Anyone else getting the "yay" logs?

[Mr.Yuck]

As far as the "caching career" of the person The Incredible's mentions, allow me to quote myself from post #9.

 

No matter, the chances of a "yay" logger going on to become an active Geocacher are like .0000001%

 

The cacher in question actually found 1100 caches before disappearing. The last cache they found was mine and it was right next to a lake. Maybe they fell in just after logging on their smartphone.

 

1,100? They'll be back. I've noticed a guy in my region who joined in 2011 I think with 1,600 finds who still drops TFTC on 99% of caches. Record show's he's never attended an event, and no one knows who he is. Just living in his own little isolated TFTC bubble there. And he's generally a "cache in the woods" guy too. He's not dropping them on LPC's at Wal-Mart.

[+briansnat]

There was a cacher active in my area that would log :} for a find and :{ for DNF and that was it. Another more experienced cacher emailed them after he received said log and explained that it would be more nice to log. The cacher changed to TFTC for finds and Boo for DNFs. One puzzle of mine has many Boo logs LOL.

 

The rare times lame loggers are confronted (and I've never done this myself, but have heard about it), is in the extremely rare cases where they DO go on to become regular Geocachers with hundreds or more finds, and still drop horrifically lame acronym or two word logs on caches. Then they go and get all offended and do stuff like you say. You can't win, can you?

 

There was a new cacher in my area who was finding a lot of my caches and logging only TFTC. When I met him at an event he was telling me much he enjoyed my caches. I played a little dumb and said "Oh, I thought you didn't like them because writing TFTC is often used as an insult. "It usually means that the cache was so lame you couldn't think of anything else to write." He was kind of horrified that his TFTC could be taken to mean that. Immediately after we met he started writing some of the better logs around. Granted this was a few years ago when TFTC usually was meant as an insult.

 

What is really odd are the uber-short logs on high D/T caches. Makes you wonder if they somehow logged the wrong cache. 5/5 that takes a couple hours = "Nice"? Huh?

 

I'm seeing more of that. It used to be that if you didn't like TFTC logs on your caches, the wisdom was to place caches that are worthy of more than a TFTC. Now I'm seeing these one one or two logs on epic caches. How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

 

It does make me wonder if the person actually found it, or was either armchairing it or logged the wrong cache by accident.

Edited February 1, 2015 by briansnat

[+Chrysalides]

How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"?

 

This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend

 

Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view.

 

I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way.

[Mr.Yuck]

How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"?

 

This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend

 

Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view.

 

I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way.

 

Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind.

[+Chrysalides]

Alright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged.

 

Thank you

 

You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous.

 

(I wish you had used the word "inconceivable" instead ) Early cachers write long logs, and the rest of you feel the peer pressure to do so? With a much smaller community then, there may be more tendency to conform. Fewer caches to log means you can devote more time to logging them? Different type of players then? I'm not a sociologist, and I don't play one on TV. I'm just an anonymous Internet ranter

[Mr.Yuck]

Alright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged.

 

Thank you

 

You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous.

 

(I wish you had used the word "inconceivable" instead ) Early cachers write long logs, and the rest of you feel the peer pressure to do so? With a much smaller community then, there may be more tendency to conform. Fewer caches to log means you can devote more time to logging them? Different type of players then? I'm not a sociologist, and I don't play one on TV. I'm just an anonymous Internet ranter

 

What am I supposed to go all Princess Bride on you? I think not. I'd love to go all sociologist on lame logs. Except Sociology doesn't really exist, other than in College. And then people who get like their masters or PHD's in sociology go on to teach it in college, and perpetuate the whole thing.

[+terratin]

We got a "1858" log yesterday, on an extensive multi, by someone finding their first cache Hmm.. it's a 2/2 multi. I wonder if the introapp would show it as the CO has a validated email address but never visited this website

[+narcissa]

How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"?

 

This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend

 

Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view.

 

I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way.

 

Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind.

 

I know a few older cachers who just aren't that comfortable typing on a computer, so their online logs have always leaned toward brevity, even in the early days.

 

My husband takes a long time to log caches because he tries to write something for each one he finds, and he ends up with a backlog. So of course, there are these ridiculous people who think there should be time limits on cache logging.

 

It's just not possible to keep up with everyone's arbitrary standards and expectations. I appreciate a detailed log note as much as the next person, but "yay" or "tftc" or "trouve en solo" isn't that big a deal.

[Mr.Yuck]

How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"?

 

This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend

 

Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view.

 

I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way.

 

Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind.

