Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 51
avroair

What Irks you most?

Recommended Posts

This thread is for posting summaries of "irks," and for brief reactions to those irks by fellow community members.  The place to hash out interpersonal disputes and communication issues is in private messages.

 

The thread has run for seven years.  Rather than closing it, I will hand out traffic tickets to individuals who don't follow the rules of the road.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Keystone said:

I will hand out traffic tickets to individuals who don't follow the rules of the road.

 

I got a traffic ticket once: "Failure to come to a complete three second stop at a 4-way stop". Rookie rural county cop. Bit of a jerk.

  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, igator210 said:

 

I got a traffic ticket once: "Failure to come to a complete three second stop at a 4-way stop". Rookie rural county cop. Bit of a jerk.

 

3 seconds?  I really didnt know that.  Full stop yes, but not 3 seconds.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, igator210 said:

I got a traffic ticket once:

I got a traffic ticket once too. I was in the left lane near an intersection, pulling into a left-turn-only lane. Traffic waiting for the signal was backed up, and the last car partially blocked the entrance to the left-turn-only lane. I went around the last car, and my left wheels crossed the centerline. I got a ticket for driving in the wrong direction. Technically, part of my vehicle was on the other side of the centerline, traveling the wrong direction. :angry:

 

That irked me, but I tried not to let in show to the officer who pulled me over.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, igator210 said:

 

I got a traffic ticket once: "Failure to come to a complete three second stop at a 4-way stop". Rookie rural county cop. Bit of a jerk.

I'll bet that irked you.:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/16/2020 at 8:25 AM, Keystone said:

This thread is for posting summaries of "irks," and for brief reactions to those irks by fellow community members.  The place to hash out interpersonal disputes and communication issues is in private messages.

 

The thread has run for seven years.  Rather than closing it, I will hand out traffic tickets to individuals who don't follow the rules of the road.

 

 

I agree. Getting back on topic. A recent irk my husband and I  experienced recently. We check up on our caches after several finds. Not to check the log signatures to compare them to the online logs (never ever do we do this)  but to make sure the cache was placed in its original spot and to refill swag. One cache was left in the open, exposed. Some things were scattered about. This was a premium member too. But he/she was a newbie. Do we message them or let it go. We decided to let it go. Who knows, if they do not like being reprimanded, what they will do to other caches. 

  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I agree. Getting back on topic. A recent irk my husband and I  experienced recently. We check up on our caches after several finds. Not to check the log signatures to compare them to the online logs (never ever do we do this)  but to make sure the cache was placed in its original spot and to refill swag. One cache was left in the open, exposed. Some things were scattered about. This was a premium member too. But he/she was a newbie. Do we message them or let it go. We decided to let it go. Who knows, if they do not like being reprimanded, what they will do to other caches. 

 

I had that happen once, where a newbie had left several of my caches sitting out in the open, like this one that's meant to be hidden in the cave behind the rock:

 

NotRehidden.jpg.948a8a186c361b1103d4be03e97f98f4.jpg

 

I agonised over whether to say anything but thought if nobody says anything he'll never learn any different so eventually I sent him this message:

 

Quote

G'day. Just did a routine check on XXXXXX and found the container sitting out in the open, instead of behind the rock in the little side cave. As you were the last to find it and are fairly new to the game, without pointing any fingers (perhaps that's how you found it) I thought it best just to give you a friendly heads-up on the etiquette of rehiding the cache exactly as you found it. Even bush caches in remote locations are visited surprisingly often by curious (and sometimes destructive) muggles, so it's important that the container is out of sight and/or hidden to blend in with the environment. Something I always try to do is to take a quick photo of the hiding place as soon as I've spotted it, and before I've moved anything, so I'll know how to put it back afterwards. Happy caching!

 

He took it in the spirit I'd intended and thanked me for the advice, and we since went on to become good friends. The important thing is to make it come across as friendly advice rather than a reprimand.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I agree. Getting back on topic. A recent irk my husband and I  experienced recently. We check up on our caches after several finds. Not to check the log signatures to compare them to the online logs (never ever do we do this)  but to make sure the cache was placed in its original spot and to refill swag. One cache was left in the open, exposed. Some things were scattered about. This was a premium member too. But he/she was a newbie. Do we message them or let it go. We decided to let it go. Who knows, if they do not like being reprimanded, what they will do to other caches. 

