What Irks you most?

[+Goldenwattle]

13 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

t irks me that a cache with 157 FPs, looks like this:

Is that a real mouse, or is that a staged scene?

[+L0ne.R]

3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Is that a real mouse, or is that a staged scene?

  

It's a real mouse. All that fluff in the photo is nesting made by mice.  The mice have chewed the clothes off of the doll.  Reports about mice nesting in the box go back more than a year to August 2019. Example of a log: "Found this cache. Needs clean up. Infested with mice. It freaked me the heck out." There are 3 NMs posted this year, 1 NM posted in 2019. It also irks me that this year the owner has posted over 150 caches in 2020 but has not found time to maintain this cache or disable the listing.  Maybe he doesn't want to disable because of the triple digit FP rating. 

Edited October 20, 2020 by L0ne.R

[+on4bam]

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Is that a real mouse, or is that a staged scene?

What's wrong with a mouse?

 

[+L0ne.R]

1 minute ago, on4bam said:

What's wrong with a mouse?

 

 

There is a chance of getting hantavirus from deer mice droppings. A very remote chance, but it's a respiratory disease that can kill within hours. 

 

 

[+L0ne.R]

16 minutes ago, on4bam said:

What's wrong with a mouse?

 

 

It's more about a deteriorated cache and how triple-digit FPs are meaningless. 

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by L0ne.R

[+on4bam]

54 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

There is a chance of getting hantavirus from deer mice droppings. A very remote chance, but it's a respiratory disease that can kill within hours.

 

52 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

It's more about a deteriorated cache and how triple-digit FPs are meaningless.

 

Note  to self: put more smileys when not being serious.

[+ecanderson]

1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

 

It's more about a deteriorated cache and how triple-digit FPs are meaningless. 

 

So we have all of the comments about the cache itself, and zero information on its location or the trip to get there, which COULD be the reason for the FPs.  Please describe those, or provide us with a gc code so that we can understand this properly.

[+cerberus1]

3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

There is a chance of getting hantavirus from deer mice droppings. A very remote chance, but it's a respiratory disease that can kill within hours. 

 

After my second bout of Lyme disease, I became very ill when getting anywhere near mice.  I can't clean my own boat in the Spring.

It has to do with ticks getting Lyme (which is similar to hantavirus...) from the mice.  Lyme starts with mice, not ticks.

We now make sure there are few mice on the property, and don't shoo-away the neighbor's cat anymore.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

20 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

After my second bout of Lyme disease, I became very ill when getting anywhere near mice.  I can't clean my own boat in the Spring.

It has to do with ticks getting Lyme (which is similar to hantavirus...) from the mice.  Lyme starts with mice, not ticks.

We now make sure there are few mice on the property, and don't shoo-away the neighbor's cat anymore.

 

A friend of mine takes a dozen or so toilet paper tubes, fills them with cotton batting soaked in permethrin and places them around the outside of his house early in the Spring and Winter. Under rocks, in cracks; wherever the mice will encounter them.

 

The mice snag chunks of the cotton and hustle them 'home' to their nests, getting themselves and their families nice and doused. 

 

Heck of a lot easier than you trying to figure out where to put poison; let the mice take it where it's needed.

[+Goldenwattle]

8 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

It's a real mouse.

Thanks LOne.R for clearing that up.

[+STNolan]

Small irk here and one that I know has been mentioned before - people who log Earth Caches without sending in the answers. I respond to about 90% of the answers I get sent; heck that's the job of an EC CO (I won't claim to be perfect as sometimes life gets in the way of responding). However it seems to me that a solid 5-10% of cacher just never send answers. I go through and verify my logs about once every month or two and I always find at least a few (usually new cachers but also quite a lot of veterans too!) who just don't bother to send in answers.

 

EARTHCACHES. ARE. NOT. VIRTUALS.

 

Of course it's always worst just after International Earthcaching Weekend... all told I just had to send 14 of these messages out:

Hello!

About once a month I go through and review my Earthcaches and I notice that you logged a find on GC84H59 Sandy Beach - Juneau Earthcache #6. It's entirely possible that they may have slipped through the cracks, but as of yet I don't seem to have any answers from you. If you're already well versed in geocaching, please ignore this next part, but I've found that many times newer cachers may not be aware about the differences between an Earthcache and a Virtual Cache! A virtual cache often requires you to merely visit a location (and possibly take a photo). An Earthcache requires a cacher to visit a location and complete an Earth-Science lesson to log a find! For more information on Earthcaches use this link: http://www.geosociety.org/GSA/fieldexp/EarthCache/guidelines/home.aspx

Again, please send your answers as soon as possible! Unfortunately without a set of answers I may be forced to delete your find. Thank you for understanding and please reach out if you have any questions!

