Jump to content

What Irks you most?


avroair
Followers 50

Recommended Posts

Unnecessarily rude comments logged on a cache. I recently received a comment "I am not thrilled with the cache location (too obvious) or the cache itself (just a baggie with a log and swag)". I can't help it that my cache was robbed recently and if you don't like my cache, then just don't find it! There is no reason to be rude and put down another person's cache, just because you feel superior!

Link to comment

Unnecessarily rude comments logged on a cache. I recently received a comment "I am not thrilled with the cache location (too obvious) or the cache itself (just a baggie with a log and swag)". I can't help it that my cache was robbed recently and if you don't like my cache, then just don't find it! There is no reason to be rude and put down another person's cache, just because you feel superior!

Maybe he was intent on finding the micro matchstick container that's still listed on the cache page.

- Instead he found a baggie with swag.

Probably much more obvious than a MSH, don't you think?

It became baggies (as per logs) in May, not "recently" as you suggest.

One "rude" log out of over twenty and no NMs? That's pretty good, really...

Link to comment

Throw-downs! Those erk me the most. If you didn't find it, replacing it with your own isn't getting the smiley. You failed to find, therefore it isn't a find. If you want to help then ask the cache owner first.

 

I am OK with extra paper for logging. But personally my caches are new, and not an issue.

Link to comment

Throw-downs! Those erk me the most. If you didn't find it, replacing it with your own isn't getting the smiley. You failed to find, therefore it isn't a find. If you want to help then ask the cache owner first.

 

I am OK with extra paper for logging. But personally my caches are new, and not an issue.

 

Yeah, this irks me too. I recently saw a log where someone looking for a D/T 4/4 couldn't find it and said they were replacing the container because it's obviously not there and they need a smilie for my "Fizzy" grid. For real? Some egos are just too big for this game!

Link to comment

Throw-downs! Those erk me the most. If you didn't find it, replacing it with your own isn't getting the smiley. You failed to find, therefore it isn't a find. If you want to help then ask the cache owner first.

 

I am OK with extra paper for logging. But personally my caches are new, and not an issue.

 

Yeah, this irks me too. I recently saw a log where someone looking for a D/T 4/4 couldn't find it and said they were replacing the container because it's obviously not there and they need a smilie for my "Fizzy" grid. For real? Some egos are just too big for this game!

The most annoying part is that the next hunters have a cheapened experience. I'm working on some really creative hides now, which I'm sure folks will miss, not find. Then, someone from out of state comes and makes a find of some cheap container and I have to delete their log because they did not find the cache, but they don't really have a chance to return.

Link to comment

Throw-downs! Those erk me the most. If you didn't find it, replacing it with your own isn't getting the smiley. You failed to find, therefore it isn't a find. If you want to help then ask the cache owner first.

 

I am OK with extra paper for logging. But personally my caches are new, and not an issue.

 

Yeah, this irks me too. I recently saw a log where someone looking for a D/T 4/4 couldn't find it and said they were replacing the container because it's obviously not there and they need a smilie for my "Fizzy" grid. For real? Some egos are just too big for this game!

The most annoying part is that the next hunters have a cheapened experience. I'm working on some really creative hides now, which I'm sure folks will miss, not find. Then, someone from out of state comes and makes a find of some cheap container and I have to delete their log because they did not find the cache, but they don't really have a chance to return.

 

This is one of those grey areas. I'm not condoning the throw down at all but I wouldn't be so quick about deleting a subsequent finders log. Lots of geocachers search for caches without reading the entire description, and there isn't anything in the guidelines which mandates that one must read the cache listing before finding the cache. I've found 4 star difficulty caches within two minutes upon arrival at GZ a few times. Sometimes you just get lucky. If the subsequent finder didn't know that it was a 4 D cache (and some caches are way overrated) they might not even realize that they found a replacement rather than the original. Since over 10% of my finds are on caches over 1000 miles from home I'm well aware of what it's like to cache from out of state (or country). That's way I always trying to find at least a couple of caches when I visit a new country. Personally, I'd delete the log on the throwdown, and send a PM to the subsequent finder to let them know that they found a throwdown rather than the actual cache and *suggest* they might want to delete their find. If the didn't, I'd let their log stand. I'd know that they didn't find the cache, and *they* would know that they didn't find the cache. If they choose to convince themselves they found it, it doesn't effect me at all.

