log their FTF as a way to screw with the other FTF hounds, that tells you a lot about them.

Link to comment

I sit down to log a cache when I get back to my computer at the end of my caching outing...no "smart"phone/leash for in-field work or any other such mobile connectivity. So, if an FTF is a one-and-done hunt, it gets logged pretty soon...but if its just one of a days outing, it'll hafta wait its due time. If at all possible, I do try to log caches each day.

Link to comment

There is a difference between "drop everything" and "within a reasonable but short amount of time since you're already spending time on this hobby anyway today so why not spend one or two minutes more and log the cache". The most frustrating thing about this difference of opinion is not that the difference exists, but that the anti-FTF crowd keeps pretending that FTF hounds want you to immediately drop your GPS on the spot and leave your dogs and kids in the woods and drive home to log a cache. I don't think writing a short log that takes about 30 seconds of your time and returning later to write your hand-crafted unique Nobel Prize winning log is such an onerous expectation. There's any number of reasons to do such a thing. For example, "Oh, hey, saw your cache on fire, nobody go hunt it today cause the fire department has it, write more later".

 

It's not "anti-FTF" to recognize that FTF is a side game played by a small minority of players, nor is it "anti-FTF" to point out how unreasonable it is to expect others to accommodate it.

 

It's simply disingenuous to conflate a warning to a cache owner with logs related to the FTF side game. Notifying a cache owner that his/her cache is affected by an imminent, serious issue is a far different issue than catering to the tiny minority of geocachers who choose to play an unsanctioned side game.

 

Those of us who choose to engage in the FTF competition must recognize that there are pitfalls. There are no rules, no guarantees, and occasional disappointment is inevitable.

 

As a FTF seeker, you have two choices: adjust your own expectations to bring them in line with reality, or shout at the entire geocaching community to log faster for your benefit. Which is the more reasonable thing to do? When I take a run at a FTF, I leave the house knowing full well that someone might get there before me. If you're unequipped to deal with such a minor disappointment, perhaps your time would be better invested in eliminating the cognitive distortions that lead to unreasonable expectations of others instead of playing FTF.

Link to comment
I don't think writing a short log that takes about 30 seconds of your time and returning later to write your hand-crafted unique Nobel Prize winning log is such an onerous expectation.
Yes, writing a short FTF log like that (to let FTF hounds know that the cache has already been found) would be a nice thing to do. But it's just that: a nice thing to do that's above and beyond the call of duty.

 

All that can be expected is that someone logs their FTF normally, the way they log all their other finds. If they are logging all their other finds a week later, then that's just the way it is.

 

On the other hand, when someone deliberately waits to log their FTF as a way to screw with the other FTF hounds, that tells you a lot about them.

I agree. And the thing it tells me about them is not a positive thing.

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

 

The benefit is that you feel like you've been "nice."

 

There's a danger in trying to be "nice" when it means compromising the stated rules and norms. For example, if I post "FTF, TFTC" to appease a FTF hound but edit my post later, it's likely that the cache owner will only see my first log and won't realize that I mean to edit it. So I've gone and insulted the cache owner in order to appease someone playing an unofficial side game with no rules.

 

It's a little bit like those drivers who stop to wave somebody in when there are ten cars behind them getting held up. It's more courteous to just drive predictably and in accordance with the law.

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."

 

Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.

Link to comment
The benefit is that you feel like you've been "nice."
I'll admit, it's a good benefit.

 

There's a danger in trying to be "nice" when it means compromising the stated rules and norms. For example, if I post "FTF, TFTC" to appease a FTF hound but edit my post later, it's likely that the cache owner will only see my first log and won't realize that I mean to edit it. So I've gone and insulted the cache owner in order to appease someone playing an unofficial side game with no rules.

I've found creative ways to help other folks out. I was once approached by the wife half of a local caching team and she asked if I could start adding the time to my physical FTF logs. I've never been much for that - it seemed like bragging to me - but when I realized it would make them happy I was more than happy to take the extra time to do it.

 

I went out for some FTFs the other night and it was brutally cold. Like, super cold. It took me about an hour to round them all up, and my fingers could barely move by the end of the tour. The ink in my pen stopped working it was so cold, so it was actually really hard for me to even leave a legible mark in the log books, although I eventually managed.

 

I usually don't log until I get home, but it was *so* cold that as I made my way back to the train station I thought to myself that if I can throw out some added info to the FTF hounds that these caches have been found, they might really appreciate it on a night like this. I am a "long logger", and tapping those out on my phone would have been pretty impractical. So as I sat on the train, and before it made it underground, the solution I came up with was to log a note that said (for example) "Found 705p details to follow". It sent a signal to other cachers who might appreciate the info, and also let the CO know that my true Found It log was on its way. And later, when I had the chance, I wrote out Found Its that pinged their way into the CO's inbox and properly reflected the logs I like to leave, and I deleted the placeholder notes.

