Jump to content

What Irks you most?


avroair
Followers 50

Recommended Posts

On 10/11/2019 at 11:34 AM, me N u said:

Bumping this thread as we have received this log on an EARTHCACHE - we've added the bold, just love attention to detail.

 

Found itFound it

10/10/2019

What a lovely day in and around Newquay, the weather forecast said it would rain this afternoon, but all we had all day was a bit of light drizzle which did not last long.

We parked up on the road (as it was allowed after 31 sept) and made our way down to the beach. Nice walk over to the cave and in we went. After discussing the questions, taken some photos it was time for us to move out to let others in.

Many thanks me N u for placing and maintaining this cache; We signed the log and replaced as found.

 

The finders knew it was an earthcache as they sent answers to  the logging tasks.


Thankfully they replaced it for others to enjoy!
And you didn't get a NM note!

Win/Win right there!

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Twentse Mug said:

Logging a geocache in the middle of a busy city in front of a shop that sells pens and pencils and claiming "no pen!"

 

Caches can't promote a business. Not putting a pen in a cache can be seen as promoting the penshop, the cache should be archived because it's commercial :D

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

When an owner gets reports that the log is sopping wet and all they do is replace the log. Same leaky container.

 

A month later the reports come in that the log is sopping wet again. 

 

Last month in NZ I was looking at some caches to do - one on our travels had been reported to have a sodden logbook. So a finder logs they've fixed it 'this should keep it going through the summer' - by replacing the ziplock - yep, just putting the wet log inside a nice new, sealed plastic bag..... needless to say it wasn't drying out.....

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
On 11/5/2019 at 11:53 AM, lee737 said:

 

Last month in NZ I was looking at some caches to do - one on our travels had been reported to have a sodden logbook. So a finder logs they've fixed it 'this should keep it going through the summer' - by replacing the ziplock - yep, just putting the wet log inside a nice new, sealed plastic bag..... needless to say it wasn't drying out.....

 

Zip bags are evil.  I hate them.  I have never once found a cache where they kept the log dry.  Usually all they do is keep the log wetter.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, fizzymagic said:

 

Zip bags are evil.  I hate them.  I have never once found a cache where they kept the log dry.  Usually all they do is keep the log wetter.

 

I agree - for the most part.

I use them differently -  I have some small, heavy duty ziplocks I bought years back for workshop use - screws etc. I get one that drops neatly into the container (maybe 2x3" size bag), literally lays flat on the bottom of the container so there is no stuffing in needed. Then I custom make a mini logbook to slide into the bag with no force. These bags are 200um thick, so are tough. I now have some caches out there using this system over nearly 4 years, the bags and books are in very good condition. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

Zip bags are evil.  I hate them.  I have never once found a cache where they kept the log dry.  Usually all they do is keep the log wetter.

I've seen zipper bags used effectively to organize the cache contents (e.g., trade items in one bag, log and writing sticks in another, trackables in a third), but the cache itself was weatherproof. The zippers themselves don't really stay weatherproof though, so the cache itself has to do the job (as it should be).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

 

Zip bags are evil.  I hate them.  I have never once found a cache where they kept the log dry.  Usually all they do is keep the log wetter.

I've seen many that have kept the log dry inside a cache that was damp or had a small amount water inside.  I've also seen bags that kept a wet log wet.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, hzoi said:

If you need a zip bag to keep the log dry...perhaps you need a better container...

 

 

Leaky + Leaky = Wet

 

And this is true for the other trend... a log inside a film canister inside a leaky upcycled jar.  I've found a lot of wet logs in those. Surprisingly, sometimes the out container is dry but the log in the film canister is damp/wet/moldy. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

When it takes a CO 2 years to respond to issues with their cache (usually a string of DNFs).

No response. Then the cache finally gets a reviewer temporarily disable. They respond within hours (sometimes minutes) of the TD.  