 

 

Link to comment

Throw-downs! Those erk me the most. If you didn't find it, replacing it with your own isn't getting the smiley. You failed to find, therefore it isn't a find. If you want to help then ask the cache owner first.

 

I am OK with extra paper for logging. But personally my caches are new, and not an issue.

 

Yeah, this irks me too. I recently saw a log where someone looking for a D/T 4/4 couldn't find it and said they were replacing the container because it's obviously not there and they need a smilie for my "Fizzy" grid. For real? Some egos are just too big for this game!

The most annoying part is that the next hunters have a cheapened experience. I'm working on some really creative hides now, which I'm sure folks will miss, not find. Then, someone from out of state comes and makes a find of some cheap container and I have to delete their log because they did not find the cache, but they don't really have a chance to return.

 

This is one of those grey areas. I'm not condoning the throw down at all but I wouldn't be so quick about deleting a subsequent finders log. Lots of geocachers search for caches without reading the entire description, and there isn't anything in the guidelines which mandates that one must read the cache listing before finding the cache. I've found 4 star difficulty caches within two minutes upon arrival at GZ a few times. Sometimes you just get lucky. If the subsequent finder didn't know that it was a 4 D cache (and some caches are way overrated) they might not even realize that they found a replacement rather than the original. Since over 10% of my finds are on caches over 1000 miles from home I'm well aware of what it's like to cache from out of state (or country). That's way I always trying to find at least a couple of caches when I visit a new country. Personally, I'd delete the log on the throwdown, and send a PM to the subsequent finder to let them know that they found a throwdown rather than the actual cache and *suggest* they might want to delete their find. If the didn't, I'd let their log stand. I'd know that they didn't find the cache, and *they* would know that they didn't find the cache. If they choose to convince themselves they found it, it doesn't effect me at all.

 

I would be worried about annoying some fellow cachers, but I'm not worried about breaking any rules by deleting the logs. The rules say they have to sign THE log, not ANY log. By technicality, the throw down is a cache that was placed and violates the proximity rules and therefore is not a valid cache.

Link to comment

I would be worried about annoying some fellow cachers, but I'm not worried about breaking any rules by deleting the logs. The rules say they have to sign THE log, not ANY log. By technicality, the throw down is a cache that was placed and violates the proximity rules and therefore is not a valid cache.

 

Yeah but . . . . really? Deleting the log of someone who's completely innocent in all of this? That seems a bit excessive to me. What difference does it really make if someone, in all innocence, found the wrong container. There are two other guilty parties here, and neither of them are the subsequent finder.

 

Don't take this the wrong way, I don't mean it to be snarky, but it seems to me that in the case of the subsequent loggers the person at fault is you. If someone threw down a log, then it's up to the CO to go out and fix things ASAP. If someone gets to the cache before the CO can fix things, they can hardly be blamed that A. someone threw down, and B. the CO couldn't get out quickly enough to fix things.

 

Just my $.02.

Link to comment

Cache owners who think they are somehow "clever" by hiding a nano on a tank, howitzer or other typical military machinery, labeling it an unknown container and giving it a 5-star rating. Anyone can do such a thing and make it a difficult cache, and it does not take any skill or imagination. What takes skill is hiding a larger container in such a place and make it a challenge to find.

Link to comment

how about caches with bad coordinates and the cache owner refuses to post new coordinates so that others have the correct ones when they run a PQ even when other caches place them in logs these CO still refuse to fix the problem.

 

Or caches with coordinates that are so bad no one can fine the cache. The CO will even post a note that they will be corrected but it never happens.

Link to comment

How about you are looking for a cache, having a problem, then try to look up the hint and the hint says

 

#1) Send me an e-mail for a hint! Really in the field and even if a person can get online in the field they then have to wait for a reply, and some of use do not have a way to get online when in the field!!!!!

 

Then #2) The hint is in the cache page! Really like above not all cachers have a way to get online when in the field

 

I would like to see reviewers refuse to publish caches with hints like these

 

In the past I have posted very nasty logs when I post DNF's of caches like this

Link to comment

How about you are looking for a cache, having a problem, then try to look up the hint and the hint says

 

#1) Send me an e-mail for a hint! Really in the field and even if a person can get online in the field they then have to wait for a reply, and some of use do not have a way to get online when in the field!!!!!