How do you know it was the newbie? Did they say in their log that they left it "scattered about"? More likely muggled. Did the newbie find any others of yours? Were they left in the same condition?

Let it go.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone dislike updated hints and coordinates in OM logs due to series of DNFs and NM logs. Put them in main page please.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MNTA said:

Anyone dislike updated hints and coordinates in OM logs due to series of DNFs and NM logs. Put them in main page please.

 

 

Hopefully people will be told that the coordinates need updating properly, otherwise people still won't be able to find it. Then if they are not updated, eventually someone should do a NM, followed by a NA.

But true, the CO should have updated those coordinates correctly. Possibly they don't know how to do this, so a good first move is friendly instructions to them how to correct the coordinates. If they are ignored, then the NM.

Actually, thinking further on this, what irks me is when people don't log a NM (after contacting the CO, if they are a beginner, with the offer of help).

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Recently ran across a new cache whose physical location was 385' from posted coordinates.  Posted coordinates were between two houses unrelated to the CO or the cache, and the "In private yard (with permission)" attribute was set!  Bad combination, so I reflected my concern about that in my found log.  You can bet those folks up the street have been / will be seeing some unwanted visitors.  I was about the 5th finder to mention the coordinate problem.

 

Not long after, I received a Message Center message from the CO.  Turns out the CO didn't get his cache approved at the original coordinates due to 528' spacing requirements, saying that his GPS said the placement was OK and the reviewer must be wrong, and was told by the CO "... therefore the coordinates will have to remain as is. People will just have to use geosense.So used coordinates up the block, and then he went ahead and placed it where he could not originally have it approved. 

 

Took a look at the thing on Google Earth, saw the issue, and I advised again that there was a coordinate problem, and what and where the interfering traditional cache was located,

 

Wouldn't work with me on it at all on rechecking his measurements, and he concluded the conversation with "I have already stated what happened. Thanks for your messages.", so I handed it over to the reviewer to deal with.

 

Edited by ecanderson
paragraph breaks hosed
  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, ecanderson said:

Recently ran across a new cache whose physical location was 385' from posted coordinates.  Posted coordinates were between two houses unrelated to the CO or the cache, and the "In private yard (with permission)" attribute was set!  Bad combination, so I reflected my concern about that in my found log.  You can bet those folks up the street have been / will be seeing some unwanted visitors.

 

Not long after, I received a Message Center message from the CO.  Turns out the CO didn't get his cache approved due to 528' spacing requirements, saying that his GPS said the placement was OK and the reviewer must be wrong, and was told by the CO "... therefore the coordinates will have to remain as is. People will just have to use geosense.So he placed it where he could not originally have it approved. 

 

Took a look at the thing on Google Earth, saw the issue, and I advised again that there was a coordinate problem, and what and where the interfering traditional cache was located,

 

Wouldn't work with me on it at all on rechecking his measurements, and he concluded the conversation with "I have already stated what happened. Thanks for your messages.", so I handed it over to the reviewer to deal with.

 

I had a similar thing. Two or three times I tried to find this cache on several visits away to another city. I made the following log and included a Google map picture to show where the coordinates were.

"These are where the coordinates are; and where I searched. Are they correct? Google map image attached."

 

The CO replied: "Please note that the geocaching web site indicates that the cache is located no where near the tank. Goldenwattle appears to have the wrong information.

See the attached screen shot of the geocaching website."  The CO included a picture of their cache page with the coordinates underlined, indicating that only they could see the changed coordinates. That put the cache 154 metres from published coordinates.

Then someone else came in and showed the same coordinates I was seeing.

I went to messaging and explained carefully (and politely) how the CO was the only one who could see those changed coordinates. They keep writing messages like, "Our listed coordinates are correct." I tried several times to explain how to correct the coordinates, but this person kept coming across as one of the 'thickest' people I had ever dealt with.

