Jump to content

New Cachers Not Writing In Online Log Portion


dcmcveigh

Recommended Posts

The moment that you took the position that if the finder didn't return an email than the log should be deleted, you made the conversation about logging requirements. Your suggestion was an example of a cache owner establishing additional logging requirements that are in violation of the guidelines.

 

You're debating semantics now and creating your own context while missing the point.

 

While it is certainly true that a cache owner has every right to send an email to a finder if he has questions, if he deletes the find log simply because no response was received, he is out of line. The cache owner should first check the physical log to see if it was signed. The ONLY time that this wouldn't be necessary is if the cache finder states in the online log that he did not sign the physical logbook.

 

I'm sorry I disagree with you. Guidelines or not. Besides... guidelines are not definitive rules. Otherwise they would be called rules. Feel free to debate the semantics if want...

 

As for being out of line that would be a violation of your own belief system in which the cacher may not share.

Link to comment
That said, if someone is logging a find from the iPhone app and posting the log directly to the site and doesn't enter anything in the log field, this is what happens. From talking with friends, who have them, I think the Android/Windows versions work the same way.\

...

Some people may not know they're supposed to do anything else other than mark it found.

Then IMHO a bug should be filed against those applications, and an update made to require that text be entered. Or change this text on http://www.geocaching.com/about/default.aspx :

Easy Steps to Geocaching

  1. Register for a free Basic Membership.
  2. Click "Hide & Seek a Cache."
  3. Enter your postal code and click "search."
  4. Choose any geocache from the list and click on its name.
  5. Enter the coordinates of the geocache into your GPS Device.
  6. Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache.
  7. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.
  8. Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

Link to comment

The moment that you took the position that if the finder didn't return an email than the log should be deleted, you made the conversation about logging requirements. Your suggestion was an example of a cache owner establishing additional logging requirements that are in violation of the guidelines.

 

You're debating semantics now and creating your own context while missing the point.

Situation 1: The cache owner is too lazy to check if the logbook is still there so requires everyone to email him a codeword from the log or else he'll delete their logs.

 

Situation 2: The cache owner thinks one log is bogus and is too lazy to check the logbook so requires to finder to email him or he'll delete their log.

 

So you're telling us that 1 is an ALR and 2 is not? Both fall under the definition of ALR so it's not just semantics. And Groundspeak will restore the log in both cases if the finder complains.

 

I think you missed the point. People here have said that a blank log is almost never bogus but a smartphone glitch. Knowing this, deleting a blank log falls under "quality control" and you're just using the vagueness of the guidelines as an excuse. Yes, you really are imposing an ALR intentionally or not: "Your log must have at least one word/acronym in it. If not you must email me an explanation or your log will be deleted."

Link to comment

Per the guidelines, if the log was signed, you cannot delete it.

Not true. There are several reasons that log can be deleted - whether the log is signed or not - such as profane language, per the guidelines.

In that case, where do the guidelines say a blank log can be deleted if the log is signed?

Link to comment

Per the guidelines, if the log was signed, you cannot delete it.

Not true. There are several reasons that log can be deleted - whether the log is signed or not - such as profane language, per the guidelines.

Certainly, you are correct. I was simplifying my point to make it fit the context of the discussion. A TFTC or blank log would not be profane or contain spoilers, so it should not be deleted as long as the physical logbook was signed.
Link to comment

The guidelines don't tell us we have to check the physical log. They say we should delete logs that appear to be bogus. A blank log appears to be bogus. Even a "TFTC" or "TNLNSL" conveys that the cache was found. The blank log just looks like an error.

If it's a 'found' log, then it conveys the message that the cache was found.
Link to comment
...BUT to be fair, a blank log appearing to be nothing other than blank seems as good of a reason to suspect a log is bogus as any.

Except that I think that logging through a smartphone app is the only way the system will let you leave a blank log. I'm no expert on writing bots, but I think it's a lot more difficult to write scripts for auto-logging via the iPhone app than it would be to write a script that will work through standard Internet protocols (like virtually every other auto-script).

 

I think a blank log probably means it's less likely to be a bot, than the other way around.

Definitely. I just don't think bots and bogus finds are mutually exclusive.

I could definitely see some bored kid sitting at work and just logging as many finds as he can via smart phone.

I'm not saying it happens, but it doesn't make a blank logs less likely to be "bogus" than any other. It just means it was definitely done by phone and probably not a bot.

