Jump to content

Complaint from CO


neilo10

Recommended Posts

When someone is courteous it's expected their efforts will be met with courtesy. Logging in the field is no excuse to be rude to a cache owner who helped out. If someone can type out an email asking for help, they can type out more than TFTC in the field. Stop for 2 minutes and type out "Thank you Wesso for helping me find this cache".

 

Oh, there's that "courtesy" word again. Once again, this issue isn't about courtesy at all, it's about trying to control the way others play the game.

 

There's no need for an "excuse." Some people place more importance on logging than others. You can choose to interpret this as "rude" but it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

In case you haven't noticed, humankind has been controlling the way other's play the game of life for long, long time. Society establishes the norms of politeness and courtesy. Sometimes it is not pleasant being on the receiving end of a social reminder. But when you are, you should probably be paying attention, not writing it off as abuse.

Link to comment

When someone is courteous it's expected their efforts will be met with courtesy. Logging in the field is no excuse to be rude to a cache owner who helped out. If someone can type out an email asking for help, they can type out more than TFTC in the field. Stop for 2 minutes and type out "Thank you Wesso for helping me find this cache".

 

Oh, there's that "courtesy" word again. Once again, this issue isn't about courtesy at all, it's about trying to control the way others play the game.

 

There's no need for an "excuse." Some people place more importance on logging than others. You can choose to interpret this as "rude" but it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

Oh, there's that "irrational" word again. Once again, think like narcissa or you are irrational. Really?

Link to comment

In case you haven't noticed, humankind has been controlling the way other's play the game of life for long, long time. Society establishes the norms of politeness and courtesy. Sometimes it is not pleasant being on the receiving end of a social reminder. But when you are, you should probably be paying attention, not writing it off as abuse.

 

"TFTC" appears to be very common. Do you consider it a norm?

 

What is the value of a longer log if it's only obtained through duress?

Link to comment

Some cachers you just can't change. I had one cacher who TYFTH to my caches. I did nothing at the time but to me it just seems rude if you put alot into your cache and that's all you get back. But my payback was when we did some of their caches and I only left a "." in the logs. I think they eventually got the hint because they went back and changed their logs to say more. And yes I changed my logs too.

Link to comment

When someone asks me for help, and then finds my cache, I see the log and think "Oh good, they found it." The end.

 

Really? You don't care if the efforts you made to hide a good cache were well received? Don't you want to live vicariously through your cache placement and hear who the finder experienced it? Isn't that a fun part of cache ownership for you?

 

I care that they were able to find it.

 

I don't need flowery descriptions of gratitude and I'm not about to go on a mad spree through someone's profile because they didn't use enough words to thank me.

 

Where did L0ne.R say anything about 'gratitude' or many 'words to thank' you? What's wrong with hoping for at least a sentence or two?

 

"Hope"

 

or

 

"Disturb cache finder with unsolicited email complaining about brevity of log"

 

When someone is courteous it's expected their efforts will be met with courtesy. Logging in the field is no excuse to be rude to a cache owner who helped out. If someone can type out an email asking for help, they can type out more than TFTC in the field. Stop for 2 minutes and type out "Thank you Wesso for helping me find this cache".

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders and it is very, very rare that I contact anyone through the site, for any reason. I'm certainly not about to berate or bother anyone because they didn't thank me to my satisfaction.

 

This all just reminds me of someone's little old great aunt carrying on about a thank you card that wasn't long enough.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment
The finder "deserved better" than Wesso's intrusive overreaction to something totally benign.
Objection: Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

Overruled: Emailing someone about "TFTC" is always an overreaction.

As is your post. As usual.

 

Well at least we agree that the email was an overreaction.

 

You'll have to forgive me, I am not in the habit of tracking other people's posts or checking out profiles so I can't comment on your personal foibles in kind. :(

Link to comment

Except for the folks who think that sending any email for any reason is completely out of line. But you can't please everyone.