Then I found out about a coordinate conflict with an existing cache. Also I looked back through the logs and found that the CO had changed the coordinates properly in the past, so they knew very well how to change them and so knew that only they could see the underlined coordinates. It was all a con, because they wanted that spot but weren't allowed. They deleted some of my logs and some of those of other people who had also made commenting logs. Then the CO got abusive, so I logged a NA.

Needs ArchivedNeeds Archived

Sad it has come to this. Cache is 154 metres from published coordinates. Now I discover the reason the CO has not updated the coordinates, despite their protestations. It is because it would break the 161 metre rule; at only about 104 metres from another cache, GC7E95X.

I will leave this up to the reviewer to deduce the truth here.

Published coordinates: S 33° 45.530 E 150° 55.400
Actual coordinates of cache as stated by CO: S 33° 45.612 E 150° 55.421
Coordinates of conflicting cache GC7E95X: S 33° 45.630 E 150° 55.485

The CO is deleting logs that depute their claims. I expect this and another log, at least, to be deleted, but fortunately this will still get to the reviewer first.

 

The reviewer came in and disabled the cache.

 

CO, "Reviewer. We will leave it up to you to please provide a web address that shows this. As explained on numerous occasions every search we do leads us to the new location."

The CO re-enabled it, annoying the reviewer. (Please be aware, I am not here to play games.) The CO argued with the reviewer too in a similar way that they had with me via messaging. "Reviewer. Can you please provide us with a link to the web address that shows the coordinates at the water tank (the old location). Every device, web page or app we use (even after clearing the web cache memory) takes us to the geocaching.com web site with the changed coordinates. ? "

 

"Reviewer. We will leave it up to you to please provide a web address that shows this. As explained on numerous occasions every search we do leads us to the new location."

The CO archived the cache before the reviewer could.

 

(Someone messaged me and said they thought the CO was mad and invited me to join him and friends to find the cache before it was archived. Nice of them, but I had to decline, as by then I was home.)

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Someone messaged me and said they thought the CO was mad

 

image.png.f65e4bd61607964661d283146c55e490.png

 

Mad CO syndrome, there seems to be a lot of it about these days.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Mad CO syndrome, there seems to be a lot of it about these days.

We have more of 'Slack CO syndrome' up here..... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

and invited me to join him and friends to find the cache before it was achieved.

(I'm assuming you meant archived)- you could put money on it that the cache is still where it was hidden, even if archived.....

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, lee737 said:

(I'm assuming you meant archived)- you could put money on it that the cache is still where it was hidden, even if archived.....

Thanks; now corrected. Yes it's likely still there, but the reviewer locked the cache page, so even if found, it can't be logged.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Today I cycled past one of my geocaches, so while there stopped to check the log. On-line there have been nine logs since April, but I found three signatures missing. That means, one in three couldn't be bothered to sign the paper log. It irks me that I have to send them messages with a photograph of the log, asking them to please point out their signature, as maybe I missed seeing it. I do that now, since once I did miss recognising a scribble as a signature. Two have replied. Cacher 1 asked where the cache was (I had given them cache name and GC number) and cacher 2, (I have to admire them for at least not making excuses) admitted they didn't sign the log. ("Hi Goldenwattle. We didn't sign the log. We only left a digital signature. Thanks for placing the cache.") Cacher 3 hasn't replied yet. To the two who replied, I sent follow up messages. Now I wait to see if any can supply proof of find, such as a photograph or description.

 

Suddenly there's the ding of a message, while writing this.

Cacher 1 asked what they can do. I had said in my previous log to them, give me a good description of the log and cache, so I repeated the exact same words back to them. The cache has a different attachment, so they should remember, if they found it. It can be tricky to find.

Waiting :rolleyes:;) ...

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

When the last 2 logs say:

 

Quote

An amazing P&G 

Quote


Awesome find!! Loved this one! 

