Jump to content

Please do NOT make bush hides a FAVORITE


Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Can't believe no one has addressed this yet...

 

I have 422 finds and 21 favorites... Which I think is reasonable. A few of these favorites are nothing spectacular. For example, I favorited my 1st find. It's a nano under a bench right outside of a church. Who cares if you don't find it meaningful or worthy of a favorite? Without that find, I might've never become a Geocacher! To me, that is my most favorite cache of all.

 

As ipodguy wisely said above, I'll favorite the very caches that are my favorites, thank you very much! :)

Link to comment

Here is a good example of how much stock to put in Favorites. Both of these caches are identical, yet otherwise very unique, hides. I would say that they both are in rather equivalent areas insomuch as the area might account for any favoritism. They both have roughly the same number of finds. Yet one, as of today, has 30 favorites, and the other only 16.

 

http://coord.info/GC1F0NV

http://coord.info/GC19F23

 

Why the huge difference? You tell me, 'cause I sure can't figure it out!

Link to comment

I have 15 active caches and I would say that any one of them is better than 99% of the caches in my area yet most of them have few or no favorite votes. Favorites are a good concept that will need more time to work, if it ever will.

 

I may need to go back and review my finds to see if there are some bush caches I can favorite. :anibad:

Link to comment

I have figured out that any cache that has a hundred finds, and only ONE FAVORITE VOTE fits in this category. So now I am eliminating those caches with ONE FAVORITE VOTE from my list of caches to find.

 

Your logic is flawed.

 

If you eliminated the caches that had one favorite point from our list of finds, you would miss seeing this:

 

439b9e29-0b3f-4d28-84d4-c1668a8cc41c.jpg

 

and this:

 

84858b37-968d-4555-bc2f-a89e002deadc.jpg

 

and this:

 

acbacb16-4cb0-4b11-b045-4e838a2b4b4d.jpg

 

Zero favorites for this one:

 

7ea67f4a-d2e6-4658-a7a3-5dc63a3853f1.jpg

 

and this one is a dreaded "guardrail cache" to boot:

 

caa83c2d-7147-437d-a48c-f8c60de5bdb7.jpg

 

But if searched out the 2nd-most-favorited cache that we have found, you would find yourself in the parking lot of a beer store. Yeah, it's a "creative" hide. :rolleyes:

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

Exactly.... thanks for making my point quite clear. Those are GOOD FAVORITES. I keep finding lousy caches instead....with one Favorite point.

 

note: Yes...I just find them all anyways....and no, I don't really care. I just went caching with a friend who was trying to only find favorite voted caches. It was fun, yet confusing..... because I know we drove right past some really awesome caches that had zero votes.

Link to comment

Exactly.... thanks for making my point quite clear. Those are GOOD FAVORITES. I keep finding lousy caches instead....with one Favorite point.

 

note: Yes...I just find them all anyways....and no, I don't really care. I just went caching with a friend who was trying to only find favorite voted caches. It was fun, yet confusing..... because I know we drove right past some really awesome caches that had zero votes.

 

How do you know they were awesome, if you drove past them?

 

All those photos I posted above are from caches with only ONE or ZERO favorite points.

 

You have to read the previous finders' logs and look at the photo galleries to determine if a cache is going to not be "lousy". Just basing it on the number of favorite points is, well...pointless.

Link to comment

I think that most of my favourite votes have gone to ingenious caches, caches at great locations, earthcaches where I have learned a lot and to caches that made me laugh.

 

I've been debating about a cache that we recently found. It's not a spectacular or even unusual location...a snowmobile trail where it crosses the road.

 

But it made us laugh. We thought it was a really fun, but "logical" hiding place.

 

If people searched for it, would they laugh too? Or think we were nuts for giving it a favorite point? I don't usually get hung up over what other people would think of my favorites, but I don't have that many to spread around.

 

I certainly didn't give one to the "creative" hide in the parking lot of the beer store. The unusual container wasn't much of a payoff, for me, considering the location. I was quite disappointed, in fact.

Link to comment

 

How do you know they were awesome, if you drove past them?

 

.

Well...one of the reasons we only have 28000 finds, is because whenever someone wants to go geocaching in our neighborhood, we go with them. We already found most of the caches around here...but we have fun spending the day with friends...and watching them have enjoyment finding all the cool caches nearby.

Link to comment

 

How do you know they were awesome, if you drove past them?

