Jump to content

What Irks you most?


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Thunderbolt and Lightfoot said:

Same competitive nature here. Ive been know to look for over an hr.  Bisons hidden in a dense conglomerate of pine trees, or a large hedgerow comes to mind....Then it will start gnawing the %^$# out of me until I can get back to avenge my apparent self perceived ineptitude. :wacko:

 

Sometimes even on the same day!

The time I am willing to spend can be influenced by the D rating. I would likely not spend more than a few minutes on a 1.5D, unless there were other reasons; such as it being the only cache I had the chance to find in a country. After a few minutes I walk away and log a DNF. I do go caching at times with a friend though who wants to keep searching, as he seems to feel it's a personal affront if he can't find a cache, in a way I don't. I find that frustrating. I want to move on and he's still searching and occasionally he finds it, but many time it still ends up a lost cause and we have wasted time on it.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I see a trend developing here. Once upon a time, if a cache needed some TLC from its owner, someone would log an NM, the CO would thank them for bringing it to their attention and go fix the problem. Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily. So people became scared to log NMs and instead DNF started being used to indicate cache problems, with some tools putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding DNFs in the same way that the red wrench marked caches with outstanding NMs. Then the CHS jumped on the bandwagon too, using some sort of weighted DNF to Find ratio to measure the health of a cache and alert both the CO and the reviewers if it dropped below par.

 

So now that DNF has become the defacto NM, it seems some COs are seeing them as slights on their caches or personal slights and we're being encouraged to only log WNs unless the search at GZ is sufficiently thorough to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the cache is missing. If this trend continues, I expect those tools will start putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding WNs and then what? We'll have suddenly run out of log types for recording anything but a find.

I thank people when they log a NM for letting me know about the problem. With that in mind I still log NMs. If someone gets angry with me for doing that, I see it that they have a problem. That's how I deal with that situation, as I don't want those bullies to stop me from logging future necessary DNFs.

  • Upvote 4
  • Love 1
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I thank people when they log a NM for letting me know about the problem. With that in mind I still log NMs. If someone gets angry with me for doing that, I see it that they have a problem. That's how I deal with that situation, as I don't want those bullies to stop me from logging future necessary DNFs.

 

Thankfully the small caching community here is still very much Olde Worlde where NMs and NAs are used and accepted for their intended purpose and DNFs are freely logged for all manner of unsuccessful hunts with no repercussions other than some gentle ribbing at the next event or group outing. I hope that doesn't change.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I thank people when they log a NM for letting me know about the problem.

I totally agree. We hate it when people don't let us know that our cache broken or possibly missing, because then we won't know that our cache needs TLC and the next finder won't get the full experience.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
15 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily.

This happened from the start.  There was a well known cacher active in the forums back then (and still quoted now) that took a NM as a personal affront - and said so "loudly" in these forums.  But it has gotten worse since then...

Link to comment
14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Thankfully the small caching community here is still very much Olde Worlde where NMs and NAs are used and accepted for their intended purpose and DNFs are freely logged for all manner of unsuccessful hunts with no repercussions other than some gentle ribbing at the next event or group outing. I hope that doesn't change.

NMs and NAs are also still graciously accepted in my much larger, New World caching community. Unfortunately, NAs -- and to a lesser extent, NMs -- are used much less often now that people have learned that reviewers have taken over that responsibility. It irks me that that has changed because of forces from outside the community.

Link to comment
19 hours ago, Thunderbolt and Lightfoot said:

Same competitive nature here. Ive been know to look for over an hr.  Bisons hidden in a dense conglomerate of pine trees, or a large hedgerow comes to mind....Then it will start gnawing the %^$# out of me until I can get back to avenge my apparent self perceived ineptitude. :wacko:

 

Sometimes even on the same day!

 

Since we can't be in the Olympics, this is the next best thing for people with competitive OCD natures. Geocaching. lol

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
19 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I see a trend developing here. Once upon a time, if a cache needed some TLC from its owner, someone would log an NM, the CO would thank them for bringing it to their attention and go fix the problem. Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily. So people became scared to log NMs and instead DNF started being used to indicate cache problems, with some tools putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding DNFs in the same way that the red wrench marked caches with outstanding NMs. Then the CHS jumped on the bandwagon too, using some sort of weighted DNF to Find ratio to measure the health of a cache and alert both the CO and the reviewers if it dropped below par.

