Jump to content

What Irks you most?


Recommended Posts

What irks me is when caches are published for an event (either immediately after, or during the event itself). It discourages the socialization that the event is supposed to promote, by encouraging people to leave so they can find the new caches.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
39 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

What irks me?  Events where caches are published at the end of the vent.  Then I have to go home and download them to my GPSr.  Not all of us have cell phones, and this discriminates against us!

We don't like events but the few we attended had laptops available to copy GPX files to USB drive and to export to GPS. There was also a "roadbook" in case people want to manually enter coordinates. Caches were typically published when the event was over.

 

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, niraD said:

What irks me is when caches are published for an event (either immediately after, or during the event itself).

It discourages the socialization that the event is supposed to promote, by encouraging people to leave so they can find the new caches.

Yep.

Many local events had at least one or two new caches to find afterwards.  Printed on paper in the beginning.

One realized that some haven't caught up to, or care to do the sorta-smartphone thing, and would patiently read them out.   :)

People running as soon as they got coordinates, one time before a very important part of an event, finally got them to give info out after everything else (including trash pickup and equipment) was done.  It was always the same people too.  

Many times it would be a coinflip between a few of us, on who was gonna eat their cake.   :D

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Clongo_Rongo said:

you claim you found it and you say it took a while to find the path, but you did not have time to sign the log - really, so you could have spent 10 mins looking for GZ, but you did not have time to sign the log ???

clearly this is wrong

er.png

Easy...delete. "Like you I didn't have time; in my case to ask you for a description of the cache, hide and log and the photographic proof, so it was quicker to just delete your log. Must be terribly difficult to actually get off the canal boat, needing to tie it up each time, even when there is no where to tie it. Much easier to stay on and just log the caches you sail past."

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, tbbiker said:

Not being able to drag and drop those souvenirs that Groundspeak keep pushing.  Come on Groundspeak:  Maybe I want them organized in any other way that alphabetical. 

Use the tampermonkey script GClh II. It lets you sort A-Z, Z-A, newest first, oldest first.

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, tbbiker said:

Not having a "thumbs down" button for a geocache.

 

You do - it's called a "Needs Maintenance" or a "Write Note" log.

In this hobby, why would you want to anonymously trash someone's creation with no explanation?

This ain't the internet, you know. Have enough respect for a CO to explain what you don't like and sign your work.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
1 hour ago, tbbiker said:

I disagree.  You can currently give a cache a favorite point if you really like it, but nothing if the cache is substandard.  I say they should do away with the favorite points and have a thumbs up and a thumbs down button instead.  This will be a lot more useful to cachers because they then can determine if they want to go to a cache with a lot of thumbs up or thumbs down points attached to it.  Plus, it will motivate CO's to place more quality caches because no one wants a number of thumbs down attached to their cache.  To answer you question:  It is not trashing, but constructive criticism which should be elaborated on in the actual log. 

 

You can disagree, but so do I. You say "which should be elaborated on in the actual log", but let's be real; you know in general people won't. In fact, the thumbs down would become the entirety of many logs, in the same annoying (to me) way that so many just say "tftc", or increasingly now, a thumbs-up emoji. Adding a 'down' would just make that an official, approved mechanism.

There's a strong feeling in this community to prevent this from morphing into social media concepts and practices. I don't mean that everyone thinks that way, but I say 'strong' because those that care strongly about it seem to come down on that side of the issue. That's based on LOTS of forum threads on the subject.

In my eyes we should be promoting real communication and feedback between us, and not just short-cutting another class of interaction.

 

You say that it'll help keep people from searching for caches that are no good - what you're saying is that you want to allow any group of people, with NO context and NO indication as to the actual experience they had to destroy my cache's prospects on a whim.   

