Jump to content

Pet hates when caching?


Followers 13

Recommended Posts

As I new Cacher I'm surprised how many experienced Caches have only placer 2 or 3 Caches themselves and found hundreds !!! think there should be some ration worked out to say how many you should ideally place - I've only just been going for a couple of months and felt I should make the effort so now have 8 hidden and only found 10

Link to comment

As I new Cacher I'm surprised how many experienced Caches have only placer 2 or 3 Caches themselves and found hundreds !!! think there should be some ration worked out to say how many you should ideally place - I've only just been going for a couple of months and felt I should make the effort so now have 8 hidden and only found 10

 

It's not really about the numbers of caches you put out there, it's the quality of them. Much better to have fewer really good caches than mountains of rubbish to pick through.

Link to comment

As I new Cacher I'm surprised how many experienced Caches have only placer 2 or 3 Caches themselves and found hundreds !!! think there should be some ration worked out to say how many you should ideally place - I've only just been going for a couple of months and felt I should make the effort so now have 8 hidden and only found 10

 

It's not really about the numbers of caches you put out there, it's the quality of them. Much better to have fewer really good caches than mountains of rubbish to pick through.

 

What he says!

Link to comment

As I new Cacher I'm surprised how many experienced Caches have only placer 2 or 3 Caches themselves and found hundreds !!! think there should be some ration worked out to say how many you should ideally place - I've only just been going for a couple of months and felt I should make the effort so now have 8 hidden and only found 10

 

It's not really about the numbers of caches you put out there, it's the quality of them. Much better to have fewer really good caches than mountains of rubbish to pick through.

 

What he says!

 

But it would be nice to have some folks hide a few more as it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation really - no new cahes nothing more to find especially if you limited where you can travel ???

Link to comment

Walking beep beep number of miles (as in this afternoon!) did we find the beep beep cache? did we heckers and now have sore calves tonight lol each time we get up from a chair it's with a "ow"........... or "ahhhhhh". Didn't help that we were on the wrong side of the river to start with and had still walked miles looking for a crossing! only to turn around and eventually found a crossing but STILL didn't get the little blighter....or words to that effect!

Link to comment

As I new Cacher I'm surprised how many experienced Caches have only placer 2 or 3 Caches themselves and found hundreds !!! think there should be some ration worked out to say how many you should ideally place - I've only just been going for a couple of months and felt I should make the effort so now have 8 hidden and only found 10

 

It's not really about the numbers of caches you put out there, it's the quality of them. Much better to have fewer really good caches than mountains of rubbish to pick through.

 

What he says!

 

But it would be nice to have some folks hide a few more as it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation really - no new caches nothing more to find especially if you limited where you can travel ???

What you say might have some relevance if there was a shortage of caches. I've found over 3000, and there are still well over 2000 unfound within a 17 mile radius of my home.

 

Requiring a ratio would encourage poor caches, as if you HAD to set a cache in order to look for more, then it's more than possible you would set the minimum you could get away with. Furthermore, it would require inexerienced cachers to set caches, and on average that is also more likely to result in poor quality or inappropriate caches.

 

Caches should be set because you want to set a cache, not as a requirement, or even out of any sense of obligation. Some people enjoy setting caches more than they enjoy finding them - that helps to keep a healthy balance.

 

Requiring a find/hide ratio is a solution to a problem we just don't have!

 

Rgds, Andy

Edited by Amberel
Link to comment
Cyclists who don't announce their approach.

Now that is one thing I hate more than anything else! :)

The other day I was walking along the prom not hearing a cyclist behind me and I happend to step in their path!

The cyclist had to stop dead to avoid hitting me but then started using real bad language at me.

Well ...... I saw red!

I grabbed his handle bars and pointed to his bell while shouting: Do you know what this is for ... do you?

I think I scared him to death! :D:D

 

This thread is making great reading....... lol

re the cyclist we were out the other day on our bikes along a walk/cyclist path, ahead of us were a couple walking, hubby sounded his bell and the poor guy walking jumped about 3ft in the air. We do say "Thank you" when we ring and overtake them. Mind you i have jumped when walking and someone rings their bell :-)

Link to comment

As I new Cacher I'm surprised how many experienced Caches have only placer 2 or 3 Caches themselves and found hundreds !!! think there should be some ration worked out to say how many you should ideally place - I've only just been going for a couple of months and felt I should make the effort so now have 8 hidden and only found 10

 

It's not really about the numbers of caches you put out there, it's the quality of them. Much better to have fewer really good caches than mountains of rubbish to pick through.

