Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 51
avroair

What Irks you most?

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

That's not my point and isn't the case here.  

Your point seems to be that a cache isn't a cache until published on GC.  The co-ords to a cache can be listed elsewhere - on a different listing service or privately - before GC, but that doesn't make a non-cache.  You're irked because someone signed before you, that happens.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, The Jester said:

Your point seems to be that a cache isn't a cache until published on GC.  The co-ords to a cache can be listed elsewhere - on a different listing service or privately - before GC, but that doesn't make a non-cache.  You're irked because someone signed before you, that happens.

Don't tell me what I'm irked about. When did the irk thread become a debate thread to debate ones irks? I'm not irked because someone signed before me and you know it. You're just looking for an argument that isn't there so stop it. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Sigh. Pay attention. It was not an accidental find. 

See the highlighted text.  You are saying only sign after publishing, which makes accidental finds "illegal".  Your statement is broader than your minor little irk, and is untrue.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Sigh. Pay attention. It was not an accidental find. 


The point is that there are any number of reasons (‘legitimate’ or not) for somebody to get their name on a logbook before a cache listing is published on geocaching.com.

 

As has been pointed out, the FTF side-game has no rules.  Sure, people will roll their eyes or become irked by ‘unethical’ behaviour, but nothing can be done about it.  HQ will not get involved.

 

If you feel justified in claiming a FTF after publication, great; put that in your log.  Everybody’s happy.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, The Jester said:

See the highlighted text.  You are saying only sign after publishing, which makes accidental finds "illegal".  Your statement is broader than your minor little irk, and is untrue.

No dear, that's not what I said. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Don't tell me what I'm irked about. When did the irk thread become a debate thread to debate ones irks? I'm not irked because someone signed before me and you know it. You're just looking for an argument that isn't there so stop it. 

I'm looking for an argument?  You've taken a minor incident and spread it across multiple threads and are making very broad claims that don't hold up.  But you won't accept anything/anyone that doesn't agree with you.  So, sure, I'm done.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, IceColdUK said:

If you feel justified in claiming a FTF after publication, great; put that in your log.  Everybody’s happy.

That's exactly what I did. Also, I'm giving my opinions on an irk of mine.  

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, The Jester said:

I'm looking for an argument?  You've taken a minor incident and spread it across multiple threads and are making very broad claims that don't hold up.  But you won't accept anything/anyone that doesn't agree with you.  So, sure, I'm done.

LOL Show me broad "claims" across multiple threads I'm making? I'm asking question and giving my personal opinions on links another person gave me here on this thread. I'm amazed that my irk has irked you to this level. Yes, it's best that you are done. 

Share this post


Link to post

It's so simple, Your name is not the first in the paper log so you're not FTF.

No matter what the reason, someone else logged it first.

 

No prices to be won, so better not worry and carry on.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/23/2013 at 2:42 PM, avroair said:

What would you consider a Deadly Sin in geocaching? What irks you most? I'm compiling a list for an event...

 

A reminder...the topic of this thread: What would you consider a Deadly Sin in geocaching? What irks you most? I'm compiling a list for an event..."

 

My irks stand. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, on4bam said:

It's so simple, Your name is not the first in the paper log so you're not FTF.

No matter what the reason, someone else logged it first.

 

No prices to be won, so better not worry and carry on.

 

Last I looked, I'm still first to find online. I'll keep it. 

Share this post


Link to post

Online?  suppose someone drives an hour, is FTF on paper and drives 1 hour home to log from a computer, someone else arrives at the cache half an hour later and logs from his/her phone... Who's FTF?

No matter what, I log when I get home in the evening so someone logging in the field should be FTF?

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Online?  suppose someone drives an hour, is FTF on paper and drives 1 hour home to log from a computer, someone else arrives at the cache half an hour later and logs from his/her phone... Who's FTF?

No matter what, I log when I get home in the evening so someone logging in the field should be FTF?

 

Who's FTF in that case? Why she/he is. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, HunterandSamuel said:

LOL What if the reviewer didn't publish the cache? A cache (a traditional cache to hide, not at a park event, etc.) isn't considered an official geocaching.com cache until published, right? 

Groundspeak doesn't own geocaching, and a container can be a geocache even if it isn't listed on the geocaching.com site.