 

.

Well...one of the reasons we only have 28000 finds, is because whenever someone wants to go geocaching in our neighborhood, we go with them. We already found most of the caches around here...but we have fun spending the day with friends...and watching them have enjoyment finding all the cool caches nearby.

Does that mean that you log finds more than once in caches in your neighborhood?

Link to comment

 

How do you know they were awesome, if you drove past them?

 

.

Well...one of the reasons we only have 28000 finds, is because whenever someone wants to go geocaching in our neighborhood, we go with them. We already found most of the caches around here...but we have fun spending the day with friends...and watching them have enjoyment finding all the cool caches nearby.

Does that mean that you log finds more than once in caches in your neighborhood?

I read it as ventura_kids opts to skip going out caching for unfound caches and spends time with friends as they find the caches that VK has already found.

Link to comment

How do you know they were awesome, if you drove past them?

 

.

Well...one of the reasons we only have 28000 finds, is because whenever someone wants to go geocaching in our neighborhood, we go with them. We already found most of the caches around here...but we have fun spending the day with friends...and watching them have enjoyment finding all the cool caches nearby.

Does that mean that you log finds more than once in caches in your neighborhood?

I read it as ventura_kids opts to skip going out caching for unfound caches and spends time with friends as they find the caches that VK has already found.

That's not how you get 28000+ finds.

Link to comment

It seems that some cachers are just placing their FAVORITE votes on crappy bush hides from their caching friends.

Please put your friendships aside, and vote for GOOD caches.

 

:drama:

 

Hi VK

 

I have a better idea you vote your fav pts the way you want, that's your business and I will vote mine how I want. MYOFB

 

SS

Edited by Scubasonic
Link to comment

How do you know they were awesome, if you drove past them?

 

.

Well...one of the reasons we only have 28000 finds, is because whenever someone wants to go geocaching in our neighborhood, we go with them. We already found most of the caches around here...but we have fun spending the day with friends...and watching them have enjoyment finding all the cool caches nearby.

Does that mean that you log finds more than once in caches in your neighborhood?

I read it as ventura_kids opts to skip going out caching for unfound caches and spends time with friends as they find the caches that VK has already found.

That's not how you get 28000+ finds.

Exactly my point.

Link to comment

I have 15 active caches and I would say that any one of them is better than 99% of the caches in my area yet most of them have few or no favorite votes. Favorites are a good concept that will need more time to work, if it ever will.

 

I may need to go back and review my finds to see if there are some bush caches I can favorite. :anibad:

 

Just to step in to defend the Puget Sound area, I think we utilize our favorite points very well. I can't remember the last time I found a cache with a point and really had to ask myself "Why?". Also, we have quite a lot of really solid hiders (I would consider myself one) and a better then average number of GREAT hiders (Hike a Photo, Dayspring, and Recycled Art Co. come to mind.). If ALL your caches are better than all but 100 caches in our area(Approximating 10,000 caches in the greater Puget Sound area, probably an overestimate.) then I really badly need to go down to Bill Gates territory and start finding them.

 

As for the favorite points, I've found them to be a good thing. Then again I'm spoiled by having a cache with quite a lot of points.

Link to comment

I have 15 active caches and I would say that any one of them is better than 99% of the caches in my area yet most of them have few or no favorite votes. Favorites are a good concept that will need more time to work, if it ever will.

 

I may need to go back and review my finds to see if there are some bush caches I can favorite. :anibad:

 

Just to step in to defend the Puget Sound area, I think we utilize our favorite points very well. I can't remember the last time I found a cache with a point and really had to ask myself "Why?". Also, we have quite a lot of really solid hiders (I would consider myself one) and a better then average number of GREAT hiders (Hike a Photo, Dayspring, and Recycled Art Co. come to mind.). If ALL your caches are better than all but 100 caches in our area(Approximating 10,000 caches in the greater Puget Sound area, probably an overestimate.) then I really badly need to go down to Bill Gates territory and start finding them.

 

As for the favorite points, I've found them to be a good thing. Then again I'm spoiled by having a cache with quite a lot of points.

At least we don't have as many Ticks here...

 

sorry. Had to say it

Edited by sword fern
Link to comment

I'm trying to use FAVORITE votes to determine GOOD caches to find.

 

It seems that some cachers are just placing their FAVORITE votes on crappy bush hides from their caching friends.