Edited by L0ne.R
Sentence structure
  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 2
Link to comment
6 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

When it takes a CO 2 years to respond to issues with their cache (usually a string of DNFs). Then the cache finally gets a reviewer temporarily disable. They respond within hours (sometimes minutes) of the TD.  

Yep..... we posted a NA on a cache container we found north of here. For months people had been logging the empty camo/container, and putting their own little log scraps in there, all NM's ignored. Within a day of our NA the CO was out in the open, and unleashed a tirade on the page of what bad sports we were for not fixing their cache.....

  • Surprised 3
Link to comment
8 hours ago, hzoi said:

If you need a zip bag to keep the log dry...perhaps you need a better container...

Where I use ziplocks, they are there, as I described, as a last line of defence. I can only recall one of ours where the outer container leaked (I was trying a new type of container) and the ziplock did protect the logbook. Where possible I like to use a waterproof sub-container to hold the logbook, but sometimes they just won't fit.....

Link to comment
1 minute ago, lee737 said:

Yep..... we posted a NA on a cache container we found north of here. For months people had been logging the empty camo/container, and putting their own little log scraps in there, all NM's ignored. Within a day of our NA the CO was out in the open, and unleashed a tirade on the page of what bad sports we were for not fixing their cache.....

 

That happened to me too, a couple of times. 

I've also had the experience of a public tongue-lashing from the next finders who praise the irresponsible owner and get mad at me for posting an NM and getting the attention of the reviewer (who disabled after an NM--probably because the owner has a reputation for doing nothing). (I suspect they threw down a cache because they insisted the cache was there and in great shape). 

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, lee737 said:

Where I use ziplocks, they are there, as I described, as a last line of defence. I can only recall one of ours where the outer container leaked (I was trying a new type of container) and the ziplock did protect the logbook. Where possible I like to use a waterproof sub-container to hold the logbook, but sometimes they just won't fit.....

 

Double-bagging can sometimes be effective. I have a cache that's actually in a watercourse that only flows in very heavy rain, but when it does the water coming down has a lot of force in it and, in spite of my best efforts, a little does get into the container. I found that with a single bag I'd just end up with a wet log inside a dry cache, but the double-bagging has so far proven effective. As a further precaution, the logbook is also made from waterproof "stone paper" (sold here under the Tradie brand).

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Double-bagging can sometimes be effective. I have a cache that's actually in a watercourse that only flows in very heavy rain, but when it does the water coming down has a lot of force in it and, in spite of my best efforts, a little does get into the container. I found that with a single bag I'd just end up with a wet log inside a dry cache, but the double-bagging has so far proven effective. As a further precaution, the logbook is also made from waterproof "stone paper" (sold here under the Tradie brand).

My son likes to make play logbooks. The last one was made from the 'stone paper'. It went through the wash in his shorts - once dried it was as if nothing had happened to it.....

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
10 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Double-bagging can sometimes be effective. I have a cache that's actually in a watercourse that only flows in very heavy rain, but when it does the water coming down has a lot of force in it and, in spite of my best efforts, a little does get into the container. I found that with a single bag I'd just end up with a wet log inside a dry cache, but the double-bagging has so far proven effective. As a further precaution, the logbook is also made from waterproof "stone paper" (sold here under the Tradie brand).

 

Waterproof paper is the key.  Double-bagging may delay the inevitable, but it places a great deal of responsibility on the finders to close the bags properly, which rarely happens with the small one.  I prefer a waterproof log with no bags at all.

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment

The problem with baggies is that someone folds the seal edge, instantly destroying the its seal - and now they capture water nicely against the log.  Sometimes that someone is the cache owner =:-o

 

In Florida, I'm seeing the standard on paddle caches become a roll of water resistant paper, captured in a slit straw. No baggie.  These sometimes start out with a small pencil. 

