Complaint from CO

[Mr.Yuck]

Did I do the wrong thing sending an unsolicited email after getting this log?

 

Not that I complained about it.

 

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

 

Wow, where'd that one come from? As one of the longest tenured anti lame log ranters around here, I would have expected that to be dropped on me. I'll pretend it was. I would say the lame logging will NEVER have an effect on the way I log, so I'd never leave the game on the find side. If lame logging ever becomes totally dominant, to the point where 90%+ of logs on every cache (no matter a P&G, a 2 mile hike to an ammo box, or an Earthcache), it would probably result in me never hiding another cache, and probably archiving all but my 2 or 3 favorites.

 

But it'll never happen. I've seen the writing on the wall for a few years now... 95% of smartphone noobs log a few caches, perhaps as many as 100, and are never heard from again. Out of the 5% that go on to become regular Geocachers, probably 4% eventually get a clue that most of their fellow "regular geocachers" that have been doing it longer than them don't drop lame logs.

[+L0ne.R]

Did I do the wrong thing sending an unsolicited email after getting this log?

 

Not that I complained about it.

 

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

 

Speaking for myself, somebody's got to fight the good fight, before the majority who champion the numbers above all at the sacrifice of quality, finally overwhelm and force out the minority who champion all aspects of quality.

[+L0ne.R]

Did I do the wrong thing sending an unsolicited email after getting this log?

 

Not that I complained about it.

 

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

 

Wow, where'd that one come from? As one of the longest tenured anti lame log ranters around here, I would have expected that to be dropped on me. I'll pretend it was. I would say the lame logging will NEVER have an effect on the way I log, so I'd never leave the game on the find side. If lame logging ever becomes totally dominant, to the point where 90%+ of logs on every cache (no matter a P&G, a 2 mile hike to an ammo box, or an Earthcache), it would probably result in me never hiding another cache, and probably archiving all but my 2 or 3 favorites.

 

But it'll never happen. I've seen the writing on the wall for a few years now... 95% of smartphone noobs log a few caches, perhaps as many as 100, and are never heard from again. Out of the 5% that go on to become regular Geocachers, probably 4% eventually get a clue that most of their fellow "regular geocachers" that have been doing it longer than them don't drop lame logs.

 

What has surprised me is (in my area) that many of the veteran cachers that cache on their own, write great logs. But put them in a group caching situation and they poop out cut n paste GSAK logs.

 

The logging trend is a dumb-down trend. At first everyone wrote a little something in the logbook. And everyone signed individually. Then micros became popular, the little logsheets required people to squeeze in a trailname. People saw the speed value (I can find more caches in a day if I can spend 1 minute at a cache rather than 5). The trend spilled over into small and larger containers - add a sheet not a logbook, so cachers can leave only a trailname. Even good size logbooks are filled with only trailnames. Teams figured out how it would be even faster to log only one team name instead of everyone in the group passing around the sheet. Power trails encouraged finders to cut n paste meaningless logs. Then this trend spilled over to all caches that are found on a numbers-run day.

 

Human nature I guess....always finding a way to dumb down things unless checks and balances are enforced.

[+niraD]

What has surprised me is (in my area) that many of the veteran cachers that cache on their own, write great logs. But put them in a group caching situation and they poop out cut n paste GSAK logs.

I am sometimes guilty of this myself.

 

When I'm geocaching on my own, I usually spend 5-10 minutes at each cache after I've found it. When I'm with a group, everyone else would be 4-9 minutes down the trail if I did that. So I rush so I can keep up with everyone else. My double-digit daily find counts have always occurred when I'm with a group, and it's just a lot harder to remember something unique about each of 17 or 28 caches, than it is to remember something unique about each of 2 or 3 caches.

[knowschad]

Did I do the wrong thing sending an unsolicited email after getting this log?

 

Not that I complained about it.

 

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

 

I wouldn't say that I'm bitter, although I am vocal about my opinion. And I don't play it very much anymore, actually.

[+dprovan]

The 2 that weren't in a power trail you should be careful to treat as if you found them on another day.

Why?

I wasn't expecting to have to spell that out. If you write power trail quality logs on the non-power trail caches, you're inflicting the effects of the power trail, for which the CO cannot be expecting reasonable logs, on a CO who might be disappointed by a vacuous log.

[+tozainamboku]

Did I do the wrong thing sending an unsolicited email after getting this log?

 

Not that I complained about it.

 

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

So I gave the example to show one reason that cache owners may prefer getting logs that share the experience of the finders instead of just saying TFTC. It wasn't meant to indicate that cache owners should expect this kind of log every time. When I get a log like this it's a treat, not an expectation.

 

I don't go around trying to control what others write in logs. I think the best one can do in to try and influence good logs through example. But I suspect that many cachers never even look at the logs and simply see them as an obstacle for getting their find point. (I typed find because the profanity filter would change the word I wanted to use to that anyhow ). Just be happy that some people still take the time to share more than TFTC in their logs.

[+Chrysalides]

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

Wow, where'd that one come from?

