What Irks you most?

[+on4bam]

It looks like the cacher who grabbed the TB doesn't really know (or care) about proper trackable logging. I still had the TB on my watchlist and see he now grabbed it again, mentioning the name of the cache. I don't understand why he didn't just use "retrieve".

For the TBs I wasn't able to retrieve from another cache I contacted the cacher who left them at the cache we found the next day as he still had not logged them. He posted a note on the cache and dropped the trackables 2 hours after my email was send.

 

[+Korichnovui]

If I get a TB in the field I may log it right away so that I can have it visit further caches that I go to, and perhaps drop it in another cache before I even go home. That's if I'm logging in the field, which I don't always do, but sometimes yeah. If I see the TB was physically but not digitally in the cache I wouldn't really think twice about it, it's really common. Everyone knows that TB logging is a big mess.

 

If I were the one that hadn't had a chance to log it yet, I'd just shrug it off. No big deal. I would understand the above situation.

 

Now if I were expected to have to write down the logging notes and keep track of this thing just because someone else didn't log it *yet* (and based off of past experiences, who knows when/if they ever will) then that is what is truly irksome. So now I can't visit it to other caches that day, unless I log it later as "write a note"? Now I have to carefully keep notes on where I put it, if I put it in another cache? No thanks.

[+cerberus1]

I feel if someone is impatient, rude to others, or simply clueless, it's not gonna hurt me to let a missed trackable log slide.   

 -  But I sure don't have to try to understand where they're coming from ...

[+on4bam]

1 hour ago, Korichnovui said:

If I get a TB in the field I may log it right away so that I can have it visit further caches that I go to,

 

Now I have to carefully keep notes on where I put it, if I put it in another cache? No thanks.

 

Visiting every cache you find so there are pages after pages of "took it to..."  I've deleted 100's of those. I just keep the retrieve and drop logs on my TBs (which now are all lost). The only visit logs I keep is when a large distance is covered in between or a country is visited.

 

Yup, I keep name/code in our GC notebook writing down where TB's are dropped. Since I log at home I also know exactly where I picked them up. All 1380 TB's I've logged are in a GSAK database so I can still see when/where I retrieved/dropped them (GCcode and coordinates).

 

[+cerberus1]

18 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Visiting every cache you find so there are pages after pages of "took it to..."  I've deleted 100's of those. I just keep the retrieve and drop logs on my TBs (which now are all lost). The only visit logs I keep is when a large distance is covered in between or a country is visited.

 

Yep.   We know of some who do the same. 

We feel this log type is (for some) just a step away from being a hoarder, holding other's property hostage "visiting" for months/years at a time.

 

I do have one visit log though.  I held onto a tag too long (hospital), and emailed the TO that it'll go in a cache when I'm able.

An entire day, and couldn't find a "small" that would fit it...

Visited it to the last "small" cache found, just so the TO knew I was trying, then put it in a small "regular" the next day.    

 

Edited July 5, 2020 by cerberus1

[+niraD]

5 hours ago, on4bam said:

The only visit logs I keep is when a large distance is covered in between or a country is visited.

The only visit logs I do is when the visit is somehow related to the trackable's goal. Then, I add a photo and log content describing the photo and how it applies to the trackable's goal.

[+The Jester]

7 hours ago, Korichnovui said:

If I get a TB in the field I may log it right away so that I can have it visit further caches that I go to, and perhaps drop it in another cache before I even go home. That's if I'm logging in the field, which I don't always do, but sometimes yeah. If I see the TB was physically but not digitally in the cache I wouldn't really think twice about it, it's really common. Everyone knows that TB logging is a big mess.

 

If I were the one that hadn't had a chance to log it yet, I'd just shrug it off. No big deal. I would understand the above situation.

 

Now if I were expected to have to write down the logging notes and keep track of this thing just because someone else didn't log it *yet* (and based off of past experiences, who knows when/if they ever will) then that is what is truly irksome. So now I can't visit it to other caches that day, unless I log it later as "write a note"? Now I have to carefully keep notes on where I put it, if I put it in another cache? No thanks.