 

So now that DNF has become the defacto NM, it seems some COs are seeing them as slights on their caches or personal slights and we're being encouraged to only log WNs unless the search at GZ is sufficiently thorough to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the cache is missing. If this trend continues, I expect those tools will start putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding WNs and then what? We'll have suddenly run out of log types for recording anything but a find.

 

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

Link to comment
19 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

The time I am willing to spend can be influenced by the D rating. I would likely not spend more than a few minutes on a 1.5D, unless there were other reasons; such as it being the only cache I had the chance to find in a country. After a few minutes I walk away and log a DNF. I do go caching at times with a friend though who wants to keep searching, as he seems to feel it's a personal affront if he can't find a cache, in a way I don't. I find that frustrating. I want to move on and he's still searching and occasionally he finds it, but many time it still ends up a lost cause and we have wasted time on it.

 

I never find geocaching a "waste of time". It joins people together, brings out our competitive side, brings families together, and gets us outdoors! 

Link to comment

My irk is people thinking that geocaching is made for adult fun only.   I have many families with children looking for our caches. It delights me to no end when they find them and log their experiences. To me, that's what geocaching is all about...bringing families together with their children. Finding that one sport to connect with the younger generation. I see them on the bike path searching for our caches, no feeling like it in the world...families doing an activity together...and we helped accomplished that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by HunterandSamuel
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I have many families with children looking for our caches. It delights me to no end when they find them and log their experiences. To me, that's what geocaching is all about...bringing families together with their children. Finding that one sport to connect with the younger generation. I see them on the bike path searching for our caches, no feeling like it in the world...families doing an activity together...and we helped accomplished that.

 

How is this a irk?:lostsignal:

Link to comment
2 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

Maybe they approached GZ for a cache described as a quick park bench hide and saw this:

Construction-rental-fences.png

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

 

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

 

On occasion I've logged an NM with a DNF, if there's good reason to believe the cache really is missing (like a string of previous DNFs on what was previously an easy find, a previous finder has looked for it and is now unable to find it, there's only one possible hiding place that matches the description and/or hint, GZ is no longer accessible, or I've made multiple attempts and really think the CO should check on it). One of the canned NM messages on the new logging page says "The cache might be missing" and the only scenario where that might be used is if the cache can't be found. Note the word might in that NM, it doesn't mean it must be missing, just that there's sufficient grounds to warrant a check by the CO.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

NM is the way to let the CO know there is a problem and I am grateful for thoughtful people who log a NM on any cache of mine that needs one, although I do read logs and it rarely gets to that situation. It's responsible and thoughtful of them to take the time to do this.

Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it? There are very obvious reasons for that. A string of DNFs on a 1.5D cache for instance. If it's a person who rates all their caches 1.5/2D (I have come upon several who do this) and the cache has the DNFs because it's really a 3/4D, that's tough. They should rate their cache correctly. I place NM after a string of DNFs based on the given rating. For example, I mightn't (very unlikely to) on a 4D, but I would on a 1.5D. The mentioned bench is gone; the tree had been chopped down and removed (although I have found more than one cache that was in a now removed tree placed by the workers by the stump), etc. It can often be obvious that the cache is now missing. You can't find a missing cache. Logging a NM lets others know the situation too, as they can't see private messages. The NM is not only for the CO; it's also a courtesy for other people attempting to find the cache. People who don't like NM logs have this very mistaken idea it's an affront to them. It most certainly isn't; it's to let the CO know there is a problem and to nudge them to fix the problem, which in many cases they should have done so long before this, as a string of DNFs and mentions of problems in logs often testifies to.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 3
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Forums are for opinions.  This isn't faceboook or similar, where everyone agrees or else.     :)

I absolutely agree with that.

However I see some seriously snide reply's to some posts. Frequent posters may take it with a grain of salt and even join in with a spirited debate. But to to a newcomer or infrequent visitor to the forums it can be off putting and give a bad impression. Especially to a young person.   

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
2 hours ago, GeocachingGoku said:

Hate it when someone shoots me down on forums. makes me feel useless

 

There is no guarantee that anyone will agree with something you post. This applies to anything someone posts, including myself.

Edited by igator210
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

I injured my back the week travel restrictions were eased. I made the mistake of driving to do maintenance on my furthest from home cache and spent the rest of the next day laid out in pain. I'm irked by age related injuries.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
23 hours ago, GeocachingGoku said:

Hate it when someone shoots me down on forums. makes me feel useless

 

You're clearly enthusiastic about geocaching and want to talk about it.  That's a great thing.