I understand the desire to rant when one receives what they perceive as an undeservedly lame log on their cache - I don't like it, but I can understand. But this goes beyond that. The whole doom and gloom, "it doesn't matter, it'll all suck in the end" even when someone is trying to share a nice story, just rubs me the wrong way.

[+baloo&bd]

 

I am the CO who sent that email. I wasn't trying to berate the finder, and sending the link to log etiquette. was trying to educate, not be-little!

"And now you know the rest of the story."

 

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

 

Sorry to jump back, but having a hard time getting my head around how this explains anything or gives the "rest of the story". Other than leaving out he had requested a hint, not sure this added much..

 

I think I deserved more than a TFTC!

 

This is the entitlement attitude on the part of the CO that make me believe it was probably also present in their email and started this. Would it have been more polite for the finder to post something more after getting a hint, maybe, but there is no requirement to do so.

 

The log is for the finders, not the CO. It is a chronicle of their experiences. Of course we all want to read how great our cache is and feed our egos, we're human. However if getting a tftc log causes you to write an email and send a link on logging etiquette to someone whom you do not know nor has requested it is, of course, out of line and maybe hiding caches is not a good idea for you.

[+L0ne.R]

I am the CO who sent that email. I wasn't trying to berate the finder, and sending the link to log etiquette. was trying to educate, not be-little!

"And now you know the rest of the story."

 

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

 

Sorry to jump back, but having a hard time getting my head around how this explains anything or gives the "rest of the story". Other than leaving out he had requested a hint, not sure this added much..

 

You may have missed 4wheelin_fool's post #194:

"

No comment about misleading us about the circumstances?

We first envisioned the cache owner emailing you out of the blue, but then discovered that you emailed him first for a hint. That kind of alters the scenario, as I doubt that he would email anyone else who posted a TFTC."

[+Team Microdot]

The log is for the finders, not the CO.

 

Well - you're half right.

 

One of the ways in which the log is equally valuable to the CO is the feedback it provides that allows them to understand the degree of enjoyment - or otherwise - that those finding their cache(s) experienced and why. This in turn facilitates said CO in working toward improving those experiences for future finders - hopefully.

 

We could subscribe to your viewpoint, and on that basis throw out any old junk and then forget about it but personally I'd have to say thanks, but no thanks

[+L0ne.R]

The log is for the finders, not the CO.

 

Why exclude the cache hider? The log is a communication tool for everyone.

 

It feels a little insulting to dismiss the cache hider. Why treat them like their contribution doesn't matter, especially the responsible cache owners who are providing good experiences for us?

 

A meaningful log helps everyone. A discourteous meaningless log helps no one, not even the finder. There's nothing in their log to help them remember the experience.

 

A meaningful log can be helpful and motivational for many cache hiders. A meaningful log often provides important information to future finders.

 

Let's reward cache hiders who take pride in their caches with meaningful logs.

[+tozainamboku]

The log facilitates socializing among geocachers. In order to form meaningful relationshion any log that can be read in less than 30 seconds should not count.

[Mr.Yuck]

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

Wow, where'd that one come from?

I understand the desire to rant when one receives what they perceive as an undeservedly lame log on their cache - I don't like it, but I can understand. But this goes beyond that. The whole doom and gloom, "it doesn't matter, it'll all suck in the end" even when someone is trying to share a nice story, just rubs me the wrong way.

 

 

I don't know if you knew this, but in addition to knowing Chad, knowschad also knows Eeyore.

 

I'll jump on the pessimist bandwagon too, what the heck. We can infer from Toz's post that he emailed that new account creator, and welcomed them to Geocaching. Lets say Toz told them "you know, if you have a smartphone, you can download an app to find these things". It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they had a smartphone and downloaded the app, if they went out and started logging caches with "Nice one", "Found it", or "Tftc". Due to the apparently overwhelming urge of new smartphone loggers to log all their finds from the cache site with the phone.

[+Chrysalides]

I don't know if you knew this, but in addition to knowing Chad, knowschad also knows Eeyore.

You know, that would be a cool username...

I'll jump on the pessimist bandwagon too, what the heck. We can infer from Toz's post that he emailed that new account creator, and welcomed them to Geocaching. Lets say Toz told them "you know, if you have a smartphone, you can download an app to find these things". It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they had a smartphone and downloaded the app, if they went out and started logging caches with "Nice one", "Found it", or "Tftc". Due to the apparently overwhelming urge of new smartphone loggers to log all their finds from the cache site with the phone.

It wouldn't surprise me either. But I hope that is not the case, not treat it as a given. And I don't get worked up over TFTC logs. We do this for fun. As a game. As a hobby. When we allow something that is outside our control to affect us so strongly negatively, it is time to take a step back and rethink.

[Mr.Yuck]

I don't know if you knew this, but in addition to knowing Chad, knowschad also knows Eeyore.

You know, that would be a cool username...

 

He also knows Marvin The Paranoid Android. "A brain the size of a planet, and I have to deal with lame logging".