 

 

And the cache turns out to look like this, an unsignable black mush of paper in a bison tube that's missing a top:

 

afe85e27-f5f2-4284-b5c2-97189e2b345a.jpg

 

 

 

  • Funny 3
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yesterday I received this message from a relatively new cacher (started in April and has 28 finds) relating to my 6-stage field puzzle cache:

 

Quote

Regarding GC62WZJ: Quest for the Middle Sea Diamond – We have gone to the area in which we think the container is located for the second time, but we still are unable to find it We have searched the big cave where we thought it would be, but it was not there. Can you please give us a hint. Thankyou.

 

Without giving it much thought, I replied with a photo of the hiding place and a description of where it's hidden, but later I started scratching my head as the big cave they mention is a fair way from GZ and GPS reception should be near perfect there on top of the ridge. Anyway, I had a look in the checker logs and there was this whole bunch of seemingly random attempts made just prior to the message:

 

CheckerLog.jpg.afb02f43eaad2d2076b1d95208931960.jpg

 

The last correct attempt was in July. As each waypoint provides one digit in the decimal minutes south and east, it doesn't look like they've bothered visiting any of them but instead just want the final served up to them on a plate. It really makes me wonder why I bother creating interesting caches.

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

<...>

 

The last correct attempt was in July. As each waypoint provides one digit in the decimal minutes south and east, it doesn't look like they've bothered visiting any of them but instead just want the final served up to them on a plate. It really makes me wonder why I bother creating interesting caches.

 

For the rest of us, Jeff. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

It looks like my perhaps overly generous hint still wasn't enough for them to find it as, checking just now, the last entry in the logbook is dated November 2019.

 

20200928_104437.jpg.12af9e354ed1164dfeca76f0b17fbaa9.jpg

 

I don't mind at all if people use creative ways to work out the coordinates of this one, particularly to circumvent the two water-access waypoints, as those logs are often fun reads, but just coming straight out and asking for it to be handed out on a plate is a step too far. Sadly this is what a lot of the newer players expect, given the way the game's being promoted.

Edited by barefootjeff

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Without giving it much thought, I replied with a photo of the hiding place and a description of where it's hidden, but later I started scratching my head as the big cave they mention is a fair way from GZ and GPS reception should be near perfect there on top of the ridge. Anyway, I had a look in the checker logs and there was this whole bunch of seemingly random attempts made just prior to the message:

 

Seems I'm going to have to retract my irk, at least in part, as it's turned out to be a different newbie trying to Battleship the checker. The one who messaged me had the correct coordinates all along but still ended up in the wrong place.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

The pandemic isn't over. The number of cases are rising. Yet group caching is starting up again in my area.

 

"Today the xxxx group had their 2nd trip to [this city] in the past month. <List of 8 individual (old timer) cachers>

 made for a great team"

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

The pandemic isn't over.

 

It irks me that so many people (and geo-event policies) still believe this.  This chart (scroll down) from an official source (CDC) tells the tale.  It's especially revealing if you click "Select Measure -> Total deaths", which shows that Covid deaths are just stealing blame from pneumonia and flu.  Total of all three: flat to declining.  "Cases" have become almost meaningless for reasons that would be off-topic here...

 

My Community Celebration Event will happen at the first irk-free opportunity, without mandatory pandemic-related boilerplate text or restrictions.

 

Edited by Viajero Perdido
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

 

It irks me that so many people (and geo-event policies) still believe this.  This chart (scroll down) from an official source (CDC) tells the tale.  It's especially revealng if you click "Select Measure -> Total deaths", which shows that Covid deaths are just stealing blame from pneumonia and flu.  Total of all three: flat to declining.  "Cases" have become almost meaningless for reasons that would be off-topic here...

 

My Community Celebration Event will happen at the first irk-free opportunity, without mandatory pandemic-related boilerplate text or restrictions.

 

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/07/coronavirus-deadlier-than-many-believed-infection-fatality-rate-cvd/

You are downplaying Covid. Unfortunately Covid is much more deadly than the flu, and likely to leave short to long term medical problems after it, even for mild cases.