 

I know a few older cachers who just aren't that comfortable typing on a computer, so their online logs have always leaned toward brevity, even in the early days.

 

My husband takes a long time to log caches because he tries to write something for each one he finds, and he ends up with a backlog. So of course, there are these ridiculous people who think there should be time limits on cache logging.

 

It's just not possible to keep up with everyone's arbitrary standards and expectations. I appreciate a detailed log note as much as the next person, but "yay" or "tftc" or "trouve en solo" isn't that big a deal.

 

Ya' know, I've been ranting about this for like 4 years now. No one, and I mean no one, was thumbing out acronym, or two word logs in the old days. Defend lame logging, deny that it's 99.9% from smartphones logging from the cache site in the field, or whatever.

 

Hey, do you get any MPLC logs up there? That's the French equivalent for TFTC, for those who don't know.

[knowschad]

I was just looking atthis cache in reference to a different thread when I saw my first "Yayy!" log. I think that it has more lame logs than any cache I've looked at.

 

"Ga County Challenge "

"Found it"

"Tftc :-)"

"Got it"

"Foind with pcerica"

"Tftc"

"#newnanite rule again ??"

"Thth!"

"Tweet tweet"

"Log full. TFTC."

"Humming birds"

"A wasp was sitting right there so we didn't try and sign the log. "

"SL"

"Log is full"

"Sl"

"Yayy "

"F"

"A & D. 11:08"

[+narcissa]

How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"?

 

This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend

 

Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view.

 

I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way.

 

Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind.

 

I know a few older cachers who just aren't that comfortable typing on a computer, so their online logs have always leaned toward brevity, even in the early days.

 

My husband takes a long time to log caches because he tries to write something for each one he finds, and he ends up with a backlog. So of course, there are these ridiculous people who think there should be time limits on cache logging.

 

It's just not possible to keep up with everyone's arbitrary standards and expectations. I appreciate a detailed log note as much as the next person, but "yay" or "tftc" or "trouve en solo" isn't that big a deal.

 

Ya' know, I've been ranting about this for like 4 years now. No one, and I mean no one, was thumbing out acronym, or two word logs in the old days. Defend lame logging, deny that it's 99.9% from smartphones logging from the cache site in the field, or whatever.

 

Hey, do you get any MPLC logs up there? That's the French equivalent for TFTC, for those who don't know.

 

I just don't think lame logging is worth the energy it takes to be annoyed by it. The people who are really bad about it will never know any better, but there is a risk that a good cacher, brief logger will feel discouraged by the complaints.

 

We certainly do get MPLC and PAT (premier à trouvé) logs and other French acronyms around here, since our region straddles Ontario and Quebec. Figuring out what they mean is kind of fun. These aren't caching specific, but I'm particularly delighted by "FDS" and "TBK" (though that one doesn't show up in logs too much unless your cache is a real bugger).

[Mr.Yuck]

How do you hike four miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook and write only "Found it"?

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"?

 

This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend

 

Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view.

 

I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way.

 

Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind.

 

I know a few older cachers who just aren't that comfortable typing on a computer, so their online logs have always leaned toward brevity, even in the early days.

 

My husband takes a long time to log caches because he tries to write something for each one he finds, and he ends up with a backlog. So of course, there are these ridiculous people who think there should be time limits on cache logging.

 

It's just not possible to keep up with everyone's arbitrary standards and expectations. I appreciate a detailed log note as much as the next person, but "yay" or "tftc" or "trouve en solo" isn't that big a deal.

 

Ya' know, I've been ranting about this for like 4 years now. No one, and I mean no one, was thumbing out acronym, or two word logs in the old days. Defend lame logging, deny that it's 99.9% from smartphones logging from the cache site in the field, or whatever.

 

Hey, do you get any MPLC logs up there? That's the French equivalent for TFTC, for those who don't know.

 

I just don't think lame logging is worth the energy it takes to be annoyed by it. The people who are really bad about it will never know any better, but there is a risk that a good cacher, brief logger will feel discouraged by the complaints.

 

We certainly do get MPLC and PAT (premier à trouvé) logs and other French acronyms around here, since our region straddles Ontario and Quebec. Figuring out what they mean is kind of fun. These aren't caching specific, but I'm particularly delighted by "FDS" and "TBK" (though that one doesn't show up in logs too much unless your cache is a real bugger).

 

I guess it's my pet peeve, lame logging. Yes, I'm afraid I'm annoyed. Maybe if it wasn't a relatively recent development. Like if people were dropping "yay" and "found it" on a regular basis before the end of 2000.