Very Respectfully,
STNolan

 

 

I can accept a 3 word log from a newbie (though it's not my favorite) if they send the answers; but people who just log the cache without doing the work are my personal irk... at least today!

[+dennistubaplayer]

I hate it when people do only smartphone coordinates or GPS coordinates. It drives me bonkers trying to convert coordinates to diffrent formats- It's a very hard process. Does anyone agree?

 

[+TeamRabbitRun]

1 minute ago, dennistubaplayer said:

I hate it when people do only smartphone coordinates or GPS coordinates. It drives me bonkers trying to convert coordinates to diffrent formats- It's a very hard process. Does anyone agree?

 

 

Why don't you just set all your devices to the same format?

You cell phone and your GPSr don't acquire coordinates in any particular format, just as raw data. How you view it is usually configurable.

[+kunarion]

17 minutes ago, dennistubaplayer said:

I hate it when people do only smartphone coordinates or GPS coordinates. It drives me bonkers trying to convert coordinates to diffrent formats- It's a very hard process. Does anyone agree?

 

 

Here's a nice online site to quickly convert between a couple of common formats and see a map.

[+niraD]

3 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

I hate it when people do only smartphone coordinates or GPS coordinates. It drives me bonkers trying to convert coordinates to diffrent formats- It's a very hard process. Does anyone agree?

I don't find it difficult to convert one format to another. It's exactly the same math as converting time: seconds to minutes to hours/degrees to minutes to seconds.

[+baer2006]

4 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

I hate it when people do only smartphone coordinates or GPS coordinates. It drives me bonkers trying to convert coordinates to diffrent formats- It's a very hard process. Does anyone agree?

I don't get it. What's the difference between "Smartphone coordinates" and "GPS coordinates"?

[+ecanderson]

He's probably talking about different  between a particular phone app coordinate format (probably dd.ddddd) and what we tend to use here (dd mm.mmm).

  Only if people get off into the weeds for some reason with dd mm ss that it's a 'harder process'.  How tough is multiplying or dividing by 60?

Edited October 23, 2020 by ecanderson

[+Viajero Perdido]

All the good irks have been covered, but my Page 78 minor irk is, people assuming that everybody else plays the game the way they do, so there's no need to explain anything when they have a question or issue.  Like, saying "smartphone coordinates" without elaborating, like asking something about apps without mentioning if they use iPhone or Android, like saying "the map goes blooey" without mentioning which map of the various ones provided by our hosts...

 

Details please, or we can't help you.

[+barefootjeff]

An irk that I'm seeing more and more is from these modern-day players who think that paper has only one side. These are three consecutive logs on one of my caches I checked on recently:

 

 

It seems the more substantial the logbook, the more blank pages they have to leave between logs.

[+Goldenwattle]

2 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

An irk that I'm seeing more and more is from these modern-day players who think that paper has only one side. These are three consecutive logs on one of my caches I checked on recently:

 

 

It seems the more substantial the logbook, the more blank pages they have to leave between logs.

And who also have the 'need' to fill a whole page all by their little selves.

[+niraD]

4 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

And who also have the 'need' to fill a whole page all by their little selves.

Which reminds me of another peeve: geocachers who write just a name and date when the CO has provided an actual log book.

[+Goldenwattle]

7 minutes ago, niraD said:

Which reminds me of another peeve: geocachers who write just a name and date when the CO has provided an actual log book.

Or use a different name from their geocaching name.

[+barefootjeff]

38 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

And who also have the 'need' to fill a whole page all by their little selves.

 

I don't mind if they write a bit extra about their experience as it all adds to the cache's story, it's just all the blank pages in between that irks me.

 

One of the worst ones I saw was up Newcastle way, where not only did every finder only write on one side of the paper, they all wrote sideways across the lines to fill one page with each name.

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by barefootjeff

[+baer2006]

13 hours ago, ecanderson said:

He's probably talking about different  between a particular phone app coordinate format (probably dd.ddddd) and what we tend to use here (dd mm.mmm).

  Only if people get off into the weeds for some reason with dd mm ss that it's a 'harder process'.  How tough is multiplying or dividing by 60?

Ah, ok, that makes sense.

 

And BTW, you wouldn't believe how many long-time geocachers basically have no clue what, say, "dd mm.mmm" actually means, and are therefore unable to convert to/from other formats without an app.

[+niraD]

49 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

And BTW, you wouldn't believe how many long-time geocachers basically have no clue what, say, "dd mm.mmm" actually means, and are therefore unable to convert to/from other formats without an app.

This forum really needs a "Sad" response.