"Using the handful of studies that have calculated infection-fatality rates for seasonal flu, Meyerowitz-Katz determined that somewhere between 1 and 10 people die for every 100,000 that are infected. For COVID-19, that number ranges between 500 and 1,000 deaths per 100,000 infections. By his calculations, the coronavirus is likely to be 50 to 100 times more deadly than the seasonal flu, which supports the Columbia University findings."

There was a program on TV last night, where it was said that the after effects of having COVID, even for mild cases was surveyed. One third appeared to make a full recovery; which means that two thirds didn't, continuing to have various issues, such as shortness of breath, incontinence, tiredness, etc. How long these symptoms will remain is as yet unknown, but some, for instance, that have scaring on the lungs, are likely to be permanent.

 

So much is still being learnt. Here is another condition which is being watched: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-23/covid-19-may-cause-parkinsons-disease-research-finds/12688384

 

It irks me, that too many people don't believe how serious Covid is.

 

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Viajero Perdido said:

Irked this isn't in Off-Topic. You win. 

 

Then why didn't you put your comments in Off-topic? I could continue the irk on that, but I don't want this to drag on.

Share this post


Link to post

1.  COVID-19 is irksome.  Further discussion of the pandemic, independent of its relationship to geocaching, belongs in the Off Topic forum.

 

2.  Regional/Local policies on the publication of event caches are driven first and foremost by official government restrictions - not by restrictions from Geocaching HQ.  Further discussion of event cache guidelines would be a good subject for a separate thread in the Event Cache forum.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

A different group in my area,  went out at the end of September....

09/2020

"We walked 8 hours ...visiting a number of caches both within the valley and around the neighbood streets. 14 of us enjoyed the day caching here today."

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post

I note the "we walked", not "we all got into 4 cars..."

What they actually did, I can't say, but it's certainly easy enough to see how 14 could walk 8 hours and manage to take appropriate precautions at the same time.  Just have to put one's mind to it.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, ecanderson said:

I note the "we walked", not "we all got into 4 cars..."

What they actually did, I can't say, but it's certainly easy enough to see how 14 could walk 8 hours and manage to take appropriate precautions at the same time.  Just have to put one's mind to it.

 

 

Good point about cars. There was this from one of the cut n paste logs from one of the team members:

 

"I met up with the group to hike the trail and after leaving some vehicles at the end trail, a few drove to the start of the trail to begin our day."

 

I expect that cars were shared to facilitate this. 

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

Good point about cars. There was this from one of the cut n paste logs from one of the team members:

 

"I met up with the group to hike the trail and after leaving some vehicles at the end trail, a few drove to the start of the trail to begin our day."

 

I expect that cars were shared to facilitate this. 

 

Quite common to do this.

Share this post


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

 

Good point about cars. There was this from one of the cut n paste logs from one of the team members:

 

"I met up with the group to hike the trail and after leaving some vehicles at the end trail, a few drove to the start of the trail to begin our day."

 

I expect that cars were shared to facilitate this. 

 

 

The usual practice here on such a group hike is to meet at the end point then half the cars are driven to the start point carrying the drivers of the remaiining cars. This is then repeated at the end to transfer the other half back to their cars at the start. As long as they're all individual cachers with no family groups, there's at most two people to a car. It's then a question of whether the particular juristiction allows that. Here, for example, the rules currently say "There is no limit on the number of people you can travel with in a car or other private vehicle such as a mini bus" but we now have essentially zero community transmission here so perhaps it's not a good example. We still can't have outdoor gatherings of more than 20 people, though, so no formal geocaching events for a good while yet.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

The usual practice here on such a group hike is to meet at the end point then half the cars are driven to the start point carrying the drivers of the remaiining cars. This is then repeated at the end to transfer the other half back to their cars at the start. As long as they're all individual cachers with no family groups, there's at most two people to a car. It's then a question of whether the particular juristiction allows that. Here, for example, the rules currently say "There is no limit on the number of people you can travel with in a car or other private vehicle such as a mini bus" but we now have essentially zero community transmission here so perhaps it's not a good example. We still can't have outdoor gatherings of more than 20 people, though, so no formal geocaching events for a good while yet.