 

However, you're not an expert at this yet.  While it's ok to share your opinions, I think some of your posts come across as the only way to do things, and not all of them have been what I would consider the preferred technique.

 

I've been at this for over 13 years now and am closing in on 10,000 finds.  I think it's fair to say we have a decent amount of experience at this point.  But at the end of the day, I am just one geocacher, and I don't pretend to have all the answers.  I try to share my experience, opinions, recommendations, or my personal approach as only that, and not as the "right answer."  I don't always remember to do it that way, but that's how I try to approach things: rather than telling someone what to do, I post about what I have done, or what I have seen, or what I think, or what I'd recommend.

 

All in all, this forum is pretty well behaved compared to some other corners of the internet.  And if nothing else, we all have at least one thing in common: we are all interested in geocaching.  So don't lose heart.  But for now, perhaps consider sitting back and doing some more reading, to inform your opinions and experience some more, and asking questions instead of answering them.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 4
Link to comment
1 hour ago, hzoi said:

 

My counter-irk is people thinking that all geocaches need to be child friendly.

 

Not all geocaches are right for my six year old daughter.  Heck, not all geocaches are right even for me, and I'm an adult in reasonably good shape.  My knees start to shake a little if I go ten feet up in a tree, and forget about caches that require climbing gear or rappelling gear.  But that's OK.  Whether I'm caching solo or with my family, it's my responsibility to know the limits and decide whether or not it's appropriate to go for a particular cache.  I do not believe it is the responsibility of all cache owners to cater to my needs.

 

+1

You don't need to "find 'm all". I most places there's enough to go around and we just select caches we want to do and ignore the others. In fact, we prefer more "adult" caches (like solve stuff in advance or on route).

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
On 5/19/2020 at 5:04 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

My irk is people thinking that geocaching is made for adult fun only.  

 

I don't know of anyone that thinks that. I have never seen anyone post anything that I would infer that from. Where does that statement even come from? Perhaps you could correct me and direct me there.

 

Everything I see indicates that virtually all geocachers believe that the activity, with its ability to allow you to choose how you participate in it, is something that can be enjoyed by everyone. There are caches that range from wheelchair accessible and easy for children to caches that take skill and training such as scuba diving or climbing cliffs.

 

I cached for many years with 2 young sons and now have a granddaughter to take caching. I have no problem finding child friendly  caches. Also a few years back I was 40 feet up a tree. I love the choices.

 

If you somehow feel that geocaching should ONLY be a kid friendly activity, I feel you are incorrect.

Edited by RocTheCacheBox
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment

When an owner uses a piece of junk as a container. Something that in no way will keep the contents dry. Then throws a paper scroll in a baggie and calls it a cache. Example, an (old broken)  wicker plant basket. 

 

Irk #2 - It has 12% favorite points

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
16 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

When an owner uses a piece of junk as a container. Something that in no way will keep the contents dry. Then throws a paper scroll in a baggie and calls it a cache. Example, an (old broken)  wicker plant basket. 

 

Irk #2 - It has 12% favorite points

 

 

 

 

I understand your first irk but the second has me scratching my head.  Why does someone else's awarding a FP to a particular cache, even if it's a crappy one, irk you?  That's their personal opinion about the cache that they're awarding a FP to, not yours.  In essence, you're judging someone else's judgment values and finding them lacking, based on what YOU think of the cache.  Just because you and I may find nothing redeeming about this particular type of cache doesn't mean that everyone feels the same way about it as we do.

 

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, RocTheCacheBox said:


I don't know of anyone that thinks that. I have never seen anyone post anything that I would infer that from. Where does that statement even come from?

 

I have. Even geocachers thinking they shouldn't have to warn parents that their cache hides are dangerous for children. 

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

So a better way is saying DNF.  

 

No, a DNF isn't a report on the cache, it's an account of an unsuccessful attempt at finding it. An NM is a request for the CO to check on the cache, and one of the reasons for that could be strong evidence that the cache might be missing. Each log type has a specific purpose and trying to blur them all together because some people are afraid of or offended by NM/NA defeats that.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, hzoi said:

My counter-irk is people thinking that all geocaches need to be child friendly.

 

No one said that. I'm shocked by the geocache community here not promoting child friendly caching along with "adults" playing also. I think I included the grown adults. My apologies to the adults who were offended. lol

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 2
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

I have. Even geocachers thinking they shouldn't have to warn parents that their cache hides are dangerous for children. 

