Jump to content

Eets uh shame


Followers 4

Recommended Posts

Sometimes I look at logs after we log, just to see what's the haps. And I noticed that a super creative cacher hider guy is shutting down his caches "due to the game changing and not for the better". I can only think it's because of the one-liner logs people have been leaving around here lately. Like LOTS and LOTS of people. I spoke to my cacher pal who visited my state recently and he leaves very short logs. He hates the long logs (and owns a cache himself). Soooo eets a bummer if this hidey cacher guy is shutting down because of that.

Link to comment

"Time to start putting my hides to rest....the game is changing and not for the good. I feel fortunate to have enjoyed the end of a golden era.

 

Thank you to those who have visited, the quality found logs and the Favorite points!!"

 

Didn't start until '12, so can't guess what "golden era" he's experienced. :)

Not sure what's expected. Not enough long logs and favorite points?

As well as "super creative", there's one heck of a lotta 1.5/1.5s...

Link to comment

"Time to start putting my hides to rest....the game is changing and not for the good. I feel fortunate to have enjoyed the end of a golden era.

 

Thank you to those who have visited, the quality found logs and the Favorite points!!"

 

Didn't start until '12, so can't guess what "golden era" he's experienced. :)

Not sure what's expected. Not enough long logs and favorite points?

As well as "super creative", there's one heck of a lotta 1.5/1.5s...

 

Wow! Super sleuth! It's a bummer because he has nice caches and those are few and far between. I can only assume it's the super duper short logs that are appearing here lately. I don't know him personally.

Link to comment

Cache ownership requires a level of patience and forgiveness for the folly of humankind that some people aren't capable of. Once you put a cache out into the world, you are always putting yourself at risk of disappointment. People will write short, negative, and/or excruciatingly stupid logs. People will damage, steal, or lose the cache. People will have different notions about swag than you do. It's part of the game, and it always has been. You can shrug and sigh and keep maintaining the cache for the benefit of those who do appreciate it, or you can pack up in a huff and quit.

Link to comment

Cache ownership requires a level of patience and forgiveness for the folly of humankind that some people aren't capable of.

 

Some cache owners give up after many years (often after more than a decade) and they have have what is required. It still cannot be denied that geocaching has changed dramatically over time in many respects and if someone

decides that cache ownership meanwhile brings more frustration than joy and decides to quite active cache ownership, then this is certainly not implying that these persons have missing capabilities.

Link to comment

Cache ownership requires a level of patience and forgiveness for the folly of humankind that some people aren't capable of.

 

Some cache owners give up after many years (often after more than a decade) and they have have what is required. It still cannot be denied that geocaching has changed dramatically over time in many respects and if someone

decides that cache ownership meanwhile brings more frustration than joy and decides to quite active cache ownership, then this is certainly not implying that these persons have missing capabilities.

 

He certainly sounds frustrated by something so it's his prerogative. I just wish I would've gotten more of his caches before he started shutting them down! Boo.

Link to comment

It still cannot be denied that geocaching has changed dramatically over time in many respects...

While I haven't been around as long as you, I've seen and heard enough to know that this is true. Heck, even in my 6+ years I've seen some pretty big changes. However, I'm as confused as cerberus1 regarding the CO in question, because the game really hasn't changed that much since August 2012. If they had been around for 10+ years, then their comment would make more sense to me.

 

I suspect there are much more mundane reasons for them archiving a bunch of their caches, like a lack of motivation/time to maintain all the caches they own. They just didn't want to say "I'm bored and/or lazy, so I'm going to archive some caches" in their log. :laughing:

Link to comment

While I haven't been around as long as you, I've seen and heard enough to know that this is true. Heck, even in my 6+ years I've seen some pretty big changes. However, I'm as confused as cerberus1 regarding the CO in question, because the game really hasn't changed that much since August 2012. If they had been around for 10+ years, then their comment would make more sense to me.

 

I neither have the time nor the motivation to investigate the case and no links have been provided. Sometimes cachers have different accounts and some of them are younger but that's not the typical case.

My comment was just meant as a general comment as reply to narcissa without knowing the specific details behind the case behind this thread.

Link to comment

Cache ownership requires a level of patience and forgiveness for the folly of humankind that some people aren't capable of.

 

Some cache owners give up after many years (often after more than a decade) and they have have what is required. It still cannot be denied that geocaching has changed dramatically over time in many respects and if someone

decides that cache ownership meanwhile brings more frustration than joy and decides to quite active cache ownership, then this is certainly not implying that these persons have missing capabilities.

 

He certainly sounds frustrated by something so it's his prerogative. I just wish I would've gotten more of his caches before he started shutting them down! Boo.

