Jump to content

What Irks you most?


avroair
Followers 50

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BendSinister said:

I'm not sure of the scale of the threats to the Geocaching business model this stuff aims to prevent, but when it impinges so drastically on what I see as a natural extension of cache maintenance (of caches placed in the almost continuous six year period when I was paying for Premium membership) it feels a little petty and aggressively punitive.

 

There was a significant, widespread spam attack that exploited the message center.  The restriction was put in place rather quickly as part of ending that emergency.  Message Center functionality was cut off totally for a period of time while this band-aid was coded.

 

Here is a link to one of the many discussions for this horrible spam attack.

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
On 1/23/2022 at 8:13 PM, Keystone said:

There was a significant, widespread spam attack that exploited the message center.  The restriction was put in place rather quickly as part of ending that emergency.  Message Center functionality was cut off totally for a period of time while this band-aid was coded.

 

I guess the followup question to that then would be is there a better way to incorporate an anti-spam measure that doesn't dramatically reduce the friendliness of communication between users?

Maybe not... or, go premium... :P

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment

Gotta like a thread that's going on 10 years old :D

 

My recent Irk is Challenge caches that don't have a checker link on the page even though someone kindly created one post publishing and this is obvious to the CO since the last dozen founds reference it.

 

OK maybe a 4 on a scale of 10 but my Doctor told me I should avoid irks so I am starting out small :mellow:

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 3
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
On 1/28/2022 at 11:23 PM, Goodgulf said:

My recent Irk is Challenge caches that don't have a checker link on the page even though someone kindly created one post publishing and this is obvious to the CO since the last dozen founds reference it.


Similarly frustrating:  Challenge caches that desperately need a checker, often because they require you to tally points for a long list of caches that you may or may not have found, which requires clicking on every one in the list that you aren't 100% sure you *haven't* found.

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment

Frustrating caching experience yesterday. I hit three trails, all of which happened to have caches from the same CO.

 

One trail deliberately had Not Chosen for the size on all 10 hides and said nothing about the containers. The descriptions made it clear this was deliberate to be more "challenging." There was at least some variance in D-rating.

 

The other two trails had all caches listed as Small, though some were actually Micros. A variety of screwtop containers. All similarly rated (D2). No hints. Perhaps 1/3 were at the base of a tree, tucked into the roots where I would expect to find such containers because it limits their accident movement. About 1/3 were tucked under or against logs. The rest seemed to be in random locations; moved or deliberate I wasn't always sure. The undergrowth, often thorny and with large amounts of pine straw, made searching for thumb-to-fist-sized containers a bit frustrating. At several locations my Garmin experienced a lot of signal bounce and limited accuracy despite limited tree cover (mostly widely spaced pines).

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
On 1/29/2022 at 5:23 AM, Goodgulf said:

Gotta like a thread that's going on 10 years old :D

 

My recent Irk is Challenge caches that don't have a checker link on the page even though someone kindly created one post publishing and this is obvious to the CO since the last dozen founds reference it.

 

OK maybe a 4 on a scale of 10 but my Doctor told me I should avoid irks so I am starting out small :mellow:

Installing the Project GC userscript is a great aid, it adds a link to the checker, even when the CO does not. :)

image.png.8c6637914aed47d1553b18861c900920.png

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
On 1/29/2022 at 3:23 PM, Goodgulf said:

My recent Irk is Challenge caches that don't have a checker link on the page even though someone kindly created one post publishing and this is obvious to the CO since the last dozen founds reference it.

I haven't noted that from memory, but it would definitely irk me too.... 

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Vooruit! said:

Installing the Project GC userscript is a great aid, it adds a link to the checker, even when the CO does not. :)

 

 

I'll second and add a new one

An older puzzle cache that has no checker and the co is long gone with most of the logs thanking the CO for help.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, MNTA said:

An older puzzle cache that has no checker and the co is long gone with most of the logs thanking the CO for help.