 

I'll jump on the pessimist bandwagon too, what the heck. We can infer from Toz's post that he emailed that new account creator, and welcomed them to Geocaching. Lets say Toz told them "you know, if you have a smartphone, you can download an app to find these things". It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they had a smartphone and downloaded the app, if they went out and started logging caches with "Nice one", "Found it", or "Tftc". Due to the apparently overwhelming urge of new smartphone loggers to log all their finds from the cache site with the phone.

It wouldn't surprise me either. But I hope that is not the case, not treat it as a given. And I don't get worked up over TFTC logs. We do this for fun. As a game. As a hobby. When we allow something that is outside our control to affect us so strongly negatively, it is time to take a step back and rethink.

 

Eh, I'll never rethink it. For example, I'm in the process of writing up a webcam cache on an alternative site at the location of a 2002 placed virtual cache. Although I was there last year, I just discovered this webcam a couple of days ago, so I just went to the virtual cache page to grab the coordinates. Recently, a 10 find newbie, logged the cache with a period: (.) They did post a pic, but they logged this 2002 virt with 16 favorite points with a period. Geocaching deserves better. Let the bar code sticker game with optional logging that almost no one uses that started out as, and always will be a smartphone game, have it.

[+Chrysalides]

Eh, I'll never rethink it. For example, I'm in the process of writing up a webcam cache on an alternative site at the location of a 2002 placed virtual cache. Although I was there last year, I just discovered this webcam a couple of days ago, so I just went to the virtual cache page to grab the coordinates. Recently, a 10 find newbie, logged the cache with a period: (.) They did post a pic, but they logged this 2002 virt with 16 favorite points with a period. Geocaching deserves better. Let the bar code sticker game with optional logging that almost no one uses that started out as, and always will be a smartphone game, have it.

I'm not saying that you have to like it, but if it eats away at your soul like cancer, robbing geocaching of all pleasure, when you wince and your blood pressure spikes when a "new log notification" email arrives in your inbox before you even open it up, might be time to consider an alternate hobby that's less stressful, like rattlesnake wrangling.

 

As for that bar code game, I'm so tempted to customize my auto logging with "that's one more cap for me! thank you for deploying this sticker."

[knowschad]

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

Wow, where'd that one come from?

I understand the desire to rant when one receives what they perceive as an undeservedly lame log on their cache - I don't like it, but I can understand. But this goes beyond that. The whole doom and gloom, "it doesn't matter, it'll all suck in the end" even when someone is trying to share a nice story, just rubs me the wrong way.

 

That may be the way you read it, but it was not the way I wrote it. I was referring to newbies learning by example from the current players. If we set a bad example, many of those new players will decide that its fine to log with copy/paste & lame acronyms.

[+Chrysalides]

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

Wow, where'd that one come from?

I understand the desire to rant when one receives what they perceive as an undeservedly lame log on their cache - I don't like it, but I can understand. But this goes beyond that. The whole doom and gloom, "it doesn't matter, it'll all suck in the end" even when someone is trying to share a nice story, just rubs me the wrong way.

 

That may be the way you read it, but it was not the way I wrote it. I was referring to newbies learning by example from the current players. If we set a bad example, many of those new players will decide that its fine to log with copy/paste & lame acronyms.

You may not have meant it that way, but I read it the way you wrote it ("You can bet"). Let's attribute it to misunderstanding then, the whole reason for the existence of this thread if both side's accounts are accurate.

[knowschad]

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

Wow, where'd that one come from?

I understand the desire to rant when one receives what they perceive as an undeservedly lame log on their cache - I don't like it, but I can understand. But this goes beyond that. The whole doom and gloom, "it doesn't matter, it'll all suck in the end" even when someone is trying to share a nice story, just rubs me the wrong way.

 

That may be the way you read it, but it was not the way I wrote it. I was referring to newbies learning by example from the current players. If we set a bad example, many of those new players will decide that its fine to log with copy/paste & lame acronyms.

You may not have meant it that way, but I read it the way you wrote it ("You can bet"). Let's attribute it to misunderstanding then, the whole reason for the existence of this thread if both side's accounts are accurate.

 

Try this on for size, then, "You can bet we are setting a bad logging example for newbies with our copy/paste and acronym logs"

[BiIIyBobNosePicker]

Thanks for the thread

[+Fightingokra]

Though I have been around geocaching for several years, I have taken long breaks in between finds and still consider myself a newb. This thread is a complete revelation to me because I assumed detailed logs were optional and that TFTC was an acceptable log. I think I was just following others examples I found and pasting TFTC then running to the next cache was easy. After reading most of the thread I think I will continue to use the acronym on P&G caches where there really isn't a story to tell. I doubt "Dove to cache, lifted plastic thing on light pole, found cache" is worth taking the time to type. I could do a better job on caches that require actual effort or brain power to find.

[Mr.Yuck]

Eh, I'll never rethink it. For example, I'm in the process of writing up a webcam cache on an alternative site at the location of a 2002 placed virtual cache. Although I was there last year, I just discovered this webcam a couple of days ago, so I just went to the virtual cache page to grab the coordinates. Recently, a 10 find newbie, logged the cache with a period: (.) They did post a pic, but they logged this 2002 virt with 16 favorite points with a period. Geocaching deserves better. Let the bar code sticker game with optional logging that almost no one uses that started out as, and always will be a smartphone game, have it.