 

I think I managed to find a way to not insult the cache owner, and also make the day a little nicer for some other cache hunters. And I felt like I had been nice, which, as I said, is kind of a neat benefit.

 

Do I expect other people to do this? No. But I admit I like being nice to others, and I like it when other people do nice things for me.

Link to comment

As a FTF seeker, you have two choices: adjust your own expectations to bring them in line with reality, or shout at the entire geocaching community to log faster for your benefit. Which is the more reasonable thing to do? When I take a run at a FTF, I leave the house knowing full well that someone might get there before me. If you're unequipped to deal with such a minor disappointment, perhaps your time would be better invested in eliminating the cognitive distortions that lead to unreasonable expectations of others instead of playing FTF.

 

Again, I don't think people are really listening to the argument here. Those that do play the FTF game (and I am no longer one of them) of course should be prepared for disappointment, and I think by and large they are. You'd have to be either new to it or have an odd disposition to not be prepared for disappointment. It's like baseball - even a first class player misses two thirds of the time at bat. This is all well-known and obvious to cachers and the fact that people keep bringing it up makes me think people really don't understand the objections or don't want to.

 

addisonbr says above

"I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it."

 

and I think this is dead on. I certainly don't expect anything when it comes to this issue or anything else in geocaching, so I have no need to recalibrate my expectations, thanks. I file it away with other minor geocaching gripes: unlogged trackables, full or wet logs, poor cache maintenance, poorly placed caches, bad coords, etc. I'm certainly guilty of some of those myself. But when I am, I know I'm guilty and I admit it, and I don't come up with tortured excuses or justifications for interfering with someone else's caching experience.

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."

 

Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.

 

I hope one day I hold a door open for you. Or anybody else for that matter.

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."

 

Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.

"Demeaning a woman"??? Wow, that's off the deep end, even for you.

Link to comment

 

Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.

 

I hope one day I hold a door open for you. Or anybody else for that matter.

 

I hope that if somebody is visibly uncomfortable about you holding a door for them, you'll accept that and back off instead of chiding them for rejecting your "gentlemanly" gesture. Imposing yourself on someone who doesn't want your help isn't gentlemanly.

 

I've declined help with doors and bags on a few occasions in my life, mostly because the person offering made me feel uncomfortable. I'd rather struggle with a bag than be forced to interact with a stranger who gives me the heebie jeebies.

 

It's courteous to offer the help. It's discourteous to impose the help when it is obviously unwelcome.

Link to comment

 

"Demeaning a woman"??? Wow, that's off the deep end, even for you.

 

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by "even for you" because I don't even recall talking to you before.

 

In any case, it is, in fact, demeaning when you impose "help" on someone who has explicitly rejected the offer. The gentlemanly thing to do would be to apologize for intruding and leave her alone.

Link to comment

 

"Demeaning a woman"??? Wow, that's off the deep end, even for you.

 

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by "even for you" because I don't even recall talking to you before.

 

In any case, it is, in fact, demeaning when you impose "help" on someone who has explicitly rejected the offer. The gentlemanly thing to do would be to apologize for intruding and leave her alone.

 

When someone posts in an open forum, they in effect, post to everyone. Anyone can read it, and if they post enough, other people will likely form an opinion about them. I have an opinion of you, based on my reading of your posts here. I suspect you have an opinion of me based on my previous posts. Lurkers may have opinions of all of us too and sometimes they come out in responses here.

 

What any of this has to do with the timely logging of FTF logs I have no idea. This seems to have wandered pretty far off topic.

Link to comment

I suspect you have an opinion of me based on my previous posts.

 

Sorry, no, I don't. I enjoy reading and replying to the comments and I'm not that concerned about who writes them. If I have an opinion of somebody, it's based on correspondence outside of the forum. Forums are useful for group discussions, but I find that most people are very different one-on-one.

 

So unless you've sent me a creepy private message or we've had a friendly one-on-one chat, no, I don't have an opinion about you, personally.

 

Sorry to derail the post further, I just find the score keeping a bit odd.

Link to comment

- I'm guilty of waiting to log a FTF for a day or two to get even at the local FTF hounds in my area.

 

But I'll add to the list of PET PEEVES:

- Pet peeve #1: Cachers not logging trackables, which leads to showing up to a cache expecting a trackable and not seeing any. So now I have to write notes on each trackable for the owner to mark as missing.

-Pet Peeve #2: Cache owners putting out a new cache and published with bad coordinates, or actual cache not even there b/c they weren't expecting to be published that quick.

-Pet Peeve #3: Cache finders not putting any thought into their logs. Can understand copy/paste for a large amount of finds in one day though.

-Pet Peeve #4: Caches in very public places or with security cameras looking right at GZ.