Oh, I didn't realise this conversation was in relation to Covid. I didn't read back far enough.

Here in Canberra we now have geocaching meets. I have attended one, but although then we hadn't had a local case for about two months, I still thought some people were not distancing enough, as it was possible to have visitors from other places. Those distancing were standing at a distance around the peripheral. I said hello to a few people, signed the log and left.

I think our last cases were back in July. Canberra residents returning from Victoria, just before the border was closed. Three tested positive, but they did the right thing, by isolating as soon as they had symptoms. Before that we had had no cases for a month.

  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

Quite often here when people carpool we still wear the masks in the car. It's generally the older geocachers who are much more forward about people wearing masks if sharing cars for a ride. Shuttling 4 people in a car by itself is certainly not irksome (or shouldn't be). 5 people packed in a car from different families with no one wearing a mask, especially if windows aren't open - that's irksome. If it irks you.

Share this post


Link to post

Hints like this irk me.... "No, not there. Keep looking"

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, lee737 said:

Hints like this irk me.... "No, not there. Keep looking"

I've found caches where that would be a useful hint, where the cache was hidden near an "obvious" hiding spot like a lamp post, a guard rail, or a newspaper box, but the cache was hidden in some other way, not using the "obvious" hiding spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Not one that irks me THE MOST. But sill Irks me.

 

Found it logs like this......

 

"So, I will apologize right now, because everything from here on is here solely for the purpose of increasing my word count average. There are caching stat challenges & stat pages that use the word count averages in our “Found It” logs.

So, now for today's trivia ...

Today is: NAT'L POPCORN DAY
On January 19th, Nat'l Popcorn Day pops onto the............. "

 

Continues on and on for 11 paragraphs about popcorn day.

Edited by RocTheCacheBox
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, RocTheCacheBox said:

Not one that irks me THE MOST. But sill Irks me.

 

Found it logs like this......

 

"So, I will apologize right now, because everything from here on is here solely for the purpose of increasing my word count average. There are caching stat challenges & stat pages that use the word count averages in our “Found It” logs.

So, now for today's trivia ...

Today is: NAT'L POPCORN DAY
On January 19th, Nat'l Popcorn Day pops onto the............. "

 

Continues on and on for 11 paragraphs about popcorn day.

Oh my gosh, so irksome! I have not gotten one of those logs in a while but when they hit my area every cache log I got was the same ridiculous log.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

Oh my gosh, so irksome! I have not gotten one of those logs in a while but when they hit my area every cache log I got was the same ridiculous log.

 

I enjoy a good, well written original log. But I hate popcorn. :D 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RocTheCacheBox said:

"So, I will apologize right now, because everything from here on is here solely for the purpose of increasing my word count average.

 

I've seen someone do that before, pretty ordinary IMO....

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

Oh my gosh, so irksome! I have not gotten one of those logs in a while but when they hit my area every cache log I got was the same ridiculous log.

Even moreso when you have a series of caches and the same cacher does a copy paste on every cache they find in it.

In my experience it has usually been European tourists copy pasting many paragraphs/pages of their vacation each time.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, RocTheCacheBox said:

 

I enjoy a good, well written original log. But I hate popcorn. :D 

 

In my experience there seems to be two schools of thought when it comes to online logs. Some believe that the content of the online is for the benefit of the CO (thanking the CO for placing the cache) and/or other geocachers.   Providing a current status on the state of container, log book/sheet  or conditions of the area can benefit both the CO and potential future seekers.  The other school of thought is that the online log is exclusively for the benefit of the finder.   Setting aside that many just seem to consider it an obligatory step to get credit for a find,  it's often obvious when a log is obviously written for the finders benefit and that fact that it clutters up list of the logs.  Frankly, I think challenge caches which count words in a log should be abolished.  

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

.  Frankly, I think challenge caches which count words in a log should be abolished.  