 

Around here, there is a series that started life as a private series of caches to celebrate a birthday. About a year later, the owner listed the series on geocaching.com and mentioned that the coveted STF (Second To Find) was available. FTF was taken by the person whose birthday it was, even though none of the caches in the series had been listed on the geocaching.com site at the time.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, niraD said:

Groundspeak doesn't own geocaching, and a container can be a geocache even if it isn't listed on the geocaching.com site.

Yes. But the CO is a new member of geocaching.com and obviously wanted the cache published by them.  Isn't a geocache not officially a geocache (on geocache.com) until published on geocaching.com? 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, niraD said:

Around here, there is a series that started life as a private series of caches to celebrate a birthday. About a year later, the owner listed the series on geocaching.com and mentioned that the coveted STF (Second To Find) was available. FTF was taken by the person whose birthday it was, even though none of the caches in the series had been listed on the geocaching.com site at the time.

Very nice. I found out recently that my brother in-law and his wife geocached before geocaching.com, apps, and GPS  They used a compass. I'll have to ask them how they found caches, who hid them, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Who's FTF in that case? Why she/he is. 

The one who first writes in the paper log of course. Logging online can be out of sync for plenty of reasons.

 

Off topic: In a few year's time, after finding 1000's of caches you might want to re-read this thread .......

 

Finding geocaches before geocaching.com? Coordinates were posted on usenet then.... ;)

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 3

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, on4bam said:

The one who first writes in the paper log of course. Logging online can be out of sync for plenty of reasons.

 

Off topic: In a few year's time, after finding 1000's of caches you might want to re-read this thread .......

 

Finding geocaches before geocaching.com? Coordinates were posted on usenet then.... ;)

No, in the case you mentioned it's he/she that found the cache first. Not in my case. Why would I want to reread this thread after 1000 finds? It's an irk thread, correct? What irks me today might not irk me in 1000 cache finds but that's not the point for an irk thread today, is it? I found many irks on this thread that seem not to be so irkable, silly to say the least,  but I would never debate the person who opened themselves up on a public message to vent about their irks, especially after being invited to vent their irks. To do that is only demeaning their feelings. Also, if you have been reading my irk...it's not about finding geocaches on usenet before being published on geocaching.com. So please, everyone...leave me to my irks. They are not up for debate. 

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Very nice. I found out recently that my brother in-law and his wife geocached before geocaching.com, apps, and GPS  They used a compass. I'll have to ask them how they found caches, who hid them, etc. 

When I started, I found hundreds of geocaches before I had a GPS device. For an explanation of the technique, see the Geocaching.com blog post:

https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2011/12/geocaching-com-presents-geocaching-without-gps/

 

I still visited the coordinates of all the caches I found though... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, niraD said:

When I started, I found hundreds of geocaches before I had a GPS device. For an explanation of the technique, see the Geocaching.com blog post:

https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2011/12/geocaching-com-presents-geocaching-without-gps/

 

I still visited the coordinates of all the caches I found though... ;)

I read about Ed Scott when first joining geocaching.com! He is so admirable, so amazing.  Love this comment of his:  “In the beginning I preferred to do it this way. Then after that it became, well, people expect me not to have a GPS. So that’s what I’ll keep on doing.” 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Another irk. Geocaching is also based on a honor system. Is it honorable to declare a FTF on a cache before it's published or even submitted for publication? Recently I deleted a log on a cache because fellow cachers here felt it was a "throwdown", something I never heard of before. But nowhere is it mentioned that a "throwdown" is against geocaching.com rules. It's discouraged but not an offense. But here I'm finding that signing a log in a cache before it's even published or submitted for publication is fine and a FTF claim is okay. Sure there aren't "stats" for FTFs but that doesn't justify what is the right thing to do...sign a log when a cache is published and not before.   

Sure it's considered by some that claiming a FTF before the cache is published is "only" a "side game". If that's the case...then many of the  complaints about unethical behavior can also be considered just a "side game" and shouldn't get people uptight about. 

 

And, you're creating your own side game!  Requiring a cache to be published before the find.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

 

And, you're creating your own side game!  Requiring a cache to be published before the find.

Not at all. 