 

Then #2) The hint is in the cache page! Really like above not all cachers have a way to get online when in the field

 

I would like to see reviewers refuse to publish caches with hints like these

 

In the past I have posted very nasty logs when I post DNF's of caches like this

 

This used to bug me,,, when i decyphered in the field using only my tiny brain. Would go through the process one letter at a time only to find that the hint was something like, "cache is too easy to find, no hint needed". I'll admit that this was kinda irksome. But now it's not as much of an issue since just about everyone decyphers electronically.

 

Sure it's goofy to put a non-hint in the hint section but when you think about it, a CO is not required to add a hint in the first place.

Link to comment

how about caches with bad coordinates and the cache owner refuses to post new coordinates so that others have the correct ones when they run a PQ even when other caches place them in logs these CO still refuse to fix the problem.

 

Or caches with coordinates that are so bad no one can fine the cache. The CO will even post a note that they will be corrected but it never happens.

NA. That would light a fire under 'em to correct the coords.

Link to comment

Cachers transfering the responsibility for their planning practices, caching practices, and technology limitations onto cache owners...

 

How about you are looking for a cache, having a problem, then try to look up the hint and the hint says

 

#1) Send me an e-mail for a hint! Really in the field and even if a person can get online in the field they then have to wait for a reply, and some of use do not have a way to get online when in the field!!!!!

 

Then #2) The hint is in the cache page! Really like above not all cachers have a way to get online when in the field

 

I would like to see reviewers refuse to publish caches with hints like these

 

In the past I have posted very nasty logs when I post DNF's of caches like this

Link to comment

Cache owners who think they are somehow "clever" by hiding a nano on a tank, howitzer or other typical military machinery, labeling it an unknown container and giving it a 5-star rating. Anyone can do such a thing and make it a difficult cache, and it does not take any skill or imagination.

This.

 

What takes skill is hiding a larger container in such a place and make it a challenge to find.

And this.

 

A nano on a tank is nothing more than a needle in a haystack hide, though, to be fair, the 'haystack' in this case is a lot kewler than a pile of rocks.

Link to comment

Cachers transfering the responsibility for their planning practices, caching practices, and technology limitations onto cache owners...

 

How about you are looking for a cache, having a problem, then try to look up the hint and the hint says

 

#1) Send me an e-mail for a hint! Really in the field and even if a person can get online in the field they then have to wait for a reply, and some of use do not have a way to get online when in the field!!!!!

 

Then #2) The hint is in the cache page! Really like above not all cachers have a way to get online when in the field

 

I would like to see reviewers refuse to publish caches with hints like these

 

In the past I have posted very nasty logs when I post DNF's of caches like this

I have no intention to spend 80-100 dollars a month for a smart phone. I do planning before I load a PQ into any of my GPS before I make a run. Unless you have been caching with me you do not have any way to know how much planning I do. Am I going to read 400-500 caches before I go caching for a day, no way. The theme of this thread is what irks people

Link to comment

Throw-downs! Those erk me the most. If you didn't find it, replacing it with your own isn't getting the smiley. You failed to find, therefore it isn't a find. If you want to help then ask the cache owner first.

 

I am OK with extra paper for logging. But personally my caches are new, and not an issue.

 

Yeah, this irks me too. I recently saw a log where someone looking for a D/T 4/4 couldn't find it and said they were replacing the container because it's obviously not there and they need a smilie for my "Fizzy" grid. For real? Some egos are just too big for this game!

The most annoying part is that the next hunters have a cheapened experience. I'm working on some really creative hides now, which I'm sure folks will miss, not find. Then, someone from out of state comes and makes a find of some cheap container and I have to delete their log because they did not find the cache, but they don't really have a chance to return.

