Jump to content

Unnecessary tracking bug posts.


DireWolf821
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

I was following a tracking bug I had found about a month ago. I did what I thought was the right thing. I found it in one cache, then placed in in a different cache a few days later. I posted that I retrieved it the day I retrieved it, and posted that I had placed it the day I placed it. I just logged on to see where this bug has traveled since I placed it and the SAME person has logged about 4 pages worth of posts saying that they took it to this cache and that cache and every cache they went to for about 1 week straight like it was visiting its relatives or something. They never did PLACE the bug, they just kept it. I found this a bit infuriating. This sounds like bad geocaching etiquette to me. Am I wrong?

Link to comment

Depends who you ask. Many agree with you. Many (like me) don't. I'm happy if my TBS visit lots of caches. That's traveling. So what that it's with one person? What's the diff? They'll place it eventually & that's fine.

 

What I don't like is what's happening now. One is sitting in a quiet cache for months, and the other is sitting on someone's desk - they told me that with a young child they can't cache much.

 

So mine are dormant. I would *much* prefer that they were visiting caches - with one person or 25 different people.

Link to comment

I'm of the school of wanting my bug to go to a specific place (or places) and the 156 visiting logs to all the local caches are an annoyance to me. So there are at least two schools of thought on the subject. Probably a lot more. I look at the goal of the bug and try to move it in the direction it wants to go. However, many goals are simply "to travel" in which case racking up miles by visiting does that job and is probably what the owner wants to happen.

 

I had/have (not sure which right now) my first one with a goal to go from NY to Arizona and then back to Kentucky. It finally did start moving west after a lot of visiting in NY and someone in Michigan took it to Texas. I was pleased when someone almost immediately picked it up there and said he would move it on. I assumed he meant west toward Arizona. He took it back to Michigan.

 

Personally I wouldn't take a bug visiting even if that was the desire of the owner simply because I don't want to have to fool around with all those posts although apparently the app on a smart phone will automatically do that for you and apparently does so by default. I have a dumb phone so that isn't possible and don't think I would use it if I had a smart phone. And that may be why all those posts are happening. The cacher may not realize his app logs a visit automatically when he logs a find on a cache.

Link to comment
the SAME person has logged about 4 pages worth of posts saying that they took it to this cache and that cache and every cache they went to for about 1 week straight like it was visiting its relatives or something. They never did PLACE the bug, they just kept it. I found this a bit infuriating. This sounds like bad geocaching etiquette to me. Am I wrong?

You're right. The TBs have inscribed "Do Not Keep Me". There is no confusion.

 

OK, in some cases the TB Owner has given permission to the taker to make such Visits. I place info on all of my TB pages specifying, "The unending automatic visit logs with no photos, no personalized text, make it seem like there's a problem. Please physically place my TB into a container and log that you did so, within two weeks of picking it up."

 

Actual Geocachers have bent that statement to mean "Keep it forever, he doesn't want 'Visits'", or "Throw it away, the guy's too demanding". So it's a no-win regardless, when Takers are determined to play without regard to other's property. But if you want to specify a certain TB etiquette, it seems that people need it spelled out on each page. The page will become many pages. It's unbelievable that a simple "move it, place it, log it" request is not enough.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

I once thought that highly specific travel instruction were realistic. Since then I realized that travel in general is a more realistic TB goal. If a TB does not get lost or stranded, consider yourself lucky and enjoy the unexpected randomness of it all.

 

As for photos, they're uncommon in TB logs. They happen equally with visits and drops, in my experience.

 

Phone cachers may be more likely to post photos, because it is much quicker to add a photo from the phone than to load the photo onto the computer and then upload it. If you're efficient, it may only be a minute or so more with the computer, but for high-numbers cachers that could make a difference.

Link to comment

Perhaps that person plans to dip it in more caches?

 

Over the years, I've come across some TBs with the goal of visiting as many caches as possible because they're in some race. I'll email the owner and ask if he or she is serious about that. If so, I'll take the TB on my trips and dip it in a thousand or two caches until the owner is satisfied. Other ones want mileage, so I'll log it in at least one cache every day until the owner is happy. Perhaps this person is doing the same thing.

 

I tend to make TBs that people can't seem to resist keeping, so I lose a lot of them after only a few hops. I'd be happy just to see my stuff continuing to be active. The only reason I wouldn't want someone taking my TBs to every cache they visit is because I don't want to deal with even more geocaching email than I already get--and I have one email address completely devoted to just Planet Groundspeak®.

 

The bottom line is this: as long as the TB's owner doesn't mind, it's fine.

Link to comment

I once thought that highly specific travel instruction were realistic. Since then I realized that travel in general is a more realistic TB goal. If a TB does not get lost or stranded, consider yourself lucky and enjoy the unexpected randomness of it all.

 

As for photos, they're uncommon in TB logs. They happen equally with visits and drops, in my experience.

 

Phone cachers may be more likely to post photos, because it is much quicker to add a photo from the phone than to load the photo onto the computer and then upload it. If you're efficient, it may only be a minute or so more with the computer, but for high-numbers cachers that could make a difference.

 

I'm thinking the problem with the very specific travel instructions is, for some reason or another, there aren't any travel instructions with the TB, and you don't find out about it until you go home after snagging the bug, log it, and realize you took a TB that wanted to see all counties in Pennsylvania to Missouri. I did that once...could have sworn I attached travel instructions. But it happens, and, like you, as long as it keeps moving, I'm happy.