Please put your friendships aside, and vote for GOOD caches.

 

I have figured out that any cache that has a hundred finds, and only ONE FAVORITE VOTE fits in this category. So now I am eliminating those caches with ONE FAVORITE VOTE from my list of caches to find.

 

:drama:

i HATE bushes. specially oleander bushes!

Link to comment

I'm trying to use FAVORITE votes to determine GOOD caches to find.

 

It seems that some cachers are just placing their FAVORITE votes on crappy bush hides from their caching friends.

Please put your friendships aside, and vote for GOOD caches.

 

I have figured out that any cache that has a hundred finds, and only ONE FAVORITE VOTE fits in this category. So now I am eliminating those caches with ONE FAVORITE VOTE from my list of caches to find.

 

:drama:

i HATE bushes. specially oleander bushes!

 

How about walker bushes?

Link to comment

I have given a bush hide a favorite point. We had a good time trying to find it. We didn't know what a bison was and thought it was a way of saying "by sign". The GPS said it was one side and the sign was on the other side. We thought it was funny and we enjoyed it. There was also a guy nearby selling some really great melons and we bought a couple.....they were very sweet and we wouldn't have enjoyed them had we not been caching at the bush.

 

I think everyone has different reasons for using a favorite point. It may not be your favorite but it might be mine. I may not agree with your favorite but I won't ask you not to give a cache you liked a favorite point because I didn't like it.

Link to comment

Searching for caches with A favorite point isn't going to help.

There is always goint to be someone who really enjoyed that bush hide, the skirt-lifter, or whatever 'bad cache poster-child' you want to single out.

Probably the only way to actually assure getting a good result is to search by favorites percentage. Of course to do that you will need to spend a high percentage of your time just doing the research.

 

This is why I like the GCVote system...everyone has an opinion about every cache they find, and they get to record/express it (anonymously).

Link to comment

About a quarter of our favorites were placed on long-archived caches that were in great spots. Many were on the AT. They were our favorites and deserved the recognition.

Now, most of our favorites go to caches that make you leave the car awhile.

- Sort of a thank you for not placing (yet another dime-a-dozen) C&D.

Most are extended hikes and/or higher terrain.

Sometimes we'll favorite a shorter run if it takes us to a cave, mine, waterfall, awesome view, etc., bringing us to a unique setting.

If the only place to hide a container nearby is a bush, so be it. ;)

Link to comment

The concept of percentage of possible favorites is one that I will get strongly behind. I was one that suggested this type of system for a long time, but I can see that caches with lots of visits get lots of favorite points. The way that they are calculating the percentage of favorite points on the screen now is better than just raw numbers, but not quite all of the way there.

 

My suggestion has been:

 

Start with a pool of premium member accounts where there is a found log on the cache page.

Limit those members to ones that have added a favorite point to any cache (in other words, they actually USE the system).

This gives you a total number of POSSIBLE favorite points.

Divide that number of possible favorite points by the number of total favorite points (a ratio).

 

Groundspeak is missing the blue step.

 

What this number accurately reflects is that of the people that can and do place favorite points, a certain percentage of them have chosen to make this in their top 10%. While the numbers aren't significantly different yet in most cases, over time I'm sure it will become significant.

 

I'm just hoping that when they finally incorporate the favorites into the PQ Generator and the GPX files that they include the percentage of favorites (calculated either way) instead of just the raw number.

Link to comment

Searching for caches with A favorite point isn't going to help.

There is always goint to be someone who really enjoyed that bush hide, the skirt-lifter, or whatever 'bad cache poster-child' you want to single out.

Probably the only way to actually assure getting a good result is to search by favorites percentage. Of course to do that you will need to spend a high percentage of your time just doing the research.

 

This is why I like the GCVote system...everyone has an opinion about every cache they find, and they get to record/express it (anonymously).

 

The concept of percentage of possible favorites is one that I will get strongly behind. I was one that suggested this type of system for a long time, but I can see that caches with lots of visits get lots of favorite points. The way that they are calculating the percentage of favorite points on the screen now is better than just raw numbers, but not quite all of the way there.

 

My suggestion has been:

 

Start with a pool of premium member accounts where there is a found log on the cache page.

Limit those members to ones that have added a favorite point to any cache (in other words, they actually USE the system).

This gives you a total number of POSSIBLE favorite points.

Divide that number of possible favorite points by the number of total favorite points (a ratio).