  • I'm a new cacher and couldn't find this easy cache - thumbs down.
  • It's raining and I didn't have fun - thumbs down.
  • I slipped in the mud - thumbs down.
  • I had an argument on the trail with my boyfriend or girlfriend - thumbs down.
  • There was garbage strewn around - thumbs down.
  • I was there with a group of ten people and that one guy hogged the cache and didn't let any of us touch it - NINE thumbs-down!
  • There wasn't enough swag in it - thumbs-down.
  • There was a minor maintenance issue, like, maybe the log is full - thumbs-down. (Which brings up another issue - it's hard enough to get people to file a NM log - being able to down-thumb a cache would deteriorate NM logs even more!)
  • The cache page is badly spelled, or formatted, or I don't know how to solve the puzzle - thumbs-down.
  • I don't like nanos, or guardrails, or lampposts, or Altoids tins - thumbs-down.

 

How would I get a TD removed? If I clean up the garbage or replace the log or dry the mud, how do I get you to UN-downthumb my cache? Will it be forever tainted by someone's casual, thoughtless click?

 

This is my relaxing hobby. I put out a few caches on a couple of Saturday afternoons because I want to share my efforts or a pretty view, not to feed someone else's obsession. It would be the height of stupidity for GS, a company that depends on the work of player-volunteers, to build in a mechanism to allow players to quickly ignore my caches without even giving them a second glance simply because someone else didn't like them.

 

Don't think it would promote better caches. The people who would care are probably ALREADY the people with better caches.

 

If you want to simply say to others who may come after you, "Skip This One", then as I said before, explain yourself and sign your work.

 

Edited by TeamRabbitRun
  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 4
Link to comment
1 hour ago, tbbiker said:

Plus, it will motivate CO's to place more quality caches because no one wants a number of thumbs down attached to their cache.

 

Nope.  Those thumb down ratings won't make a CO who doesn't do maintenance do anything different than they already do now, just like a thumb up rating won't encourage COs to work harder to maintain their caches.

 

1 hour ago, tbbiker said:

This will be a lot more useful to cachers because.....

 

So a thumb up or a thumb down is more useful than a favorite point?  I would think they'd probably be less useful, particularly the thumb down, because there's no context provided unless they add the information (negative or positive) in the log, which is what is already in play with what we've got now.  Seems to me this is a solution looking for a problem.

 

21 minutes ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

but nothing if the cache is substandard

 

I write as bland a log as possible or as descriptive as possible with all the issues I encountered.  The logs provide so much more information than a simple thumb up or down, assuming a log is written to share your experience, either positive or negative.  If there's something wrong with the cache, then file the NM (or the NA if an unattended NM log has already been filed).  Also, what you do you consider substandard?  I don't like LPC/GRCs but if they're in good shape, they're not substandard; they're just .....well, there.

 

2 hours ago, tbbiker said:

It is not trashing, but constructive criticism which should be elaborated on in the actual log

 

What type of constructive criticism are you going to provide in your log?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, tbbiker said:

You can currently give a cache a favorite point if you really like it, but nothing if the cache is substandard. 

 

I say they should do away with the favorite points and have a thumbs up and a thumbs down button instead. 

This will be a lot more useful to cachers because they then can determine if they want to go to a cache with a lot of thumbs up or thumbs down points attached to it.  Plus, it will motivate CO's to place more quality caches because no one wants a number of thumbs down attached to their cache.  To answer you question:  It is not trashing, but constructive criticism which should be elaborated on in the actual log. 

 

First off, I understand that this is your irk.  :)

 

You can favorite one in ten caches you really liked with the system the way it is. 

We're still using accrued FPs from when they first came out (12/10).  

I feel 1 in 10 is reaching, but we see FPs used for FTF, or because the CO's your friend...  Nothing at all to do with that cache...

Most near me look for easy 1.5-2 caches.  I prefer those well-over 2 in terrain. 

I'd "thumbs down" every nondescript roadside cache ... if I did them.  

Others may look at a rope climb, and thumbs-down when they realize they'll never do them (and didn't read the description).

 - Both "thumbs down/up" would be skewed to people's own likes, not having anything to do with the cache itself.