I'm not saying that you have to like it, but if it eats away at your soul like cancer, robbing geocaching of all pleasure, when you wince and your blood pressure spikes when a "new log notification" email arrives in your inbox before you even open it up, might be time to consider an alternate hobby that's less stressful, like rattlesnake wrangling.

 

As for that bar code game, I'm so tempted to customize my auto logging with "that's one more cap for me! thank you for deploying this sticker."

 

WTF is a cache log? I have 30 inches of snow on the ground, and the temperature hasn't risen above 32 degrees in 5 weeks. I haven't seen one of these "cache logs" you speak of in two months.

 

I actually see very few lame logs on my caches. Generally, they're all "in the woods" and a good .25 miles one way from parking, all while being in a suburban setting. That's actually a rather effective intro app deterrent. And I haven't even taken it to the next level, that being all PMO.

[knowschad]

Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds.

If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers.

Wow, where'd that one come from?

I understand the desire to rant when one receives what they perceive as an undeservedly lame log on their cache - I don't like it, but I can understand. But this goes beyond that. The whole doom and gloom, "it doesn't matter, it'll all suck in the end" even when someone is trying to share a nice story, just rubs me the wrong way.

 

That may be the way you read it, but it was not the way I wrote it. I was referring to newbies learning by example from the current players. If we set a bad example, many of those new players will decide that its fine to log with copy/paste & lame acronyms.

You may not have meant it that way, but I read it the way you wrote it ("You can bet"). Let's attribute it to misunderstanding then, the whole reason for the existence of this thread if both side's accounts are accurate.

 

Try this on for size, then, "You can bet we are setting a bad logging example for newbies with our copy/paste and acronym logs"

 

 

 

Though I have been around geocaching for several years, I have taken long breaks in between finds and still consider myself a newb. This thread is a complete revelation to me because I assumed detailed logs were optional and that TFTC was an acceptable log. I think I was just following others examples I found and pasting TFTC then running to the next cache was easy. After reading most of the thread I think I will continue to use the acronym on P&G caches where there really isn't a story to tell. I doubt "Dove to cache, lifted plastic thing on light pole, found cache" is worth taking the time to type. I could do a better job on caches that require actual effort or brain power to find.

 

I rest my case.

 

Thanks, Fightingokra. That's a great attitude. I will say that one thing that I sometimes like to do for skirt lifters and stop sign type hides is to log something fun like, "Gee, I'm finally starting to figure this type out!". I actually posted a string of phoney DNFs to a skirt lifter once before posting my actual find. You can make them fun if you want to.

Edited March 1, 2015 by knowschad

[knowschad]

I'm not saying that you have to like it, but if it eats away at your soul like cancer, robbing geocaching of all pleasure, when you wince and your blood pressure spikes when a "new log notification" email arrives in your inbox before you even open it up, might be time to consider an alternate hobby that's less stressful, like rattlesnake wrangling.

 

LMAO!!! :lol:

 

I am nominating that for the Annual National Hyperbole Award!

[4wheelin_fool]

I'm not saying that you have to like it, but if it eats away at your soul like cancer, robbing geocaching of all pleasure, when you wince and your blood pressure spikes when a "new log notification" email arrives in your inbox before you even open it up, might be time to consider an alternate hobby that's less stressful, like rattlesnake wrangling.

 

LMAO!!! :lol:

 

I am nominating that for the Annual National Hyperbole Award!

 

Reading TFTC logs is like observing a wounded pygmy dwarf ferret with a fracured femur, limp along, wailing in agony, while leaving a trail of blood, puss, and fecal matter until finally losing complete interest and getting consumed with scanning QR codes.

Edited March 1, 2015 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Chrysalides]

I'm not saying that you have to like it, but if it eats away at your soul like cancer, robbing geocaching of all pleasure, when you wince and your blood pressure spikes when a "new log notification" email arrives in your inbox before you even open it up, might be time to consider an alternate hobby that's less stressful, like rattlesnake wrangling.

 

LMAO!!! :lol:

 

I am nominating that for the Annual National Hyperbole Award!

 

Reading TFTC logs is like observing a wounded pygmy dwarf ferret with a fracured femur, limp along, wailing in agony, while leaving a trail of blood, puss, and fecal matter until finally losing complete interest and getting consumed with scanning QR codes.

Dang it, it's my award and you can't share it!

[knowschad]

I'm not saying that you have to like it, but if it eats away at your soul like cancer, robbing geocaching of all pleasure, when you wince and your blood pressure spikes when a "new log notification" email arrives in your inbox before you even open it up, might be time to consider an alternate hobby that's less stressful, like rattlesnake wrangling.

 

LMAO!!! :lol:

 

I am nominating that for the Annual National Hyperbole Award!

 

Reading TFTC logs is like observing a wounded pygmy dwarf ferret with a fracured femur, limp along, wailing in agony, while leaving a trail of blood, puss, and fecal matter until finally losing complete interest and getting consumed with scanning QR codes.