 

Groundspeak is missing the blue step.

 

What this number accurately reflects is that of the people that can and do place favorite points, a certain percentage of them have chosen to make this in their top 10%. While the numbers aren't significantly different yet in most cases, over time I'm sure it will become significant.

 

I'm just hoping that when they finally incorporate the favorites into the PQ Generator and the GPX files that they include the percentage of favorites (calculated either way) instead of just the raw number.

 

Percentages and GCVote are no better than the raw favorite count in determining which caches you are likely to enjoy. What you need to do with favorites is click to see who favorited the cache. After a while you will learn who has similar taste to you and when you see they favorited a cache you'll know you're more likely to enjoy it. Perhaps Groundspeak could create some system that looks at who favorited the same caches you did and recommends other caches these people have favorited.

 

Now of course this doesn't help as much when you are traveling. There you probably want to use favorites as just one criteria. Perhaps it can be used to filter to a smaller number of caches where you can read the pages and see if the logs indicate this might be an exceptional cache.

 

There are too many variables that effect when someone favorites a cache. Knowschad's example earlier points this out. Neither raw counts or percentage or anything else will determine which is the best cache for you. I would never suggest one cache is "better" than another based on the number of favorite votes it got. What I suggest that each favorite vote means another geocacher liked this cache. The more geocachers who like a cache the more likely it is that one or more of them have similar taste as you do. I use this to find caches I'm more likely going to enjoy. I'm not looking for the best caches, just for ones I'm likely to enjoy.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

Exactly.... thanks for making my point quite clear. Those are GOOD FAVORITES. I keep finding lousy caches instead....with one Favorite point.

 

note: Yes...I just find them all anyways....and no, I don't really care. I just went caching with a friend who was trying to only find favorite voted caches. It was fun, yet confusing..... because I know we drove right past some really awesome caches that had zero votes.

 

I frequently see posts with phases similar to the section I bolded part in yours. Please explain why those awesome hides have zero favorite points. If you thought they were awesome caches, why did you not favorite them?

 

 

 

 

Those who are unwilling to be a part of the solution often have their fingerprints all over the problem. :signalviolin: JCTAIST ;)

Link to comment

 

I downloaded a loc file of caches with at least one favorite vote, for an area I recently visited. So many of the 1-vote caches were poor placements. When I got home and looked to see why that person gave it a favorite vote, it was because it was someone's first find, or because they went caching with someone special that day or it was a friend's cache and they were with them when it was planted or something else that had no connection to the cache or location.

 

I do not think that something is wrong with selecting a cache for one's favourites based on the overall experience as the list is not called "caches recommended for other cachers".

It is certainly only up to me which caches I regard as my favourites and why.

 

 

From now on I'll choose caches with at least 2 favorite votes.

 

If a group of friends visits some caches together and they all put the caches on their favourite lists due to the joint experience, this rule of thumb will not help you.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment
Percentages and GCVote are no better than the raw favorite count in determining which caches you are likely to enjoy.

I'm not sure that this is true.

I agree, the only thing that would make GCvote less capable than the Favorite count is the amount of people using it. But GCvote is available to all users who use any one of... Firefox, Chrome, IE7, IE8, Opera, Safari, and GSAK.

Then add that with the ability to use a median calculation so that a few nimrods cant drastically improve a 1.5 star cache with 5 star ratings then ya got something better. I can't tell if some dude got 10 of his family and friends to each place a fav point on his GRH but it wont matter with GCvote if they all gave it a 5 and every other person that comes along gives it between 1 and 2.5.

I simply cant use the favorite points to determine anything because all it is intended to be is a "don't hurt anyone's feelings" like system.

Link to comment

Here is a good example of how much stock to put in Favorites. Both of these caches are identical, yet otherwise very unique, hides. I would say that they both are in rather equivalent areas insomuch as the area might account for any favoritism. They both have roughly the same number of finds. Yet one, as of today, has 30 favorites, and the other only 16.

 

http://coord.info/GC1F0NV

http://coord.info/GC19F23

 

Why the huge difference? You tell me, 'cause I sure can't figure it out!

Mutsley & Crew have more friends than you? :laughing:

Link to comment

Here is a good example of how much stock to put in Favorites. Both of these caches are identical, yet otherwise very unique, hides. I would say that they both are in rather equivalent areas insomuch as the area might account for any favoritism. They both have roughly the same number of finds. Yet one, as of today, has 30 favorites, and the other only 16.