Hey !  That's just like favorite points.  ;)

 

We try to write a nice log on every cache, whether it's a piecea carp or the best seen.

 We limit "constructive criticism" to any issues in our log, and leave a NM if it needs to go further.

The site has already said they won't be negative to a member.  Why you can ignore a cache, but not it's owner.

Attempting to embarrass the CO into putting out "quality" caches is the reason "thumbs down" will never happen...

 

Link to comment

 

10 minutes ago, on4bam said:
22 minutes ago, TmdAndGG said:

Maybe they're both being sarcastic;)

I've never seen irony or sarcasm on these forums and that irks me.

Maybe you should read the rest of my post.

 

22 minutes ago, TmdAndGG said:

Maybe they're both being sarcastic;)

Anyways, back to irks.

For real now, back to irks.

Edited by TmdAndGG
Link to comment

This may already have been posted, but I can't go thru 72 pages to try and find.  So, I got really irked today when I went to find 2 mystery caches.  Took some work to solve them, got to the corrected coords, and both were micros in freaking huge fir trees!  I found eventually found them, but I despise "fir tree hides".  That's all!  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
36 minutes ago, GrateBear said:

This may already have been posted, but I can't go thru 72 pages to try and find.  So, I got really irked today when I went to find 2 mystery caches.  Took some work to solve them, got to the corrected coords, and both were micros in freaking huge fir trees!  I found eventually found them, but I despise "fir tree hides".  That's all!  

Here (Central Texas) they are "cedar tree hides" but technically speaking they are "juniper tree hides." 

Edited by SamLowrey
Link to comment
47 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Today's irk: cachers who urinate in caches. Yes, it happened to one of mine yesterday :bad:.

That's worse than the used nappy I found spread across a cache.

 

I too was very suspicious of the liquid contents of a cache I once found. I handled that very carefully. I think from memory the log had miraculously managed to stay dry. That cache was under a dry rock overhang, so hard to say otherwise, how that got filled with liquid. Some people have the minds of young children. Likely the 'IQ' too.

Link to comment
41 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I too was very suspicious of the liquid contents of a cache I once found. I handled that very carefully. I think from memory the log had miraculously managed to stay dry. That cache was under a dry rock overhang, so hard to say otherwise, how that got filled with liquid. Some people have the minds of young children. Likely the 'IQ' too.

 

On my one they took everything out of the container before "using" it, leaving the logbook and pencil tucked behind it and perhaps the stash note too although I found that lying on the ground next to the hiding place this morning. It was dry and there'd been rain the night before their find, also it was one I'd checked on just a week ago, so little doubt who was responsible. I disabled the cache and took the container home for a swim in the washing machine, and probably won't put it back out until the culprit's novelty of messing with caches wears off.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

On my one they took everything out of the container before "using" it, leaving the logbook and pencil tucked behind it and perhaps the stash note too although I found that lying on the ground next to the hiding place this morning. It was dry and there'd been rain the night before their find, also it was one I'd checked on just a week ago, so little doubt who was responsible. I disabled the cache and took the container home for a swim in the washing machine, and probably won't put it back out until the culprit's novelty of messing with caches wears off.

Ah yes, I see this cache; GC5H5G2.

I notice your multi has had a recent find too. Have you checked that one?

Link to comment
Just now, Goldenwattle said:

Ah yes, I see this cache; GC5H5G2.

I notice your multi has had a recent find too. Have you checked that one?

 

Yes I did and it was fine, well at least it seemed fine but I didn't actually check for any liquid in the bottom of its long tube and probably had it upright the whole time so wouldn't have noticed. I was mainly checking that they'd signed the log and put it back properly, which they had. I guess I should go over and do another check on it tomorrow.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Today's irk: cachers who urinate in caches. Yes, it happened to one of mine yesterday :bad:.

I wouldn't call people who do that cachers.

 

But yeah, muggles sometimes do that. In our area, the caches stayed disabled for a month or so, and when they came back, the excreting muggle had lost interest.