 

Huh? How is a CO expected to know the skills, abilities and awareness of surroundings of every potential cacher's children? The best I can do is try to highlight the dangers through attributes (cliffs/falling rocks, dangerous animals, etc.) and in the description, but at the end of the day it's the parents who must decide which caches are suitable for their children and which ones aren't.

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

No, a DNF isn't a report on the cache, it's an account of an unsuccessful attempt at finding it. An NM is a request for the CO to check on the cache, and one of the reasons for that could be strong evidence that the cache might be missing. Each log type has a specific purpose and trying to blur them all together because some people are afraid of or offended by NM/NA defeats that.

 

I think when a cache might possibly be considered missing...a DNF is better than a NM. 

Link to comment
Just now, HunterandSamuel said:

 

I think when a cache might possibly be considered missing...a DNF is better than a NM. 

 

Are you convinced enough that you want the CO to check on it? If so, log an NM; if not, just log a DNF. The reviewers here won't accept an NA unless there's already an outstanding NM, but if no-one ever logs an NM on a missing cache, how is it ever going to be taken out of play?

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Huh? How is a CO expected to know the skills, abilities and awareness of surroundings of every potential cacher's children? The best I can do is try to highlight the dangers through attributes (cliffs/falling rocks, dangerous animals, etc.) and in the description, but at the end of the day it's the parents who must decide which caches are suitable for their children and which ones aren't.

 

 

I was referring to another case here on this forum where a cache hide was near a railroad track but there was no warning to the parent who brought their children there to find the cache. People here  said that it's up to the parents to see that's it's not a safe place. I disagree. It's up to the cache owner hiding a cache in a dangerous place to say it's not child friendly. 

  • Surprised 4
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Are you convinced enough that you want the CO to check on it? If so, log an NM; if not, just log a DNF. The reviewers here won't accept an NA unless there's already an outstanding NM, but if no-one ever logs an NM on a missing cache, how is it ever going to be taken out of play?

 

I think a DNF is enough to convince a cache ower to check on it. 

  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I was referring to another case here on this forum where a cache hide was near a railroad track but there was no warning to the parent who brought their children there to find the cache. People here  said that it's up to the parents to see that's it's not a safe place. I disagree. It's up to the cache owner hiding a cache in a dangerous place to say it's not child friendly. 

 

What do you consider a child? A 3-year-old? A 15-year-old? What's safe for one might be unsafe for the other. Even two kids of the same age can have vastly different abilities to cope with dangers. A 12-year-old with lots of outdoor experience would likely be fine at most of my caches, which are often close to cliff edges and in bushland where snakes are commonplace, but one who's spent those 12 years living in suburbia and playing video games would likely not be. I can point out those things, but I can't decide whether they will be dangerous to your child.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

 

Barefoot, I know you are trying to be the big guy representing all the regulars here and I really like your pictures of your bare feet, but geocaching isn't about just you adults. It's also about bringing families together and children learning about geocaching and the fun this treasure hunting brings. And during this time of the coronavirus and staying at home quarantine, it has become a great activity for families to do together. 

  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

I think a DNF is enough to convince a cache ower to check on it. 

 

Most of the time when I log a DNF, I don't want the CO to check on it, I just want to record my inability to complete the find. My most recent DNFs were:

  • A coastal multi-stage EarthCache (GC8K5D1) where unexpectedly large seas prevented me from reaching several of the waypoints
  • A cache in amongst wetlands mangroves (GC8G5A7) where the swarms of mosquitoes were so thick on the day I attempted it that I had to abandon my search.
  • Three DNFs in a row on a D3.5 cache (GC8J4D2), but I knew it wasn't missing because other people were finding it. On my fourth attempt I found it too.
  • A 2.5/2.5 cache (GC6ZVE8) that I thought was on the other side of a creek that was a bit too slippery and deep for me to try crossing that day. When I went back for another attempt, it turned out my GPSr had been misleading me that day as I was on the right side of the creek after all.
  • A 1/1 traditional in central Sydney (GC8B1QV) that would've been an easy find except there were security guards and hi-viz workers clustered around GZ preparing for a fireworks display.

In none of those would there have been any point in the CO checking on it as there would have been nothing they could do to make the problem go away.

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

Whoosh. Does it matter? Did it go over your head? In this case it was a small child. I think a three year old. Are you satisfied now? 