 

So wouldn't that include the "unsolicited e-mail" from the OP to the CO asking for a hint? And should the CO have ignored that e-mail? Or is an e-mail OK only if the recipient likes the message? Perhaps the CO should have responded with something like IANHTLBTT (It's a normal hide; try looking behind the tree.) If CO's are out of line for expecting more than an acronym, why aren't finders out of line for asking for more than they are willing to do? That' what I see as the entitlement here - the OP wanted the CO to do MORE than the OP themselves was willing to do.

 

JMHO,

Mrs. Car54

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders

 

And others have differing expectations to your own - and there's nothing at all irrational about that.

Link to comment

When someone is courteous it's expected their efforts will be met with courtesy. Logging in the field is no excuse to be rude to a cache owner who helped out. If someone can type out an email asking for help, they can type out more than TFTC in the field. Stop for 2 minutes and type out "Thank you Wesso for helping me find this cache".

 

+1!

 

Mrs. Car54

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders

 

And others have differing expectations to your own - and there's nothing at all irrational about that.

 

The expectation isn't the thing we're talking about though.

 

We're talking about the act of emailing someone to complain that they failed to meet it.

 

You can have all the expectations that you want, but it's not reasonable to expect others to know what your expectations are, and it's absolutely ridiculous to send shouty emails to people over it.

 

The cache owner is here saying he just wanted to be thanked. That's all well and good but, the thing is, he was thanked! TFTC means "Thanks for the cache." It's very, very common!

 

And here is this hapless geocacher, just trying to get his logging done (because heaven knows what complaints come in if you're late with that), and then getting pounced on by the cache owner because he didn't use enough words.

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders

 

And others have differing expectations to your own - and there's nothing at all irrational about that.

 

The expectation isn't the thing we're talking about though.

 

We're talking about the act of emailing someone to complain that they failed to meet it.

 

You can have all the expectations that you want, but it's not reasonable to expect others to know what your expectations are, and it's absolutely ridiculous to send shouty emails to people over it.

 

The cache owner is here saying he just wanted to be thanked. That's all well and good but, the thing is, he was thanked! TFTC means "Thanks for the cache." It's very, very common!

 

And here is this hapless geocacher, just trying to get his logging done (because heaven knows what complaints come in if you're late with that), and then getting pounced on by the cache owner because he didn't use enough words.

 

I'm fully aware of the overall subject of the thread but at the point I posted I personally was just talking about this:

 

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

Link to comment

Except for the folks who think that sending any email for any reason is completely out of line. But you can't please everyone.

 

So wouldn't that include the "unsolicited e-mail" from the OP to the CO asking for a hint? And should the CO have ignored that e-mail? Or is an e-mail OK only if the recipient likes the message? Perhaps the CO should have responded with something like IANHTLBTT (It's a normal hide; try looking behind the tree.) If CO's are out of line for expecting more than an acronym, why aren't finders out of line for asking for more than they are willing to do? That' what I see as the entitlement here - the OP wanted the CO to do MORE than the OP themselves was willing to do.

 

JMHO,

Mrs. Car54

 

That was quite rude, for the finder to harass the hapless cache owner with an unsolicited email, and to berate him about the hint being too short, or not good enough. It is irrational to believe that asking for a hint is enough reason to bother someone with an email, which is quite an overreaction!!! :rolleyes:

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders

 

And others have differing expectations to your own - and there's nothing at all irrational about that.

 

The expectation isn't the thing we're talking about though.

 

We're talking about the act of emailing someone to complain that they failed to meet it.

 

You can have all the expectations that you want, but it's not reasonable to expect others to know what your expectations are, and it's absolutely ridiculous to send shouty emails to people over it.

 

The cache owner is here saying he just wanted to be thanked. That's all well and good but, the thing is, he was thanked! TFTC means "Thanks for the cache." It's very, very common!

 

And here is this hapless geocacher, just trying to get his logging done (because heaven knows what complaints come in if you're late with that), and then getting pounced on by the cache owner because he didn't use enough words.