Link to comment

Did a series today and saw that others were about an hour and a half before us. After logging online, I notice they logged too saying they found all (there were 34) except 1. I looked at their latest founds and saw they logged all 34 as found. I then looked at the listing of one of the caches where they logged a find as "we found them all except one (this was it)".

It (still) irks me that people don't log DNF's .....

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Did a series today and saw that others were about an hour and a half before us. After logging online, I notice they logged too saying they found all (there were 34) except 1. I looked at their latest founds and saw they logged all 34 as found. I then looked at the listing of one of the caches where they logged a find as "we found them all except one (this was it)".

It (still) irks me that people don't log DNF's .....

 

 

If the CO is doing their job, eventually they will catch up on that and delete them. It irks me too that some people won't log DNFs. I been in groups and been the only one to log a DNF. I have on some occasions, listed in my log all the searchers' geo-names who were with me, so if they didn't log their DNF (they didn't), others can see that.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

If the CO is doing their job, eventually they will catch up on that and delete them. It irks me too that some people won't log DNFs. I been in groups and been the only one to log a DNF. I have on some occasions, listed in my log all the searchers' geo-names who were with me, so if they didn't log their DNF (they didn't), others can see that.

 

Yup, I've seen logs like that too. It's always funny to read a group didn't find a cache, one logs a DNF, another one logs a Found it and yet another one logs nothing.

Link to comment
33 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I been in groups and been the only one to log a DNF. I have on some occasions, listed in my log all the searchers' geo-names who were with me, so if they didn't log their DNF (they didn't), others can see that.


I don’t have a problem with that.  A whole bunch of DNFs from a group doesn’t add much to a listing.  A single DNF mentioning the difficulty experienced by the whole group gets the message across just as well.

 

And we all know that too many DNFs will trigger those pesky CHS emails!  Just so long as nobody is claiming a find.

 

(Personally, though, I like to log all of my DNFs.)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
9 hours ago, niraD said:

I wouldn't call people who do that cachers.

 

But yeah, muggles sometimes do that. In our area, the caches stayed disabled for a month or so, and when they came back, the excreting muggle had lost interest.

 

I'm pretty sure the culprits were cachers, given where the cache is (it's a T3.5 in steep bushland), the way it's concealed and that only a few daylight hours had elapsed between when they logged their find and when I checked on the cache. And yes, the messages they sent me prior to logging their find, repeatedly asking for hints, gave me grounds for wanting to check on that cache as soon as I could. It's also transpired there's a bit of prior history between one of their group and another local cacher.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I'm pretty sure the culprits were cachers, given where the cache is (it's a T3.5 in steep bushland), the way it's concealed and that only a few daylight hours had elapsed between when they logged their find and when I checked on the cache. And yes, the messages they sent me prior to logging their find, repeatedly asking for hints, gave me grounds for wanting to check on that cache as soon as I could. It's also transpired there's a bit of prior history between one of their group and another local cacher.

 

This forum definitely needs a "Sad" response... :sad:

Link to comment
13 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

And we all know that too many DNFs will trigger those pesky CHS emails!

Sometimes I would like it to be triggered faster. A string of DNFs on a 1.5D and nothing seems to happen. I think it's fine, and should happen, if a group can't find a cache if everyone logs a DNF. Five DNFs from a group is five individuals who couldn't find the cache, and I don't see that as any different from five lone visits from geocachers who couldn't find the cache. A low difficulty cache with that many DNFs should have a CO visit, and if I were in a group that couldn't find it, I would be tempted to add a NM as well.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
14 hours ago, IceColdUK said:


I don’t have a problem with that.  A whole bunch of DNFs from a group doesn’t add much to a listing.  A single DNF mentioning the difficulty experienced by the whole group gets the message across just as well.

 

And we all know that too many DNFs will trigger those pesky CHS emails!  Just so long as nobody is claiming a find.

 

(Personally, though, I like to log all of my DNFs.)