 

Maybe they're worth rebooting. Sometimes people have great ideas for caches but can't hack it as cache owners.

Link to comment
Maybe they're worth rebooting. Sometimes people have great ideas for caches but can't hack it as cache owners.
There was a cache owner around here who committed geocide a while back. A number of his caches were so popular that others resurrected them in the form of tribute/redux caches.
Link to comment

Cache ownership requires a level of patience and forgiveness for the folly of humankind that some people aren't capable of. Once you put a cache out into the world, you are always putting yourself at risk of disappointment. People will write short, negative, and/or excruciatingly stupid logs. People will damage, steal, or lose the cache. People will have different notions about swag than you do. It's part of the game, and it always has been. You can shrug and sigh and keep maintaining the cache for the benefit of those who do appreciate it, or you can pack up in a huff and quit.

 

that's it in a nut shell. Well said.

Link to comment

I think the message from that owner thanking finders for the long logs implies that the short logs he is getting now are part of what bugs him. I'm not so sure that the favorite points has anything to do with it, because that's a relatively new feature, but it's hard to tell without knowing how long he has been putting out caches. I have over 400 favorite points on my caches, and I've found that almost all of them come from the first few finders. If I don't keep putting out new caches, not many favorite points accumulate. I have mostly puzzle caches. This phenomenon may be because part of what people like about a cache is being the first, or among the first, to solve/find it. If a cache has taken a long time to find (or puzzle to solve) it's probably not going to be a favorite for that person. That's understandable and doesn't bother me. I don't put out caches for the favorite points, but I do enjoy thoughtful, long logs. I, too, dislike the changes to geocaching (like people using smart phones to hide or find) but the world changes around us and it is up to me to adapt or move on. I still maintain a good number of caches, but I don't see anything wrong with choosing to archive a cache when it seems to have run its course. Around here the cache density is so high good hiding places are hard to come by. Sometimes I archive a cache of mine that no longer gets much traffic just so I can put out another one in the same general (or even exact) location. It's not a form of sour grapes, or "taking my ball away if you won't let me play quarterback." I just want to put stuff out that other want to go for. Not all caches, especially puzzles, turn out to be as good as one expects so it's worth "killing your babies" sometimes.

Link to comment

"Time to start putting my hides to rest....the game is changing and not for the good. I feel fortunate to have enjoyed the end of a golden era.

 

Thank you to those who have visited, the quality found logs and the Favorite points!!"

 

Didn't start until '12, so can't guess what "golden era" he's experienced. :)

Not sure what's expected. Not enough long logs and favorite points?

As well as "super creative", there's one heck of a lotta 1.5/1.5s...

 

That's my buddy, Jake. A great guy! You are not alone, Bubbles, by wishing he was still in the game more. He did put out some very fun hides, but has been increasingly frustrated by lowest-effort logging on caches that he put a lot of effort into, by the apparent preference of cachers for a large group of low-effort hides vs. going after a single lone hide that was well done, and frankly, by what seems to him to be inconsistency and poor judgement from our reviewer. He also has recently had several changes to his lifestyle that put geocaching at a much lower priority in his life.

Link to comment

Like any other CO I enjoy long logs. It doesn't bother me if someone leaves a short log though. You never know what the other cacher is thinking and they might really enjoy your cache even if they only leave TFTC. I always remember one cacher that started in our area. He found 100+ caches and all logs were TFTC and many of them were mine as he lives close. Now he leaves long logs and has gone back on some of mine and added logs. He just didn't know any better. He even went back and said that many of our caches were the reason he became a premium member just so he could give us some favorite points. We have now done other stuff like fishing trips and not just caching. So you never know why someone leaves a TFTC and how much they might really be enjoying your caches even with that log.

Link to comment

Another thing to consider is that they might have technological reasons for leaving shorter logs - for instance, I try to leave longer logs, but sometimes if I'm using my smartphone to log a find they end up being shorter as it's a pain to type out a longer log on the little screen.

 

Then...maybe don't use your smartphone to log. You don't HAVE to log in the field, you know.

Link to comment

Another thing to consider is that they might have technological reasons for leaving shorter logs - for instance, I try to leave longer logs, but sometimes if I'm using my smartphone to log a find they end up being shorter as it's a pain to type out a longer log on the little screen.

 

This is one of the main things people decry about smartphone cachers.

Link to comment

Another thing to consider is that they might have technological reasons for leaving shorter logs - for instance, I try to leave longer logs, but sometimes if I'm using my smartphone to log a find they end up being shorter as it's a pain to type out a longer log on the little screen.

 

I've never used a Windows phone, but I know both Android and iPhone allow you to voice dictate. It's built into both's default keyboards.

