Jump to content

Common log


Recommended Posts

I'm going to shock you here, Mr. T. I don't think the wording is too bad. I sort of interpret the "that's one more find for me" text as "Hey, I found another one. This isn't so hard after all. I can do this".

In addition to the other complaints about the specific wording, the primary problem here is that no matter what the default log says, it's lying about the fact that the user said that. And the more folksy and casual it sounds, the more the app writer is intentionally trying to deceive us. The default log should be "No log provided" since that's the real situation. In particular, the expression of appreciation is just flat out insulting.

 

How you really should be interpreting the log is that it's the app writer that's celebrating the fact that another find can be attributed to the app. The user didn't say anything about anything.

 

I agree 100%. Do the app writers really think that COs are so stupid as to believe that the n00b finders wrote that log themselves (especially after reading it more than once)?

 

At least the original version was more honest.

Link to comment
In addition to the other complaints about the specific wording, the primary problem here is that no matter what the default log says, it's lying about the fact that the user said that. And the more folksy and casual it sounds, the more the app writer is intentionally trying to deceive us. The default log should be "No log provided" since that's the real situation.
How about something like this:

 

"I neglected to replace this default message with a thoughtful description of my experience finding this geocache."

 

Even if the user didn't actually write any of that, I don't think there is anything in there that is deceptive.

Link to comment
In addition to the other complaints about the specific wording, the primary problem here is that no matter what the default log says, it's lying about the fact that the user said that. And the more folksy and casual it sounds, the more the app writer is intentionally trying to deceive us. The default log should be "No log provided" since that's the real situation.
How about something like this:

 

"I neglected to replace this default message with a thoughtful description of my experience finding this geocache."

 

Even if the user didn't actually write any of that, I don't think there is anything in there that is deceptive.

 

I don't own a smartphone, so I have no idea what the interface looks like to the new "intro app" users. If the actual log text is displayed to them before posting, perhaps it should say, "Geocaches are hidden by people just like you. Please enter your experience here".

 

I think at that point, some will think that they can be a part of something bigger than the device they are holding in their hand, and others will think that they have to involve themselves further than their phones and and go play some other smartphone game.

Link to comment

You know .... it wasn't that long ago that I was a new geocacher. I didn't leave long logs at the time, because I didn't know I was supposed to do that. It took me quite a while to discover that people liked longer logs.

 

There are only two rules to geocaching, right? Sign the physical log, and trade even or better. Are we complaining because these automatic logs are a violation of a third unwritten rule about writing original and entertaining online logs?

 

Anyone think about sending an email to these novice cachers, introducing them to the idea of writing original logs for themselves? They may not even know they're violating this unwritten rule (if there is such a thing).

 

Oh yes, I have tried this and have been slammed by those who I contacted. Every time. Gave up. I play the game the way I like to play and have given up trying to influence others unless they ask for advice or input.

 

So, then, there really shouldn't be an issue with newbie cachers who use the default text, right? They're playing the game the way they like to play it, too.

 

Joined in 2011. By any chance were these "short logs" thumbed out on a smartphone from the cache site? Because the next person I hear of who went home after finding a cache and typed "Tftc" on a computer will be the first. :P

 

No ... I've managed to resist having a smartphone so far. :) But my early logs weren't much longer than "Found on my way to work SL TFTC". As others have pointed out, it wasn't until I started hiding them that I realized how much longer logs are appreciated.

 

Outside the context of geocaching there are no rules which tell us that we should be polite and considerate to others, yet many people are. It shouldn't be necessary to have a rule for geocachers to be polite and considerate either.

 

Ah, but what is "polite and considerate"? Nobody's ever told these newbies that auto-generated text isn't "polite" or "considerate". Heck, I've seen complaints on this forum about people who leave exceedingly long and boring comments. (Granted, those are much rarer, but ... still ...)

 

Newbies can't be expected to be held to a standard that nobody's informed them of. That's all I'm saying.

Link to comment

So, then, there really shouldn't be an issue with newbie cachers who use the default text, right?

 

Newbies can't be expected to be held to a standard that nobody's informed them of. That's all I'm saying.

 

We can't completely lay the blame on the new app users. Although I'm with the camp that say it is basic etiquette.