 

I have looked at a few caches in Quebec over the years, especially in Montreal (thought about going there a couple years ago, but it never happened). I have seen "MPLC" logs, and I thought it was cute. Not familiar with PAT. I would associate that with Point After Touchdown.

[cezanne]

The people who are really bad about it will never know any better, but there is a risk that a good cacher, brief logger will feel discouraged by the complaints.

 

 

I do not know how you define the term "good cacher". I'm on my part less concerned that brief loggers that like e.g. a local relatively new cacher who typically logs with "Gef" which apparently is his abbreviation for "gefunden" which is German means found gets discouraged than the established hiders of nice caches get frustrated and archive their caches if such logs become common.

In the former case I would not miss anything if such a cacher left geocaching while I would miss a lot if some hiders of caches I appreciate very much left.

 

The only reason why I have maintained some of my caches for over ten years is that I get reasonable logs most of the time. If every 1 out of 5 logs received is like Gef or TFTC I certainly would give up.

[+narcissa]

The people who are really bad about it will never know any better, but there is a risk that a good cacher, brief logger will feel discouraged by the complaints.

 

 

I do not know how you define the term "good cacher". I'm on my part less concerned that brief loggers that like e.g. a local relatively new cacher who typically logs with "Gef" which apparently is his abbreviation for "gefunden" which is German means found gets discouraged than the established hiders of nice caches get frustrated and archive their caches if such logs become common.

In the former case I would not miss anything if such a cacher left geocaching while I would miss a lot if some hiders of caches I appreciate very much left.

 

The only reason why I have maintained some of my caches for over ten years is that I get reasonable logs most of the time. If every 1 out of 5 logs received is like Gef or TFTC I certainly would give up.

 

I am thinking about some of the older cachers I know who just aren't that into computers or smartphones, and really just use them as minimally as possible to facilitate geocaching. They're good cachers. They place good caches, which you might discover as long as you can overlook a bare cache description. They find caches and write in the logbooks, and might even trade swag. They go to events. They're just not into typing a whole lot, and that's okay.

 

I have little sympathy for anyone who overlooks all the happy logs from finders who appreciated the cache, and archives their caches in a snit because someone logged "TFTC" or "Gef." Good riddance.

[cezanne]

I am thinking about some of the older cachers I know who just aren't that into computers or smartphones, and really just use them as minimally as possible to facilitate geocaching. They're good cachers. They place good caches, which you might discover as long as you can overlook a bare cache description. They find caches and write in the logbooks, and might even trade swag. They go to events. They're just not into typing a whole lot, and that's okay.

 

Actually, none of those who writes such logs in my areas is old - they are typically considerably younger than I'm and most of them own a smartphone (I don't).

It's not about writing long log stories. "gef" does not even tell something about the condition of the cache and that's definitely not enough for me to keep me motivated to still maintain my caches despite the big changes in geocaching which almost all have been to the negative for me.

 

Cezanne

[+L0ne.R]

The people who are really bad about it will never know any better, but there is a risk that a good cacher, brief logger will feel discouraged by the complaints.

 

 

I do not know how you define the term "good cacher". I'm on my part less concerned that brief loggers that like e.g. a local relatively new cacher who typically logs with "Gef" which apparently is his abbreviation for "gefunden" which is German means found gets discouraged than the established hiders of nice caches get frustrated and archive their caches if such logs become common.

In the former case I would not miss anything if such a cacher left geocaching while I would miss a lot if some hiders of caches I appreciate very much left.

 

The only reason why I have maintained some of my caches for over ten years is that I get reasonable logs most of the time. If every 1 out of 5 logs received is like Gef or TFTC I certainly would give up.

 

I am thinking about some of the older cachers I know who just aren't that into computers or smartphones, and really just use them as minimally as possible to facilitate geocaching. They're good cachers. They place good caches, which you might discover as long as you can overlook a bare cache description. They find caches and write in the logbooks, and might even trade swag. They go to events. They're just not into typing a whole lot, and that's okay.

 

I have little sympathy for anyone who overlooks all the happy logs from finders who appreciated the cache, and archives their caches in a snit because someone logged "TFTC" or "Gef." Good riddance.

 

I too would give up on over a decade of cache ownership. Not in a public snit, more of a resignation i.e. submitting to the new personal preference of cachers. Did that with Letterbox Hybrids. No longer hide them, deleted my LBH PQ, no longer put up a big fuss about them in the forums. Archiving ours helped me move on. I rarely search for them unless I hear/read good things about one. My decision has been rather cathartic.