I assume you also shrug it off if somebody grabs the TB back to finish their drops & visits.  And that you understand not everyone has the ability to log in the field.  Or are you just concerned only about your logging (which adds to the TB logging mess you mentioned). 

 

I never "write down" much about TB's, I use the note taking on the GPSr so that when I get to logging I can see where I picked up & dropped them.  By not keeping notes you are adding to the "TB logging mess".

[+Goldenwattle]

6 hours ago, on4bam said:

Visiting every cache you find so there are pages after pages of "took it to..."  I've deleted 100's of those.

The photographs too? Some people, such as myself, like to include photographs of where the TB has journeyed to.

https://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=5482216

 

I have had that TB longer than I planned because of Covid. I was to pass it onto someone who also knew the owner, who had died since they sent that TB out :(.

[+on4bam]

2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

The photographs too?

 

What photo's?

I've never seen a photo added when people log "took it to..." in bulk.

[+barefootjeff]

4 minutes ago, on4bam said:

What photo's?

I've never seen a photo added when people log "took it to..." in bulk.

 

Like this perhaps? A TB I recently moved along on its mission with a couple visit logs on my hike to my target drop-off cache...

 

[+on4bam]

Well, you may do so but my comment was because I've never had a photo visitlog on one of my (now all lost) TBs. (Maybe you missed the smiley )

 

[+CAVinoGal]

11 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Some people, such as myself, like to include photographs of where the TB has journeyed to.

 

9 hours ago, on4bam said:

I've never seen a photo added when people log "took it to..." in bulk.

 

There's the key phrase - in bulk.  I do the same as Goldenwattle and barefootjeff - select visits with photos (not on all my visit/took it to logs, but several), especially if I can follow the theme or mission. And I don't "visit" my TB's to every single cache I log.  I had one I carried across the country - entitled Cacher's Pets - wanted to travel and collect pix of pets of cacher's along the way.  I tried to comply, and about every other log included a photo or two; the in between visits were to add mileage and document the journey across the country (airport and different city visits). (TB9628K if anyone is interested)

 

What was this thread about? Oh, yeah, irks.  Pages and pages of "took it to" logs do irk me, but that's the way some folks play.  At least we (TO's) don't get emails for all those visits.  I just post the type of TB travel logs I would enjoy receiving on my own TB's - photos of the TB in play, and traveling, and some notes about where the cacher is taking it.

[+Goldenwattle]

9 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

 

 

There's the key phrase - in bulk.  I do the same as Goldenwattle and barefootjeff - select visits with photos (not on all my visit/took it to logs, but several), especially if I can follow the theme or mission. And I don't "visit" my TB's to every single cache I log.  I had one I carried across the country - entitled Cacher's Pets - wanted to travel and collect pix of pets of cacher's along the way.  I tried to comply, and about every other log included a photo or two; the in between visits were to add mileage and document the journey across the country (airport and different city visits). (TB9628K if anyone is interested)

 

What was this thread about? Oh, yeah, irks.  Pages and pages of "took it to" logs do irk me, but that's the way some folks play.  At least we (TO's) don't get emails for all those visits.  I just post the type of TB travel logs I would enjoy receiving on my own TB's - photos of the TB in play, and traveling, and some notes about where the cacher is taking it.

It's great to see photographs. I used to visit TBs to every cache, although many had photographs. In my early days of caching, from memory, every log had a photograph. I would make sure to find something, even for power trails; the blue sky, a wild-flower, the view of a creek, a spider, etc. But after reading complaints here I have reduced TB's visits, but I still include photographs. Mostly it's photographs of the location or the journey to the cache, rather than the actual TB. I do like to make sure the TB is photographed when I pick it up and when I leave it, with the occasional photograph of it in between, although then it might be as part of a group photograph of TBs.

[+Oxford Stone]

Interesting perspective. I soon gave up on TB ownership when mine went missing twice. Are the "visited" logs that annoying?

I'll put a TB I'm carrying on "visited" but that will just be the rest of the caches visited that day, i'll drop it off in the first decent small / regular / large I find on my next trip. I usually try to go a diametrically opposite direction from home so it at least gets 40 or 50 miles on its tally.