 

We are however are telling Groundspeak that we feel the current canned message comes off as deceitful and supports the numbers game. They listened the first time, and changed the message. Perhaps they may listen again and change it to what dprovan suggests:

 

"No log provided"

 

This is a more honest statement and alerts the new cacher that they can provide their own log.

Edited by L0ne.R
Link to comment

I would have loved to be a fly on the wall in the meeting where the Groundspeak lackeys decided on the wording to use.

 

Are you OK Toz? :unsure:

When I'm not geocaching or writing TL;DR posts in the forums, I am a software developer with over 30 years of experience. For professional reasons I have a curiosity about how software is developed and whether or not developers actual make any effort to design software for the way it get used.

 

The smartphone apps allow users not only to find geocaches but to log their finds right from the app with the press of a button. The entire process is far different from the days when this activity required you to go on a website, print out or download the caches you planned to search for, find the caches and perhaps take field notes about what you found, and then return home, log on to a website, and log your experiences. Yet it sometimes seem that neither Groundspeak nor the denizens of the forums understand this.

 

There was recently a whole other thread about how the Intro App could be improved to help newbies learn nuances such as that cache owners appreciate an individualized note when logging the cache online. I as I pointed out there you can lead a horse to water by you can't make it drink. I suspect there are ways to present the logging process to a newbie that lets them know a personalized note is nice to have, but you can't force the newbie to actually take the time to compose a note for each cache they find.

Link to comment

 

you can't force the newbie to actually take the time to compose a note for each cache they find.

 

But couldn't you (not you personally) at least force them to validate their @#&^%$%^&* email before they can post any finds???????

 

Or replace the default log with a greyed out suggestion to write something about their experience. It could even require a certain number of characters, but then people would be complaining about logs that only say "1234567891011"

Link to comment

Although it would be better if they encouraged detailed logs, the reality is that along with cache density comes more people finding many hides in a day, and the higher likelihood of clone copy and paste logs, which are not much different than "tftc". Even with an instant log from the app, most are not going to sit there and type out anything detailed, but rather just move on to the next one. Going home and typing out 30 unique logs after a long day out can be a chore that most will not do.

Link to comment

 

you can't force the newbie to actually take the time to compose a note for each cache they find.

 

But couldn't you (not you personally) at least force them to validate their @#&^%$%^&* email before they can post any finds???????

Not entirely.

 

You could set up the app so that someone would not get to see caches until they have validated an email address. It's very likely that some who downloads an app that requires a validation like this, knows how to use a throwaway email account they set up just to get around the validation requirement and that they never use again.

 

It is also quite likely that Groundspeak doesn't want to make people who download an intro app to perform an extra validation step (or even have a email address) before they can start looking for caches. The idea is to get people to try geocaching not to turn them off.

 

However there do seem to be some cache owners who wish to not allow brand new intro app users to search for their caches. It may be somewhat more reasonable to provide these cache owners with a way to express that preference and hide these caches until a user validates their email address (or upgrades to the full app).

Link to comment

I like being able to read the story of somebody finding my cache, but it doesn't bother me at all to see TFTC and nothing else. Especially since there is no requirement to make an online log of your visit. The only rule is to sign the physical log. Everybody can play the game how they want to as long as they follow that rule. I like to read the long logs, but I'm just as satisfied if you just leave a "." and nothing else.

Link to comment

Although it would be better if they encouraged detailed logs, the reality is that along with cache density comes more people finding many hides in a day, and the higher likelihood of clone copy and paste logs, which are not much different than "tftc". Even with an instant log from the app, most are not going to sit there and type out anything detailed, but rather just move on to the next one. Going home and typing out 30 unique logs after a long day out can be a chore that most will not do.

 

True, but we are not talking about the guy with 20,000 finds that has resorted to a C&P log for the 100 caches that he found today. We're talking about the new player, and the idea that this isn't, "Angry Birds".

 

Read my signature! Geocaching, it's not just a Smartphone game!

Link to comment

I would have loved to be a fly on the wall in the meeting where the Groundspeak lackeys decided on the wording to use.

 

Are you OK Toz? :unsure:

When I'm not geocaching or writing TL;DR posts in the forums, I am a software developer with over 30 years of experience. For professional reasons I have a curiosity about how software is developed and whether or not developers actual make any effort to design software for the way it get used.