 

http://coord.info/GC1F0NV

http://coord.info/GC19F23

 

Why the huge difference? You tell me, 'cause I sure can't figure it out!

 

The only thing i can think of is that the cache with 30 favorites is being found before the other. That first time finding that clever hide was really cool but the second, third, fourth, and so on, aren't as cool.

 

Kinda like the first lpc we found a few years back. I never knew about this and thought it was kind of a nifty hide. Now at 589,983,613 lpc finds later,,, not so nifty. :blink:

Link to comment

From the Knowledge Books site:

 

1.9 Favorites

 

Geocaching Favorites is a simple way to track and share the caches that you enjoyed the most. For every 10 caches that you have found, you will be able to Favorite 1 exceptional cache in your find history. The Favorites accumulated by a cache are displayed in search results and on the cache page so everyone can see which caches stand above the rest.

 

What does it mean when people say a cache is a Favorite cache?

A Favorite can mean many different things. It could mean that the location is interesting or unusual in some way, or that the hiding place or cache container itself reflects the creativity of the cache owner. The one thing you can say for certain is that the overall quality of the cache is likely to be above average.

 

When requesting a reward type of system people wanted to separate the wheat from the chaff (the lame from the above average). Does a parking lot cache suddenly become an above average cache because it was a FTF for someone?

 

With regards to caches in bushes, they may be truly an above average caching experience. If the location is scenic and/or the hike up to the location is picturesque and/or the container is creative/funny/unique or a combination of these qualities I'd say the experience may be deserving of a Favorite vote despite the unfavored woody plant of choice.

Link to comment

Here is a good example of how much stock to put in Favorites. Both of these caches are identical, yet otherwise very unique, hides. I would say that they both are in rather equivalent areas insomuch as the area might account for any favoritism. They both have roughly the same number of finds. Yet one, as of today, has 30 favorites, and the other only 16.

 

http://coord.info/GC1F0NV

http://coord.info/GC19F23

 

Why the huge difference? You tell me, 'cause I sure can't figure it out!

 

The only thing i can think of is that the cache with 30 favorites is being found before the other. That first time finding that clever hide was really cool but the second, third, fourth, and so on, aren't as cool.

 

Kinda like the first lpc we found a few years back. I never knew about this and thought it was kind of a nifty hide. Now at 589,983,613 lpc finds later,,, not so nifty. :blink:

 

The two caches are probably at least 30 miles apart, probably more. There have been a few who've found both, but not enough to make that kind of difference. Besides, some would have found cache A first, and others would have found cache B first.

 

Avenois... there is no doubt that what you say is true! LOL!

Link to comment

Here is a good example of how much stock to put in Favorites. Both of these caches are identical, yet otherwise very unique, hides. I would say that they both are in rather equivalent areas insomuch as the area might account for any favoritism. They both have roughly the same number of finds. Yet one, as of today, has 30 favorites, and the other only 16.

 

http://coord.info/GC1F0NV

http://coord.info/GC19F23

 

Why the huge difference? You tell me, 'cause I sure can't figure it out!

My take.

GC1F0NV Dan's Iron Stump

30 favorite points

166 finds

46 finds this year accounting for 27.710843373493976% total finds.

 

GC19F23 Thin Ice

16 favorite points

170 finds

13 finds this year accounting for 7.647058823529412 total finds.

 

Obviously that is why there is a difference, one simply has more finds logged to it since favorite points started making it an improper comparison regardless of how identical they may be in every other aspect.

Link to comment

Here is a good example of how much stock to put in Favorites. Both of these caches are identical, yet otherwise very unique, hides. I would say that they both are in rather equivalent areas insomuch as the area might account for any favoritism. They both have roughly the same number of finds. Yet one, as of today, has 30 favorites, and the other only 16.

 

http://coord.info/GC1F0NV

http://coord.info/GC19F23

 

Why the huge difference? You tell me, 'cause I sure can't figure it out!

My take.

GC1F0NV Dan's Iron Stump

30 favorite points

166 finds

46 finds this year accounting for 27.710843373493976% total finds.

 

GC19F23 Thin Ice

16 favorite points

170 finds

13 finds this year accounting for 7.647058823529412 total finds.