 

I'm fully aware of the overall subject of the thread but at the point I posted I personally was just talking about this:

 

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

That is true. It is, ultimately, irrational to expect strangers to know our preferences. We all have hopes and expectations that are irrational and impossible to enforce. That's human.

 

Most of us are generally able to recognize this and keep things in check so we don't lash out at people for chewing gum loudly on the bus, or whatever.

 

It only becomes an issue when someone fails to realize that it's irrational, and starts bothering people who don't meet those expectations. i.e. Yelling at people on the bus, or emailing to harangue someone for failing to thank them in enough words.

Link to comment

Except for the folks who think that sending any email for any reason is completely out of line. But you can't please everyone.

 

So wouldn't that include the "unsolicited e-mail" from the OP to the CO asking for a hint? And should the CO have ignored that e-mail? Or is an e-mail OK only if the recipient likes the message? Perhaps the CO should have responded with something like IANHTLBTT (It's a normal hide; try looking behind the tree.) If CO's are out of line for expecting more than an acronym, why aren't finders out of line for asking for more than they are willing to do? That' what I see as the entitlement here - the OP wanted the CO to do MORE than the OP themselves was willing to do.

 

JMHO,

Mrs. Car54

 

That was quite rude, for the finder to harass the hapless cache owner with an unsolicited email, and to berate him about the hint being too short, or not good enough. It is irrational to believe that asking for a hint is enough reason to bother someone with an email, which is quite an overreaction!!! :rolleyes:

 

I wouldn't fault a CO for feeling bothered by the original email and/or ignoring it.

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders

 

And others have differing expectations to your own - and there's nothing at all irrational about that.

 

The expectation isn't the thing we're talking about though.

 

We're talking about the act of emailing someone to complain that they failed to meet it.

 

You can have all the expectations that you want, but it's not reasonable to expect others to know what your expectations are, and it's absolutely ridiculous to send shouty emails to people over it.

 

The cache owner is here saying he just wanted to be thanked. That's all well and good but, the thing is, he was thanked! TFTC means "Thanks for the cache." It's very, very common!

 

And here is this hapless geocacher, just trying to get his logging done (because heaven knows what complaints come in if you're late with that), and then getting pounced on by the cache owner because he didn't use enough words.

 

I'm fully aware of the overall subject of the thread but at the point I posted I personally was just talking about this:

 

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

That is true. It is, ultimately, irrational to expect strangers to know our preferences.

 

That wasn't what I was talking about either.

 

And even if it were, we can easily address that by conveying our preferences to others - with email being a useful mechanism for that.

Link to comment

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

And yet you seem to have precisely that expectation - or at least seem to berate/belittle those who have expectations which differ from your own :unsure:

 

I have very few expectations of cache finders

 

And others have differing expectations to your own - and there's nothing at all irrational about that.

 

The expectation isn't the thing we're talking about though.

 

We're talking about the act of emailing someone to complain that they failed to meet it.

 

You can have all the expectations that you want, but it's not reasonable to expect others to know what your expectations are, and it's absolutely ridiculous to send shouty emails to people over it.

 

The cache owner is here saying he just wanted to be thanked. That's all well and good but, the thing is, he was thanked! TFTC means "Thanks for the cache." It's very, very common!

 

And here is this hapless geocacher, just trying to get his logging done (because heaven knows what complaints come in if you're late with that), and then getting pounced on by the cache owner because he didn't use enough words.

 

I'm fully aware of the overall subject of the thread but at the point I posted I personally was just talking about this:

 

it's irrational to expect others to place the same importance on it that you do.

 

That is true. It is, ultimately, irrational to expect strangers to know our preferences.

 

That wasn't what I was talking about either.

 

And even if it were, we can easily address that by conveying our preferences to others - with email being a useful mechanism for that.

 

Which is more reasonable:

 

-Demand that every cacher to modify their behaviour to suit the individual preferences of various cache owners.

 

-Ignore logs that don't meet our particular tastes and save our energy for appreciating the ones that do.