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, that's it. I'm taking back my throwdown. My signature is already on the cache log. You have convinced me that unethical finds are okay. I'm now a miserable unethical geocacher who will not play by "ethical rules" no more but ...will not violate geocaching.com rules. Breaking the chains of this opinionated forum. Freedom! 

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Not at all. 

 

You have yet to show a rule that the cache must be published before it can be found!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

 

You have yet to show a rule that the cache must be published before it can be found!

I didn't say there was a rule. 

Share this post


Link to post

Something that has irked me lately, until I figured out what it was, is when I go back to Forums Home page, after reading all the topics, it's showing that there is still an unread topic even though none is/are showing unread on the page. I think what is happening is a that a thread gets moved to another forum before I've read it. I then have to click on the unread icon to clear it. Is this a glitch?

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, colleda said:

Something that has irked me lately, until I figured out what it was, is when I go back to Forums Home page, after reading all the topics, it's showing that there is still an unread topic even though none is/are showing unread on the page. I think what is happening is a that a thread gets moved to another forum before I've read it. I then have to click on the unread icon to clear it. Is this a glitch?


Had to laugh... I went straight from here, via NEXT UNREAD TOPIC to the message:

 

Sorry, there is a problem

There are no unread content items.

 

... which happens whenever a thread is moved to another forum.  Mark forum as read! 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/4/2020 at 4:19 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

I didn't say there was a rule. 

As others have stated, FTF is a simple thing to understand.  The first signature on the log is the first person to find the cache.  Whether they found and signed a year before, the day of, or an hour or week after the listing being published on this website.  If I arrive at a newly listed cache and there is a signature on the log, there is zero logical way that I can claim to have been the first to find it. That signature that was on the log precludes me being the first.

 

If I am scouting a location to place a cache, and stumble across a container and sign the blank logbook, I am the FTF - whether that cache is ever listed on this website or another one. (Yes, there are/were others and I have FTF on three different listing sites.)  There are a couple caches that I sound and was the first to sign that have yet to be listed on this site (or any other of which I'm aware). I may be the OTF (Only to find) on those.

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, K13 said:

As others have stated, FTF is a simple thing to understand.  The first signature on the log is the first person to find the cache.  Whether they found and signed a year before, the day of, or an hour or week after the listing being published on this website.  If I arrive at a newly listed cache and there is a signature on the log, there is zero logical way that I can claim to have been the first to find it. That signature that was on the log precludes me being the first.

 

If I am scouting a location to place a cache, and stumble across a container and sign the blank logbook, I am the FTF - whether that cache is ever listed on this website or another one. (Yes, there are/were others and I have FTF on three different listing sites.)  There are a couple caches that I sound and was the first to sign that have yet to be listed on this site (or any other of which I'm aware). I may be the OTF (Only to find) on those.

 

Excellent! Now the stats hounds can create new drama over another number, OTF! :P:P

Edited by 31BMSG

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, 31BMSG said:

Excellent! Now the stats hounds can create new drama over another number, OTF! :P:P

 

Okay, now let's discuss the concept of "Co-OTF".

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post

My newest irk: Someone makes a point and their own statements prove the opposite of what they claim.

 

Another new irk: I have maxed out the number of reactions (up votes, etc.) to posts for a day. I wonder when the limit was put in place, and what is the number?

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, K13 said:

Another new irk: I have maxed out the number of reactions (up votes, etc.) to posts for a day.

BTDTGTTS

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, niraD said:

BTDTGTTS

An irk is carp like this.  So meaningful and helpful - NOT.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

Okay, now let's discuss the concept of "Co-OTF".

Please let's not :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

Nothing irks me like a badly maintained cache with an active CO. The old ones where the CO's long gone - that's not so bad, I've occasionally given them a clean out, added new paper etc. But when there's a cache disabled by the reviewer and the CO writes "we hope to put out a new container in April" and / or they are actively putting out new caches without maintaining their missing ones... it's an irk.

The only effect it has on me is when there's an area I want to visit and find (OK - try to find) all the caches but there are one or two caches which are in this "we'll put out a new container when it's a bit warmer" type CO notes. Probably my fault for being completist and wanting to get all the caches... and of course there are always other places to visit - but some people should just not become COs in the first place.