 

What he says!

 

But it would be nice to have some folks hide a few more as it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation really - no new caches nothing more to find especially if you limited where you can travel ???

What you say might have some relevance if there was a shortage of caches. I've found over 3000, and there are still well over 2000 unfound within a 17 mile radius of my home.

 

Requiring a ratio would encourage poor caches, as if you HAD to set a cache in order to look for more, then it's more than possible you would set the minimum you could get away with. Furthermore, it would require inexerienced cachers to set caches, and on average that is also more likely to result in poor quality or inappropriate caches.

 

Caches should be set because you want to set a cache, not as a requirement, or even out of any sense of obligation. Some people enjoy setting caches more than they enjoy finding them - that helps to keep a healthy balance.

 

Requiring a find/hide ratio is a solution to a problem we just don't have!

 

Rgds, Andy

 

Hi Andy thanks for the feedback - your right a ratio isn't required - in a way I was fishing for a reaction to this - your a good example of someone who has hid a really good number of caches ( 40 +) and are really contributing to the "system" - your in a pretty built up area but where I am there isn't that many and big holes where there is nothing but many active caches and to really to make the game work there are a few more needed round here - people seem quite happy to go out there and find my new ones :) I'm sure you would agree only hiding one or 2 or even none at all doesnt' really make the thing work or am I missing something ???

Link to comment

If someone doesn't feel confident that they can find a good spot, construct a good cache, or (most importantly) comit to maintaining their cache once it's out there, then I would rather they didn't hide one.

 

It seems to be (in our area at least) that there are prolific, consistently good hiders who enjoy finding the locations, constructing caches & cache pages and looking after them. They are good at it and we really appreciate their efforts.

 

There are also those who get into the game and feel the need to put out caches straight away to 'pay something back'. These tend to be (though not exlusively) uninteresting hides which go missing after a few weeks and sit disabled until finally archived.

 

Then there are folks like us who just put out what we feel comfident we can maintain - we only get one day off a week, and call us selfish, but we'd rather spend that day finding new places and being out with friends rather than running round replacing logs and checking out caches with DNFs on them.

 

I still have over 2000 caches to find within a 40 mile radius of my home, on top of the nearly 1000 we've found to date. So we're not reaching crisis point yet :)

 

But in areas where there are a small number of caches and large areas not populated at all, what you need are some cachers with good hiding skills and commitment, not just everyone putting caches out from a sense of responsibility and because they think they ought to - in my opinion.

Link to comment

Main hate is cache owners who just can't be bothered to go our and do any maintainance work on their caches.

I think a lot of 'new' cachers fall into this trap. Filled with enthusiasm at their new found interest they set one then another, then a few more without thinking about the time involved in maintaining them.

There's a cacher near me who has set quite a few, and one has been missing since last Dec and despite an indication of a replacement is still missing. They have also set a series which is a great series, BUT three of them have now been muggled for some time with no action. I suspect the owner has a young family which understandably will be taking up much of their time. And that I think can be the point, a great sport to do with the family, but a bit more difficult when it comes to looking after caches - especially when they set several.

Link to comment

I agree with much of what has been posted. Maintenance is an important aspect that is often overlooked. I have around 40 active caches with another short series in the planning stage. I like to think that people enjoy the caches I've set and I spend a lot time actively maintaining them. Some folk don't... for example... There's a rural micro cache on the edge of my manor that has a full logsheet and has had for nearly 18 months. Most of the logs since then say so but there were no 'Needs Maintenance' logs and I soon found out why. Mine was deleted by the cache owners within minutes of being posted and that was followed soon after by an email from them telling me that they didn't have time to replace it. They said that it didn't stop people finding their cache and 'enjoying it' so I should mind my own business.

Link to comment

I agree with much of what has been posted. Maintenance is an important aspect that is often overlooked. I have around 40 active caches with another short series in the planning stage. I like to think that people enjoy the caches I've set and I spend a lot time actively maintaining them. Some folk don't... for example... There's a rural micro cache on the edge of my manor that has a full logsheet and has had for nearly 18 months. Most of the logs since then say so but there were no 'Needs Maintenance' logs and I soon found out why. Mine was deleted by the cache owners within minutes of being posted and that was followed soon after by an email from them telling me that they didn't have time to replace it. They said that it didn't stop people finding their cache and 'enjoying it' so I should mind my own business.

 

:blink:

 

Are you not very tempted to post a NA log, with full details of the issues involved and quoting the owner's words regarding having no time to replace it?