Link to comment

The guidelines don't tell us we have to check the physical log. They say we should delete logs that appear to be bogus. A blank log appears to be bogus. Even a "TFTC" or "TNLNSL" conveys that the cache was found. The blank log just looks like an error.

 

But, on the other hand, a blank log is still a communication that the person "Found it". It has a Log Action associated with it, so the lack of text doesn't automatically make it bogus. Thoughtless, perhaps, but not necessarily bogus. Same as a Blank "Didn't Find it" log doesn't change that meaning. A blank "Posted a note" would be a good chuckle though as an exercise in irony.

Link to comment

Deleting a log because you didn't like what someone said (or didn't say) is not a reason to delete a log. If there's a question about whether someone found it, the best option is to check the logbook.

 

That said, if someone is logging a find from the iPhone app and posting the log directly to the site and doesn't enter anything in the log field, this is what happens. From talking with friends, who have them, I think the Android/Windows versions work the same way.

 

In the past, if no one entered anything, a generic "Logged from my smartphone" or similar message would get posted. On the iPhone app, that changed to being blank in the most recent version. Some people may not know they're supposed to do anything else other than mark it found.

 

I think there might be some people that don't know that you're supposed to do anything more than mark it as found. When I discovered geocaching it was on the application on the phone. My first log is therefore painfully short because i didn't know what to write in that comment area. I assumed it was for something uber special that I was supposed to note. I didn't know I was supposed to really write anything just that I was to log that I found it online via that application.

 

A small number of people use this forum. And there are apparent norms that people believe should exist in this hobby that are voiced often by people in this forum. That it's rude to put TFTC, logged from my phone, or nothing at all. That you're "supposed" to write long eloquent logs about the journey there or the actual cache. The cachers that don't interact in real life with others or on this forum are not going to know those norms. And honestly if I was that cacher and got e-mailed from a CO basically saying my log is not good enough so I'm going to delete your find I would be pretty upset and start to wonder if the rest of the caching community was that petty. i wouldn't find it as a nice educational e-mail. Not all people who particpate in this hobby want to be part of the culture. Some people simply do this in their spare time. My friend writes extremely short logs. Not because he doesn't like the cache. He can't type very well and is terrible speller. He doesn't like to showcase either of those things and therefore doesn't log much (if at all at times) and does it from his phone. I will write short logs on occasion because I just don't have anything to say. He would quit this hobby completely if he started getting e-mails demanding more details in his logs.

 

I plan on putting out a hide or two next summer. I will likely not be that affected if someone logs a blank log. If someone went out there and found the cache I'm ok with that. If they don't have much to say I'm ok with that too. I wouldn't find it that insulting or problematic that I would feel a strong need to start deleteing logs from my cache.

Link to comment
That said, if someone is logging a find from the iPhone app and posting the log directly to the site and doesn't enter anything in the log field, this is what happens. From talking with friends, who have them, I think the Android/Windows versions work the same way.\

...

Some people may not know they're supposed to do anything else other than mark it found.

Then IMHO a bug should be filed against those applications

In the first version, you had to enter something. In the second version, the program defaulted to entering a generic "logged from smartphone" or something like that if nothing was entered, but people complained about the that. The current version allows for blank logs.

 

Personally I like that you don't have to enter anything because I don't write any logs in the field, and being forced to type something was a pain, but on the other hand, it it required people to write something, the blank logs would cease. Unfortunately, we might only get TFTC or cut and paste types.

 

The blank log just looks like an error.

That's exactly what I thought when someone posted a blank log on one of my caches. I wasn't even sure it was a find being logged. The email notification looked funny because there was nothing there. I actually had to go to the cache page and look at the log to see what happened. That's when I saw the blank log. It wasn't until I did a test log from the iPhone app that I saw you could post a blank log.

 

A basic "TFTC" only log = I didn't like your cache.

I think this is how it used to be, but around here, TFTC has become the defacto log for many cachers. Those who don't like a cache simply write SL, which means signed log.

 

Ultimately, if there's a question about whether someone found a cache or not, the logbook will give the true answer, though the debate of whether the logbook really needs to be signed could begin at any moment.

Edited by Skippermark
Link to comment
Narcissa- The guidelines don't tell us we have to check the physical log. They say we should delete logs that appear to be bogus. A blank log appears to be bogus. Even a "TFTC" or "TNLNSL" conveys that the cache was found. The blank log just looks like an error.