 

For me, my DNFs are more a record of my caching history than adding something to a listing, so if I can't find a cache I'll log a DNF whether I'm by myself or in a group. Either way, I was still trying to find it but couldn't. I can also imagine a situation where others in the group log a find but I log a DNF, if for some reason I wasn't able to get myself within signing distance of the log. There was one like that where I baulked at crossing some rapids so stayed behind to photograph the other two making the find on the far shore. I came back a few months later when the water was lower to convert that DNF into a find.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Experienced cachers (i.e., I'm not talking about clueless newbies here), who are incredibly sloppy when it comes to properly logging trackables. They have a bunch of trackables (not their own), auto-log a visit on every cache they find, but don't really bother that they actually log a drop when they physically put a trackable into a cache. Results:

- I more than once found a trackable in a cache, only to find out that virtually it was still in the hands of a cacher ("visting" all their finds), who had logged the cache weeks ago (and had neglected to "drop" the trackable)

- One of my own coins was dropped in a cache, together with a note saying that the coin is not actually in that cache, but that it has been dropped some time before, but the cacher cannot remember where.

 

It's bad enough that trackables get lost in muggled caches, stolen by coin thieves, or taken by newbies who don't know the concept. I don't need experienced cachers who add to all this by not properly logging the trackables.

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
44 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Even a newbie should be aware not to hang onto it.

Have you ever gone geocaching with newbies when they find trackables?

 

They don't see the TB tag; they just see the cute toy it's attached to. They don't see the geocoin; they just see a cool medallion. And these were newbies that I had just explained geocaching to (including trackables), just before we left the trailhead. They were all set to trade for the cool trinkets they'd found.

 

This isn't an uncommon thing in my experience. I don't expect newbies to know what to do with trackables.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Yes some people have no conscience. Even a newbie should be aware not to hang onto it.

 

We're not seeing that in any area.   Sometimes things get "fixed" at events, or sending an email.

 - But we still have long-time pm cachers that trade trackables for swag...   

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

When someone logs your cache and writes "This gets a favorite point!" but your cache doesn't get a favorite point.  Let it go?  Send a reminder?

 

Guess I'd ask, "Do you really wanna be that guy ?"    It's a favorite point.  It's not cash, and there's no award...   :)

We keep hard-copy lists.  One is people who ask for FPs.  We won't on any after that, maybe skip their caches too.

 - But when I'm ticked and go basic a while, I'll mention "this gets a favorite", and when pm again will add it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, niraD said:

Have you ever gone geocaching with newbies when they find trackables?

 

They don't see the TB tag; they just see the cute toy it's attached to. They don't see the geocoin; they just see a cool medallion. And these were newbies that I had just explained geocaching to (including trackables), just before we left the trailhead. They were all set to trade for the cool trinkets they'd found.

 

This isn't an uncommon thing in my experience. I don't expect newbies to know what to do with trackables.

I was a newby once. I didn't know any geocachers and went out on my own to find caches without a GPS, but from the first cache I found I knew to take a pen, and the first TB I found I knew to pass it on.  (I think I might have had all of about 30 finds.) I was thrilled when I found my first TB and felt it a responsibly to not lose it and place it in another cache. I found nothing mysterious or difficult to understand what it was. It had a tag which had a number. The caches had numbers too, which does help focus the mind that this tag also has a number and it means something.

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment

Yes, but that was the time you had to read the listing on the website, learn how to use coordinates, have to find out what geocaching was about. These days clicking on a "suggestion" in the appstore will get you started in seconds so you can follow that arrow and find a box of goodies.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Yes, but that was the time you had to read the listing on the website, learn how to use coordinates, have to find out what geocaching was about. These days clicking on a "suggestion" in the appstore will get you started in seconds so you can follow that arrow and find a box of goodies.

Even before Groundspeak's apps, back when I had to hand newbies a preprogrammed GPSr, I still saw plenty of newbies want to trade for trackables. I had explained what trackables are and even passed around examples, but when they found a trinket in a cache, they forgot all that. It was treasure a trade item, and they wanted to trade for it.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...