 

MrsB

Link to comment

I agree with much of what has been posted. Maintenance is an important aspect that is often overlooked. I have around 40 active caches with another short series in the planning stage. I like to think that people enjoy the caches I've set and I spend a lot time actively maintaining them. Some folk don't... for example... There's a rural micro cache on the edge of my manor that has a full logsheet and has had for nearly 18 months. Most of the logs since then say so but there were no 'Needs Maintenance' logs and I soon found out why. Mine was deleted by the cache owners within minutes of being posted and that was followed soon after by an email from them telling me that they didn't have time to replace it. They said that it didn't stop people finding their cache and 'enjoying it' so I should mind my own business.

 

:blink:

 

Are you not very tempted to post a NA log, with full details of the issues involved and quoting the owner's words regarding having no time to replace it?

 

MrsB

 

The thought crossed my mind but as it was part of a series and contained information needed to find the final cache, I chose not to.

Link to comment

I have watched this thread for a while and I have several pet hates:ph34r:

 

Just a couple:

 

Where the coordinates are obviously wrong and all the visitors say they are out, but do not bother to include their readings, in the log.

 

Parking coordinates, either buried in the cache page somewhere, with no additional waypoint :( or the other extreme where every single cache in a series has the parking added as a waypoint, do I need 20 waypoints all in the same place :o Some people are never happy :lol:

Link to comment

Caches that are set without using a GPS, or even a phone, just using Google Earth, a map, and lots of luck.

 

Dogs that, as soon as they see me, jump up on me for joy and friendliness, and try to lick my face.

 

Owners who say "He won't hurt you", to which the reply I give is "Good, then I won't have to hurt him", implying, correctly, that if a dog attacks me, I'll defend myself with whatver is to hand.

 

Footpaths that lead through six inch deep cow poo, with no way to avoid it.

 

Stiles that require considerable acrobatic skill and luck to get over uninjured.

 

Boots that, six miles into a twelve mile route, you discover are just a fraction too short and are killing your toes.

 

The way my Loox PDA does a factory reset whenever I change the battery, because the backup battery is dead and there's no way to replace it.

 

Driving a mile down a narrow byway, finding an impassable blockage, and them reversing back a very long way.

 

Getting a puncture on my bike.

Link to comment
I'm sure you would agree only hiding one or 2 or even none at all doesnt' really make the thing work or am I missing something ???
I'm not intending to be perverse, but no, I can't agree.

 

Hiding a cache should not be something you do as an obligation, it should be something you do because you want to do it, and because you want to do it well. Feeling obliged to do something you don't really want to do is not a recipe for doing it well. Even if there was an obligation to set caches, simply counting the number hidden is a poor metric because it takes no account of quality - I would rather someone set one top quality cache than ten indifferent ones.

 

In general, the current system of "no obligation" works just fine in terms of numbers - there are over a million caches round the world. I understand that these are not spread evenly, and that it may not seem to work so well for you if you live in a sparsely populated (in cache terms) area. I'm prepared to travel to find good caches (I'm travelling over 200 miles on Sunday to do just one cache). But I can also see that there might be a different perspective if you are not able to travel.

 

All I can really say is that if you feel the situation in your area is not so good, that's unfortunate but there probably isn't much that can be done about it - twisting people's arms to set caches would likely result in poor quality caches, which in my book is worse than no caches.

 

Rgds, Andy

Link to comment

Amberel makes a very good point above - cache hiding should not be an 'obligation'. Some cachers have lots of spare time and are able to maintain hundreds. I know others who have never hidden a single one. They balance each other out and cache numbers are on the rise so there's no need to worry about how many you hide.

 

Speaking as someone who's been doing this nearly 6 years, I can say that newbies are definitely hiding caches much earlier than they ever used to. I think it used to be normal to wait a year or so before hiding a cache, but now we have people putting out caches within days of their first find. That's not a criticism, just an observation.

 

If you read through these forums you will find lots of threads from experienced cachers wishing that the rules were changed sot that you were not allowed hides until you've been playing the game for a certain amount of time or until you've found a set number of caches. The reason for that is some people feel that first hides are generally poorer. It's not always the case obviously, but experience can count for a lot. My first cache hide wasn't very good - I wouldn't hide one like that now, so I speak from experience.