Link to comment

- I'm guilty of waiting to log a FTF for a day or two to get even at the local FTF hounds in my area.

 

Why do you need to get even with them? Did they kill your favourite pet?

 

You'd have to be an FTF Hound to understand.

 

I'm friends with several, and about to be married to one. I've never heard any of them express a desire to get even with the others. They like to race to the cache, but they don't seem to exhibit a lasting desire for revenge when they don't win.

Link to comment

- I'm guilty of waiting to log a FTF for a day or two to get even at the local FTF hounds in my area.

 

Why do you need to get even with them? Did they kill your favourite pet?

 

You'd have to be an FTF Hound to understand.

 

I'm friends with several, and about to be married to one. I've never heard any of them express a desire to get even with the others. They like to race to the cache, but they don't seem to exhibit a lasting desire for revenge when they don't win.

Different people play differently.

I understand his position. I wouldn't like seeing it happen, but I understand it.

Link to comment
I don't think it's unreasonable to be courteous to other cachers and to expect the same of them. I don't play the FTF game anymore, but on the rare occasions I get one I make sure to log it asap, and I don't think it's some terrible burden for others to do so as well.

 

I have to agree that common courtesy is what is called for in this situation. As a result, I try to log any FTFs I happen to get quickly so as not to annoy other cachers.

 

Would it not be similarly appropriate for me to request that those who do play the FTF game be courteous to those of us who do not, and refrain from posting obnoxious "Nyah nyah FTF WOO HOO!!!" logs on their FTFs, and keep the taunting and in-your face comments to private emails?

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."

 

Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.

"Demeaning a woman"??? Wow, that's off the deep end, even for you.

 

It actually speaks volumes. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Link to comment

I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.

Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?

Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."

 

Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.

"Demeaning a woman"??? Wow, that's off the deep end, even for you.

 

It actually speaks volumes. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

Damned if you don't leave someone alone when your offer of help is clearly not wanted.

 

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

Link to comment

It actually speaks volumes. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

Damned if you don't leave someone alone when your offer of help is clearly not wanted.

 

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

This is way off topic but if you follow the off topic portion of this thread, you've missed the boat in terms of the original context. +1

Link to comment

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

Do people actually do this? In the real non-internet world?

Link to comment
I think it's a courteous thing to accommodate other people in this game, but I've learned to not necessarily expect it.
Should we infer from your comment that playing the game without reference to an unofficial side game is discourteous?
Sometimes if there's something nice I can do to help someone else out, I like to do it. Sometimes I do nice things when they don't benefit me, and sometimes I even do nice things when they inconvenience me a bit.

 

It doesn't mean that people who refuse are being rude. But I like to think I'm being courteous when I choose to be nice. I also appreciate it when other people do nice things for me (especially when it doesn't benefit them), but I certainly don't expect it.

The best story I heard that explains this: A man opened a door for a woman. She sniffed and said "You don't have to open the door because I'm a woman." He gently replied "I didn't open because you're a woman, but because I'm a gentleman."
Demeaning a woman and being self-congratulatory about it isn't gentlemanly.
"Demeaning a woman"??? Wow, that's off the deep end, even for you.
It actually speaks volumes. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Damned if you don't leave someone alone when your offer of help is clearly not wanted.

 

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

Last week, I was a few steps behind a woman coming into work. She pulled open the door about six inches and then waited for me to catch up, take it, and open it fully so she could enter. Given that the door to our office building is pretty easy to open, I can only assume that she believes that my lot in life is to open her door.

 

So I guess one of my pet peeves is when someone has an expectation that others will provide a completely unnecessary kindness, to the point of practically demanding that others provide them these services.

 

It is not rude to fail to provide a courtesy, whether that courtesy is making double darn sure that you log a ftf especially promptly or opening a door for a lady.

Link to comment

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

Do people actually do this? In the real non-internet world?

I don't think that it's unimaginable that someone might say 'I got it' or something similar to let someone know that holding the door for her is unnecessary.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

Do people actually do this? In the real non-internet world?

I don't think that it's unimaginable that someone might say 'I got it' or something similar to let someone know that holding the door for her is unnecessary.

 

Okay, sure, fair enough. To be clear, do people really get that torqued up over somebody holding a door for them? And do people then "bark" at people who don't want doors held open for them? Is this where we're at with this whole civil society thing?

 

Manly Man: "Let me get that door for you"

 

Woman Person: "That's not necessary."

 

Manly Man: "Oh, no problem I got it."

 

Woman Person: "HOW DARE YOU MALE CHAUVINISTIC OPPRESSOR!!! CLOSE THAT DOOR THIS INSTANT!!"

 

Manly Man: "I SHALL NOT! YOU WILL ENTER THIS DOOR WITHOUT SOILING YOUR SLENDER FINGERS ON THIS DISEASE-RIDDEN HANDLE, FOR I AM A MAN!!! HUZZAH!"