 

So far, of the ones I released, one disappeared from the cache I dropped it off in (marked missing by a site administrator), one was taken WAY out of the original boundaries (more upset it was placed over a year ago, with a month later DNF in the cache it was supposed to be in, so it's probably gone), one is most likely missing since it's been in the same cache in Maine for over a year (and plenty of cache finds since then), and one is now in Switzerland (placed date, and last cache find date, match, so I'm hoping it's still there). But unfortunately, that's the nature of the game.

Link to comment

TB's record mileage. You get a map to show its rout gaining that mileage. So to visit each cache as it goes around that rout shows its exact rout gaining that mileage.

 

The mileage is more accurate and you can see its exact journey as accurately as possible. You are incorrect as the TB wasn't yours therefore you have no grounds to get upset. As long as you fulfilled your role correctly, walk away happy. If someone else doesn't - then it's nobody's business apart from the TB owner and the TB holder. Too much assumed authority in caching all of a sudden - "hey never did PLACE the bug, they just kept it. I found this a bit infuriating. This sounds like bad geocaching etiquette to me. Am I wrong?"

 

Infuriating eh lol. Wow. Enraged TB watcher goes boozyquack and launches a campaign of terror on unsuspecting TB visitor. "The last thing I remember was pressing visit all and the door was smashed down and it all went black, and then the paramedics holding my hand calling my name". The perpetrator was found in a puddle of their own urine after suffering an aneurism.

 

My advice would be do not investigate TB hotels it may drive you to do something catesphrophic. You'll get cachers tic and want to hurt small animals.

Link to comment

TB's record mileage. You get a map to show its rout gaining that mileage. So to visit each cache as it goes around that rout shows its exact rout gaining that mileage.

 

The mileage is more accurate and you can see its exact journey as accurately as possible. You are incorrect as the TB wasn't yours therefore you have no grounds to get upset. As long as you fulfilled your role correctly, walk away happy. If someone else doesn't - then it's nobody's business apart from the TB owner and the TB holder. Too much assumed authority in caching all of a sudden - "hey never did PLACE the bug, they just kept it. I found this a bit infuriating. This sounds like bad geocaching etiquette to me. Am I wrong?"

 

Infuriating eh lol. Wow. Enraged TB watcher goes boozyquack and launches a campaign of terror on unsuspecting TB visitor. "The last thing I remember was pressing visit all and the door was smashed down and it all went black, and then the paramedics holding my hand calling my name". The perpetrator was found in a puddle of their own urine after suffering an aneurism.

 

My advice would be do not investigate TB hotels it may drive you to do something catesphrophic. You'll get cachers tic and want to hurt small animals.

 

I now have an awesome new word to use: boozyquack.

 

I love it!

Link to comment

I just learned to multi-quote. Cool.

 

I was following a tracking bug I had found about a month ago. I did what I thought was the right thing. I found it in one cache, then placed in in a different cache a few days later. I posted that I retrieved it the day I retrieved it, and posted that I had placed it the day I placed it. I just logged on to see where this bug has traveled since I placed it and the SAME person has logged about 4 pages worth of posts saying that they took it to this cache and that cache and every cache they went to for about 1 week straight like it was visiting its relatives or something. They never did PLACE the bug, they just kept it. I found this a bit infuriating. This sounds like bad geocaching etiquette to me. Am I wrong?

 

Being reasonably new at this game, with 2 of our own bugs out and about, I didn't find it infuriating as such, but it didn't seem logical - just quirky. Why would ya? It felt beside the point.

 

Depends who you ask. Many agree with you. Many (like me) don't. I'm happy if my TBS visit lots of caches. That's traveling. So what that it's with one person? What's the diff? They'll place it eventually & that's fine.

 

What I don't like is what's happening now. One is sitting in a quiet cache for months, and the other is sitting on someone's desk - they told me that with a young child they can't cache much.

 

So mine are dormant. I would *much* prefer that they were visiting caches - with one person or 25 different people.

 

But then this - this makes sense! NOW it feels logical!

 

Perhaps that person plans to dip it in more caches?

 

Over the years, I've come across some TBs with the goal of visiting as many caches as possible because they're in some race. I'll email the owner and ask if he or she is serious about that. If so, I'll take the TB on my trips and dip it in a thousand or two caches until the owner is satisfied. Other ones want mileage, so I'll log it in at least one cache every day until the owner is happy. Perhaps this person is doing the same thing.

 

I tend to make TBs that people can't seem to resist keeping, so I lose a lot of them after only a few hops. I'd be happy just to see my stuff continuing to be active. The only reason I wouldn't want someone taking my TBs to every cache they visit is because I don't want to deal with even more geocaching email than I already get--and I have one email address completely devoted to just Planet Groundspeak®.

 

The bottom line is this: as long as the TB's owner doesn't mind, it's fine.

 

I guess thats a great final word really. Owner pays, so if owners happy, that's a win.

Link to comment

Depends who you ask. Many agree with you. Many (like me) don't. I'm happy if my TBS visit lots of caches. That's traveling. So what that it's with one person? What's the diff? They'll place it eventually & that's fine.

 

What I don't like is what's happening now. One is sitting in a quiet cache for months, and the other is sitting on someone's desk - they told me that with a young child they can't cache much.

 

So mine are dormant. I would *much* prefer that they were visiting caches - with one person or 25 different people.

 

This TB is likely not going anywhere. It's possibly mounted on the cachers wall in his mothers basement while he posts virtual visit logs.

 

Infuriating? I don't know, but it's certainly annoying. Pages of nonsensical logs which don't mean anything, with fake mileage, and no actual movement. And it's becoming more popular.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
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 1
×
×
  • Create New...