 

The smartphone apps allow users not only to find geocaches but to log their finds right from the app with the press of a button. The entire process is far different from the days when this activity required you to go on a website, print out or download the caches you planned to search for, find the caches and perhaps take field notes about what you found, and then return home, log on to a website, and log your experiences. Yet it sometimes seem that neither Groundspeak nor the denizens of the forums understand this.

 

There was recently a whole other thread about how the Intro App could be improved to help newbies learn nuances such as that cache owners appreciate an individualized note when logging the cache online. I as I pointed out there you can lead a horse to water by you can't make it drink. I suspect there are ways to present the logging process to a newbie that lets them know a personalized note is nice to have, but you can't force the newbie to actually take the time to compose a note for each cache they find.

 

Ahhh, that's more like it. :)

Link to comment

I like being able to read the story of somebody finding my cache, but it doesn't bother me at all to see TFTC and nothing else. Especially since there is no requirement to make an online log of your visit. The only rule is to sign the physical log. Everybody can play the game how they want to as long as they follow that rule. I like to read the long logs, but I'm just as satisfied if you just leave a "." and nothing else.

 

I have to say, this is an unusual opinion coming from a 2005 joiner. Whether people want to believe it or not, the hoardes of . or Tftc logs came out of nowhere with the release of the smartphone apps in 2009 and 2010.

 

Don't take this is an insult, but I was obviously curious to see how many caches you've hidden that you would have this opinion, and I see you haven't exactly been a Geocaching fanatic those 9 years. :) That does actually explain (in my opinion), your "no big deal about lame logs" stance.

Link to comment

I like being able to read the story of somebody finding my cache, but it doesn't bother me at all to see TFTC and nothing else. Especially since there is no requirement to make an online log of your visit. The only rule is to sign the physical log. Everybody can play the game how they want to as long as they follow that rule. I like to read the long logs, but I'm just as satisfied if you just leave a "." and nothing else.

 

I have to say, this is an unusual opinion coming from a 2005 joiner. Whether people want to believe it or not, the hoardes of . or Tftc logs came out of nowhere with the release of the smartphone apps in 2009 and 2010.

 

Don't take this is an insult, but I was obviously curious to see how many caches you've hidden that you would have this opinion, and I see you haven't exactly been a Geocaching fanatic those 9 years. :) That does actually explain (in my opinion), your "no big deal about lame logs" stance.

I've been a member since 2003 and I agree with Travelinmatt76. I don't mind a short log either. I hide caches for people to find, so as long as there's as smiley log that lets me know the cache was found it's accomplished my goal. If the finder is a good writer and tells an interesting story in their log then that's a bonus. But it's not required nor expected.

 

I also refute that the hoards of . or TFTC logs started with the smartphone. There were threads complaining of TFTC logs long befor there was a smartphone app. TFTC was already in the geocaching lexicon when I began in 2003. I myself left a . log on a cache early on. Certainly an app that allows logging in the field and provides a default log (perhaps empty) will seen a increase in the number of people who leave the default. Maybe you can claim an increase in the number of logs like this. I haven't seen it on my caches, but they tend to attract fewer smartphone users.

Link to comment

Although it would be better if they encouraged detailed logs, the reality is that along with cache density comes more people finding many hides in a day, and the higher likelihood of clone copy and paste logs, which are not much different than "tftc". Even with an instant log from the app, most are not going to sit there and type out anything detailed, but rather just move on to the next one. Going home and typing out 30 unique logs after a long day out can be a chore that most will not do.

 

True, but we are not talking about the guy with 20,000 finds that has resorted to a C&P log for the 100 caches that he found today. We're talking about the new player, and the idea that this isn't, "Angry Birds".

 

Read my signature! Geocaching, it's not just a Smartphone game!

 

Whether its a new player or someone who has been around a bit, the trend is going to be towards less logging in direct proportion to cache density.

Link to comment

Anyone think about sending an email to these novice cachers, introducing them to the idea of writing original logs for themselves? They may not even know they're violating this unwritten rule (if there is such a thing).

 

I created a boilerplate message for these new cachers that I thought I could copy and paste and e-mail to them, explaining how unique logs are appreciated. Its only a few sentences though, and I dont know how effective it would be.