Link to comment

Which is more reasonable:

 

-Demand that every cacher to modify their behaviour to suit the individual preferences of various cache owners.

 

-Ignore logs that don't meet our particular tastes and save our energy for appreciating the ones that do.

 

Which is more reasonable:

 

-Brand cachers who have have differing expectations to our own and choose to communicate with others about them as unhinged and irrational

 

- Accept that different people having different expectations than our own is to be expected (no pun intended but it did make me smile when I noticed it) and not a justification for name calling and belittlement of their viewpoint

 

Personally I think the second option would facilitate more productive discussion.

Link to comment

Which is more reasonable:

 

-Demand that every cacher to modify their behaviour to suit the individual preferences of various cache owners.

 

-Ignore logs that don't meet our particular tastes and save our energy for appreciating the ones that do.

 

Which is more reasonable:

 

-Brand cachers who have have differing expectations to our own and choose to communicate with others about them as unhinged and irrational

 

- Accept that different people having different expectations than our own is to be expected (no pun intended but it did make me smile when I noticed it) and not a justification for name calling and belittlement of their viewpoint

 

Personally I think the second option would facilitate more productive discussion.

 

The expectation is irrational. We all have irrational expectations. Most of us are capable of managing those expectations without bothering other geocachers.

 

Emailing demands to other geocachers is unhinged.

 

What is really astonishing is that the forum mob is so keen to defend this, as though it's normal. In ten years of geocaching I am hard pressed to recall any instances of cache owners emailing me in such a manner.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

The expectation is irrational. We all have irrational expectations. Most of us are capable of managing those expectations without bothering other geocachers.

 

Emailing demands to other geocachers is unhinged.

 

What is really astonishing is that the forum mob is so keen to defend this, as though it's normal. In ten years of geocaching I am hard pressed to recall any instances of cache owners emailing me in such a manner.

 

Which expectation is irrational? The expectation that there are others who hold similar values to our own? No - that's not irrational at all - some will, others won't - that's a given.

 

Expecting a decent log from a cacher you've gone out of your way to help - at least a reciprocal effort - isn't unhinged.

 

I don't think the forum mob - whoever they are - are keen to defend what you think they are defending.

Link to comment

The expectation is irrational. We all have irrational expectations. Most of us are capable of managing those expectations without bothering other geocachers.

 

Emailing demands to other geocachers is unhinged.

 

What is really astonishing is that the forum mob is so keen to defend this, as though it's normal. In ten years of geocaching I am hard pressed to recall any instances of cache owners emailing me in such a manner.

 

Which expectation is irrational? The expectation that there are others who hold similar values to our own? No - that's not irrational at all - some will, others won't - that's a given.

 

Expecting a decent log from a cacher you've gone out of your way to help - at least a reciprocal effort - isn't unhinged.

 

I don't think the forum mob - whoever they are - are keen to defend what you think they are defending.

 

Expecting or wishing for a "decent" log - whatever that may be - isn't unhinged, though it is irrational.

 

Emailing someone because they didn't thank you with enough words is unhinged.

 

And what purpose does it serve? On the off-chance that the poor cacher does capitulate to these ridiculous demands, is the cache owner really going to take some Machiavellian delight in reading logs that were obtained through shaming and duress? Is it actually satisfying to have some poor cacher - whose only real crime is having a verified email address - slink back and write a longer log? How could anyone actually feel good about that transaction?

Link to comment

Expecting or wishing for a "decent" log - whatever that may be - isn't unhinged, though it is irrational.

 

It's neither - but then I think we've discussed this several times before. The expectation is perfectly rational but subject to potential disappointment.

 

Emailing someone because they didn't thank you with enough words is unhinged.

 

That would depend ENTIRELY on the content of the email. If the email was highly aggressive then I might agree with you - but I very highly doubt that was the case at all.

 

And what purpose does it serve? On the off-chance that the poor cacher does capitulate to these ridiculous demands, is the cache owner really going to take some Machiavellian delight in reading logs that were obtained through shaming and duress? Is it actually satisfying to have some poor cacher - whose only real crime is having a verified email address - slink back and write a longer log? How could anyone actually feel good about that transaction?