 

Yep, and I'll add even more recent puzzles with active COs where every log says they either got help from the CO or a previous finder. Sometimes I wonder if there's a competition to create the most unsolvable puzzles. Puzzles that only make sense after you've solved them are a bit like hints that only make sense after you've found the cache.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 3
Link to comment

‘Community’ maintenance.
-Throwing down a container because you can’t find one, especially when it’s just hidden. 
-Stealing stainless steel cache containers by ‘replacing them with a bigger one’

 

Edited by Ry Dawg
  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Ry Dawg said:

‘Community’ maintenance.
-Throwing down a container because you can’t find one, especially when it’s just hidden. 
-Stealing stainless steel cache containers by ‘replacing them with a bigger one’

 

Yesterday I ran into this. A 5/1.5 the hint was a hide style by an older cacher and knew immediately what to search for I spent 5 minutes looking for a small stick sitting in a hole to be extracted. When I realized I'm standing over a fake rock. Reading the logs looks like it's been that way for a couple of years. CO is no longer active and his other remaining unarchived cache down the street was a ziplock bag in the drainage ditch covered by mud. Filed NM on both of them.

  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, MNTA said:

Yesterday I ran into this. A 5/1.5 the hint was a hide style by an older cacher and knew immediately what to search for I spent 5 minutes looking for a small stick sitting in a hole to be extracted. When I realized I'm standing over a fake rock. Reading the logs looks like it's been that way for a couple of years. CO is no longer active and his other remaining unarchived cache down the street was a ziplock bag in the drainage ditch covered by mud. Filed NM on both of them.


If it wasn't for the inactive CO I would have asked if you were caching where I was yesterday: stick in a small hole (in a larger tree)... in the rain. (That ziplock, ugh!)

Link to comment
On 1/28/2022 at 11:23 PM, Goodgulf said:

Gotta like a thread that's going on 10 years old :D

 

My recent Irk is Challenge caches that don't have a checker link on the page even though someone kindly created one post publishing and this is obvious to the CO since the last dozen founds reference it.

 

 

Agreed... on both.

I just did a challenge cache exactly like that: CO still very active, checker findable on Project GC, but NO LINK so I did it all by "hand"/analog before I remembered I could search by GC number. SIGH.
 

Link to comment
On 3/20/2022 at 12:18 PM, CCFwasG said:

 

Agreed... on both.

I just did a challenge cache exactly like that: CO still very active, checker findable on Project GC, but NO LINK so I did it all by "hand"/analog before I remembered I could search by GC number. SIGH.
 

If its an older challenge (Pre Checkers), the CO might not even be aware that a checker exists, or know how to link it to the cache page. I've seen a several checker requests that start with "This isn't my challenge, but can a checker be made for...."

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, igator210 said:
On 3/20/2022 at 12:18 PM, CCFwasG said:

 

Agreed... on both.

I just did a challenge cache exactly like that: CO still very active, checker findable on Project GC, but NO LINK so I did it all by "hand"/analog before I remembered I could search by GC number. SIGH.
 

If its an older challenge (Pre Checkers), the CO might not even be aware that a checker exists, or know how to link it to the cache page. I've seen a several checker requests that start with "This isn't my challenge, but can a checker be made for...."

 

If you install the Project-GC browser script, it will add any associated PGC checker into the sidebar of the cache listing, even if the CO hasn't added the checker to the description. Extremely handy. Some listings may have multiple checkers associated with it. No need to manually search the GC any more.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, MNTA said:

COs that Say they did maintenance but didn't

 

I reckon you can put a lot of that down to OM being the default log type for owned caches. I've been caught out a few times when I was so focussed on what I was writing in the log I forgot to change the type from its default. Someone from HQ mentioned recently that default log types were going to be removed in the next iteration of the logging page and for me that can't come soon enough.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 1/28/2022 at 10:23 PM, Goodgulf said:

Gotta like a thread that's going on 10 years old :D

 

My recent Irk is Challenge caches that don't have a checker link on the page even though someone kindly created one post publishing and this is obvious to the CO since the last dozen founds reference it.

