Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 44
avroair

What Irks you most?

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Are you suggesting people should go find lots of caches they don't like or normally won't do just to get FP's? I'd rather do nice caches without having FP's to give out than go on a "run of the mill" hunt just to get FP's.

Not at all.

 

I'm suggesting that if someone did find hundreds of fungible film canisters, then it wouldn't be surprising for them to have dozens of unspent FP.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Got another irk yesterday.

I normally read logs before setting out but for yesterday's outing we had set a "main goal" and wanted to pick up a few caches on the way there. The first cache was a very short multi for which I already answer questions at WP1 to calculate the cache location. We arrived at GZ and found the micro at the bottom of a traffic sign post. It was supposed to be attached to the cap covering the post but it had fallen in. While preparing our "to do" list I skipped reading the logs for that easy cache because GSAK had 4 green (=found it) logs. It wasn't until we saw the micro at the bottom that i read these last logs, all of them stating the micro fell in but they logged a find because the CO allowed them too. No NM or DNF was posted so at first sight nothing seemed to be wrong with the cache. Of course I posted a DNF AND NM.

Why didn't the CO TD this cache.. it's been 2 weeks since the first log that mentioned "after contacting the CO we were allowed to log a find".

 

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, niraD said:

I'm suggesting that if someone did find hundreds of fungible film canisters, then it wouldn't be surprising for them to have dozens of unspent FP.

Yep.

When many of us received a hefty amount of favorite points based on finds since starting, some already had more than they'd ever use.     ;)

We gave a lot to long-archived caches we've done. Most we know didn't.  They were our favorites.  Still had one heck-of-a-lot left.

We do know a few who hit well-known power trails, with well-over a thousand "finds",  and none of those caches got a FP.

Why would they ?  Mediocre containers placed wherever,  just "for a smiley" and because there's room.

 - Great caches to gather FPs on,  but not worth placing one on.   I feel one-in-twenty is pushing it these days... 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, on4bam said:
9 hours ago, niraD said:

Maybe they spent a weekend on a numbers trail and racked up a hundred FP without spending any.

Are you suggesting people should go find lots of caches they don't like or normally won't do just to get FP's? I'd rather do nice caches without having FP's to give out than go on a "run of the mill" hunt just to get FP's.

Obviously I can't speak for niraD, but I'm going to answer "No", anyway. I thought it was obvious he was saying that once you rule out the 1000 caches on the numbers trail and see that they've only found 30 other caches, then you'd expect only 3 FPs assigned. I'm completely unable to read anything in his post suggesting power trails as a way to get extra FPs. If anything, it's just the oppositeL: he's saying that someone doing a power trail is, statistically speaking, likely to ignore the FPs they get from the numbers run. After all, he's responding to a post complaining about people assigning too few FPs, not a post about people assigning FPs indiscriminately because they have more than they deserve.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

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.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, 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.

 

Is that you, God?

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
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!

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/11/2019 at 5:34 PM, me N u said:

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


Cut and paste log, generated by (maybe) GSAK to include the COs name.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, IceColdUK said:


Cut and paste log, generated by (maybe) GSAK to include the COs name.

 

Templates make logging easier BUT each cache should have a unique log (unless for cut and paste listings :ph34r: )

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

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. 

Edited by L0ne.R
typo
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

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

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
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

 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post

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

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post

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 1

Share this post


Link to post
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 2

Share this post


Link to post
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.....

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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).

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post

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

Share this post


Link to post
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 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, hzoi said:

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

 

No sweat! :)

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Oxford Stone said:

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

 

Looking more closely at that, it's obviously an auto-signature thing they have in place. They've removed it on this occasion. Capital letter after semi-colon, though? Irksome!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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 7

Share this post


Link to post

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 2

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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!

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post

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 3

Share this post


Link to post

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

Share this post


Link to post
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.    :)

 

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 44

×
×
  • Create New...