 

Exaggerating for effect rarely turns an unconvincing argument into a convincing one.

Link to comment

Expecting or wishing for a "decent" log - whatever that may be - isn't unhinged, though it is irrational.

 

It's neither - but then I think we've discussed this several times before. The expectation is perfectly rational but subject to potential disappointment.

 

Emailing someone because they didn't thank you with enough words is unhinged.

 

That would depend ENTIRELY on the content of the email. If the email was highly aggressive then I might agree with you - but I very highly doubt that was the case at all.

 

And what purpose does it serve? On the off-chance that the poor cacher does capitulate to these ridiculous demands, is the cache owner really going to take some Machiavellian delight in reading logs that were obtained through shaming and duress? Is it actually satisfying to have some poor cacher - whose only real crime is having a verified email address - slink back and write a longer log? How could anyone actually feel good about that transaction?

 

Exaggerating for effect rarely turns an unconvincing argument into a convincing one.

 

Exaggerating what? What benefit can possibly come from this? Speaking of expectations, what is the expected outcome of such an email?

Link to comment

O Cache Owner!

Don't expect more from me!

I found your cache and you get TFTC.

 

Irrational to expect more,

My log for all to see!

 

From far and wide,

Oh caching log, we'll write TFTC.

 

God keep our log glorious and free!

O caching log, we'll write TFTC.

 

O caching log, we'll write TFTC!

 

Excellent!

 

Would you mind if I copy and pasted that a few hundred times? :D

 

I think this thread has reached a crescendo much higher than the original participants reached themselves.

 

Perhaps we should all become unhinged and demand that people conform to Narcissa's belief to stop all of the ridiculous emails? :unsure:

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

Perhaps we should all become unhinged and demand that people conform to Narcissa's belief to stop all of the ridiculous emails? :unsure:

 

The whole point of the forum is that it's a safe place to be unhinged and irrational about TFTC and FTF and pencils in ziplocks without actually bothering people who would rather not hear about it.

Link to comment

Perhaps we should all become unhinged and demand that people conform to Narcissa's belief to stop all of the ridiculous emails? :unsure:

 

The whole point of the forum is that it's a safe place to be unhinged and irrational about TFTC and FTF and pencils in ziplocks without actually bothering people who would rather not hear about it.

 

:blink:

 

I wondered why I kept coming back here - now I know.

Link to comment

My simple thoughts on this:

 

1. As a cache owner, I would never email a finder to tell them I would appreciate it if they wrote more in a log of my cache.

 

2. I understand the view that a cache owner sending such an email could be done with the best intent to educate, but I think it is more likely to cause more harm than good - even if politely written.

 

3. As a finder and log writer, I would find it odd to receive such a mail from a cache owner about a log I've written.

 

4. I have, and will continue to send polite unsolicited mail to a cacher I do not know there is some guideline issue, they appeared to use the wrong log type, etc.

Link to comment

I had Occassion last week to go and find about 20 caches hidden by the one CO. On one of these we were rushed for time and simply wrote TFTC with the intentions of adding to the log later (which we did). I received an email from the CO to say that he expectedmore than the TFTC . I replied and said that we were doing the follow up at that time. He rudely sent me the etiquette of Caching to read. Didn't bother to reply.

 

I havent checked the logs, but it seems that he his saying that he put TFTC on only one of the 20 caches belonging to that CO. If he put more detailed logs on all the other caches, it seems extremely rude to have sent the email complaining about the TFTC.

 

PAul

Edited by Ma & Pa
Link to comment

So wouldn't that include the "unsolicited e-mail" from the OP to the CO asking for a hint? And should the CO have ignored that e-mail? Or is an e-mail OK only if the recipient likes the message? Perhaps the CO should have responded with something like IANHTLBTT (It's a normal hide; try looking behind the tree.) If CO's are out of line for expecting more than an acronym, why aren't finders out of line for asking for more than they are willing to do? That' what I see as the entitlement here - the OP wanted the CO to do MORE than the OP themselves was willing to do.