(The only 2 bits of maintenance I need to do on mine at the moment are down to "over-maintenance" - I've put out a new container after some DNFs, vegetation has died back and guess what, there's the original container. So I have these 2 places where there are 2 containers. I'll go out and tidy them up. In April.)

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, K13 said:

As others have stated, FTF is a simple thing to understand.  The first signature on the log is the first person to find the cache.  Whether they found and signed a year before, the day of, or an hour or week after the listing being published on this website.

 

Depends on the situation as some have explained on this thread. In my case I'm the FTF although there are signatures before me, as I have explained over and over. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

Depends on the situation as some have explained on this thread. In my case I'm the FTF although there are signatures before me, as I have explained over and over. 

You're not. Others signed the log before you, as was explained over and over.

Suppose the cache was a cake, the signatures before you have eaten the cake, would you still claim to have eaten the cake? ;)

 

  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, on4bam said:

You're not. Others signed the log before you, as was explained over and over.

Suppose the cache was a cake, the signatures before you have eaten the cake, would you still claim to have eaten the cake? ;)

 

 

I most certainly am FTF. 

PS. Food caches are against guidelines. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I most certainly am FTF. 

PS. Food caches are against guidelines. 

 

Some people still think the Earth is flat.

PS. You understand "suppose" is meant to make the example  more clear.

 

Keep on believing you're FTF, it doesn't affect me and others will also have their opinion on it. As long as you're happy you can "believe" what you want. :ph34r:

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Keep on believing you're FTF, it doesn't affect me and others will also have their opinion on it

1 minute ago, on4bam said:

PS. You understand "suppose" is meant to make the example  more clear.

 

Sure but it didn't. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Keep on believing you're FTF, it doesn't affect me

 

 

Then stop bringing it up. It's an old horse. PS. I don't "believe" that I am FTF. I know I am FTF. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Sure but it didn't.

 

 

If someone hides a cake (cache) and the first finder can eat it (log on paper), do you think anything would have been left when you got to the the hidingplace? If you do, claim FTF, if there are just crumbs, you're not.

 

 

Edited by on4bam
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, on4bam said:

 

If someone hides a cake (cache) and the first finder can eat it (log on paper), do you think anything would have been left when you got to the the hidingplace?

 

 

Still didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post

An FTF definitional "irk" has been noted.  TIme to move on to other irks.  Thanks.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

16 minutes ago, Keystone said:

An FTF definitional "irk" has been noted.  TIme to move on to other irks.  Thanks.

 

My newest irk.  We have a Halloween cauldron cache full of worms. You have to search deep to find the log. The worms replaced the black water beads with scary bugs, etc for just the winter months because the beads were freezing in the cold.  Anyway, cachers are taking the worms thinking they are swag. lol  I've even found one in another cache of ours (we check up on our caches weekly). But I can understand why this is happening, the worms are really cool and realistic looking and kids probably love them. I have another huge bag of them so just a minor irk. 

worms.JPG

Edited by HunterandSamuel

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Oxford Stone said:

effect it has on me is when there's an area I want to visit and find (OK - try to find) all the caches but there are one or two caches which are in this "we'll put out a new container when it's a bit warmer" type CO notes.

 

Similar for me is when there's an area I want to visit and find (OK - try to find) one or two caches... but all of the caches are abandoned caches that have last logs (often months of last logs) that say: "found the lid", or "soaked, unsignable", or "since the cache hasn't been found in months, I left a [micro pill bottle throwdown] cache [even though the cache was previously a small peanut butter jar] [so I can claim a find]. Thank you [app inserted: cache owner]."

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Agreed, LOne.r - sometimes I feel I'm the only person round here hitting Needs Archived, while some caches in dreadful condition / obviously missing get tolerated...

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, The Jester said:
12 hours ago, niraD said:

BTDTGTTS

An irk is carp like this.  So meaningful and helpful - NOT.

BTDTGTTS ;)

Share this post


Link to post

System is you can decide if you are FTF, in the case of Project GC by adding {FTF} to your log.

 

There is no computer awarded FTF.

 

AFAIK COs can't delete your log simply because you put {FTF} in it, as you've found the cache.

 

So put FTF if you care about it and think you are FTF, no matter whether there are already signatures on the paper log or other claims. If there are no rules, you decide the rules. If you cheat your own rules, then you're bloody stupid.

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 51

×
×
  • Create New...