Rare exception is if I have an upcoming overseas business trip (remember them?), then I might carry a TB (and log visits) for up to a month so say 60-80 caches.

[+IceColdUK]

3 hours ago, Oxford Stone said:

Interesting perspective. I soon gave up on TB ownership when mine went missing twice. Are the "visited" logs that annoying?

I'll put a TB I'm carrying on "visited" but that will just be the rest of the caches visited that day, i'll drop it off in the first decent small / regular / large I find on my next trip. I usually try to go a diametrically opposite direction from home so it at least gets 40 or 50 miles on its tally.

Rare exception is if I have an upcoming overseas business trip (remember them?), then I might carry a TB (and log visits) for up to a month so say 60-80 caches.

 

If it was my TB, I'd like to see the journey, but not the turn-by-turn directions.  So, generally that's what I try to do for a TB that I'm holding - I'll dip it into a cache each time I take it out, with further dips after each significant jump (say 20 km or more) on the same day.  I wouldn't dip it in every cache on a series, or even every cache in the same(ish) location.  I'm not annoyed by people that do, but it does make the maps a bit of a mess!

[+ecanderson]

How about a new irk?

The use of the phrase "Ground Zero" to refer to a cache's POSTED coordinates.

I've been told that this confusing (and colloquially incorrect) use of this expression was promoted by GCHQ in some online help or other text.

Coordinates are where you aim a missile.  Ground zero is the point at which the sucker actually goes bang.

Ground zero is never where you think something should occur, or hope something should occur, it's where it actually occurs.

Using the term properly, then, Ground Zero is the true physical location of the cache, not its posted coordinates where the owner hopes it actually resides -- unless, of course, the owner got it spot on, in which case it's all the same.

Edited July 14, 2020 by ecanderson

[+on4bam]

Not so much an irk but it could be if it happened more:

 

Easy traditional with a first DNF on May 2nd and another one on May 7th.

The CO checks the cache a day later and TD's it as the container is gone stating container will be replaces ASAP.

July 7th (after 2 months) a reviewer posts a standard note asking the CO to solve the problem or at least post an update.

The same day the CO posts a note "Sorry that this is the way you communicate, cache will be removed since you're so impatient (I suspect they mean the listing as the container has been gone for 2 months).

Cache is archived by the CO at the same time.

 

CO is not a newbie (started in 2015) but only found about 200 traditionals and also placed one.

Makes me wonder, what did they expect? No reviewer action after 2 months?

Why not post a note they are "working on it" that would buy them another month.

 

[+baer2006]

1 hour ago, on4bam said:

The same day the CO posts a note "Sorry that this is the way you communicate, cache will be removed since you're so impatient

Sounds like the type of CO, who treats every small criticism of their cache as a personal offense, and then in return only complains about the "way of communication" without ever addressing the substance of the original criticism. I've seen this often enough by now to just think "What a jerk" and then forget about it. So it's not a real irk for me .

[+Goldenwattle]

10 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

Sounds like the type of CO, who treats every small criticism of their cache as a personal offense, and then in return only complains about the "way of communication" without ever addressing the substance of the original criticism. I've seen this often enough by now to just think "What a jerk" and then forget about it. So it's not a real irk for me .

Imagine, some people have to work with people like that.

[+on4bam]

After finishing the Belgian database update the remainder of a series of multi's we started last year is now archived. It was a 50Km bike ride but it had lots of problems. We DNF'ed #2 which was not replaced (in almost a year), DNF'ed #9 because a tag was missing, others found it by PAFing, DNF'ed #11 that afterward nothing but DNFs except one found it that states cache was NOT found.

Too bad as this was a nice tour, at least the part we could finish.

Another long tour gone which is a shame as there are very little of hem here, most "long" multi's are only 10-15Km. Fortunately we're close to the Netherlands where there are lot more day-long multi's (and high FP too).