 

Good idea, but since a large percentage of Intro app users are not reachable by email, and many (don't have any idea of how many are the same as the unvalidated email users) use their 3 caches, then maybe 3 more, and then never return again, I'm afraid it will be largely ineffective.

 

I wasn't really serious, as a boilerplate message encouraging unique logs was intended to be ironic. :P

Link to comment

As a cache owner, I have received some short 'found it' logs. In general I am just happy that a cacher has found the cache. Even though my hides are in urban parks (with wonderful scenery and views) I have attempted to place the cache with the main goal of bringing people to places that might not otherwise know exist. So, even though the log may be short, I know that the finder would have had a nice excursion.

 

As an aside, I have noticed that many times the short log that I receive when the finder posted their initial log has been expanded when they got home. Unfortunately we don't receive another notification from GS when a log has been edited.

 

I am also like the nice photos that are posted which are often a surprise when I check the logs online as we don't get a notification of these postings either. When I post a find with my iPhone I usually attach one photo, but add others when at home and on the website.

Link to comment

I like being able to read the story of somebody finding my cache, but it doesn't bother me at all to see TFTC and nothing else. Especially since there is no requirement to make an online log of your visit. The only rule is to sign the physical log. Everybody can play the game how they want to as long as they follow that rule. I like to read the long logs, but I'm just as satisfied if you just leave a "." and nothing else.

 

I have to say, this is an unusual opinion coming from a 2005 joiner. Whether people want to believe it or not, the hoardes of . or Tftc logs came out of nowhere with the release of the smartphone apps in 2009 and 2010.

 

Don't take this is an insult, but I was obviously curious to see how many caches you've hidden that you would have this opinion, and I see you haven't exactly been a Geocaching fanatic those 9 years. :) That does actually explain (in my opinion), your "no big deal about lame logs" stance.

I've been a member since 2003 and I agree with Travelinmatt76. I don't mind a short log either. I hide caches for people to find, so as long as there's as smiley log that lets me know the cache was found it's accomplished my goal. If the finder is a good writer and tells an interesting story in their log then that's a bonus. But it's not required nor expected.

 

I also refute that the hoards of . or TFTC logs started with the smartphone. There were threads complaining of TFTC logs long befor there was a smartphone app. TFTC was already in the geocaching lexicon when I began in 2003. I myself left a . log on a cache early on. Certainly an app that allows logging in the field and provides a default log (perhaps empty) will seen a increase in the number of people who leave the default. Maybe you can claim an increase in the number of logs like this. I haven't seen it on my caches, but they tend to attract fewer smartphone users.

 

If I would have thought about you when posting that, I would have said you'd have no problem with them. That would make you, along with him, unusual. :anicute:

 

I refute you as well, Mr. T. no one, and I mean no one, was logging with periods before the smartphone apps. I've told this story before, but I'll tell it again. Sometime in the Spring of 2010, myself and another old-timer who joined in 2002, and probably had 100 hides then (more now), were out Geocaching, and she says "did you ever notice how many Tftc logs there are these days, and it's ALWAYS newbies doing it" So I was like "yeah, you're right, what's up with that?". It actually took several months for us to figure out where these HOARDS of lame logs were coming from. i.e., people logging from the field on their smartphones.

 

Yes, you can find an occasional TFTC or Found it log from 2008 or earlier, but not HOARDS of them. As I said in a different thread a couple weeks ago, finding a TFTC log from 2008 or earlier is about as rare as TFTC logger who has hidden any caches themselves. :)

Link to comment

As a cache owner, I have received some short 'found it' logs. In general I am just happy that a cacher has found the cache. Even though my hides are in urban parks (with wonderful scenery and views) I have attempted to place the cache with the main goal of bringing people to places that might not otherwise know exist. So, even though the log may be short, I know that the finder would have had a nice excursion.

 

As an aside, I have noticed that many times the short log that I receive when the finder posted their initial log has been expanded when they got home. Unfortunately we don't receive another notification from GS when a log has been edited.

 

I am also like the nice photos that are posted which are often a surprise when I check the logs online as we don't get a notification of these postings either. When I post a find with my iPhone I usually attach one photo, but add others when at home and on the website.