 

If you want to hide some caches then go for it - but do it because you really want to and you think you have a location to share with people, not because you feel you should :)

Link to comment

As a newcomer to the wacky world of geocaching, what hacks me off is not being able to find a cache, getting home, looking on the site and seeing the last 20 entries against the item in question, saying "easy find", quick find" "just popped out in my fag break from work and found this in 10 secs" "found it in the first place I looked" etc etc. Ok, so you found it, that's good. Just say you found it. The use of words such as "easy" imply a) the finder is just so dadgum smart, when everyone else will have struggled B) the cache owner really should have put more effort into hiding it more thoroughly. Rant over. Maybe.

Link to comment

I give in....should be the second letter of the alphabet!!

You mean a B), a B), grrrr, a B). Oh, I know what you mean.

Also know what you mean about the 'easy peasy lemon squeezy' logs. Don't think they are meant to be mocking to previous or future cachers but I agree they are annoying when you're in a bad mood after a DNF.

They're annoying on our caches too because actually we didn't really set out to make our caches difficult, or devious, or clever. They are where they are to take people to nice places with nice views or something interesting nearby.

When someone writes "quick easy find" I can't help thinking to myself "It wasn't meant to be difficult, did you even notice the view or your surroundings? Was the only thing you got from my cache a sense of misplaced accomplishment that you found it 'quickly'?"

But that's just when I am in a mean mood.

I think the truth is some people are not great writers and often struggle for something to say about their adventures, so will use "quick easy find" and "tftc" to pad things out a bit without really thinking how it might be misinterpreted.

No point in getting too worried about what people write, these days I'm grateful if it isn't just a dot or an empty log B)

Link to comment

As a newcomer to the wacky world of geocaching, what hacks me off is not being able to find a cache, getting home, looking on the site and seeing the last 20 entries against the item in question, saying "easy find", quick find" "just popped out in my fag break from work and found this in 10 secs" "found it in the first place I looked" etc etc. Ok, so you found it, that's good. Just say you found it. The use of words such as "easy" imply a) the finder is just so dadgum smart, when everyone else will have struggled b ) the cache owner really should have put more effort into hiding it more thoroughly. Rant over. Maybe.

 

I agree with Lovejoy that comments like "easy find" are simply to register the fact that someone found it quickly rather than to mock someone else. I often cache with a friend and there are times when we've been to a cache that previously took him 20 minutes to find and took me 20 seconds. There was one particular time when I visited a cache literally a dozen times over 18 months or more and never found it, but the time I went through with him he went straight to it within 5 minutes.

 

If someone has a hide with a high difficulty rating then comments that it was easy could encourage them to drop the difficulty rating. It could also encourage the person who has logged 23 DNFs on it so far to show that it's not in a totally obscure position.

Edited by team tisri
Link to comment

People who think that by using the clue, they are cheating and keep ramming it down everybody else's throat in their logs! If they want to make it hard for themselves, that's their lookout!

 

Absolutely! As far as I'm concerned, caches are meant to be found, and the clue is there to help you find it. Searching for ages, giving up and going after a long trek is no fun at all. There's no point in making it too hard.

Link to comment

  • Entire areas where 95% of the caches are extremely cryptic puzzles that I have no idea how to solve. North Surrey is plagued with these.
  • Nanos marked as "Other".
  • Caches that no-one bothers to maintain, despite lots of "Needs Maintenance" logs. I'll happily fix someone's cache myself if I find it needs doing, but loads of people just ignore this.
  • Caches in dubious areas where you feel likely to get mugged.
  • People who get pedantic about which logs they will accept, who get petty if people break rules they stipulate, although GC.com have clamped down on this a bit now.
  • People who don't bother providing public transport information on cache descriptions. We don't all drive.

 

Lee

Link to comment

My pet hate, people that moan about short TFTC logs and don't realise that a short log says more about the cache than the finder. Take the hint. Just because people find your cache doesn't mean they enjoyed it.

Yes indeed... back in the day I nearly placed a blank log... the wonderful find was in amongst fly-tipped items, some new, some evidently much older... I wondered what possessed anyone to put a cache there thinking anyone else would enjoy it.

Link to comment

My biggest pet hate is cachers who give up on the hobby but fail to archive or allow someone to adopt their caches. I went on a circular walk whilst on holiday to Norfolk to do the Fossil series, and the caches had damp logbooks, some had waterlogged logbooks, and some had fallen from their spot, and only because other cachers replaced them, they were kept alive. Also, between the 2nd to last, and the last cache was a mile walk on a fairly busy country road. I recommended archiving some on my logs. The last one was a cracked tuppleware box wedged on the back of a road sign in a plastic bag, and previous reports said it was found on the side of the road, and put back a few times. The cache owner hadn't logged in for well over a year.