 

I just did a 5 year old group like this where about a third of the logs had finally deteriorated.  5 years is pretty good for something that's in a preform, matchsafe or other micro container, wet almost from day one, because the cacher's hands are wet from paddling. 

 

 

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
On 11/8/2019 at 9:30 PM, lee737 said:
On 11/8/2019 at 1:05 PM, hzoi said:

If you need a zip bag to keep the log dry...perhaps you need a better container...

Where I use ziplocks, they are there, as I described, as a last line of defence.

For the record, that was not directed at you, and I have also included bags in my containers just in case. 

 

More of a general statement, so I'll clarify.  If one needs a bag to keep a log dry, and isn't just including one just in case, that's not a container to use.

 

On 11/9/2019 at 8:37 AM, fizzymagic said:

Waterproof paper is the key.

 

I respectfully disagree.  I was out this weekend and came across two magnetic key hides (a notoriously not waterproof container) with just waterproof paper.  My pen started to bleed the moment I put it to paper, and most of the other log entries were unrecognizable blurs.

  • Helpful 4
Link to comment
9 hours ago, hzoi said:

I respectfully disagree.  I was out this weekend and came across two magnetic key hides (a notoriously not waterproof container) with just waterproof paper.  My pen started to bleed the moment I put it to paper, and most of the other log entries were unrecognizable blurs.

Not a solution to the discussion, but you might consider a non-water soluble ink pen.  The ones I use (a Zebra F-301 fine point & a "space" pen) have never had problems with bleeding - even on soaked logs.  I also use a stamp and use a waterproof ink pad so it won't bleed.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 10/11/2019 at 5:34 PM, me N u said:

Bumping this thread as we have received this log on an EARTHCACHE - we've added the bold, just love attention to detail.

 

Found itFound it

10/10/2019

What a lovely day in and around Newquay, the weather forecast said it would rain this afternoon, but all we had all day was a bit of light drizzle which did not last long.

We parked up on the road (as it was allowed after 31 sept) and made our way down to the beach. Nice walk over to the cave and in we went. After discussing the questions, taken some photos it was time for us to move out to let others in.

Many thanks me N u for placing and maintaining this cache; We signed the log and replaced as found.

 

The finders knew it was an earthcache as they sent answers to  the logging tasks.

I tell you what irks me - I STILL haven't found a cache on 31 September [see above]...

  • Funny 3
Link to comment
On 11/9/2019 at 7:26 AM, lee737 said:

Yep..... we posted a NA on a cache container we found north of here. For months people had been logging the empty camo/container, and putting their own little log scraps in there, all NM's ignored. Within a day of our NA the CO was out in the open, and unleashed a tirade on the page of what bad sports we were for not fixing their cache.....

I've had similar from a CO, who had several caches that needed new logs. They said they expected finders to maintain their caches. When I reported that here, I also got lots of criticism from some people here for also not maintaining their cache, by replacing all the missing logs, rather than log NMs. For those that criticised me, I still don't intend to replace a heap of logs on another COs power trails, and I don't expect anyone, or even want them to, to replace full logs on my caches, without checking with me first. Log a NM please and I will fix the problem. I maintain my caches, and don't leave it up to others to do this for me.

Yes, that irked me, both that CO and then some people (not everyone) here saying how they maintain other CO caches and suggesting I should do the same for a CO who couldn't be bothered. It wasn't one cache, it was quite a few in the power trail. It would have used up a lot of logs.