If a cacher has logged onto the site and checked "Found It" for a cache, that is a clear indication that they did indeed find the cache. Although you would like them to write something about how great your cache is, that isn't a requirement and a blank log is just that, a blank log. To require a cacher to write a log you have to approve is, as others have said, an ALR, or optional task, pure and simple. The guidelines are very clear on this where they state:

"Cache owners may not delete the cache seeker's log based solely on optional tasks."

As to your claim that the guidelines "don't tell us we have to check the physical log", that is false. The again clearly state:

"As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.)."
The guidelines are clear that if you have PROOF that someone didn't find the cache or log it, then you can delete the online found log but the only way you can prove it is to physically check the log. Edited by rjb43nh
Link to comment

can someone link to these guidelines. I can't find them.

Seriously? You've hidden 21 caches.

 

Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines

 

OK, wrote that on the mobile, so I wasn't as clear as I could have been. I had been looking at guidelines on deleting logs in the knowledge books. It is under Log Deletion. I didn't see anything about bogus logs or anything like that.

 

I couldn't find the other section on my mobile so I was looking for a link to it. I see the section now, thank you for the help.

Link to comment

It is under Log Deletion. I didn't see anything about bogus logs or anything like that.

 

There's some good info in there. Here's the key part:

 

Logs that fail to meet stated requirements (such as Found It logs by people who have never found the cache) or logs that conflict with our Terms of Use Agreement may be deleted.

 

While it's not about blank logs, I still like this one:

 

Deleting a "bug drop note" does not effect the Trackable mileage but may effect the log owner's happiness. Be careful.

 

That's a nice way of saying that you may get a large string of DNFs and your hide count will be effectively reduced to zero.

Link to comment

I think there should be reasonable effort to hide a cache and a reasonable effort to log a cache. I'm not sure how to make that happen, even by tweaking current technology or by trying to talk sensibly.

 

I'm still going to complain and make suggestions and offer ideas to get there, whether you like it or not.

Link to comment

A basic "TFTC" only log = I didn't like your cache.

 

At least that's the way I typically take it. *shrug* I don't lose too much sleep over it.

 

It used to be that way. But many new cachers use that for every cache. I've seen plenty of cachers who log every cache the same way (Found!, TFTC, TFTF, Date & Time, etc) Some of this is smart phone, some is laziness, but most is education. I know my logs were much shorter my first couple days until I found the forum and saw that I should write more. I usually write at least a couple sentences even on an ordinary cache.

 

I also recieved a blank found it log recently. I almost emailed the finder but could not think of a way that didn't sound rude

Link to comment

you have the smartphone technology to thank

 

That was my first thought too.

 

Thats probably true. If you were to read my first ever log, I think it was just the time and date. I had no clue what geocaching really was, and what the logs really meant. I thought about changing those original logs after I realized I should write more than TFTC, but to be honest I think its nice reminder to leave them there.

 

So yes while smartphone users probably are rookie cachers, EVERYONE started somewhere.

 

Rookie cachers... i started caching back before the smartphone was even a term... now pushing 3000 finds, i find the phone as just another tool. Heck, the other day, i forgot the gps..needless to say, i found a cache just using the phone...

 

The steaks

 

Posted with my Droid2 Global

Link to comment
Smartphone’s have nothing to do with blank logs... that’s just a silly statement...

I totally disagree.

 

When you log on the web site, the UI makes it very clear that a log comment is a critical part of the process. There's a huge box that takes up a large chunk of the screen, and in fact you aren't even *allowed* to leave the space empty. Try to leave a blank "Found It" log and you'll get kicked back with a "* Required" message by the comment field.

 

By way of contrast, in the iPhone app the "Message" field is virtually indistinguishable from a bunch of other choices which are indisputably optional - Attach a Photo, Drop a Trackable... And furthermore, if you try to submit a blank "Found It" log from the iPhone app, you'll find that the system happily accepts it.

 

If I put myself in the shoes of a new cacher whose only interface with the game is through the iPhone app I can *absolutely* see how it ramps up the frequency of blank logs. From a UI perspective it's a very different experience than logging on the website. I believe the likelihood that these are bots is pretty low.

If what you say is accurate, then it is a problem with the "trusted" developers. The non trusted developers are still stuck with automatically using the web UI, and therefor must enter something into the log. The only way to get nothing into the log would be by going directly into the API. Sounds like a bug in the API that GS should fix.

 

PS Smart Phones are not the problem. People are the problem. (kind of like guns don't kill people...) 95%ish of my find logs are from my smart phone, and I think if you did an analysis of them, you would find them to be in the top 20% in terms of log quality. I never do the cut and past thing, because I always log from GZ.