 

How is the CO supposed to know that someone might bring a 3-year-old with them? Or a 5-year-old? Or a 15-year-old? Or their 85-year-old grandmother for that matter? It's the responsibility of the person visiting the cache to decide for themselves whether it's safe for them and their family because they're the only one who knows what their abilities are.

 

1 hour ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

Barefoot, I know you are trying to be the big guy representing all the regulars here and I really like your pictures of your bare feet, but geocaching isn't about just you adults. It's also about bringing families together and children learning about geocaching and the fun this treasure hunting brings. And during this time of the coronavirus and staying at home quarantine, it has become a great activity for families to do together. 

 

Huh? All I'm saying is that not all caches are family-friendly and there will be some, even many, that are not suitable for 3-year-olds, and it's the parent's responsibilty, not the CO's, to deal with that. The reason I'm piping up here is that most of my own caches are in relatively remote bushland and would be quite dangerous for 3-year-olds to be wandering around unsupervised, but I don't see a need to either archive them because they're not "contributing towards making this a family-friendly game" or put warnings in big letters on them saying DON'T BRING YOUR 3-YEAR-OLD CHILD!

 

If you want to take your 3-year-old along and let them wander around unsupervised, it's up to you to pick those caches where that will be safe. Look at the map, look at the description, look at the attributes. There are plenty of caches that are safe for your children, but there are also plenty of caches that aren't. It's your responsibilty to choose which is which, not the CO's.

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I was referring to another case here on this forum where a cache hide was near a railroad track but there was no warning to the parent who brought their children there to find the cache. People here  said that it's up to the parents to see that's it's not a safe place. I disagree. It's up to the cache owner hiding a cache in a dangerous place to say it's not child friendly. 

 

Look, I'm just trying to understand what the difference is between that cache near a railway line you're complaining about and my Great Train Heist cache which has three virtual waypoints on railway station platforms and a final that's three metres back from the edge of a 20-metre cliff. Am I responsible if someone ignores my "No Kids" and assorted hazard attributes and lets their 3-year-old fall under a train or off the cliff?

Link to comment
On 5/19/2020 at 2:04 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

My irk is people thinking that geocaching is made for adult fun only.

 

Some geocachers do hide their caches for adults, and MOST of the geocachers I know ARE adults, who sometimes bring their kids and grandkids along for some fun hides.  I'm a grandparent who has taken grandkids on FTF hunts and hikes to find caches.  But I look at the area we are headed, read the description, and try to ensure it's a good one for kids to find, like GC89AF4.

 

Some caches are created with kids in mind, but I'd venture to say a majority of caches are not, and are created for the adults to find.  Then again, each locale is different, and some areas may be more "family-friendly" than others.  You need to be at least a teenager to have an account on your own.  And using a GPS/app to find a cache does take some level of maturity to understand.  Puzzles are sometimes complex and not written for children or even teens.  

 

I think it's great that you are making your caches with families in mind.  All you  can do is hope others follow your lead so more family type caches will be available.  In the end, it is up to the parent/grandparent/responsible adult to determine whether a cache or area is going to be family friendly.  Yes, geocaching CAN BE a great family activity, but I don't think it was developed as a family activity; it began as a more solitary, adult hobby.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
47 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

MOST of the geocachers I know ARE adults

I agree. Geocaching is mostly an adult game and when I meet geocachers at events and caches, it's extremely rare to have children present. That's why it irks me those up in the cloud-suggestions for playground caches (which should be banned), " Bring your children along with you." (I always imagine this sweet, naive, off with the fairies voice saying that. It's usually beginners who do.) Those starry eyed parents might be in a world of nappies and toddlers, but that's only a small time in most people's lives, so most geocachers don't have children of a suitable age readily available. I'm sure that many cachers' adult children would blend in just find, if they can make the trip there from whatever part of the world they live in now. I suppose those without children of the suitable age could nab some for their next playground visit (definitely a joke!).

As a female I feel very uncomfortable visiting playgrounds to find a cache ("Mummy, what's she doing there?"), so imagine how much worse this is for males. Males around playgrounds look very suspect. So please, starry-eyed new parents, don't presume most geocachers have children of the right age they can bring to cover their visit to playgrounds and write naive things like, "Bring your children along with you." Those suggestions irk me and many others, especially I imagine, males. Geocachers, from my experience of events and meeting others on the trail, are mostly adults.

  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...