Before this whole thing blew up :

 

1. OP's version is that he posted a TFTC intending to follow up later. CO said he expected more. OP replied saying he'll post more details when he has more time. CO sent link to logging etiquette. OP found that obnoxious.

 

2. CO's version is that OP sent him email asking for help. When OP posted TFTC, he inquired. Then he sent the etiquette link hoping to educate, not to be obnoxious.

 

Based on this, I'd just write it off as simple misunderstanding. But since this is the forums, the whole thing becomes YADALE - yet another debate about logging etiquette / expectations. I thought this is not scheduled until next week - didn't we just finish another one not so long ago?

 

Opinions vary among the following topics :

 

1) Should cache owners expect good logs? (what constitutes a good log is a topic for another thread)

 

2) Is it proper for a cache owner to contact a finder telling them they expect more in their log?

 

3) Where's the line between a helpful reminder and an obnoxious demand?

 

Then we get into off topic discussions like the definition of courtesy, when is it proper for one cacher to contact another, courtroom procedures and presentation of evidence.

 

I'm surprised some perennial phrases have not crop up yet. Things like "get your knickers in a twist", "sense of entitlement", and the ever popular "puritan". No one has brought up the fact that people used to write long logs "back in the days", followed by "maybe you don't have as many caches to log back when". But the "smartphone users are to blame" has been brought up. I'm also disappointed that no one has declared that This Is The End Of Geocaching As We Know It.

 

Yeah, I hang out here too much *sigh*

Link to comment

So wouldn't that include the "unsolicited e-mail" from the OP to the CO asking for a hint? And should the CO have ignored that e-mail? Or is an e-mail OK only if the recipient likes the message? Perhaps the CO should have responded with something like IANHTLBTT (It's a normal hide; try looking behind the tree.) If CO's are out of line for expecting more than an acronym, why aren't finders out of line for asking for more than they are willing to do? That' what I see as the entitlement here - the OP wanted the CO to do MORE than the OP themselves was willing to do.

Before this whole thing blew up :

 

1. OP's version is that he posted a TFTC intending to follow up later. CO said he expected more. OP replied saying he'll post more details when he has more time. CO sent link to logging etiquette. OP found that obnoxious.

 

2. CO's version is that OP sent him email asking for help. When OP posted TFTC, he inquired. Then he sent the etiquette link hoping to educate, not to be obnoxious.

 

Based on this, I'd just write it off as simple misunderstanding. But since this is the forums, the whole thing becomes YADALE - yet another debate about logging etiquette / expectations. I thought this is not scheduled until next week - didn't we just finish another one not so long ago?

 

Opinions vary among the following topics :

 

1) Should cache owners expect good logs? (what constitutes a good log is a topic for another thread)

 

2) Is it proper for a cache owner to contact a finder telling them they expect more in their log?

 

3) Where's the line between a helpful reminder and an obnoxious demand?

 

Then we get into off topic discussions like the definition of courtesy, when is it proper for one cacher to contact another, courtroom procedures and presentation of evidence.

 

I'm surprised some perennial phrases have not crop up yet. Things like "get your knickers in a twist", "sense of entitlement", and the ever popular "puritan". No one has brought up the fact that people used to write long logs "back in the days", followed by "maybe you don't have as many caches to log back when". But the "smartphone users are to blame" has been brought up. I'm also disappointed that no one has declared that This Is The End Of Geocaching As We Know It™.

 

Yeah, I hang out here too much *sigh*

 

Now that I know how it will end, there's no need for me to follow this thread any longer. Thanks!

Link to comment

Now that I know how it will end, there's no need for me to follow this thread any longer. Thanks!

You're welcome. Now we can go discuss the scourge of power trails.

 

Wait, there will be "if you don't like them, don't find them", together with "but I can't easily filter them out", "how about an attribute for power trails", "geocaching was never meant to be this way".