 

This is one of those grey areas. I'm not condoning the throw down at all but I wouldn't be so quick about deleting a subsequent finders log. Lots of geocachers search for caches without reading the entire description, and there isn't anything in the guidelines which mandates that one must read the cache listing before finding the cache. I've found 4 star difficulty caches within two minutes upon arrival at GZ a few times. Sometimes you just get lucky. If the subsequent finder didn't know that it was a 4 D cache (and some caches are way overrated) they might not even realize that they found a replacement rather than the original. Since over 10% of my finds are on caches over 1000 miles from home I'm well aware of what it's like to cache from out of state (or country). That's way I always trying to find at least a couple of caches when I visit a new country. Personally, I'd delete the log on the throwdown, and send a PM to the subsequent finder to let them know that they found a throwdown rather than the actual cache and *suggest* they might want to delete their find. If the didn't, I'd let their log stand. I'd know that they didn't find the cache, and *they* would know that they didn't find the cache. If they choose to convince themselves they found it, it doesn't effect me at all.

 

I would be worried about annoying some fellow cachers, but I'm not worried about breaking any rules by deleting the logs. The rules say they have to sign THE log, not ANY log. By technicality, the throw down is a cache that was placed and violates the proximity rules and therefore is not a valid cache.

 

You may want to read this Help Center article: Throwdowns - How to handle them.

Link to comment

Cachers transfering the responsibility for their planning practices, caching practices, and technology limitations onto cache owners...

 

How about you are looking for a cache, having a problem, then try to look up the hint and the hint says

 

#1) Send me an e-mail for a hint! Really in the field and even if a person can get online in the field they then have to wait for a reply, and some of use do not have a way to get online when in the field!!!!!

 

Then #2) The hint is in the cache page! Really like above not all cachers have a way to get online when in the field

 

I would like to see reviewers refuse to publish caches with hints like these

 

In the past I have posted very nasty logs when I post DNF's of caches like this

I have no intention to spend 80-100 dollars a month for a smart phone. I do planning before I load a PQ into any of my GPS before I make a run. Unless you have been caching with me you do not have any way to know how much planning I do. Am I going to read 400-500 caches before I go caching for a day, no way. The theme of this thread is what irks people

 

What irks me is people not reading cache descriptions and chache pages without any description.

Link to comment

I'm annoyed that people still think that taking pictures of private property or persons FROM the street or public property is against the law. Sorry...NO.

 

What does this have to do with Geocaching? Why do you continue to add off topic posts to the topics that you read?

Link to comment

I'm annoyed that people still think that taking pictures of private property or persons FROM the street or public property is against the law. Sorry...NO.

 

What does this have to do with Geocaching? Why do you continue to add off topic posts to the topics that you read?

Nice troll post.

 

Says the guy who submitted a completely off-topic post...

Link to comment

What irks me is the fact that geocachers are are so easily irked by... no.... wait.. that is about people, not geocaching... Nevermind.

But geocaching doesn't exist about without people.

 

BTW....my post above IS referring to an experience WHILE geocaching.....geniuses!

 

It appears at least one genius has a faulty irony detector.

 

==============================================================

 

Regardless, I need to exit this thread posthaste before acquiring a time out. The negative tone of the theme of this thread unfortunately encourages vitriol.

Link to comment

Ooh, ooh, I've got a good one.

 

Cut and paste logs. :rolleyes:

 

I hit the road at 4 am and found 5000 caches before dinner. I'm sure your cache was lovely, but I can't remember a thing about it. Plus it will likely be muggled soon because I didn't bother rehiding it properly as I was in such a rush. Also, I don't know a nano from an ammo can so I'm writing you this cut and paste log. p.s. Please hide more smilies caches.

 

+1

Especially a ridiculously long rambling log that shows the html code. Cut and pasted over and over again.

Link to comment

My list generally involves puzzle caches:

 

People with no spatial reasoning or math skills who put out impossible puzzles that only make sense in their minds. For example, one cache owner I know, who has 10,000+ finds, tried to do a letterbox. No kidding, the first clue: At posted coordinates, look for the cross and project 100 feet to the west. Well, the starting point was in a cemetery. Do you know how many crosses are on head stones and statues in a cemetery? It was like saying go to Christmas tree lot and look for a fir.

 

Caches with a high difficulty rating that are obviously placed just for the amusement of close friends. The hint is usually something like, my (cache owner) middle name. Well, unless I know you really personally, I only know your caching name.

 

But my #1 rant -- cachers who complain about the lack of quality, interesting caches who have never placed a cache themselves! Thehy like to b*itch about others, but never placed something themselves. I have only placed 8 caches, a series of caches, but the planning, location scouting, want to have a variety of caches (multi, puzzle, etc.), and write ups, and container acquisition/prep took 10x the amount of time than I thought they would.