Dang it, it's my award and you can't share it!

 

Sorry, but his was better. In fact,that may well be the very best hyperbole ever written by anybody in the entire universe.

[+Chrysalides]

Sorry, but his was better. In fact,that may well be the very best hyperbole ever written by anybody in the entire universe.

I'm going to pull a Kanye West at the award ceremony.

[+Chrysalides]

Though I have been around geocaching for several years, I have taken long breaks in between finds and still consider myself a newb. This thread is a complete revelation to me because I assumed detailed logs were optional and that TFTC was an acceptable log. I think I was just following others examples I found and pasting TFTC then running to the next cache was easy. After reading most of the thread I think I will continue to use the acronym on P&G caches where there really isn't a story to tell. I doubt "Dove to cache, lifted plastic thing on light pole, found cache" is worth taking the time to type. I could do a better job on caches that require actual effort or brain power to find.

I'm glad this thread has at least one positive outcome. Thank you.

[+colleda]

I was reminded of this thread this week when some logs started showing up for some of our caches. We have a series of 21 placed along a popular cycleway. They are of varying sizes, terrain and difficulty and certainly not power trail. When we read the logs we were a little disappointed as they were all the same, copy and paste, I think some call it boilerplate(?) and one sentence long. The finder/s are Canadian on a cycling holiday. I also noticed that they had missed a few. I now don't know whether they skipped them or they were DNFs.

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

[+GeoLog81]

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

 

Well, the noobs often write quite a long logs. If you find 2-3 caches a day, you have quite a lot to say.

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

You can criticize the running for numbers, but both things make fun. Sometimes a day is very good because you've fighted 2 hours in snow to find a remote container, sometimes because you've made 50 through urban area.

[Mr.Yuck]

I was reminded of this thread this week when some logs started showing up for some of our caches. We have a series of 21 placed along a popular cycleway. They are of varying sizes, terrain and difficulty and certainly not power trail. When we read the logs we were a little disappointed as they were all the same, copy and paste, I think some call it boilerplate(?) and one sentence long. The finder/s are Canadian on a cycling holiday. I also noticed that they had missed a few. I now don't know whether they skipped them or they were DNFs.

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

 

Well true, not necessarily noobs. Tftc is strongly associated with on the spot, smartphone logging from the field. So they have 3,000 finds, big whoop. Doesn't make them not a noob. When did they start Geocaching? If it was 2010 or later, they were born in the smartphone era. Probably logged ALL their early finds with Tftc. Chances are they haven't hidden very many caches themselves; and of course it would be classic if they never hid a cache.

 

EDIT: In fact, this reminds me that the OP, who claimed to be chastised for dropping a Tftc (but there was more to the story) joined in July 2013 and protested that they are "not newcomers" (see post #3). By the way, they've never hidden a cache.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Mr.Yuck

[+colleda]

I was reminded of this thread this week when some logs started showing up for some of our caches. We have a series of 21 placed along a popular cycleway. They are of varying sizes, terrain and difficulty and certainly not power trail. When we read the logs we were a little disappointed as they were all the same, copy and paste, I think some call it boilerplate(?) and one sentence long. The finder/s are Canadian on a cycling holiday. I also noticed that they had missed a few. I now don't know whether they skipped them or they were DNFs.

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

When did they start Geocaching? If it was 2010 or later, they were born in the smartphone era. Probably logged ALL their early finds with Tftc. Chances are they haven't hidden very many caches themselves; and of course it would be classic if they never hid a cache.

 

Started Feb 2013. Finds weren't logged in the field looking at the email timing they were about a minute or even less apart. Have hidden one cache themselves. If that's the way they like to play so be it. But, as mentioned in other threads COs, such as we, like to know what's going on with the unlogged DNFs.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

In other words you're saying that finding as many caches as possible in a day is more important than showing sincere appreciate to those that placed all those caches for you to find.

 

Here's an idea. Instead of spending 10 hours outdoors and finding 50 caches, you could spend 9 hours outdoors and *only* 45 caches and use that extra hour to properly thank those that are feeding your addiction. Maybe if you slowed down and didn't try to rush from cache to cache you'd be able to remember what you did that day.

 

 

[+narcissa]

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

In other words you're saying that finding as many caches as possible in a day is more important than showing sincere appreciate to those that placed all those caches for you to find.

 

Here's an idea. Instead of spending 10 hours outdoors and finding 50 caches, you could spend 9 hours outdoors and *only* 45 caches and use that extra hour to properly thank those that are feeding your addiction. Maybe if you slowed down and didn't try to rush from cache to cache you'd be able to remember what you did that day.

 

The length of a log is not a reasonable measure of its sincerity.

[knowschad]

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

In other words you're saying that finding as many caches as possible in a day is more important than showing sincere appreciate to those that placed all those caches for you to find.

 

Here's an idea. Instead of spending 10 hours outdoors and finding 50 caches, you could spend 9 hours outdoors and *only* 45 caches and use that extra hour to properly thank those that are feeding your addiction. Maybe if you slowed down and didn't try to rush from cache to cache you'd be able to remember what you did that day.