 

Hmm... maybe another different topic?

Link to comment

I'm surprised some perennial phrases have not crop up yet. Things like "get your knickers in a twist", "sense of entitlement", and the ever popular "puritan". No one has brought up the fact that people used to write long logs "back in the days", followed by "maybe you don't have as many caches to log back when". But the "smartphone users are to blame" has been brought up. I'm also disappointed that no one has declared that This Is The End Of Geocaching As We Know It.

 

Maybe this means we're making progress! :santa:

Link to comment

I'm surprised some perennial phrases have not crop up yet. Things like "get your knickers in a twist", "sense of entitlement", and the ever popular "puritan". No one has brought up the fact that people used to write long logs "back in the days", followed by "maybe you don't have as many caches to log back when". But the "smartphone users are to blame" has been brought up. I'm also disappointed that no one has declared that This Is The End Of Geocaching As We Know It.

 

Maybe this means we're making progress! :santa:

 

Is that a new one?

Link to comment

The CO would most likely not have seen that alleged "more complete" log, since he would not be receiving notification on an edit, and few of these 'more later" loggers bother to delete and add, chosing rather to edit their short log. They won't wand to delete and relog because OMG, it might mess with their stats!

That's not really relevant, since he wouldn't get notification for the edited version regardless of whether he asked for an improvement or not.

Link to comment

The CO would most likely not have seen that alleged "more complete" log, since he would not be receiving notification on an edit, and few of these 'more later" loggers bother to delete and add, chosing rather to edit their short log. They won't wand to delete and relog because OMG, it might mess with their stats!

That's not really relevant, since he wouldn't get notification for the edited version regardless of whether he asked for an improvement or not.

 

Isn't that what I said?:unsure:

Link to comment

Now that I know how it will end, there's no need for me to follow this thread any longer. Thanks!

You're welcome. Now we can go discuss the scourge of power trails.

 

Wait, there will be "if you don't like them, don't find them", together with "but I can't easily filter them out", "how about an attribute for power trails", "geocaching was never meant to be this way".

 

Hmm... maybe another different topic?

 

Looks like the twisted knickers cliche got dropped elsewhere.

Link to comment

 

I'm surprised some perennial phrases have not crop up yet. Things like "get your knickers in a twist", "sense of entitlement", and the ever popular "puritan". No one has brought up the fact that people used to write long logs "back in the days", followed by "maybe you don't have as many caches to log back when". But the "smartphone users are to blame" has been brought up. I'm also disappointed that no one has declared that This Is The End Of Geocaching As We Know It.

 

Yeah, I hang out here too much *sigh*

 

Well, there's actually only one person who uses both "get your knickers in a twist" AND Puritan. So apparently he hasn't yet. :ph34r:

 

Per the bold, here ya' go. A 2001 placed cache which was archived in 2007, pre-smartphone geocaching. Find me one Tftc log, I dare you. FTF by MortonFox, then known as StayFloopy. And what was Cheech Gang doing in Central New Jersey? :P

Link to comment

 

I'm surprised some perennial phrases have not crop up yet. Things like "get your knickers in a twist", "sense of entitlement", and the ever popular "puritan". No one has brought up the fact that people used to write long logs "back in the days", followed by "maybe you don't have as many caches to log back when". But the "smartphone users are to blame" has been brought up. I'm also disappointed that no one has declared that This Is The End Of Geocaching As We Know It.

 

Yeah, I hang out here too much *sigh*

 

Well, there's actually only one person who uses both "get your knickers in a twist" AND Puritan. So apparently he hasn't yet. :ph34r:

 

Per the bold, here ya' go. A 2001 placed cache which was archived in 2007, pre-smartphone geocaching. Find me one Tftc log, I dare you. FTF by MortonFox, then known as StayFloopy. And what was Cheech Gang doing in Central New Jersey? :P

 

I didn't see a TFTC, but I did see a "Found it." No thanks at all! I hope that cacher received a sound beating for being so rude and ungrateful.

Edited by narcissa
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...