 

C'mon now, people who joined before 2009 are just posting here and saying they have no problem with lame logs just to make me look bad, right? :lol: I will never back down from the stance that MOST cache owners of the pre-smartphone era aren't fans of lame logs. I'm not crazy you know, their incidence has multiplied 10,000 fold with the advent of instant "thumb logging" from the field. :P

 

Toronto, eh? I actually have about 100 finds in The GTA, but unfortunately never found one of yours.

Link to comment

As an aside, I have noticed that many times the short log that I receive when the finder posted their initial log has been expanded when they got home. Unfortunately we don't receive another notification from GS when a log has been edited.

 

I've noticed that too. I would like to be notified if the finder updates their log but at the same time, I wouldn't want to be notified if all they do is fix punctuation or grammar. Perhaps if GS had a 'notify cache owner of your updated log' checkbox when editing a log, that would be helpful.

 

In general I am just happy that a cacher has found the cache.

 

Me, I thrive on feedback. I create my caches to provide a nice experience for finders. TFTC tells me that my cache is just another kernel in the popcorn bowl of caches. What's the point? If it's only to provide a finder with a smiley, that's just too superficial for me. I need there to be more substance to the game. It's the finders that tell me that I made their day a little more enjoyable, or write that they noticed the efforts I put into the cache, that keeps me motivated.

 

So, for those people who are happy to get TFTC and "." logs, what's the motivation to hide?

Edited by L0ne.R
Link to comment

So, for those people who are happy to get TFTC and "." logs, what's the motivation to hide?

 

I place caches I would like to find, in locations I would like to visit or with stories I would like to hear. Some of my favorites may be found only once every two or three years, some more often. I have been cutting back on the number of active caches that are listed. But my decisions about whether I want to keep the cache as part of a "core group" of caches I have placed, or archive them if I feel their purpose has been served, has nothing to do with logs I receive. I guess the location itself gives me the motivation I need.

 

It is always nice, of course, when someone writes a log that lets me know that they understand why I placed the cache. But a TFTC or a "." log does not change my opinion about the hide. It lets me know that someone has been there. Like a letterbox update on AtlasQuest that has no comment associated with it. I think about the log for about as long as it took them to write it.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

So, for those people who are happy to get TFTC and "." logs, what's the motivation to hide?

For people to find them. :mellow:

 

The operative word being "people" as opposed to "soul-less automatons".

That's a pretty harsh characterization of someone who may find it difficult to come up with something to say or who simply doesn't care to spend much time writing. I can accept that not every person is a great writer and that some may find writing a chore.

Link to comment

I'm not sure I agree with some of you that logging from your cell phone makes a worse log. However I started caching with my phone so that might be the problem. When I am there and just found the cache I can say all kinds of stuff about it and what just happened. However I have had a few trips with many caches with a group that I waited to log later when I got home. I had a much harder time coming up with something unique to say about every hide as they kind of blended together after finding them all. I prefer to log them at GZ when I find them. If it is one special one I might come back home and log it with the experience but in general my logs are better at the time of finding them then later. If I do have more to say I can do it later but I don't have a problem typing them out on my phone. I think it is more the cacher that would be lazy with the log rather then making the phone the problem. I could just as easily come home and type "TFTC" on all my finds as I could do on my phone.

Link to comment

So, for those people who are happy to get TFTC and "." logs, what's the motivation to hide?

For people to find them. :mellow:

 

The operative word being "people" as opposed to "soul-less automatons".

 

I think I get what you're saying...it's about connecting with people. TFTC and "." lack a connection. TFTC and "." tells us nothing about whether they found a specific cache, just that someone went to the cache page and logged a find. Might as well be a soul-less automaton.

Link to comment

I like being able to read the story of somebody finding my cache, but it doesn't bother me at all to see TFTC and nothing else. Especially since there is no requirement to make an online log of your visit. The only rule is to sign the physical log. Everybody can play the game how they want to as long as they follow that rule. I like to read the long logs, but I'm just as satisfied if you just leave a "." and nothing else.

 

I have to say, this is an unusual opinion coming from a 2005 joiner. Whether people want to believe it or not, the hoardes of . or Tftc logs came out of nowhere with the release of the smartphone apps in 2009 and 2010.

 

Don't take this is an insult, but I was obviously curious to see how many caches you've hidden that you would have this opinion, and I see you haven't exactly been a Geocaching fanatic those 9 years. :) That does actually explain (in my opinion), your "no big deal about lame logs" stance.