 

The length of a log is not a reasonable measure of its sincerity.

Is that what he said?

[+Ambrosia]

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

 

Well, the noobs often write quite a long logs. If you find 2-3 caches a day, you have quite a lot to say.

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

You can criticize the running for numbers, but both things make fun. Sometimes a day is very good because you've fighted 2 hours in snow to find a remote container, sometimes because you've made 50 through urban area.

 

My biggest day was something like 55 caches. You can be sure that I remembered each cache, and wrote a unique log for every single one of them.

[Mr.Yuck]

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

 

Well, the noobs often write quite a long logs. If you find 2-3 caches a day, you have quite a lot to say.

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

You can criticize the running for numbers, but both things make fun. Sometimes a day is very good because you've fighted 2 hours in snow to find a remote container, sometimes because you've made 50 through urban area.

 

My biggest day was something like 55 caches. You can be sure that I remembered each cache, and wrote a unique log for every single one of them.

 

45 here, and I only remembered about 25 of them on a 13 mile round trip bike ride. But I found I could "remember" about 20 more of them compliments of Google Sat View. Then I just faked the other 5. But those logs were most certainly not "Tftc". That was pretty much a once in a lifetime experience for me though, as far as Geocaching goes. I doubt I'll ever come close to it again. That's just me, I don't live near the desert, and won't be stopping for film canisters every .1 mile.

 

EDIT: Don't run the numbers on that one, they don't add up. But there were a good 5 or so I couldn't remember. Google sat view really does help me though. I also did about 15 by bike on the bike trail power trail in Ashtabula, Ohio, and I had to consult sat view to help me remember a couple of them even.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Mr.Yuck

[+Chrysalides]

My biggest day was something like 55 caches. You can be sure that I remembered each cache, and wrote a unique log for every single one of them.

You have much better memory than I do. I found about that number on my busiest day, and there's about 3 or 4 that I totally have no recollection of at the end of the day. I remember every DNF clearly, however, and I have a very vivid memory of the one with a very ripe roadkill not far away, unfortunately

[+Ambrosia]

Well, I do use memory aids. In the beginning, I wrote cache notes down in a little notebook, but that was too clunky for me. Now, I take pictures at a lot of the cache sites. Sometimes, I'll write little notes on a paper if need be. But even so, I remember most caches. Of course, I've found very few in comparison to other people, and I try to stick mostly to preselected caches, so maybe they don't blur as much that way.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

However, if you spend 10 hours outdoors, find 50 caches, and then plan for next day which will be the same, don't expect someone to write individual log for every cache. By such numbers, many people often, even if the remember some cache was special, don't remember which one was that...

 

In other words you're saying that finding as many caches as possible in a day is more important than showing sincere appreciate to those that placed all those caches for you to find.

 

Here's an idea. Instead of spending 10 hours outdoors and finding 50 caches, you could spend 9 hours outdoors and *only* 45 caches and use that extra hour to properly thank those that are feeding your addiction. Maybe if you slowed down and didn't try to rush from cache to cache you'd be able to remember what you did that day.

 

The length of a log is not a reasonable measure of its sincerity.

 

I'll agree that the length of a log is not the *only*measure of it's sincerity, but to me, reducing a expression of appreciation down to the minimum number of characters possible just comes across as less than sincere then if someone actually writes out complete words. Maybe the difference is subtle, but I still see a difference between the following:

 

TFTC

Thanks

Thank you for placing the cache.

Thank you for hiding this cache. Clever hide. Great location.

 

or even

 

This was a lot of fun. It was a great spot for a cache. TFTC

 

I know that you are not bothered by a four character log, and it's not power trail owners that are complaining about 4 character logs, but when it's clearly obvious that the cache owner has put in the extra effort to create a unique container, find a spot with a great view, or in some way has attempted to make their cache more interesting than film pot under a lamp post isn't it reasonable to at least *try* to show sincere appreciation?

 

 

[knowschad]

Well, I do use memory aids. In the beginning, I wrote cache notes down in a little notebook, but that was too clunky for me. Now, I take pictures at a lot of the cache sites. Sometimes, I'll write little notes on a paper if need be. But even so, I remember most caches. Of course, I've found very few in comparison to other people, and I try to stick mostly to preselected caches, so maybe they don't blur as much that way.

 

When I was doing a lot of caches in a day, I used a small digital recorder that fit nicely in my shirt pocket. I now have a smart phone where I can take pictures, use a digital voice recorder app, and/or take notes. Its just a matter of caring enough to do that (and remembering to).

[Mr.Yuck]

I was reminded of this thread this week when some logs started showing up for some of our caches. We have a series of 21 placed along a popular cycleway. They are of varying sizes, terrain and difficulty and certainly not power trail. When we read the logs we were a little disappointed as they were all the same, copy and paste, I think some call it boilerplate(?) and one sentence long. The finder/s are Canadian on a cycling holiday. I also noticed that they had missed a few. I now don't know whether they skipped them or they were DNFs.