[+STNolan]

12 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

An irk that I'm seeing more and more is from these modern-day players who think that paper has only one side. These are three consecutive logs on one of my caches I checked on recently:

 

 

It seems the more substantial the logbook, the more blank pages they have to leave between logs.

 

I think the content of their log would irk me more... "very very upsetting..." and "Thanks we hate this..." 

What's the old saying? If you can't say anything nice...

[+kunarion]

12 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

An irk that I'm seeing more and more is from these modern-day players who think that paper has only one side.

 

I'm often the first cacher to sign any given Micro log sheet in the back, after people had been cramming signatures onto the full side.  I mention in my online log that the sheet is half full, that I signed "the back".  If it's my Micro, I'm replacing that log.  Micros tend to have one thin roll of not-quite-dry, fraying paper, I sign those with a sharpie, and that bleeds through.  Over time, lots of kinds of ink bleed through.  Even with map paper.  Both sides are cool, but I'm a one side guy.

 

And I almost never fill pages with a story, but if it's a book, I might add a line or two about condition or TBs.  I tend to find little log sheets where it's probably best to write only date and name, and on my own caches (many of mine have log books), people sign a book with only the date & name, just bigger.  Yeah, sometimes they occupy an entire book page with it, or add an address label or ink stamp.  I'm not so irked.  But I may try to think of a cool story for the rare log book.  Maybe something a little lighter than the text "very very upsetting". 

[+cerberus1]

13 hours ago, niraD said:

Which reminds me of another peeve: geocachers who write just a name and date when the CO has provided an actual log book.

 

That bugged us for some time. 

Then we realized that with this new group only using one line (some may skip a line...), I'll be too old to play before they're "full".     

[+cerberus1]

13 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Or use a different name from their geocaching name.

 

All but one person we've ever taken under wing to learn the hobby has written their own, "christian" name in the log.

 - And that's more people than fit on some logs.  

It isn't until they decide to join the hobby that they create a "geocaching" name. 

[+niraD]

1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

All but one person we've ever taken under wing to learn the hobby has written their own, "christian" name in the log.

 - And that's more people than fit on some logs.  

It isn't until they decide to join the hobby that they create a "geocaching" name. 

Yep. When I was introduced to geocaching by a friend, I wrote my real name in the logs. A few days later, I created a geocaching.com account and logged them under my new account. And others that I've introduced to geocaching have written their real names in the logs, at least until they've created geocaching.com accounts. Sometimes they've cached with me for years before creating their own geocaching.com accounts.

[+barefootjeff]

5 hours ago, STNolan said:

 

I think the content of their log would irk me more... "very very upsetting..." and "Thanks we hate this..." 

What's the old saying? If you can't say anything nice...

 

Ha ha, context is everything. This is the cache in question:

 

[+HunterandSamuel]

18 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

An irk that I'm seeing more and more is from these modern-day players who think that paper has only one side.

 

 

We happened to us recently. lol  Went down to replace the log and discovered that the other side was blank. The cacher was new. I think it makes them feel productive? lol 

[+HunterandSamuel]

On 9/19/2020 at 9:31 PM, colleda said:

How do you know it was the newbie?

 

Because of their find counts and the date joined? 

Edited October 30, 2020 by HunterandSamuel

[+HunterandSamuel]

On 10/11/2020 at 11:04 PM, Goldenwattle said:

I said something similar after not finding a signature. I did the usual, said I would accept the find with a description of the hide or a photograph. They supplied neither,

 

That's another irk of mine. A CO checking signatures on the paper logs to online logs and then asking the geocacher for proof. lol 

[+barefootjeff]

5 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

That's another irk of mine. A CO checking signatures on the paper logs to online logs and then asking the geocacher for proof. lol 

 

Are you happy then for armchair loggers to log finds on your caches without them going anywhere near the cache? Or to accept finds on multis from those who only go as far as the first waypoint? From the Help Centre:

 

Quote

You can log caches online as "Found" after you visited the coordinates and signed the logbook.

 

This is a fundamental tenet of the game: you sign the logbook. The CO can put all sorts of obstacles in the way of you doing that, such as difficult terrain, clever camo or some trick to opening the container, but at the end of the day if you want that smiley you have to get your name in that logbook. Anything less is a DNF.

 

You probably haven't experienced fake loggers but it happens and in some places it happens a lot. I've had a few on my caches. Sometimes it's an honest mistake, like opening the wrong cache page when logging at home after a day of caching, but it's the CO's responsibility to follow up such cases. If they don't, the integrity of the game suffers.

[+ecanderson]

Guess H&S's "lol" at the end wasn't sufficient.

GCHQ:  Please institute a proper set of 'sarcasm on / sarcasm off' emoticons.  That's twice today this has come up.