 

I was going to say that the other problem is BadgeGen (Project-GC) but then I found this:

 

https://project-gc.com/w/The_Author

 

The original intent when implementing this Badge was obviously to make Geocachers write better/longer logs. Sadly some Geocachers instead chose to write long irrelevant logs, or even pasting texts which doesn't even have to do with Geocaching. Due to these reasons the possibility to loop this Badge was removed with the 4.x release.

 

  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

In my experience there seems to be two schools of thought when it comes to online logs. Some believe that the content of the online is for the benefit of the CO (thanking the CO for placing the cache) and/or other geocachers.   Providing a current status on the state of container, log book/sheet  or conditions of the area can benefit both the CO and potential future seekers.  The other school of thought is that the online log is exclusively for the benefit of the finder.   Setting aside that many just seem to consider it an obligatory step to get credit for a find,  it's often obvious when a log is obviously written for the finders benefit and that fact that it clutters up list of the logs.  Frankly, I think challenge caches which count words in a log should be abolished.  

 

I must be in the third school then. I write my logs as if I'm speaking to the CO, but a fair percentage of the caches I find are older ones with inactive COs so that doesn't work. I also mention stuff that might be of use to future finders, such as the pitfalls I fell into on the way to GZ (thorns, slippery rocks, mosquitoes, leeches, ticks, etc.), but some of those caches are rarely found and by the time there's a future finder it'll probably be quite different. So really, my logs are often just a journal of my caching exploits for my own benefit, something to look back on in future years to relive those experiences.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

In my experience there seems to be two schools of thought when it comes to online logs. Some believe that the content of the online is for the benefit of the CO (thanking the CO for placing the cache) and/or other geocachers.   Providing a current status on the state of container, log book/sheet  or conditions of the area can benefit both the CO and potential future seekers.  The other school of thought is that the online log is exclusively for the benefit of the finder.   Setting aside that many just seem to consider it an obligatory step to get credit for a find,  it's often obvious when a log is obviously written for the finders benefit and that fact that it clutters up list of the logs.  Frankly, I think challenge caches which count words in a log should be abolished.  

 

The last point I agree upon - and I'm someone who writes long logs and doesn't copy and paste.

 

Like Jeff, I think there's a combination of the two that's possible. I can write my journal entry but in it give some feedback or note where I parked or that the path was knee deep in nettles or under water. I know that's what I'd like to see on my own caches - but, frankly, anything better than an emoji will keep me happy.

 

In fact, I think the very short log with some characters just to claim the find seems far more frequent than either type.

Share this post


Link to post

International EarthCache Day seems to bring them out. Yesterday I received a three-word Found-It log on my EarthCache from a PM newbie who joined in April but has never visited the website. No answers to the questions so I sent them a message explaining how EarthCaches work, but if past experience is anything to go by, they probably don't know about the Message Centre or check emails either.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

International EarthCache Day seems to bring them out. Yesterday I received a three-word Found-It log on my EarthCache from a PM newbie who joined in April but has never visited the website. No answers to the questions so I sent them a message explaining how EarthCaches work, but if past experience is anything to go by, they probably don't know about the Message Centre or check emails either.

What did you do with the log? They should have received an email to say there is a message.

EarthCache Day - If I know it's that day, I make sure not find an Earthcache to avoid another souvenir.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

What did you do with the log? They should have received an email to say there is a message.

EarthCache Day - If I know it's that day, I make sure not find an Earthcache to avoid another souvenir.

 

Okay, they replied to my message with some answers, all of which are wrong, not just slightly wrong but, well, I have to wonder if they were even at GZ or if they were, if they just followed the arrow on the app and said "amazing geological features" (which is their entire log) without ever looking at the description. Isn't that what the app tells them to do, just follow the arrow and only look at the description if you get stuck?

 

I really hate this. They're a newbie just following the marketing hype about the game and probably don't even know there is a website. In the end I replied with an annotated photo of what they should have seen at GZ along with an explanation of the geology and a question for them to ponder. I did my stint as a university examiner back in the 1990s and have no desire to see this escalate into a slanging match so I said it's up to them to decide whether they did enough for their log to stand. Sigh, why did I ever want to own an EC?

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1

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...