 

Although I've found the odd poorly maintained stand alone cache, this was the first series (8 caches) that I've come across like this.

 

Other pet hates include caches that appear to be in the middle of nowhere, and if only the CO were to give parking co-ords, and where the footpath begins, you would avoid driving around for miles looking for how to approach this cache.

Link to comment

I recently completed the 'Fossil' series so I know exactly what you mean... But sometimes, just sometimes, people may have very good excuses for not logging in for a long time. Sorry to darken the tone, but life is short, people get ill and may not be able to come back. But of course this would be a rare occurrence and probably unlikely. I can't imagine not logging in for a single day, never mind months or years, but maybe, just maybe... just my tuppence on the issue...

Link to comment

I recently completed the 'Fossil' series so I know exactly what you mean... But sometimes, just sometimes, people may have very good excuses for not logging in for a long time. Sorry to darken the tone, but life is short, people get ill and may not be able to come back. But of course this would be a rare occurrence and probably unlikely. I can't imagine not logging in for a single day, never mind months or years, but maybe, just maybe... just my tuppence on the issue...

 

Dave Gorman fan?

Link to comment

Happens more often than people realise.. But more often people change their job and/or email address, move to another part of the country or just lose interest.

 

Personally I have a cache in York where I work but in a couple of months I will no longer work here and have no plans to return, so I'm not sure what to do with my cache, at the moment I'm planning to leave it in place as it's been there for nearly a year with no maintenance required, and archive it when it has a problem.

Link to comment

Having read this thread with interest and agreement with many - here are mine...

 

- caches with no parking co-ords - we don't all know the local area

- micros where a larger container could easily be supported

- unsuitable containers (chinese takeaway tubs)

- caches in bags of any kind

- cache locations where there is nothing of any interest (other than a hole to pop a micro in)

- blank logs - seems to be on the increase (a polite email usually follows)

- short logs (TFTC) - if they have a problem with my cache - tell me or is it just laziness.

- cachers who insist on telling you the hint before you even start looking <_<

- naff hints

- unmaintained caches

- newbies telling me my co-ords are out when the cache has been there 5 years without a problem

- sometimes have a problem with nature but then thats half the fun.

Link to comment

Another pet hate, is people who don't log trackables properly. There have been times when I've picked up a trackable, and it's still logged as with the person who placed it in the cache. Naturally before jumping the gun, you wait for the person concerned to log their visit to the cache, however once they do log their visit, and don't drop the trackable, I send an e-mail a few days after I see their logged visit to the cache asking if they could register the trackable as dropped off in the cache. I've then never had a reply back, and even seen that they've visited other caches since, so they must be active members, so I just do the grab, then write a note for the cache so that the trackable visits the cache, then off to continue the journey.

 

Also this travel bug achieved it's goal within a week, but hasn't been placed into any further caches since February last year. I've even sent a few e-mails to chase it up, but never had a response.

Link to comment

Another pet hate, is people who don't log trackables properly. There have been times when I've picked up a trackable, and it's still logged as with the person who placed it in the cache. Naturally before jumping the gun, you wait for the person concerned to log their visit to the cache, however once they do log their visit, and don't drop the trackable, I send an e-mail a few days after I see their logged visit to the cache asking if they could register the trackable as dropped off in the cache. I've then never had a reply back, and even seen that they've visited other caches since, so they must be active members, so I just do the grab, then write a note for the cache so that the trackable visits the cache, then off to continue the journey.

 

It'd be nice if more cachers would take that approach. I've just got back off a 4 day holiday. Several bugs were 'grabbed' from me the same day I dropped them in a cache. :mad:

 

So, a pet hate of impatient cachers. If you're going to grab a TB, at least then log it into the cache you found it from to keep mileage up to date. Several of the ones I dropped where in mileage races :(

Link to comment

  • People who don't bother providing public transport information on cache descriptions. We don't all drive.

 

Lee

 

Isn't that a bit unreasonable.. I doubt if many people do my caches using Public Transport, bus times will change regularly I guess - I'd never be able to keep the cache page up to date.

 

I'm not asking for a complete timetable - that's obviously unreasonable - but giving people information about where the nearest bus stop or railway station is will be accurate for years as they rarely move or close. The assumption that everyone drives is just lazy. I use public transport for almost all caches that are further than walking distance from my house, and about 99.9% of them have no public transport information on them at all. Some of them - such as Transect Line - are extremely remote indeed, but still do-able without a car.

 

Lee

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 13
×
×
  • Create New...