The CO did end up replacing the full logs, after the reviewer came in and said there was nothing "malicious", as the CO called it, in logged a NM.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment

I'm sure this has been mentioned somewhere on this post, but the thing that has been coming up again and again for me is when a cache is placed in a really mediocre spot, maybe even a poor placement,  (i.e.- thorns, little/no cover, etc) when there are some AMAZING spots in close vicinity to the cache site.  (rural area, no other caches to have to work around).  Like, if the person had just spent 5-10 minutes actually exploring the area, it could be a really great hide, and something to see.  I had one of those today, and I have to admit I wish I could adopt the cache so I could move it 50m and make it a really cool destination with something interesting to see.  Not even a suggestion in the cache listing to explore a nearby trail.....I wonder if they were even aware of it when they placed a very boring roadside cache that is armored by blackberry vines. :rolleyes:

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Forest Forager said:

I'm sure this has been mentioned somewhere on this post, but the thing that has been coming up again and again for me is when a cache is placed in a really mediocre spot, maybe even a poor placement,  (i.e.- thorns, little/no cover, etc) when there are some AMAZING spots in close vicinity to the cache site.  (rural area, no other caches to have to work around).  Like, if the person had just spent 5-10 minutes actually exploring the area, it could be a really great hide, and something to see.  I had one of those today, and I have to admit I wish I could adopt the cache so I could move it 50m and make it a really cool destination with something interesting to see.  Not even a suggestion in the cache listing to explore a nearby trail.....I wonder if they were even aware of it when they placed a very boring roadside cache that is armored by blackberry vines. :rolleyes:

 

I've seen similar things, but sometimes the cache remains in place because it's not located at the remarkable place.

 

I have one in in a forested area in what I thought was pretty cool spot.  The first finder mentioned that 20 feet from there are three different types of tree that look like they're growing from the same trunk.

 

But I haven't moved anything.  I hope it's close enough.  The cache would not remain viable if not well hidden (and easy for finders to re-hide), and the cache saturation of the place limited the options.  And I haven't moved the tree. :cute:

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
41 minutes ago, kunarion said:

 

I've seen similar things, but sometimes the cache remains in place because it's not located at the remarkable place.

 

I have one in in a forested area in what I thought was pretty cool spot.  The first finder mentioned that 20 feet from there are three different types of tree that look like they're growing from the same trunk.

 

But I haven't moved anything.  I hope it's close enough.  The cache would not remain viable if not well hidden (and easy for finders to re-hide), and the cache saturation of the place limited the options.  And I haven't moved the tree. :cute:

 

Yep, I totally get that, and wouldn't be bothered if the cache somehow at least brought you to or through the really cool spot first.  Or mentioned it in the cache listing.  In the few I am thinking of recently, there is no mention of the awesome area, or feature.  I just decided to poke around the general vicinity myself and was like..."WOW. (And why isn't the cache here, instead??)   It has the feel of someone throwing the cache in the air to see where it lands and then taking the coordinates of that, rather than walking around and finding a decent place to hide a cache!

Link to comment
14 hours ago, Forest Forager said:

Yep, I totally get that, and wouldn't be bothered if the cache somehow at least brought you to or through the really cool spot first.  Or mentioned it in the cache listing.  In the few I am thinking of recently, there is no mention of the awesome area, or feature.  I just decided to poke around the general vicinity myself and was like..."WOW. (And why isn't the cache here, instead??)   It has the feel of someone throwing the cache in the air to see where it lands and then taking the coordinates of that, rather than walking around and finding a decent place to hide a cache!

 

Yeah.  I usually pick a recommended area and select the caches in advance, maybe hunting other ones along the way.  It's cool (and pretty rare) for a cache to be in an amazing spot, and cachers often find it as intended, and the container and the area is in excellent condition.  I'm usually happy if the cache is not the exact opposite of a pretty cool cache. :anicute:

 

 

Edited by kunarion
Went to change my name to an unpronounceable character.
Link to comment

Agreeing very much with Forest Forager's point.  Although a bit away from cool feature will extend the life of the cache, mentioning it on the page can get someone to it.

 

Any irk that's come up a bunch lately, cache changes considerably, but rather than archive and start over, or even just edit the page to match, there's some text at the bottom of thelong poory speeled unpucntuated rambling enfless sefl-interested, onlya moma could possibly car and her not much, still going on heare about some trival evant ofchildnernd hood memory and are you still reding this? becus most eveyone slse gave up alrady forusre, alot donot car much about the cache isnow 13paces thataway and a pillbootle in the bushes.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 4
Link to comment

Related to the above...  A cache too close to the cool spot.