Edited by MIGolfer
Link to comment

I don't understand why, people raid the cache and take everything while leaving nothing, I only went the first time today had to hike to the top of a mtn haha but found it and there was a little water inside and two hair bows, a army figure and luckily a geo coin from the last person to visit, I took the army figure and my sister got the coin,left some las vegas dice,and a hackee sack so there would be something cool for the next person but we dried it out, put the spare pencils and log book in a baggie and the swag in a bag, like the thrill of the hunt , and a little swag to remember it is what makes it fun. Its not that hard to do a little up keep ,and make sure you leave something cool, not a old wet coupon to bush gardens theme park that mcdonalds gives away for free each year lol

Link to comment

I don't understand why, people raid the cache and take everything while leaving nothing, I only went the first time today had to hike to the top of a mtn haha but found it and there was a little water inside and two hair bows, a army figure and luckily a geo coin from the last person to visit, I took the army figure and my sister got the coin,left some las vegas dice,and a hackee sack so there would be something cool for the next person but we dried it out, put the spare pencils and log book in a baggie and the swag in a bag, like the thrill of the hunt , and a little swag to remember it is what makes it fun. Its not that hard to do a little up keep ,and make sure you leave something cool, not a old wet coupon to bush gardens theme park that mcdonalds gives away for free each year lol

 

Look to the left of this post at my avatar. (Asher the cat has gained a few pounds since I took that photo).

 

Read the tag, "The view is the treasure". If you are climbing a mountain expecting to strike gold, you are probably going to be disappointed. As long as you take the time to check out that view, you will be rewarded.

Link to comment

Ooh... Roman reminded me.

Creating an awesome puzzle, with a final which is a crappy container in a crappy location. :blink:

Not really a deadly sin, but certainly a let down. <_<

 

I totally agree with that. I did a hard puzzle and it took me a week to get it right and then when I drove 20 more miles to find the thing it was a film canister by a stop sign. :mad:

Link to comment

Ooh... Roman reminded me.

Creating an awesome puzzle, with a final which is a crappy container in a crappy location. :blink:

Not really a deadly sin, but certainly a let down. <_<

 

I totally agree with that. I did a hard puzzle and it took me a week to get it right and then when I drove 20 more miles to find the thing it was a film canister by a stop sign. :mad:

 

Yep, a let down. I generally won't work on a puzzle if it's a micro container. I'll sometimes do the puzzle then not bother to search for the cache, if the google satellite/street views for the final coordinates are unfavourable.

It's interesting that puzzle owners have said (in the forums) they are doing the caching community a service by planting in a parking lot. They are leaving the good spots for other cache types and not taking up a nice location with a cache that fewer people will visit. Seems to be a puzzle thing. I haven't experienced or read the same sentiment coming from multicache owners. Their caches get far fewer visits then traditionals.

Link to comment

Although reviewers do a great job in getting peoples caches out there, do you not think that if you are putting out a cache and it is not accepted due to the fact that it is too close to the final destination of a puzzle cache that the traditional cache should be really allowed to stand at its location.

 

I am not really one for puzzle caches, and people that place puzzles there final destination can be some distance away from where the ? that is located on the maps and if you are planting a tradtional cache you have know idea where that final destination could be. I reccently went out with a friend who had solved the puzzles and there final placings were some 2 miles away from ? on the map, so unfair on people who may have wanted to hide a cache in that location.

 

Maybe puzzle caches there final destination should be within 500ft of the ? so at least we know roughly what area it could be.

Link to comment

What irks me is the fact that geocachers are are so easily irked by... no.... wait.. that is about people, not geocaching... Nevermind.

But geocaching doesn't exist about without people.

 

BTW....my post above IS referring to an experience WHILE geocaching.....geniuses!

 

It appears at least one genius has a faulty irony detector.

 

==============================================================

 

Regardless, I need to exit this thread posthaste before acquiring a time out. The negative tone of the theme of this thread unfortunately encourages vitriol.

There might be a valid on-topic caching-related gripe here. Many people, myself included in my recent finds, take (non-spoiler) photos while caching and post these to the "found" post. It better shows my experience of the search and find, & gives others some idea of what the area is like.