 

OK maybe a 4 on a scale of 10 but my Doctor told me I should avoid irks so I am starting out small :mellow:

 

Glad your irk level is only a 4 as I have some old challenge caches that have no checkers on them. :) 

 

Personally, I feel there is too much hand holding going on in geocaching these days! For me, having to figure out whether I qualify for completion of a challenge cache is just another part of the challenge. Imo, the addition of a checker should be left up to the cache owner.

 

Yes, I'd say this is my irk for the day. :anibad:

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
On 4/3/2022 at 1:18 PM, Mudfrog said:

 

Glad your irk level is only a 4 as I have some old challenge caches that have no checkers on them. :) 

 

Personally, I feel there is too much hand holding going on in geocaching these days! For me, having to figure out whether I qualify for completion of a challenge cache is just another part of the challenge. Imo, the addition of a checker should be left up to the cache owner.

 

Yes, I'd say this is my irk for the day. :anibad:

 


I pretty much agree on the hand-holding thing but there have been a few Challenge caches I either did or wanted to do that were so complex in their requirements that it would take hours and hours to figure out. I admit I love Project GC for those. :-) But some are basic and not needed!

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, CCFwasG said:


I pretty much agree on the hand-holding thing but there have been a few Challenge caches I either did or wanted to do that were so complex in their requirements that it would take hours and hours to figure out. I admit I love Project GC for those. :-) But some are basic and not needed!

 

 

As a challenge owner I found it a bit of a Catch 22. In order to set the qualification bar at a reasonable level so it wouldn't be either too easy or too arduous for the bulk of cachers in its catchment area, I had to do all the qualification-checking by hand on a list I made of thirty or so "typical" cachers before I was happy enough with the settings to submit it to Project-GC to have a checker created. I didn't mind doing it, it was part of the fun in creating that challenge (GC8DQXK), but with players now able to hide their finds and stats from everyone else it could be harder next time.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

... but with players now able to hide their finds and stats from everyone else it could be harder next time.


I am one who hides my stats, but can finds be hidden?? I used to wait a long time to log because ... reasons.

p.s. your challenge is interesting but one I'd never attempt simply because so many COs don't bother with attributes (so I don't do attribute challenges for that reason, though might change my mind one day...). Example: recently found one with a significant hike, to a view (in the name!) and it had zero attributes at all! And YES the no attributes thing irks me... I am sure it does you too! ;-) 

Edited by CCFwasG
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, CCFwasG said:

p.s. your challenge is interesting but one I'd never attempt simply because so many COs don't bother with attributes (so I don't do attribute challenges for that reason, though might change my mind one day...). Example: recently found one with a significant hike, to a view (in the name!) and it had zero attributes at all! And YES the no attributes thing irks me... I am sure it does you too! ;-) 

 

I'm pretty sure our reviewer has said somewhere that he won't publish a cache without any attributes at all, and looking back through my more recent finds, most have half a dozen or more set. The smallest number of attributes on any of my hides is five, and that's on a couple of traditionals alongside a section of the Great North Walk.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I'm pretty sure our reviewer has said somewhere that he won't publish a cache without any attributes at all.... 

He won't (whoever our reviewer is at the moment I guess?) - I submitted a listing once, forgetting to set the attributes, and he held it up until they were done....

  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, lee737 said:

He won't (whoever our reviewer is at the moment I guess?) - I submitted a listing once, forgetting to set the attributes, and he held it up until they were done....

This is appropriate only for those attributes where Geocaching HQ has asked the Reviewers to "enforce" proper use of the attribute.  Examples include Wheelchair Accessible, UV Light Required, and Challenge Cache.  Other than the required attributes, usage is optional and the Reviewer's role is limited to "suggesting" that attributes might help the cache page.

  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Keystone said:

This is appropriate only for those attributes where Geocaching HQ has asked the Reviewers to "enforce" proper use of the attribute.  Examples include Wheelchair Accessible, UV Light Required, and Challenge Cache.  Other than the required attributes, usage is optional and the Reviewer's role is limited to "suggesting" that attributes might help the cache page.

None of those attributes.... and although I don't have the communication now, it didn't feel like a 'suggestion'..... more like a commandment... :)

Link to comment

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...
Followers 50
×
×
  • Create New...