I now don't whether to consider us lucky that we got a sentence because I checked on some of their other recent find logs to see that they were just TFTC, from cachers with 3000+ finds. Looks like TFTC is not restricted to noobs.

When did they start Geocaching? If it was 2010 or later, they were born in the smartphone era. Probably logged ALL their early finds with Tftc. Chances are they haven't hidden very many caches themselves; and of course it would be classic if they never hid a cache.

 

Started Feb 2013. Finds weren't logged in the field looking at the email timing they were about a minute or even less apart. Have hidden one cache themselves. If that's the way they like to play so be it. But, as mentioned in other threads COs, such as we, like to know what's going on with the unlogged DNFs.

 

I could do a full sociological profile here, but I won't bore anyone. Still a noobie to me, despite having more finds than me in my 12 year Geocaching career. Born in the lame logging era, and still lame logging, even if they're dropping them from GSAK. If they want numbers, they'd be well suited for a certain bar code sticker game, where logging is optional, and almost no one ever bothers.

 

EDIT: P.S. at least that game has incentives for participating on the hiding side. Don't get me wrong, cache ownership is not for everyone, but it's quite comical how the overwhelming majority of the two word or less lame loggers have never participated on the hide side. I'd pretty much deem the experiment of trying to turn an established 10 year old game into a "smartphone game" a dismal failure.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Mr.Yuck

[+narcissa]

I'll agree that the length of a log is not the *only*measure of it's sincerity, but to me, reducing a expression of appreciation down to the minimum number of characters possible just comes across as less than sincere then if someone actually writes out complete words. Maybe the difference is subtle, but I still see a difference between the following:

 

TFTC

Thanks

Thank you for placing the cache.

Thank you for hiding this cache. Clever hide. Great location.

 

or even

 

This was a lot of fun. It was a great spot for a cache. TFTC

 

I know that you are not bothered by a four character log, and it's not power trail owners that are complaining about 4 character logs, but when it's clearly obvious that the cache owner has put in the extra effort to create a unique container, find a spot with a great view, or in some way has attempted to make their cache more interesting than film pot under a lamp post isn't it reasonable to at least *try* to show sincere appreciation?

 

Are you saying that it isn't reasonable to write a detailed, lengthy log about a lamppost micro if I so choose?

 

I don't see a material difference. Any of those could be automatic logs. I could set things up so every one of my find logs says:

 

"Wow! This was an amazing cache! So much fun, a great hiding spot, and what a view! On the walk to the GZ, I spotted a beautiful bird I have never seen before so I took a picture and I'm going to find out what it was. Thanks so much for this great hide! This is what geocaching is all about!"

 

Now, that might make you feel good if you saw it go by once. But if you noticed that I had logged the same thing on 500 consecutive power trail caches, you'd probably doubt its sincerity, right? What is the real value of a longer log if someone only wrote it because they've been browbeaten into it? That's not sincerity, it's capitulation.

 

I also think that in a game where people come and go, and the quality of cachers and caches varies wildly, it's helpful to know who the like-minded cachers are. When someone writes "lol tftc" on every cache they find, it tells me that I am unlikely to have anything in common with that cacher. That, in and of itself, is useful.

[+Uncle Alaska]

 

I don't see a material difference. Any of those could be automatic logs. I could set things up so every one of my find logs says:

 

"Wow! This was an amazing cache! So much fun, a great hiding spot, and what a view! On the walk to the GZ, I spotted a beautiful bird I have never seen before so I took a picture and I'm going to find out what it was. Thanks so much for this great hide! This is what geocaching is all about!"

 

One could do even better..write 15, unique, 3 paragraph logs. Logs that each tell a unique little story, heap praise all over the cache and CO, and say that the cache is in great shape. Then rotate them from cache to cache...doesn't mean they are more or less sincere than TFTC!

 

Could even take the time to make up individual 5-8 paragraph masterpiece logs, without even remembering the cache...all to fool the owner into believing you thought their cache was the "bees knees"...

 

Should one go to such lengths to please an individual or group?? Does every log have to be a short story? Am I suppose to write a short story on certain caches that everyone else thinks is great (and has tons of fav points), yet I think was dull or mundane?

[+narcissa]

 

I don't see a material difference. Any of those could be automatic logs. I could set things up so every one of my find logs says:

 

"Wow! This was an amazing cache! So much fun, a great hiding spot, and what a view! On the walk to the GZ, I spotted a beautiful bird I have never seen before so I took a picture and I'm going to find out what it was. Thanks so much for this great hide! This is what geocaching is all about!"

 

One could do even better..write 15, unique, 3 paragraph logs. Logs that each tell a unique little story, heap praise all over the cache and CO, and say that the cache is in great shape. Then rotate them from cache to cache...doesn't mean they are more or less sincere than TFTC!

 

Could even take the time to make up individual 5-8 paragraph masterpiece logs, without even remembering the cache...all to fool the owner into believing you thought their cache was the "bees knees"...