Link to comment

I'm really glad I read this thread and maybe my experience as a newbie will be relevant. I was introduced a while ago and my interest has been ramping steadily. Since going premium... actually, some of the fun's gone out; instead of a map showing a few green dots of promised adventure, there are hundreds of dots of stop-and-grab roadside caches. Nothing against people who want to play that kind of game, but it's really different from what attracted me. And it seems to conflict with what I read in the hiders' guide, to paraphrase: "ask yourself why you are bringing people to this spot; if the only answer is for the cache, it's probably not a good place."

 

I've been learning by imitation. Maybe there's something I should've read somewhere that explains logging as an important part of the fun of hiding a cache, and the importance of leaving meaningful logs. But I've just been imitating what I see from other cachers... and that's meant mostly short unmemorable logs. Well, I know better now and it makes perfect sense!

Link to comment

For someone who claims to be a "newbie" you have a take of one caching a lot longer.

Refreshing post. Thanks.

 

Sad when you find those hundreds of stop-and-grab roadside pill bottles are pmo too, like there's something special about them. :D

We just travel a bit farther now, going for caches we enjoy, with no problem skipping others on our way.

 

The 8th-step of Geocaching at its simplest level in "How is the game played?" on Geocaching 101 , the answer is "Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

Somehow (to me), a log of "TFTC" doesn't seem to share too much. :)

Edited by cerberus1
Link to comment

 

Somehow (to me), a log of "TFTC" doesn't seem to share too much. :)

 

True but still better in my opinion than copying and pasting the same log that has been written for a cache series or powertrail and is also pasted into the logs of

individual caches by other hiders which existed long before the trail caches. It somehow feels strange for those hiders if they are treated like they are the owners of the trail caches and

this sort of behaviour has caused a lot of frustration in my caching area and some owners of old caches have already given up and archived their caches.

TFTC is at least not wrong but if someone thanks for the creation of the trail caches in caches that do not belong to the trail, it gets annoying and it shows that those cachers do not

have the slightest interest into the logs. They are just there to score finds and of course if 30 new caches show up and in the end 1-2 old are archived those cachers do not care at all.

All caches already found by them lose their attraction anyway for that kind of audience - these caches cannot be found any more. They have no interest into caches that live for 10 or more years,

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I'm really glad I read this thread and maybe my experience as a newbie will be relevant. I was introduced a while ago and my interest has been ramping steadily. Since going premium... actually, some of the fun's gone out; instead of a map showing a few green dots of promised adventure, there are hundreds of dots of stop-and-grab roadside caches. Nothing against people who want to play that kind of game, but it's really different from what attracted me. And it seems to conflict with what I read in the hiders' guide, to paraphrase: "ask yourself why you are bringing people to this spot; if the only answer is for the cache, it's probably not a good place."

 

I've been learning by imitation. Maybe there's something I should've read somewhere that explains logging as an important part of the fun of hiding a cache, and the importance of leaving meaningful logs. But I've just been imitating what I see from other cachers... and that's meant mostly short unmemorable logs. Well, I know better now and it makes perfect sense!

 

And now you can move from "learning by imitation" to "teaching by example." :)

Link to comment

Another thing to consider is that they might have technological reasons for leaving shorter logs - for instance, I try to leave longer logs, but sometimes if I'm using my smartphone to log a find they end up being shorter as it's a pain to type out a longer log on the little screen.

 

Then...maybe don't use your smartphone to log. You don't HAVE to log in the field, you know.

 

There's also the ability to edit one's log. I will often put out a short log via my phone to get a particular thought out about my search, but come back later and edit it for errors and to add description. I know the edits don't show up in notifications, but at least they are there for future finders.

Edited by J Grouchy
Link to comment

Re: Smartphone app and logging

 

I wish more people were aware of and would utilize field notes.

 

I'll log on my phone if we're grabbing just a cache or two and I know I'll have time to type in a few sentences. But, if we're visiting a trail with several caches, or if I'm using my GPSr for caching and just have the phone as backup, or if we're in an area with spotty reception, or if I need to leave a much more substantial tale of the cache, I utilize the field notes capability of the app.

 

On the iPhone app, it can be found here:

 

Field%20Note_zpsjsdywjjb.jpg

 

Just touch the three dots at the top instead of the usual "Found it" green bar in the middle of the screen, and you can jot a quick field note: "saw raccoon, log wet;" "car travel bug, wasps;" "almost fell in creek;" or whatever. You can send these logs and they don't show up on the cache yet, just in your field notes on the website (last item on the "Play" dropdown). Now when you're back at your computer (or have more time and / or an easier to use keyboard) you can write more substantial logs with the help of the quick notes to jog your memory and submit them to officially log the caches.