 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

1 hour ago, ecanderson said:

Guess H&S's "lol" at the end wasn't sufficient.

GCHQ:  Please institute a proper set of 'sarcasm on / sarcasm off' emoticons.  That's twice today this has come up.

 

Reddit doesn't have an emoticon, but uses a /s to indicate that something is sarcasm.  GC didn't write the forum software thus many not be able to add emoticons so we can only use what the developers of the forum software provide.  We can, however, use text to convey sarcasm.

[+ecanderson]

That's what I thought the "lol" was intended to convey, but it evidently wasn't sufficient.

[+Goldenwattle]

9 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

All but one person we've ever taken under wing to learn the hobby has written their own, "christian" name in the log.

 - And that's more people than fit on some logs.  

It isn't until they decide to join the hobby that they create a "geocaching" name. 

Using their given name when not a member is puzzling (as in, who are they?), but not a problem, as not being a member they can't log on line. It's when the paper signature and the on line name don't match.

[+Goldenwattle]

5 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

That's another irk of mine. A CO checking signatures on the paper logs to online logs and then asking the geocacher for proof. lol 

I was once asked for proof, and I supplied it. It didn't offend me at all. I had found the cache and signed the log, so I was able to describe the cache and hide in detail. I even described where I parked and the ground surface. That was accepted. The log was a messy lots of scraps of paper, which is why the CO no doubt couldn't find my signature. I was impressed that the CO was doing their job.

[+barefootjeff]

53 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I was once asked for proof, and I supplied it. It didn't offend me at all. I had found the cache and signed the log, so I was able to describe the cache and hide in detail. I even described where I parked and the ground surface. That was accepted. The log was a messy lots of scraps of paper, which is why the CO no doubt couldn't find my signature. I was impressed that the CO was doing their job.

 

I'd have thought if the CO was doing their job, the log wouldn't have degenerated into "messy lots of scraps of paper".

[+Goldenwattle]

14 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I'd have thought if the CO was doing their job, the log wouldn't have degenerated into "messy lots of scraps of paper".

True, but at least the log was still dry .

[+lee737]

On 10/24/2020 at 3:15 AM, dennistubaplayer said:

I hate it when people do only smartphone coordinates or GPS coordinates. It drives me bonkers trying to convert coordinates to diffrent formats- It's a very hard process. Does anyone agree?

 

Converting between coordinates is pretty simple, and only needs a little thought and a calculator.... I used this exact thing as a maths lesson for my 11yo son last week.....

[+The Jester]

9 hours ago, lee737 said:

Converting between coordinates is pretty simple, and only needs a little thought and a calculator.... I used this exact thing as a maths lesson for my 11yo son last week.....

Even a calculator isn't needed, every GPSr I've owned would do the conversion for me.  I've had an app on my android device that would do the conversion (heck, years ago I had one on the PDA!).

[+lee737]

1 hour ago, The Jester said:

every GPSr I've owned would do the conversion for me.

A lot more mucking about than just a simple operation with a calculator IME....

[+lee737]

Calculator -

.mmmm * 60 =

[+niraD]

12 minutes ago, lee737 said:

Calculator -

.mmmm * 60 =

Calculator:

.mmmm

Enter

60

×

 

(Since we're in the "irks" thread...)

[+lee737]

My calcs (or should I say calc apps now - thats an irk too) are RPN too.... I was just keeping my point more relatable to the non-nerd.... 

[+baer2006]

10 hours ago, on4bam said:

Takes 15 seconds on my OR700 (and OR600/CO300 before that)

Settings > Position format > hddd.mm.mmmm > hdd mm ss.ss.   and back afterwards.

On my tablet with GCC Coordinates > Converter Select type, enter coordinates, Select to format...

I think the point is not which method of conversion is a few seconds faster than the other. It's to know what any conversion tools are actually doing. You can geocache quite fine without ever realizing that one degree consists of 60 minutes, each of which has 60 seconds. But I admit that it irks me every time, when I see an experienced(!) geocacher call the fractional minutes "seconds". Also, you can't imagine what a fuss was made in a big German geocaching FB group, when Garmin extended the dd°mm.mmm to 4 fractional digits for the minutes. Instead of shrugging it off and either ignoring the last digit (a consumer GPS is not that exact anyway) or setting it explicitly to 0 when entering coordinates, some people really didn't know what to do. You don't have to be a math genius to know that you can always pad a decimal number with trailing zeroes after the decimal point (or comma ).

[+The Jester]

On 10/26/2020 at 2:48 AM, lee737 said:

A lot more mucking about than just a simple operation with a calculator IME....

Until you deal with UTM...