I think that the problem with your position is that it is built on the assumption that blank logs truly are a problem and that TPTB see them as such.

I would suggest that the fact that the web UI requres text to be entered in the log indicates that Groundspeak does see blank logs as a problem.

Or it was an oversight not to 'fix' the web form or it is a change in policy that hasn't yet been built into the website or they don't care about the issue enough to worry about whether the two formats match.

I'm bumping this older thread to close the circle on this issue.

 

Jeremy denied a suggestion on the feedback site to disallow blank logs, stating the following:

We now support blank logs instead of forcing the user to type things like "." and "TFTC" to post a log. We decided to do this since "I found it" is enough of an action for those who would prefer not to post a verbose log.
Link to comment

.....

I'm bumping this older thread to close the circle on this issue.

 

Jeremy denied a suggestion on the feedback site to disallow blank logs, stating the following:

We now support blank logs instead of forcing the user to type things like "." and "TFTC" to post a log. We decided to do this since "I found it" is enough of an action for those who would prefer not to post a verbose log.

Sigh........

 

Seems like a move in the wrong direction to me. Seem to me it just helps devolve this activity into an anonymous numbers game. The title of the log type just isn't enough.

Link to comment

.....

I'm bumping this older thread to close the circle on this issue.

 

Jeremy denied a suggestion on the feedback site to disallow blank logs, stating the following:

We now support blank logs instead of forcing the user to type things like "." and "TFTC" to post a log. We decided to do this since "I found it" is enough of an action for those who would prefer not to post a verbose log.

Sigh........

 

Seems like a move in the wrong direction to me. Seem to me it just helps devolve this activity into an anonymous numbers game. The title of the log type just isn't enough.

 

Wow. Should be interesting to see how this unfolds. I sure hope it doesn't encourage more non-logs. But I have a feeling it will.

Link to comment

Devolves the activity?

 

One step further from community?

 

Oh, please. You all need to lighten up.

 

If all anybody ever left were blank logs, or "TFTC," it would indeed be sad. I enjoy reading logs that tell stories, that let me know something about the people who found my cache (or found another cache before me). But allowing blank logs is ok with me.

 

Not everyone can use language well. We recently had a thread here started by a therapist who is using caching as therapy for patients recovering from brain injuries. Maybe the person leaving the blank log can read, and has good spatial skills, but is unable to form sentences.

 

Maybe the person logging your cache is barely literate, and is afraid he'll embarrass himself if he tries to write anything. Or maybe he's very literate, but not in your language.

 

There are a lot of reasons a person might leave a blank log, or just write "TFTC." Just let it go. It's not The End Of Caching As We Know It, it's just a blank log. It probably doesn't mean what you think it means.

Edited by GeoGeeBee
Link to comment

Too many people on here try to come up with every possible scenario why to do things one way or another. Those scenarios are a small percentage and impossible for any guidelines to cover. You have to make the rules/guidelines to cover the most people. In your scenario, they could have something in their profile and most CO's would be fine with it, when they get very few blank or tftc logs, but allowing for it, just lets others be lazy and do it too.

Link to comment

I'm just curious--I have a question for CO's who have gotten blank or TFTC logs. Have you ever gone back and read the logs after a few days to see if the logger edited it at all? I just wonder if people ever log with their smartphone, but don't want to type a full log on it, and so edit it later when they get to a computer. Just curious.

 

I for one use a iPhone when travelling for caching and I write TFTC or equivalent, as it is cumbersome to type using the iPhone. Then when I get back to a REAL computer I will update the log with a more rich if deserving entry, I think if my log got deleted for the TFTC, I would be alittle cranky, It sometime takes a few days for me to get caught up with my proper logging. I think CO`s get a little to wrapped up in the "this is my cache" mood.. It`s a game and people will play the way the enjoy it. I am a CO and love reading the logs of my caches and others, but people will play the way they want to play and im o.k with that thats just how I roll.

 

IMHO

Edited by EvilTree
Link to comment

I'm just curious--I have a question for CO's who have gotten blank or TFTC logs. Have you ever gone back and read the logs after a few days to see if the logger edited it at all? I just wonder if people ever log with their smartphone, but don't want to type a full log on it, and so edit it later when they get to a computer. Just curious.

 

I for one use a iPhone when travelling for caching and I write TFTC or equivalent, as it is cumbersome to type using the iPhone. Then when I get back to a REAL computer I will update the log with a more rich if deserving entry, I think if my log got deleted for the TFTC, I would be alittle cranky, It sometime takes a few days for me to get caught up with my proper logging. I think CO`s get a little to wrapped up in the "this is my cache" mood.. It`s a game and people will play the way the enjoy it. I am a CO and love reading the logs of my caches and others, but people will play the way they want to play and im o.k with that thats just how I roll.