 

I was about to re-hide a waterfall cache when muggles showed up, an endless stream it seemed, with new ones showing up to replace others that just left. And they're all standing around that brilliantly chosen hiding spot.

 

(Who's that guy just sitting there, not taking pictures of the waterfall? He seems grumpy about something.)

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 4
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

Related to the above...  A cache too close to the cool spot.

 

I was about to re-hide a waterfall cache when muggles showed up, an endless stream it seemed, with new ones showing up to replace others that just left. And they're all standing around that brilliantly chosen hiding spot.

Yep.    :D

Our favorite hider, known for awesome views, waterfalls, and unique areas,  purposely places caches away from those cool spots.

Sometimes they've used what they wanted you to see as part of a multi, knowing some in-a-hurry will only go to GZ , turn around and head back.

Some have asked "why here?" in logs,  but we've  passed people saying they're headed to that same, cool spot on the way back.    :)

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, colleda said:

At present I'm finding many caches in the Caribbean crammed with full logs and rarely an NM to be seen. There will be a few NMs added when I get home and where I don't have to rely on cafe wifi.

Forgot to to mention, wet and soggy log sheets, missing container caps, ripped or no baggies.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Today I found another cache that a previous finder put candy in.  People, stop putting candy and food in ANY geocache!!!  Nobody eats them (would you?), they attract bugs, and eventually turn into a sugary goo.  This one was already getting sticky, good thing I carry wet wipes in the car, but now I'm going to smell like grape jolly rancher.  Yuck.  That's my rant for the day.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
1 hour ago, hockeydaze said:

Today I found another cache that a previous finder put candy in.  People, stop putting candy and food in ANY geocache!!!  Nobody eats them (would you?), they attract bugs, and eventually turn into a sugary goo.  This one was already getting sticky, good thing I carry wet wipes in the car, but now I'm going to smell like grape jolly rancher.  Yuck.  That's my rant for the day.

They also attract wild dogs, etc that then proceed to chew the cache in an attempt to get to the food. Soap will attract them too.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, hockeydaze said:

Today I found another cache that a previous finder put candy in.  People, stop putting candy and food in ANY geocache!!!  Nobody eats them (would you?), they attract bugs, and eventually turn into a sugary goo.  This one was already getting sticky, good thing I carry wet wipes in the car, but now I'm going to smell like grape jolly rancher.  Yuck.  That's my rant for the day.

Yep.  And most critters will destroy a container to get at it.

We had some that were mangled years ago.  Turns out a cacher placed one pinwheel mint in every cache they found.  Sheesh...

Have to admit though, I'd be torn about pitching a grape jolly rancher.  :D

 

Link to comment

WIYM?

The sense of being lied to. Long ago I gave up caring about how people found a final cache of a puzzle or multi (coordinate sharing is quite prolific, it's futile battling it or wasting energy caring about it much any more, and it just causes drama when you start playing blame games, plus I've been known to take note of finals, though being sure to note the ones I do), but what irks the most is the feeling that people are actually okay with being dishonest to you. Especially when you try to be friendly and avoid confrontations and drama when possible, yet geo-friends in the community don't feel they can just be open and honest.

 

For example, if I put out a hard puzzle, and 1 person solves and 30 people find, I'm not going to make a fuss over that any more. It happens. It will happen. And there's no way to avoid it. But man, if I like to know things about my cache or puzzle, like how hard it was to solve or retrieve or whether they just got coordinates from someone, and you can't seem to get a straight answer, that is what irks me. :(

 

ETA: Or one better - when people attempt to justify dishonesty, or make you feel as if it's your problem for feeling offended (thankfully this hasn't happened recently, but it's happened). I mean I can't disagree with justifying the finding of a cache without solving a puzzle or completing a multi - that's allowable, it's not against the rules - it's just risky for how it might affect the cache owner's response; but justifying dishonesty... irk!