 

Obviously that is why there is a difference, one simply has more finds logged to it since favorite points started making it an improper comparison regardless of how identical they may be in every other aspect.

 

making it an improper comparison
Bingo!!
Link to comment
Percentages and GCVote are no better than the raw favorite count in determining which caches you are likely to enjoy.

I'm not sure that this is true.

I agree, the only thing that would make GCvote less capable than the Favorite count is the amount of people using it. But GCvote is available to all users who use any one of... Firefox, Chrome, IE7, IE8, Opera, Safari, and GSAK.

Then add that with the ability to use a median calculation so that a few nimrods cant drastically improve a 1.5 star cache with 5 star ratings then ya got something better. I can't tell if some dude got 10 of his family and friends to each place a fav point on his GRH but it wont matter with GCvote if they all gave it a 5 and every other person that comes along gives it between 1 and 2.5.

I simply cant use the favorite points to determine anything because all it is intended to be is a "don't hurt anyone's feelings" like system.

I don't see how GCVote helps find caches I would enjoy. It might if there is such a thing as an average cacher and if I believe myself to be average. But I don't see any way to define what average means in terms of enjoying caches, nor to I believe that even if there was some distribution of enjoyability that it would look normal, with most cachers clustered around the average cachers.

 

Sure if you believe everyone except a few outliers enjoy the same things then once you have an adequate sample of geocachers rating a cache, the outliers will be overwhelmed by the all the nearly average geocachers and GCVote or a percentage of favorites will approximate this average cacher. But I challenge you to provide any proof that the people's likes are distributed this way. The constant arguments in these forums (including the premise of this thread)

is evidence that there is not an average cacher as far as what caches they enjoy.

 

I have explained that the more favorite votes a cache has the more cachers enjoy it, and therefore the more likely that someone who enjoys caches I would enjoy, enjoyed it. In no way am I contending that a cache with 50 favorite votes is better than a cache with five favorite votes. If I look at the names of those who favored the cache and see a name of someone I think has similar taste there is a good chance I will enjoy the cache. If I don't know the people who favorited a cache, then all I am saying is that, all else being equal, the more votes, the more likely one is from someone with similar tastes. I say "all else being equal" because in my case I enjoy higher terrain caches. Many times I know I will enjoy a high terrain cache with one or two favorites (or even with no favorites) more than the park and grab with 50 favorites. I hope that nobody uses favorites without looking at other information about the cache to decide what caches to search for.

Link to comment

tozainamboku,

 

I agree with a lot of things your saying which is why I have suggested a 5* (in half star increments starting at 0, zero being different from not voting) rating that allows you to place cachers on a weight list so that any cache that they vote on automatically draws the average rating closer to their rating.

 

Here is how GCvote helps me as it stands. In the areas where it is used it helps me avoid crap during tourism. Yup the other side of the coin for rating systems. If Netflix thinks that I'll rate a movie 1 star, so far it has been wrong wrong wrong, I rant and rave about how Netflix should be paying me for daring to have the movie at all. :lol: Every once in a wile I will break down and watch another and then remember that if it says 1 star, avoid it. I can just about guarantee the same with GCvote. You can also check the vote distribution. So lets say you're willing to a few 2 star caches and you spot one with 20 votes on it, you check the vote distro and see 15 1's and 5 5's. You know that it is actually a 1 star where sock puppets and I love every cache voters have hit it up and ya avoid it. Favorite points absolutely can not do that.

Another thing that GCvote can do for me that the Favorite Ponts can't, allow me to 1. vote on a cache I haven't logged because I am not logging my finds when loan caching anymore and 2. vote relatively anonymously.

Edited by Vater_Araignee
Link to comment
I don't see how GCVote helps find caches I would enjoy.

Few would disagree that Favorites ratios or GCVote ratings are not perfect predictors of what caches you would enjoy.

 

I don't think that this means that ratios or ratings are devoid of all information and utterly unhelpful.

 

Perfection need not be the enemy of the good.

Link to comment

Perhaps I'm pickier than most. That would explain why I still have over 2750 Favorite votes left to place. I can't find a FAVORITE cache yet. :lol:

If everybody was as picky as you, then no caches would have any favorite votes, and you would have nothing to complain about. I see you have a bunch of favorites actually.

 

Lead by example and give your favorite votes to caches that are not "crappy."

 

If you don't vote, you can't complain about those who do vote.

Edited by kpanko
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 5
×
×
  • Create New...