I expect it would also be cathartic if we archive our caches once 'Yay', 'TFTC', 'Found it', '' and cut-n-paste power-trail-type logs become the norm - take up more than 50% of the logs, and the logs start to aggravate more than motivate.

[knowschad]

I am thinking about some of the older cachers I know who just aren't that into computers or smartphones, and really just use them as minimally as possible to facilitate geocaching. They're good cachers. They place good caches, which you might discover as long as you can overlook a bare cache description. They find caches and write in the logbooks, and might even trade swag. They go to events. They're just not into typing a whole lot, and that's okay.

 

Actually, none of those who writes such logs in my areas is old - they are typically considerably younger than I'm and most of them own a smartphone (I don't).

It's not about writing long log stories. "gef" does not even tell something about the condition of the cache and that's definitely not enough for me to keep me motivated to still maintain my caches despite the big changes in geocaching which almost all have been to the negative for me.

 

Cezanne

 

Yup. I haven't committed "geocide" or done anything as drastic as archiving any of my caches because of this trend in lazy logging, but I have pretty much stopped hiding new ones and have changed many of my older hides to PMO caches because of them. I realize that it isn't true for all cache owners, but the feedback that I got from finders of my caches is what kept me going as a cache owner. I hid pretty good caches, and went through a lot of time, trouble, and money making some of them. I'm not going to do that for a "yay for me".

[+dprovan]

I am thinking about some of the older cachers I know who just aren't that into computers or smartphones, and really just use them as minimally as possible to facilitate geocaching.

What I'm noticing lately is that long time cachers that are just fine with computers, but have tens of thousands of finds, are starting to be more minimalist in their logs. I'm thinking they're getting a little weary of writing logs after writing so many. I don't mind them being brief, but I do find that it makes me question whether I'm behind the times when I write a few paragraphs. And while I think the bigger issue with the "yay" logs is something else -- like not really realizing that people are actually reading and care about what they write -- I have to wonder if newbies are seeing a string of half sentence logs, not always relevant to the particular cache, and thinking that such logs are the norm.

 

Interestingly, the long time cachers I have in mind all have many, many hides themselves, so I have to think that they have no problem getting such logs on their own caches.

[+Ladybug Kids]

I simply remind myself that logs like that say much more about the cache finder than the cache. The advent of the smart phone and the ability to preload a default log has led to a lot of this ("that's one more cache for me," "found it, the rest of the story later" (but the "story" rarely gets written) and other annoyingly short logs). One must also remember that "TNLNSL TFTC" and "DPM" were used by keyboard users long before smart phones took off.

Edited February 3, 2015 by Ladybug Kids

[cezanne]

Yup. I haven't committed "geocide" or done anything as drastic as archiving any of my caches because of this trend in lazy logging,

 

Neither have I, but lame logs help in decreasing the motivation of myself and other long time cachers in the area to hide new caches and

to fix issues for old caches instead of letting them die. Typically it is not a single reason, but the accumulation of several sources of fustration that lead to the archival of caches owned by cachers between them and the mass more and more distance develops over time.

The situation is particularly bad in areas where a powertrail is nearby and many owners of old caches that do not belong to such trails have given up and archived their caches.

 

I realize that it isn't true for all cache owners, but the feedback that I got from finders of my caches is what kept me going as a cache owner.

 

That's true for me as well. I just recently got an urgently needed boost of motivation as a retired couple started to geocache hardly more than a month ago and have shown great interest into my caches - so far they have only 26 finds, but have already found 6 of mine (one of them went for more than a year unfound). Their logs, their questions about my caches and their other feedback are palm for my soul.

They are caching alone and have not been introduced to geocaching by someone else.

 

It's not that I'm dependent on many positive logs. I'm questioning the existence of my caches since the very beginning and the logs should help me in deciding when the time for a cache is over because there are no new cachers any more interested into such type of caches.

 

Part of the problem is that the shorter the logs get that new cachers use to see, the shorter their own

logs will become. New cachers hardly believe me when I tell them that logs like the FTF log that I received for one of my first caches http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=b281f7a7-a87d-403e-a378-d0ce5cd5fb11

was not something uncommon in those days.

 

Cezanne

Edited February 3, 2015 by cezanne

[+crazypig88]

I have made my large cache PMO for about three days, then wanted to change it back. All of mine are non PMO. *wandering mind* I have that large cache two tenths of a mile away from my school, yet I haven't checked on it in over two months. I guess the bus won't stop for a CO!