 

Should one go to such lengths to please an individual or group?? Does every log have to be a short story? Am I suppose to write a short story on certain caches that everyone else thinks is great (and has tons of fav points), yet I think was dull or mundane?

 

Yeah, sometimes I'm just not that wowed by caches that other people love. A cache can be well-designed, well-placed, and well-maintained and still just not be very memorable for some people. Is it the end of the world if, sometimes, some people see my caches as just another find? Not at all.

 

It's certainly no cause for the hand-wringing and bullying that goes on.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

I don't see a material difference. Any of those could be automatic logs. I could set things up so every one of my find logs says:

 

"Wow! This was an amazing cache! So much fun, a great hiding spot, and what a view! On the walk to the GZ, I spotted a beautiful bird I have never seen before so I took a picture and I'm going to find out what it was. Thanks so much for this great hide! This is what geocaching is all about!"

 

One could do even better..write 15, unique, 3 paragraph logs. Logs that each tell a unique little story, heap praise all over the cache and CO, and say that the cache is in great shape. Then rotate them from cache to cache...doesn't mean they are more or less sincere than TFTC!

 

Could even take the time to make up individual 5-8 paragraph masterpiece logs, without even remembering the cache...all to fool the owner into believing you thought their cache was the "bees knees"...

 

Should one go to such lengths to please an individual or group?? Does every log have to be a short story? Am I suppose to write a short story on certain caches that everyone else thinks is great (and has tons of fav points), yet I think was dull or mundane?

 

You have us in the anti-lame logging faction all wrong. I obviously can't speak for all of us, but I'd say we generally don't give a hoot about being praised. We're merely "anti-lame logging". C'mon Dude, you're a charter member. No one was logging caches with "Tftc" or "Found it" in 2001. :P

[+Uncle Alaska]

You have us in the anti-lame logging faction all wrong. I obviously can't speak for all of us, but I'd say we generally don't give a hoot about being praised. We're merely "anti-lame logging". C'mon Dude, you're a charter member. No one was logging caches with "Tftc" or "Found it" in 2001. :P

 

No, because it was not invented yet as an acronym in common usage...there were also only 1-2 (or none) caches in each town, thus giving a cacher lot's of time to contemplate the experience. I can walk in a four mile radius from my current residence and find hundreds of caches...not all of them are worthy of a thousand word essay. I also didn't see people wringing their hands and "churning their stomach acid" over some of the most minute changes or differences in the game back then either. I truly think a good portion of the people who regularly visit these forums; do so because they love to argue (over anything, no matter how insignificant).

 

My point above is, why worry about it so much...I can write a log masterpiece for a cache and the only person who knows how sincere and truthful I am about the experience is me. So why should a cache owner have so much anxiety over how it is written??

 

Some people are into numbers...some not. Some go through different phases and shake up the way they cache...some will refuse to change. Some are fluent and exquisite in their ability to write a commanding log...some are not. Some have the time and energy to write a short story...some do not. Some are hiders, some are finders, some dabble in both. Some use GPSRs only, some use phones, some use both, some use only paper maps...I can continue ad nauseum. My point? There are so many thousands (millions?) of permutations on how one might approach their caching experience...don't get hung up churning your stomach acid if somebody is not doing it the same as you or your group is.

[Mr.Yuck]

You have us in the anti-lame logging faction all wrong. I obviously can't speak for all of us, but I'd say we generally don't give a hoot about being praised. We're merely "anti-lame logging". C'mon Dude, you're a charter member. No one was logging caches with "Tftc" or "Found it" in 2001. :P

 

No, because it was not invented yet as an acronym in common usage...there were also only 1-2 (or none) caches in each town, thus giving a cacher lot's of time to contemplate the experience. I can walk in a four mile radius from my current residence and find hundreds of caches...not all of them are worthy of a thousand word essay. I also didn't see people wringing their hands and "churning their stomach acid" over some of the most minute changes or differences in the game back then either. I truly think a good portion of the people who regularly visit these forums; do so because they love to argue (over anything, no matter how insignificant).

 

My point above is, why worry about it so much...I can write a log masterpiece for a cache and the only person who knows how sincere and truthful I am about the experience is me. So why should a cache owner have so much anxiety over how it is written??

 

Some people are into numbers...some not. Some go through different phases and shake up the way they cache...some will refuse to change. Some are fluent and exquisite in their ability to write a commanding log...some are not. Some have the time and energy to write a short story...some do not. Some are hiders, some are finders, some dabble in both. Some use GPSRs only, some use phones, some use both, some use only paper maps...I can continue ad nauseum. My point? There are so many thousands (millions?) of permutations on how one might approach their caching experience...don't get hung up churning your stomach acid if somebody is not doing it the same as you or your group is.

 

No one is "churning stomach acid". And actually, the correct term around here is "getting your knickers in a twist". Lets see, I started in 2003, and everyone had to go out and buy a dedicated GPS unit, and went home to their computer to write a nice story about their adventure for the day. I'm not allowed to compare this to MILLIONS of clueless people downloading the intro app, and logging Geocaches with "Yay"? All while of course just making an observation, knickers being low and loose.