Edited by thebruce0
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

For example, if I put out a hard puzzle, and 1 person solves and 30 people find, I'm not going to make a fuss over that any more. It happens. It will happen. And there's no way to avoid it. But man, if I like to know things about my cache or puzzle, like how hard it was to solve or retrieve or whether they just got coordinates from someone, and you can't seem to get a straight answer, that is what irks me. :(

 

Ride-along-logs are irritating, usually without meaningful content and generally downvotes FPs, but it is not against the rules so we have to live with it. With some luck, there are enough serious finds with nice logs to compensate.

 

More generally speaking, long copy-paste logs (which often is a sign of ride-along) are a nuisance. They are not only without any interesting information, they are often also so long that you must waste time and energy browsing them to see if there is anything in there that you need to know! I can take one once in a while, but I was never so close to quit the whole hobby when I got a veritable shower of long copy-paste logs on a number of my favourite caches. But again, just a few of them, or TFTCs, are not much of a problem, I can ignore them and remember the good ones.

 

Wet logs, however, rarely bothers me much. With a good enough pen, I can write on anything. :)

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

ETA: Or one better - when people attempt to justify dishonesty, or make you feel as if it's your problem for feeling offended (thankfully this hasn't happened recently, but it's happened).

 

Boy oh boy, I totally relate. And I have been made to feel it was my problem, via a public log from the group leader, after I retrieved and archived it.

 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
On 11/25/2019 at 8:56 PM, L0ne.R said:

I chose not to live with it. I don't hide caches anymore.

 

I may quote you on that. You are not the first I heard with that view, and it is IMHO one the most justifyable reasons. Sometimes I feel that my efforts don't count, cachers skip over the fun part. If that is too common in an area, I see no point in placing there. I have three rather distinct areas that I place in, and there is definitely a difference. So I put most efforts where it is appreciated. But all three produce good logs often enough.

 

If you had no such area to work with, I fully understand you. I suppose I am lucky.

Edited by Ragnemalm
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

Sometimes I feel that my efforts don't count, cachers skip over the fun part.

 

This is perhaps where we disagree, as I don't think it's the CO's perogative to decide which part of a cache is "the fun part". Cachers all have different tastes - some love puzzle-solving, some love long hikes, kayak paddles or mountain climbs, some love big containers full of swag and some just want a quick P&G so they can dash off to the next one. The best we can do I think is try to combine multiple facets into a cache, like a solve-at-home puzzle that leads to a hike through the forest and finally to a big themed container in a scenic spot. If some cachers want to skip the bits they don't like, that's entirely their choice.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
On 11/26/2019 at 6:24 AM, Ragnemalm said:

Ride-along-logs are irritating

In groups usually people go with their strengths. In our small group, although we all solve some puzzles, one person solves many more than the rest, as he loves doing this and is better at it. Another is likely to be the tree climber, I am likely to be the swimmer. Even if we don't contribute in one area, we will in another. I have never worried that the others got to sign the log when I was the only wet person. Sometimes too it's not practicable for all to get the cache. If everyone had to climb the tree it would be a slow caching day, or the canoe might only fit two people and then when the destination is reached, only one might get out to make the actual find, while the other person stays with the canoe to stop it floating away.

Link to comment

I was out caching in Newcastle today (about 100km north of here but a fairly pleasant train ride) and struck an irk. A nano with the Steath Required attribute and warnings in the description about hordes of muggles frequenting GZ, where there's an extraordinary number of places a nano could lurk, but no hint. Really, if you don't want me standing around for half an hour poking in every nook and cranny and drawing everyone's attention, at least give me something to help narrow down the search! I did eventually find it, and BTW had no trouble getting the scroll back in the lid even without a log roller TOTT :).

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 2
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...