 

No insult taken. I haven't been as active as I would like to be, I'm just not able to do as much as I did before. I feel like my opinion would be the same even if I had 100 caches. I just get excited when I get the notice that someone visited, but I also know of several who signed the physical log but never visited online. Do you feel different about someone who doesn't log online versus somebody leaving a dot or TFTC?

Link to comment

Do you feel different about someone who doesn't log online versus somebody leaving a dot or TFTC?

 

Me, I get all happy when I get a notification in my email. I open up the email anticipating a write-up about our cache. Did they like the location, did they like the camo job, did they think the logbook cover was funny, etc. A dot is such a let down. Worse then not getting an online log at all. Neither the dot/TFTC, or no log at all are good for the game. Of 2 negatives I would say the dot/TFTC/copy&paste-without-any-reference-to-the-cache are the worst of the 2, because it's more of an in-your-face slight.

 

 

Link to comment

Do you feel different about someone who doesn't log online versus somebody leaving a dot or TFTC?

 

Me, I get all happy when I get a notification in my email. I open up the email anticipating a write-up about our cache. Did they like the location, did they like the camo job, did they think the logbook cover was funny, etc. A dot is such a let down. Worse then not getting an online log at all. Neither the dot/TFTC, or no log at all are good for the game. Of 2 negatives I would say the dot/TFTC/copy&paste-without-any-reference-to-the-cache are the worst of the 2, because it's more of an in-your-face slight.

That's how I am. I get a notice in my mail that someone logged one of my caches, and my little heart goes pitty-pat. When I open it up and there's a nothing post, it's such a let down. I can't help it.

 

It's been so prevalent lately, that I'm afraid to click on the link and read the log. But as a cache owner, I read every log no matter what. I'm always hopeful that I'll get that one nice log (which I do get here and there, and especially on certain caches like our virts).

Link to comment

It's hard for me to understand how Groundspeak could possibly think that "one more find for me!", with its the emphasis on the finder's numbers, no thanks to the cache owner, could possibly be an improvement....

 

No thanks to the cache owner??

 

"That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache."

 

... which is about as thankful as receiving an email six weeks after Christmas saying "thank you so much for the gift you gave me". Copy-and-paste logs don't express thanks whatever form of words they happen to use.

Link to comment

It's hard for me to understand how Groundspeak could possibly think that "one more find for me!", with its the emphasis on the finder's numbers, no thanks to the cache owner, could possibly be an improvement....

 

No thanks to the cache owner??

 

"That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache."

 

... which is about as thankful as receiving an email six weeks after Christmas saying "thank you so much for the gift you gave me". Copy-and-paste logs don't express thanks whatever form of words they happen to use.

 

If I were to find one of your caches, regardless of what I write, the log will close with,

 

Thanks team tisri...

Link to comment

I've been geocaching since 2003. When I started, pretty much all the caches were big (ammo box/5-gal bucket) and required at least a bit of a hike to reach. AND there was usually just one cache on a trail, however long that trail may have been. It was common to first write a pretty significant log in the log book and then to elaborate in the online log. You'll notice in some old caches that still have the original log that there is a page for just one log. It made the hunt more interesting for the finder, the CO, and any subsequent finders. I've actually taken old damp logs out of my caches and enjoyed sitting down to read all the entries. Now there are so many caches getting placed, some with little thought or effort put into the placement. Now I'm not one of those "old-timers" that openly says "I hate nano's" - I think they have their place and I've enjoyed finding caches of all shapes and sizes. But in all honesty, I get a little irritated with new cachers who go out and place a bazillion caches and it seems as though they just drove around tossing nanos out the window (figuratively speaking). The only real effort seems to be in the slightly creative title which simply reflects the name of the business where the cache is located. When I find these types of caches I put about as much effort into my log as the CO put into the placement/write up. Especially in situations where the CO has clearly neglected to maintain their easily accessable caches for long periods of time. (My feeling, if you have a bunch of P&G's and 10% are being DNF'd for months and you can't get out to maintain them maybe you should rethink your hides. As geocaching.com says, if the only reason you're placing a cache in a particular location is to plant a cache, maybe you should rethink the hide).