 

 

 

(The banana fell out of my ear.)

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment
Are there FTF hunters who prefer the challenge/mystery of not knowing if a cache has been found?

For me, it depends. I enjoy a challenge, but sometimes if the line gets blurred between a challenge and maybe getting jerked around a little, it gets less fun for me.

 

I was going to suggest an analogy to help explain what I mean, but doing that on these boards isn't always advisable... Folks often get distracted by the ways in which the two things are actually a bit *different* (and they would of course be right because no two things are ever exactly the same), and in the meantime the original point is completely obscured. So I'll leave it as - yes I enjoy a challenge and the fun of a mystery, but there are circumstances in which it feels a little more like getting jerked around than challenged, and those times I don't like it as much.

Link to comment

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

Do people actually do this? In the real non-internet world?

I don't think that it's unimaginable that someone might say 'I got it' or something similar to let someone know that holding the door for her is unnecessary.

 

Okay, sure, fair enough. To be clear, do people really get that torqued up over somebody holding a door for them? And do people then "bark" at people who don't want doors held open for them? Is this where we're at with this whole civil society thing?

 

Manly Man: "Let me get that door for you"

 

Woman Person: "That's not necessary."

 

Manly Man: "Oh, no problem I got it."

 

Woman Person: "HOW DARE YOU MALE CHAUVINISTIC OPPRESSOR!!! CLOSE THAT DOOR THIS INSTANT!!"

 

Manly Man: "I SHALL NOT! YOU WILL ENTER THIS DOOR WITHOUT SOILING YOUR SLENDER FINGERS ON THIS DISEASE-RIDDEN HANDLE, FOR I AM A MAN!!! HUZZAH!"

 

 

 

(The banana fell out of my ear.)

Isn't there a point where someone doing something even after being waived off is actual rudeness, rather than courtesy?
Link to comment

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

Do people actually do this? In the real non-internet world?

 

Yes. While I wouldn't make a haughty comment like the imaginary woman in the original parable, I have politely declined offers of door opening, bag carrying etc. on a few occasions, mainly because I felt uncomfortable giving my attention to a strange man. There have been a couple of instances where men have become quite indignant and aggressive because I wouldn't let them hold a door for me.

 

There have been many more occasions when I gratefully accepted the offer of help with a door, or bags, or whatever. But there are times when a person sets off my internal alarm and I don't want to interact with that person or be beholden to them in any way.

 

As far as I see it, if the offer of help comes from genuine kindness and courtesy, the rejection will be accepted without a fuss, even when that rejection is unnecessarily rude. When someone gets indignant about being rejected, it's likely because the original offer of help was a ploy for attention anyway.

Link to comment

Why would you insist on holding a door if someone tells you they don't want you to? A polite person apologizes for the intrusion and backs off, knowing that the gesture was kindly meant if not kindly received. Insisting on holding a door for someone after she unambiguously tells you she doesn't want you to is not kind. It's an imposition, and it's demeaning. Barking at her that you're doing it because you're a gentleman is just laughable. A gentleman doesn't impose himself on someone like that.

 

Do people actually do this? In the real non-internet world?

I don't think that it's unimaginable that someone might say 'I got it' or something similar to let someone know that holding the door for her is unnecessary.

 

Okay, sure, fair enough. To be clear, do people really get that torqued up over somebody holding a door for them? And do people then "bark" at people who don't want doors held open for them? Is this where we're at with this whole civil society thing?

 

Manly Man: "Let me get that door for you"

 

Woman Person: "That's not necessary."

 

Manly Man: "Oh, no problem I got it."

 

Woman Person: "HOW DARE YOU MALE CHAUVINISTIC OPPRESSOR!!! CLOSE THAT DOOR THIS INSTANT!!"

 

Manly Man: "I SHALL NOT! YOU WILL ENTER THIS DOOR WITHOUT SOILING YOUR SLENDER FINGERS ON THIS DISEASE-RIDDEN HANDLE, FOR I AM A MAN!!! HUZZAH!"

 

 

 

(The banana fell out of my ear.)

 

For me, it's more along the lines of:

 

Vaguely Creepy Man: Let me get that for you.

 

Me: Oh, no thank you.

 

Vaguely Creepy Man: YOU DON'T NEED TO BE SO STUCK UP.

 

Me: *frightened stare, finds alternate exit*

Link to comment

Isn't there a point where someone doing something even after being waived off is actual rudeness, rather than courtesy?

 

Yes, it's called social ineptitude when you refuse to realize when assistance is neither needed, nor wanted, but you attempt to force the issue anyway. As a woman, I do find that rude. Don't presume that I am just trying to "tough it out" if I wave you off target once already. If I say that I've "got it," I mean it. It was polite of you to offer though.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...