 

IMHO

 

You might want to consider that the CO gets an email when you find the cache, but not when you edit your log. So he or she won't get to enjoy your "more rich if deserving entry" unless he or she happens to visit his own cache page. I almost never go look at my cache pages, do you?

 

I use the Android app, and if I don't feel up to typing on my phone, I upload my log as a field note instead of posting it directly. Does the iPhone app have that ability?

Link to comment

I'm just curious--I have a question for CO's who have gotten blank or TFTC logs. Have you ever gone back and read the logs after a few days to see if the logger edited it at all? I just wonder if people ever log with their smartphone, but don't want to type a full log on it, and so edit it later when they get to a computer. Just curious.

 

I for one use a iPhone when travelling for caching and I write TFTC or equivalent, as it is cumbersome to type using the iPhone. Then when I get back to a REAL computer I will update the log with a more rich if deserving entry, I think if my log got deleted for the TFTC, I would be alittle cranky, It sometime takes a few days for me to get caught up with my proper logging. I think CO`s get a little to wrapped up in the "this is my cache" mood.. It`s a game and people will play the way the enjoy it. I am a CO and love reading the logs of my caches and others, but people will play the way they want to play and im o.k with that thats just how I roll.

 

IMHO

 

You might want to consider that the CO gets an email when you find the cache, but not when you edit your log. So he or she won't get to enjoy your "more rich if deserving entry" unless he or she happens to visit his own cache page. I almost never go look at my cache pages, do you?

 

I use the Android app, and if I don't feel up to typing on my phone, I upload my log as a field note instead of posting it directly. Does the iPhone app have that ability?

 

I for one do go to my cache pages, for the very reason you mentioned, I do not get a email when logs are edited and I know loggers update there caches later in the evening some times and I for one love the different stories people leave as every cachers experience to the same cache is different, I only have deleted some one elses logs once it was a bot about "stop destroying the eco blablabla system" that was wide spread...... As to the feild notes, yes IPHONE has that too, have used that in the past, maybe thats the way to go. ;)

Link to comment

This is a note posted by a cache owner whose caches I've found. The note is posted at the very bottom of his profile page (after lists of his hides and FTFs) where cachers are unlikely to spot it.

 

"Just a note. We have placed over thirty caches. If you write a log and use only acronyms, ie TFTC, TNLN, etc the log will be deleted. If we take the time and trouble (and expense) to place a cache for your enjoyment, at least take the time to write a sensible log. Thank you."

 

My logs usually reflect the hide. Some of this guy's hides were good but others were sub-par. Some have no thought and barely any expense put into them. I think it's a bit self-righteous of him to delete people's "TFTC" logs. I had no idea that people could leave blank logs. I thought the system had a one character minimum. While it may be a little rude to leave a blank online log (especially if you spent a lot of time and money on the cache) I think that if the paper log is signed then the cachers should get credit for the find.

Link to comment

This is a note posted by a cache owner whose caches I've found. The note is posted at the very bottom of his profile page (after lists of his hides and FTFs) where cachers are unlikely to spot it.

 

"Just a note. We have placed over thirty caches. If you write a log and use only acronyms, ie TFTC, TNLN, etc the log will be deleted. If we take the time and trouble (and expense) to place a cache for your enjoyment, at least take the time to write a sensible log. Thank you."

 

My logs usually reflect the hide. Some of this guy's hides were good but others were sub-par. Some have no thought and barely any expense put into them. I think it's a bit self-righteous of him to delete people's "TFTC" logs. I had no idea that people could leave blank logs. I thought the system had a one character minimum. While it may be a little rude to leave a blank online log (especially if you spent a lot of time and money on the cache) I think that if the paper log is signed then the cachers should get credit for the find.

His requirement is in violation of the listing guidelines. If TPTB found out about it, he would be required to remove it.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I'm just curious--I have a question for CO's who have gotten blank or TFTC logs. Have you ever gone back and read the logs after a few days to see if the logger edited it at all? I just wonder if people ever log with their smartphone, but don't want to type a full log on it, and so edit it later when they get to a computer. Just curious.

 

That is a fair question. Yes, some cachers will go back later to edit the blank log, but most blank logs that I've seen remain blank.