 

[+JBipes]

What really got under my scalp and cranked me to no end was and still is caches I have placed and they get muggled. I placed a cache recently and before it had even been logged as found, it got muggled, totally gone. I replaced it, and it got muggled again before first find. Had another that was doing fine, first 11 to find thought it was a perfect container and placed easily found yet concealed from muggles. Next searcher couldn’t find. Checked on it and sure enough it was gone. Archived it and will not try to replace. Muggles seemingly are illiterate, cannot read the note inside or on the label on outside. Just torques my bolts to the breaking point 

Edited July 14, 2020 by JBipes
Misspelled “muggled”

[+colleda]

20 minutes ago, JBipes said:

What really got under my scalp and cranked me to no end was and still is caches I have placed and they get muggled. I placed a cache recently and before it had even been logged as found, it got muggled, totally gone. I replaced it, and it got muggled again before first find. Had another that was doing fine, first 11 to find thought it was a perfect container and placed easily found yet concealed from muggles. Next searcher couldn’t find. Checked on it and sure enough it was gone. Archived it and will not try to replace. Muggles seemingly are illiterate, cannot read the note inside or on the label on outside. Just torques my bolts to the breaking point 

A legitimate "irk" but by no means unusual. Time to "build a better mousetrap" as the saying goes. Or, as the English would say, "Keep Calm and Carry On".

We have another saying here, "Don't let the Bxxxxxxs grind you down".

[+cerberus1]

4 hours ago, JBipes said:

What really got under my scalp and cranked me to no end was and still is caches I have placed and they get muggled.

I placed a cache recently and before it had even been logged as found, it got muggled, totally gone.

I replaced it, and it got muggled again before first find.

Had another that was doing fine, first 11 to find thought it was a perfect container and placed easily found yet concealed from muggles.

Next searcher couldn’t find. Checked on it and sure enough it was gone. Archived it and will not try to replace.

Muggles seemingly are illiterate, cannot read the note inside or on the label on outside. Just torques my bolts to the breaking point 

 

Curious, did you ask permission from the landowner to place caches ?  

We've seen a few were taken by the landowners, when they found containers and no one asking to place them there.

The other 2/3rds spent months attending meetings, to finally find time to get permission to a township board.

Finally get our hide in, and soon others, assuming the park was now free to place,  put theirs in too.  No permission.

Those people caused us to lose ours as well as theirs.  That township now thinks cachers are rude people they can do without...

 

We've also seen numerous examples of caretakers grabbing containers when no one told them that caches were allowed there.

Sometimes they give 'em a mowing first...

We experienced neighbors along a small park chase the other 2/3rds and I out, wondering why-the-heck all of a sudden these strangers are coming around their kids.

Just luck I wasn't by myself...

[+Goldenwattle]

15 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

The other 2/3rds spent months attending meetings, to finally find time to get permission to a township board.

Finally get our hide in, and soon others, assuming the park was now free to place,  put theirs in too.  No permission.

Those people caused us to lose ours as well as theirs.  That township now thinks cachers are rude people they can do without...

I am so pleased it's not so difficult to place containers here in Australia. As long as we keep them off privately owned property (out of someone's yard for instance) or National Parks (although we seem to be able to place them in Nature Reserves in the ACT) without asking permission, we can put them almost anywhere. I have never needed to get permission to place any of my caches, as they are all in public areas.

[+cerberus1]

21 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I am so pleased it's not so difficult to place containers here in Australia.

 

Wow.  Was kinda surprised your area is pretty-much blank in a few spots.  

Here, most "public" parks actually belong to a city, town, or state, and already have a geocaching policy (like the wiki I linked to).

Most older park systems have a park manager, with all info online too.    

New areas often don't, and the one I referenced shows how a few careless cachers can ruin an entire township's introduction to the hobby.

[+barefootjeff]

13 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Wow.  Was kinda surprised your area is pretty-much blank in a few spots.  

Here, most "public" parks actually belong to a city, town, or state, and already have a geocaching policy (like the wiki I linked to).

Most older park systems have a park manager, with all info online too.    

New areas often don't, and the one I referenced shows how a few careless cachers can ruin an entire township's introduction to the hobby.