 

The poster says he's had negative reaction to photo-taking while caching. Taking him at his word, that's an interesting experience and irksome. Some muggles don't want photos taken of them or their property, apparently, & being aware of that is better than pressing the issue because, yes, it is legal to take the photos.

Link to comment

Ooh... Roman reminded me.

Creating an awesome puzzle, with a final which is a crappy container in a crappy location. :blink:

Not really a deadly sin, but certainly a let down. <_<

 

I totally agree with that. I did a hard puzzle and it took me a week to get it right and then when I drove 20 more miles to find the thing it was a film canister by a stop sign. :mad:

 

Yep, a let down. I generally won't work on a puzzle if it's a micro container. I'll sometimes do the puzzle then not bother to search for the cache, if the google satellite/street views for the final coordinates are unfavourable.

It's interesting that puzzle owners have said (in the forums) they are doing the caching community a service by planting in a parking lot. They are leaving the good spots for other cache types and not taking up a nice location with a cache that fewer people will visit. Seems to be a puzzle thing. I haven't experienced or read the same sentiment coming from multicache owners. Their caches get far fewer visits then traditionals.

Personally, I think they are just being lazy...

Link to comment

Folks who yell out "found it" when others are looking and want to EARN the find themselves...and started the search first...and alone.

 

Then...also dislike that when 30+/- people show up with a hunt on, they stand around on the adjacent pathway yet somehow logged a "found it" when I am not sure they event put eyes on it.

Edited by TheWeatherWarrior
Link to comment

Muggles that don't simply damage or remove caches out of ignorance, but actively sabotage them after obviously reading the little note about what geocaching is about.I know a charming example of a cache near a playground that a muggle defecated into, and another who filled half the log of a small cache with very badly drawn genitalia.

Link to comment

It is disappointing to me when a cache doesn't come close to realizing the potential of its surroundings.

 

One nearby suburban cache required a short walk along a dry creek, shady and desolate given the nearby population, with plenty of trees around for cover. As I turned a bend in the creek, I noticed an old, steel-grey piece of iron machinery towards the middle of the creek bed. It had a number of gears, levers, and obviously at some point in history was used for something. But for what? A pump? A mill? A discarded piece of shop machinery? Anyone's guess.

 

So where was the cache? In a film canister hanging by a tree on the creek bank. No cache on this crazy piece of equipment, and no mention of it in the description.

 

It's what basically stopped my interest in frequent cache hunting - the proliferation of caches without regard for context or environment. And, if a potentially interesting space in the surrounding city becomes free during the archiving process, it's often the same cachers who jump on it, and another taped-up film canister is hanging there the next day.

Edited by backprop
Link to comment

Its really starting to irk me with some of the requests for changes on the site or the apps. People are getting so lazy they want the site to do all the work for them. Like change the color of the pin on the map if its a DNF. Duhhhh, If it shows on your map, without a smiley, guess what, you haven't found it. Then the ones that want the phones to do this or that so they don't have to push another button or two. Then the ones that want things done automatically so they don't have to do whatever. I am surprised that these people have enough energy to get out of their cars and walk to gz. LOL

 

I would like to see the site change the logging requirements to be at least ten words long. So that it wouldn't accept a log of TFTC or just a smiley face. Wouldn't that be nice? At least people would have to type 10 words to get a smiley. I think any cache is worth 10 words. All I am seeing anymore it seems is the TFTC Ok I feel better now.

Link to comment

Its really starting to irk me with some of the requests for changes on the site or the apps. People are getting so lazy they want the site to do all the work for them. Like change the color of the pin on the map if its a DNF. Duhhhh, If it shows on your map, without a smiley, guess what, you haven't found it. Then the ones that want the phones to do this or that so they don't have to push another button or two. Then the ones that want things done automatically so they don't have to do whatever. I am surprised that these people have enough energy to get out of their cars and walk to gz. LOL

 

I would like to see the site change the logging requirements to be at least ten words long. So that it wouldn't accept a log of TFTC or just a smiley face. Wouldn't that be nice? At least people would have to type 10 words to get a smiley. I think any cache is worth 10 words. All I am seeing anymore it seems is the TFTC Ok I feel better now.

You want people to stop suggesting improvements to the site and/or app, but you want to require people to post 10 word comments? Seriously? If I do a LPC, what do you want me to say?