Link to comment

This is a note posted by a cache owner whose caches I've found. The note is posted at the very bottom of his profile page (after lists of his hides and FTFs) where cachers are unlikely to spot it.

 

"Just a note. We have placed over thirty caches. If you write a log and use only acronyms, ie TFTC, TNLN, etc the log will be deleted. If we take the time and trouble (and expense) to place a cache for your enjoyment, at least take the time to write a sensible log. Thank you."

 

My logs usually reflect the hide. Some of this guy's hides were good but others were sub-par. Some have no thought and barely any expense put into them. I think it's a bit self-righteous of him to delete people's "TFTC" logs. I had no idea that people could leave blank logs. I thought the system had a one character minimum. While it may be a little rude to leave a blank online log (especially if you spent a lot of time and money on the cache) I think that if the paper log is signed then the cachers should get credit for the find.

His requirement is in violation of the listing guidelines. If TPTB found out about it, he would be required to remove it.

 

Sbell111 is correct. As much as some of us so called Puritans don't like blank logs or "TFTC" only logs, we cannot delete them just because they're blank logs or TFTC logs. Now before the end of ALR's in April 2009, it was rare, but people could threaten to delete such logs, and get away with it. Perhaps that verbage has been in their profile for quite some time? It's possible it's pretty new too though, as the number of TFTC only logs has rocketed into orbit in the last two years. :lol:

Link to comment

This is a note posted by a cache owner whose caches I've found. The note is posted at the very bottom of his profile page (after lists of his hides and FTFs) where cachers are unlikely to spot it.

 

"Just a note. We have placed over thirty caches. If you write a log and use only acronyms, ie TFTC, TNLN, etc the log will be deleted. If we take the time and trouble (and expense) to place a cache for your enjoyment, at least take the time to write a sensible log. Thank you."

 

My logs usually reflect the hide. Some of this guy's hides were good but others were sub-par. Some have no thought and barely any expense put into them. I think it's a bit self-righteous of him to delete people's "TFTC" logs. I had no idea that people could leave blank logs. I thought the system had a one character minimum. While it may be a little rude to leave a blank online log (especially if you spent a lot of time and money on the cache) I think that if the paper log is signed then the cachers should get credit for the find.

His requirement is in violation of the listing guidelines. If TPTB found out about it, he would be required to remove it.

 

Sbell111 is correct. As much as some of us so called Puritans don't like blank logs or "TFTC" only logs, we cannot delete them just because they're blank logs or TFTC logs. Now before the end of ALR's in April 2009, it was rare, but people could threaten to delete such logs, and get away with it. Perhaps that verbage has been in their profile for quite some time? It's possible it's pretty new too though, as the number of TFTC only logs has rocketed into orbit in the last two years. :lol:

 

No, he's not very new. He's been caching since 2008. I used to go to school in his area and got some of his caches. He burst on the scene with some controversial ideas and a "holier than thou" attitude about caching. Then when I was returning to the province he lives in, I checked his profile to see how many FTFs he had (he's very much into FTFs) and that's when I noticed the warning about log deletion. I don't think it was there when I lived in the area, so I think he added it in the past year. It could be an empty threat because I did see a "TFTC" on one of his caches.

Link to comment

I'm new to geocaching, obviously, if you've checked my finds. Hehe

I've been doing this from my smartphone because I already own that, & why pay another couple of hundred for a GPS unit when the phone can do that? Which, judging from a lot of the posts in this topic, is some sort of sin in the geocaching world.

I don't leave incredibly long logs because I want it to be new for the person coming along behind me. That's what I enjoy about the cache. I do leave more than TFTC because that does seem rude, and I compliment whatever I enjoyed about it.

I have a CO in my area who in every cache threatens to delete finds if it only states TFTC, (I saw this is now frowned upon) and it makes me less likely to want to do her caches because who does she think she is?

And... I don't know about the iPhone, but on my droid app, to post a log you have to choose found it, DNF, whatever... So there are no accidental logs.

All in all... It's a game people... Relax, and let people enjoy it. Isn't that why we do it?

Link to comment

 

I don't leave incredibly long logs because I want it to be new for the person coming along behind me. That's what I enjoy about the cache. I do leave more than TFTC because that does seem rude, and I compliment whatever I enjoyed about it.

 

Just as a suggestion, if you'd like to write more about the cache but not spoil it for others, you can incrypt your log. :)

 

 

As for the topic...I just hate the semantics games when it really seems like all that's needed is common sense. But I suppose common sense is YMMV and that's the problem.

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...