 

The local parks here are generally the responsibility of local councils and about all they do is occasionally send in contractors to mow the grass. With limited resources, they're too thinly stretched to bother with trivial matters like geocaches and about the worst that can happen is the contractors might think a cache is litter and bin it. Bushland reserves get even less attention. There are a few exceptions, such as Sydney Olympic Park which has a geocaching policy (caches are allowed but only with explicit permission) but the rest don't care. Bureaucrats here can only comprehend something if there's an existing policy and a form to fill out and stamp.

 

All my own hides are in bushland reserves and where possible I try to go for public land zoned RE1 (public recreation) as that's what geocaching is, E2 (environmental conservation) which is used on undeveloped land that's not worthy of incorporation into a national park and is not considered useful for anything else, or W2 (recreational waterway). The two I have in national parks were placed with permission under their geocaching policy.

[+Goldenwattle]

3 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Wow.  Was kinda surprised your area is pretty-much blank in a few spots.  

Here, most "public" parks actually belong to a city, town, or state, and already have a geocaching policy (like the wiki I linked to).

Most older park systems have a park manager, with all info online too.    

New areas often don't, and the one I referenced shows how a few careless cachers can ruin an entire township's introduction to the hobby.

Where I live, most 'parks' are usually open areas with trees and where occasionally the grass is mown. They are not usually manicured gardens. There are a few more cared for ones, such as the local Australian National Botanical Gardens. I am not sure what the rules are there, but there are caches there, although not all have the final cache inside the gardens.

[+barefootjeff]

Maybe I'm getting old and grumpy, or maybe it's the bleak weather making me feel that way, but I just got this log on one of my recent bushland hides (published in May):

 

It sounds like they had quite an adventure finding the cache, but what happened? Do I need to make the description or hint clearer? Are there pitfalls future seekers might do well to avoid? Or did they follow the advice in the app and only read the description when they got stuck?

 

I suppose I should be grateful the log is a complete sentence and not just TFTC, an emoji or a dot, but if there was a vote for unsatisfying logs this would likely qualify. It's one-sentence logs like these that make me wonder if I should have just plonked the cache down at the parking coordinates.

[+barefootjeff]

21 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

It sounds like they had quite an adventure finding the cache, but what happened? Do I need to make the description or hint clearer? Are there pitfalls future seekers might do well to avoid? Or did they follow the advice in the app and only read the description when they got stuck?

 

Having visited the cache this morning, maybe it's just as well they didn't provide any more detail in their online log. This is what they wrote in the logbook:

 

 

Their online name is neither Mackenzie nor The Chamba of F...s but it's the only find this week and the dates match. They also left the cache sticking out next to its camo rock instead of concealed behind it. It's what happens when you get a wet week during the school holidays, I suppose, but this recent spate of PM muggles-with-apps is becoming annoying because the D/T and cache type basic member filtering doesn't keep them at bay.

Edited July 17, 2020 by barefootjeff

[+L0ne.R]

A T1 cache with this in a recent log posted by the owner:

 

Owner Maintenance

03/24/2020

New container and logbook in place. Be careful people. Shorter people may need a step stool to access the cache.

 

 

[+HoochDog]

I see more and more COs outright asking that you award their caches favorite points in their cache descriptions and I just find it tacky and needy and it makes me far less likely to do so.  

[+on4bam]

19 minutes ago, HoochDog said:

I see more and more COs outright asking that you award their caches favorite points in their cache descriptions and I just find it tacky and needy and it makes me far less likely to do so.  

 

Got one like that recently. The cache had a problem (not the CO's fault) with a WP where the situation must have changed very recently, maybe even on the day we visited the WP. CO reacted quickly, checked the WP the day after and changed the question for that WP immediately. We found the cache the next day and later got an email they "wouldn't mind a FP". Although the cache was "above average" our FP awarding threshold is a bit higher. 

We don't think of FP's as "awards" but as a reminder we "really, really liked that cache".

On a small series of 11 caches, all individually handicrafted we gave 2 a FP because they had something "extra" over all others that were also nicely made. Others may give all caches of the series a FP as they were all great.