 

I apologize if this post offends some. I agree, everyone can play the game in whatever manner they choose. I try not to let my pet peeves get to me - this IS afterall something I do for fun and getting irritated isn't really fun. I'm working on a 366 challenge so I'm always going to take advantage of new hides, regardless of how they were placed.

 

ALoha

 

Unimogger

Link to comment

After seeing several of these "logs" over the past few weeks guessed it was The App© but came here seeking confirmation. Apparently the interface needs work as about half of the logs are duplicated seconds later. The majority of the users have a profile that says they have "never" been on the Geocaching.com. I agree with the others who have suggested that the new users don't understand that this is a game played with other people. They might as well just be “checking in” or playing a scan-the-barcode-game for all they know. I’ll be treating these logs as a “Needs Maintenance” since obviously the finder isn’t being instructed on what to do after making the find by the app.

 

I’m one of those dinosaurs that really misses the days before Casual Caching took over. Better logs, better over-all hides and finders who gave enough of a rat’s posterior to at least re-hide the cache and not steal all of the swag. On the other hand, the massive influx of new blood has yielded a positive revenue stream and allowed us to have better maps and the incredibly useful API. Groundspeak keeps making it easier and easier to make a start in Geocaching and that erodes the foundation that most of us squeaky wheels ride on. It is only a matter of time before they roll out a change to the website auto-filling some template or other. Maybe they’ll go the way of the Trackables and just let you “visit” a cache for +1 smiley. Since that featured rolled out I get 95% less logs on my (few remaining) travelers. So I stopped releasing them. Most have now been taken out of circulation (I wont say “stolen” as that implies malicious intent) by the same aforementioned uneducated casual cachers.

 

Remember when you could submit really great logs to GC.com? That feature vanished years ago when they realized nobody cared except a few of us complainers on the forum. Logs take up disk space which is an expense they might be able to eliminate. Well, they can run their business how ever they want but I promise this: If I stop getting logs I’ll stop hiding caches.

Link to comment

You know what is a good idea. Stop reading the forums. Just play the game. I am having more fun the less I read & participate in the forums. But if you want to torture yourself and bring the game down...by all means...keep posting.

Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. ;)

Link to comment

You know what is a good idea. Stop reading the forums. Just play the game. I am having more fun the less I read & participate in the forums. But if you want to torture yourself and bring the game down...by all means...keep posting.

Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. ;)

 

"Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature?

Link to comment

You know what is a good idea. Stop reading the forums. Just play the game. I am having more fun the less I read & participate in the forums. But if you want to torture yourself and bring the game down...by all means...keep posting.

Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. ;)

 

"Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature?

 

I love the quote too. And also the part of seeing a few cachers here that are of like mind regarding the game devolving into parking for points. We are much fewer and far between than you think. For example, I totally busted a 2002 joining couple I know last weekend finding a keyholder on a clothing donation bin in a parking lot. :o

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

"Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature?

Not at all. This thread is a showcase of entertaining sigs. B)

 

We are much fewer and far between than you think. For example, I totally busted a 2002 joining couple I know last weekend finding a keyholder on a clothing donation bin in a parking lot. :o

The game was born in the forests and will die in the parking lots! I think we've all been there though. I must admit that as rookie cacher I once searched a dumpster behind a fast food joint... and made the find. I'm not proud. BUT (returning to the topic) I still managed a 50 word log entry. :D If it ain't worth logging, it wasn't worth finding.

Link to comment

You know what is a good idea. Stop reading the forums. Just play the game. I am having more fun the less I read & participate in the forums. But if you want to torture yourself and bring the game down...by all means...keep posting.

Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. ;)

 

"Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature?

 

I love the quote too. And also the part of seeing a few cachers here that are of like mind regarding the game devolving into parking for points. We are much fewer and far between than you think. For example, I totally busted a 2002 joining couple I know last weekend finding a keyholder on a clothing donation bin in a parking lot. :o

 

Yikes! I placed a keyholder on a clothing donation bin in a parking lot. Of course it was my job to service that bin on a daily basis, so that particular cache was the best maintained cache in the area. http://coord.info/GC1YPZB

Link to comment

You know what is a good idea. Stop reading the forums. Just play the game. I am having more fun the less I read & participate in the forums. But if you want to torture yourself and bring the game down...by all means...keep posting.

Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. ;)

 

"Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature?

a GREAT name for a cache!
Link to comment

I'm not bashing here! This is actually a positive development for the "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache" text. I was surfing a few cache pages where I'll be vacationing in a week, and I couldn't help but notice an under 20 find person who has never validated their account nor visited the website logged their last two caches with "Xhwlcna" and "Snlzcbajf" (random characters thumbed out on a phone in 20 miliseconds). Curiosity got the better of me, so I went to see if they had logged all their caches that way. Nope, the log before that was "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache."

 

See, I told you it was a positive development. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

I'm not bashing here! This is actually a positive development for the "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache" text. I was surfing a few cache pages where I'll be vacationing in a week, and I couldn't help but notice an under 20 find person who has never validated their account nor visited the website logged their last two caches with "Xhwlcna" and "Snlzcbajf" (random characters thumbed out on a phone in 20 miliseconds). Curiosity got the better of me, so I went to see if they had logged all their caches that way. Nope, the log before that was "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache."

 

See, I told you it was a positive development. :rolleyes:

 

"Xtra Hard We Love Caching Nice Ammocan"

 

"Sneezed Near Lock'n'lock, Zipper Caught Balls And Jammed, Fun"

 

Those are actually common acronyms in Toronto which practices a Rob Ford style of caching.

Link to comment

I'm not bashing here! This is actually a positive development for the "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache" text. I was surfing a few cache pages where I'll be vacationing in a week, and I couldn't help but notice an under 20 find person who has never validated their account nor visited the website logged their last two caches with "Xhwlcna" and "Snlzcbajf" (random characters thumbed out on a phone in 20 miliseconds). Curiosity got the better of me, so I went to see if they had logged all their caches that way. Nope, the log before that was "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache."

 

See, I told you it was a positive development. :rolleyes:

 

"Xtra Hard We Love Caching Nice Ammocan"

 

"Sneezed Near Lock'n'lock, Zipper Caught Balls And Jammed, Fun"

 

Those are actually common acronyms in Toronto which practices a Rob Ford style of caching.

 

Thanks, I think that's exactly what they meant. Except one of them was an Earthcache. I'm going to guess the owner did not receive an email outlining the required "educational task". :ph34r: You know, I really do try not to be a bad guy around here. But do I hide Geocaches for people to do this: dfkdsjl? By the way, that took 15 milliseconds, not the 20 milliseconds I quoted. Was it really that long ago that the worst thing about n00bs was that they didn't know how to log Travel Bugs, and they would type spoilers in their logs? :lol:

Link to comment

I'm not bashing here! This is actually a positive development for the "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache" text. I was surfing a few cache pages where I'll be vacationing in a week, and I couldn't help but notice an under 20 find person who has never validated their account nor visited the website logged their last two caches with "Xhwlcna" and "Snlzcbajf" (random characters thumbed out on a phone in 20 miliseconds). Curiosity got the better of me, so I went to see if they had logged all their caches that way. Nope, the log before that was "That’s one more find for me! Thanks so much for hiding this geocache."

 

See, I told you it was a positive development. :rolleyes:

 

"Xtra Hard We Love Caching Nice Ammocan"

 

"Sneezed Near Lock'n'lock, Zipper Caught Balls And Jammed, Fun"

 

Those are actually common acronyms in Toronto which practices a Rob Ford style of caching.

 

Thanks, I think that's exactly what they meant. Except one of them was an Earthcache. I'm going to guess the owner did not receive an email outlining the required "educational task". :ph34r: You know, I really do try not to be a bad guy around here. But do I hide Geocaches for people to do this: dfkdsjl? By the way, that took 15 milliseconds, not the 20 milliseconds I quoted. Was it really that long ago that the worst thing about n00bs was that they didn't know how to log Travel Bugs, and they would type spoilers in their logs? :lol:

 

Actually, if I was looking for good caches to find when visiting a new area and saw a bunch of logs like this, I'd probably skip them. There is a GSAK macro that will give a full report, number of logs, min, max and average. Of course, you have to get all of the logs on the caches in your target area.

 

I think that I may start using this method for selecting caches to find while traveling.

 

Also, I've made it clear several times in this forum that I am not a big fan of deleting found logs, and out of almost 8000 logs, I have only had to delete one. If I got a, "dgyrufui", from an invalidated member, it would be an instant "poof".

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...
×
×
  • Create New...