 

"Wow, that was a really challenging cache. I'm so glad you brought me out here to the middle of a parking lot. Took nothing/left nothing, cause honestly nothing would fit inside your bison tube anyway. Log is full and soaked so I added another piece of paper that will become wet. I'd post a Needs Maintenance log, but I see your cache already has three that you've ignored for 6 months. Replaced under the only obvious spot within 100 meters. Thanks for the cache!"

 

I'm more than happy to write up a few paragraphs on a cache that was fun/challenging/took me to a nice spot. If cache owners want interesting dialogue on their cache pages, try hiding interesting caches!

Link to comment

 

I would like to see the site change the logging requirements to be at least ten words long.

 

I agree short logs are annoying, but they are useful indicators of a bad or thoughtlessly placed cache. When I see a cache with a log full of "TFTC" only logs it I know it's probably going to be forgettable. On the occasion that I find it anyways, I have always found that to be true. A thoughtless cache deserves a thoughtless log and it helps tip off others of the quality so they can avoid it if they want.

Link to comment

If I do a LPC, what do you want me to say?

How about, "Your cache is a testament to mundania. Tha motto of Groundspeak is, 'The Language Of Location'. Can you share with the rest of the world why this boring lamp post, smack dab in the middle of a 500 acre, exhaust laden, sweltering, blacktop hell, was so special that it rated a geocache? Please, for the love of Gaia, if you insist on utterly boring people to tears, (which is certainly your right), could you stick to such hobbies as watching paint dry, or listening to grass grow, and leave the geocache placements to those who are not afraid to walk more than 5' from their air conditioned SUV? Thanks."

Link to comment

I would like to see the site change the logging requirements to be at least ten words long.

 

I agree short logs are annoying, but they are useful indicators of a bad or thoughtlessly placed cache. When I see a cache with a log full of "TFTC" only logs it I know it's probably going to be forgettable. On the occasion that I find it anyways, I have always found that to be true. A thoughtless cache deserves a thoughtless log and it helps tip off others of the quality so they can avoid it if they want.

 

I have of cache that generally gets good logs, and a couple of cachers have said that it was one of the best caches they've ever found. It still gets an occasional TFTC log.

 

I'd contend that the quality of logs on many caches is less about the quality of the cache, and more about the general logging tendencies of the finder. Those that write just a TFTC or a log tend to write TFTC for most of their logs. Those that post a more wordy and/or eloquent log tend to post wordy/eloquent logs for most of their finds.

 

Yes, there are a lot of lame cache, but there are a lot of cache owners that do put a lot of thought and effort into creating a good cache and the "some caches don't deserve more than a TFTC" looks to me like blame shifting to cache owners from the people actually writing the logs.

Edited by NYPaddleCacher
Link to comment

I would like to see the site change the logging requirements to be at least ten words long.

 

I agree short logs are annoying, but they are useful indicators of a bad or thoughtlessly placed cache. When I see a cache with a log full of "TFTC" only logs it I know it's probably going to be forgettable. On the occasion that I find it anyways, I have always found that to be true. A thoughtless cache deserves a thoughtless log and it helps tip off others of the quality so they can avoid it if they want.

 

I have of cache that generally gets good logs, and a couple of cachers have said that it was one of the best caches they've ever found. It still gets an occasional TFTC log.

 

I'd contend that the quality of logs on many caches is less about the quality of the cache, and more about the general logging tendencies of the finder. Those that write just a TFTC or a log tend to write TFTC for most of their logs. Those that post a more wordy and/or eloquent log tend to post wordy/eloquent logs for most of their finds.

 

Yes, there are a lot of lame cache, but there are a lot of cache owners that do put a lot of thought and effort into creating a good cache and the "some caches don't deserve more than a TFTC" looks to me like blame shifting to cache owners from the people actually writing the logs.

 

That's only partly true. I know the type of cachers you are talking about. But when you look at a cache page and every single one of the entries is some variation of "Quick grab. TFTC", you pretty much know its a +1 smilie cache site. There is nothing interesting about it other than to increase numbers. I tend to avoid these types unless I want to keep a streak going in inclement weather or some such excuse. LPCs have their place, but they don't deserve 10 words with every Found It log.

 

Requiring finders to post more than 10 words about their experience is just stupid and would erode participation in the sport.

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 50
×
×
  • Create New...