 

[+Goldenwattle]

On 7/17/2020 at 1:45 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

Having visited the cache this morning, maybe it's just as well they didn't provide any more detail in their online log. This is what they wrote in the logbook:

 

 

Their online name is neither Mackenzie nor The Chamba of F...s but it's the only find this week and the dates match. They also left the cache sticking out next to its camo rock instead of concealed behind it. It's what happens when you get a wet week during the school holidays, I suppose, but this recent spate of PM muggles-with-apps is becoming annoying because the D/T and cache type basic member filtering doesn't keep them at bay.

Ha, ha, I could show you a log I photographed  a couple of days ago, with suggestions of what to do with personal parts of their body. Their writing covered both sides of the log. Rather than display it here, if you are interested, it can be found here.GC6WFW7

Irked by immature muggle children finding caches. If not a child, they have the mental maturity of one.

[+Goldenwattle]

On 7/23/2020 at 2:53 AM, L0ne.R said:

A T1 cache with this in a recent log posted by the owner:

 

Owner Maintenance

03/24/2020

New container and logbook in place. Be careful people. Shorter people may need a step stool to access the cache.

 

 

Make a NM. It's not wheelchair friendly. T1 is the only rating a reviewer can act on.

[+Goldenwattle]

35 minutes ago, HoochDog said:

I see more and more COs outright asking that you award their caches favorite points in their cache descriptions and I just find it tacky and needy and it makes me far less likely to do so.  

Fortunately in over 10,000 finds, I have never had that happen to me.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Ha, ha, I could show you a log I photographed  a couple of days ago, with suggestions of what to do with personal parts of their body. Their writing covered both sides of the log. Rather than display it here, if you are interested, it can be found here.GC6WFW7

Irked by immature muggle children finding caches. If not a child, they have the mental maturity of one.

 

Do you think you could remove the images from your log? Please?

 

Report it to the CO, report it to a reviewer, absolutely file a "Needs Maintenance" immediately, but our kids are looking at the images on these cache pages.

 

Even if kids aren't looking at it, your log images diminish the cache listing.

 

This is something YOU posted, not the CO or the childish finders.

 

[+RocTheCacheBox]

2 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

Do you think you could remove the images from your log? Please?

 

Report it to the CO, report it to a reviewer, absolutely file a "Needs Maintenance" immediately, but our kids are looking at the images on these cache pages.

 

Even if kids aren't looking at it, your log images diminish the cache listing.

 

This is something YOU posted, not the CO or the childish finders.

 

 

Totally agree. 

Inappropriate to be in a cache.

Inappropriate to be in a log for a cache.

[+lee737]

7 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

Do you think you could remove the images from your log? Please?

 

 

+1

I would have just removed the log (replaced if I could) and messaged the CO in case they wanted the logsheet sent to them.....

[+Goldenwattle]

It was just childish, your reactions are rather prudish. Such things can be seen in some less talented (what I think of as, loser) graffiti for instance.

But as the CO has now replaced the log I can delete them. It's now superfluous. The CO never was worried enough to ask me to remove the photographs.

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, lee737 said:

 

+1

I would have just removed the log (replaced if I could) and messaged the CO in case they wanted the logsheet sent to them.....

I rarely replace logs, although if I had a spare log with me, as I know this CO, I guess I could have replaced it. But why would you expect I would be carrying spare logs? I wasn't.

[+lee737]

16 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

But why would you expect I would be carrying spare logs?

I wouldn't, and didn't.... 

I don't carry spare logs either, but in this situation may have used some notepaper....

[+Goldenwattle]

3 minutes ago, lee737 said:

I wouldn't, and didn't.... 

I don't carry spare logs either, but in this situation may have used some notepaper....

No spare notepaper either . Only a sheet with the days caches printed out on, and on which I make notes about the caches, the scenery and any other experiences, to late include in my online log.

[+cerberus1]

13 hours ago, HoochDog said:

I see more and more COs outright asking that you award their caches favorite points in their cache descriptions and I just find it tacky and needy and it makes me far less likely to do so.  

 

Yep.  Once in a while we'll get one emailing too.  "Such a nice log, why not give me a FP    " kinda thing.

If they aren't okay hides, I'll skip theirs entirely the rare time that happens.

I try to write a nice log for everyone,  and sometimes I might even say "this container/hide type is one of my favorites", but neither means I'm automatically gonna hand someone a FP.

[+Max and 99]

13 hours ago, HoochDog said:

I see more and more COs outright asking that you award their caches favorite points in their cache descriptions and I just find it tacky and needy and it makes me far less likely to do so.  

Not just geocaches. Adventure Labs too. Although now I understand why they do it, given that HQ might award them another AL based on their current AL ratings.

Still, I don't like it.

[+SamLowrey]

34 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Yep.  Once in a while we'll get one emailing too.  "Such a nice log, why not give me a FP    " kinda thing.

If they aren't okay hides, I'll skip theirs entirely the rare time that happens.

I try to write a nice log for everyone,  and sometimes I might even say "this container/hide type is one of my favorites", but neither means I'm automatically gonna hand someone a FP.

 

I usually avoid nano's.  I was working this really swell multi in a smallish town and the final was a nano.  So this little nano was on a fence that fenced off some historical equipment near a historical building.  Somehow I dropped the lid and this was the fall (well, winter in Texas - not much different) and the area was covered in leaves.  I contacted the CO and told him I would replace it and I did in a reasonable time (if only I had carried nano's in my cache repair kit then - I do now.)  Anyway, he did ask me for a favorite, which I was kinda surprised about.  It deserved one anyway so no big deal.

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC77MFZ_hubbard-hub-bub-featuring-tris-speakers-grave

 

 

Edited July 25, 2020 by SamLowrey

[+on4bam]

7 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

It was just childish, your reactions are rather prudish. Such things can be seen in some less talented (what I think of as, loser) graffiti for instance.

 

It's the regional differences again. I wouldn't even think twice about this. There's worse stuff sprayed on walls/bridges. The kids can see it argument means nothing, just listen to kids when they think no adults are around (not all though).

 

[+RocTheCacheBox]

5 hours ago, on4bam said:

13 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

It was just childish, your reactions are rather prudish. Such things can be seen in some less talented (what I think of as, loser) graffiti for instance.

 

It's the regional differences again. I wouldn't even think twice about this. There's worse stuff sprayed on walls/bridges. The kids can see it argument means nothing, just listen to kids when they think no adults are around (not all though).

 

LOL. One thing NEVER been accused of in life is being prude. 

I don't drop the f-bomb or other choice words around my granddaughter. I also don't excuse poor behavior of one person (referring to the cache loggers) by pointing out the poor behavior of others. If worse stuff was sprayed on something I owned, Id paint over it as soon as possable.

I try to be better than those "others" But I'm only human. Sometimes I'm not.

[Ewe&Me]

On 6/30/2020 at 6:30 AM, baer2006 said:

And if you say, that you're not always online or caching with a GPSr only, you're an old dinosaur ...

That would be us!  No data on our phone - no internet in our camper.  We’ll deal with it when we get home.  You do realize new dinosaurs eventually become old dinosaurs, right?!!  ?

[+The Jester]

5 hours ago, Ewe&Me said:

On ‎6‎/‎30‎/‎2020 at 2:30 AM, baer2006 said:

And if you say, that you're not always online or caching with a GPSr only, you're an old dinosaur ...

That would be us!  No data on our phone - no internet in our camper.  We’ll deal with it when we get home.  You do realize new dinosaurs eventually become old dinosaurs, right?!!  ?

And the largest predator ever was "an old dinosaur".

 

As I would joke with the kids back when I worked with teens "you may get bigger than me, you may get stronger than me, but you'll never get more vicious than me - I have a lot more practice!"  So watch out for us "old dinosaurs".

[INTIMIDAT3R]

On 7/25/2020 at 1:39 PM, The Jester said:

And the largest predator ever was "an old dinosaur".

 

As I would joke with the kids back when I worked with teens "you may get bigger than me, you may get stronger than me, but you'll never get more vicious than me - I have a lot more practice!"  So watch out for us "old dinosaurs".

 

As my Dad once said to me, "Watch it boy, I'm this old for a reason." ?

Edited August 10, 2020 by INTIMIDAT3R