 

Hope this helps someone out there!

 

--Q

Link to comment

Personally I admire the way some people can write seemingly endless logs about their journey to the cache. I'm a very literal person and I like to get to the point; I just can't write like that.

 

Where one log log will begin 'I wandered over hill and dale, a graceful equine bowed his head to graze on the luscious grass as the glorious sunset blazed on the horizon'.

Mine will be 'Walked past a horse, it got dark.'

It would feel dishonest to write in the style of the former, or any other way, because that's just not me.

 

If there was something funny or particularly noteworthy that happened, I would include it. But if it's an uneventful cache find (perhaps I should be more selective of which caches I hunt), I just can't think of what to say other than along the lines of "Found quickly, TFTC".

I could elaborate: "Parked up, Got out, walked down the Street, turned the corner, read the notice board and noticed there's a jumble sale on next week..." (true story) but that seems to border on irrelevance, I obviously need to find balance.

Link to comment

Personally I admire the way some people can write seemingly endless logs about their journey to the cache. I'm a very literal person and I like to get to the point; I just can't write like that.

 

Where one log log will begin 'I wandered over hill and dale, a graceful equine bowed his head to graze on the luscious grass as the glorious sunset blazed on the horizon'.

Mine will be 'Walked past a horse, it got dark.'

It would feel dishonest to write in the style of the former, or any other way, because that's just not me.

 

If there was something funny or particularly noteworthy that happened, I would include it. But if it's an uneventful cache find (perhaps I should be more selective of which caches I hunt), I just can't think of what to say other than along the lines of "Found quickly, TFTC".

I could elaborate: "Parked up, Got out, walked down the Street, turned the corner, read the notice board and noticed there's a jumble sale on next week..." (true story) but that seems to border on irrelevance, I obviously need to find balance.

 

Sometimes, finding a cache is nice but not eventful and I run out of things to say. For those, my logs tend to look like this: Found with ____ and _____ on a great day with __ finds. This was our last find before it got dark. Really enjoyed driving on these backroads. Thanks for the cache.

 

I appreciate a long cache log full of drama and adventure as much as the next person, but most of my finds are on perfectly nice caches where it takes just moments to find and move on. A sincere thank you should be enough, and yet, for many, it isn't.

Link to comment

Sometimes, finding a cache is nice but not eventful and I run out of things to say. For those, my logs tend to look like this: Found with ____ and _____ on a great day with __ finds. This was our last find before it got dark. Really enjoyed driving on these backroads. Thanks for the cache.

 

I appreciate a long cache log full of drama and adventure as much as the next person, but most of my finds are on perfectly nice caches where it takes just moments to find and move on. A sincere thank you should be enough, and yet, for many, it isn't.

 

Of course not every cache hunt is eventful and leads to a log full of drama and adventure. However if every log of the day reads like the above and the caches visited vary very much in terms of what they have to offer (some well maintained, some close to trash, some at scenic locations, others at lamp posts at a parking lot), the sincerity of the logs is questionable in many cases (I'm not saying that this the case in your specific case). Actually many of these logs just serve the purpose to reduce the logging effort. A comment on the condition of a cache is much more important in my opinion than a statement on how many caches this person has found on that specific day.

 

What I really hate is logs that say something like "Another point on the map turned into a smiley".

Link to comment

Sometimes, finding a cache is nice but not eventful and I run out of things to say. For those, my logs tend to look like this: Found with ____ and _____ on a great day with __ finds. This was our last find before it got dark. Really enjoyed driving on these backroads. Thanks for the cache.

 

I appreciate a long cache log full of drama and adventure as much as the next person, but most of my finds are on perfectly nice caches where it takes just moments to find and move on. A sincere thank you should be enough, and yet, for many, it isn't.

 

Of course not every cache hunt is eventful and leads to a log full of drama and adventure. However if every log of the day reads like the above and the caches visited vary very much in terms of what they have to offer (some well maintained, some close to trash, some at scenic locations, others at lamp posts at a parking lot), the sincerity of the logs is questionable in many cases (I'm not saying that this the case in your specific case). Actually many of these logs just serve the purpose to reduce the logging effort. A comment on the condition of a cache is much more important in my opinion than a statement on how many caches this person has found on that specific day.

 

What I really hate is logs that say something like "Another point on the map turned into a smiley".

 

I choose to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume their log is sincere, whether it's a 500-word adventure story, or "TFTC."

Link to comment

I choose to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume their log is sincere, whether it's a 500-word adventure story, or "TFTC."

 

There are cases however where one actually knows that it is not sincere - many logs come from people one knows well enough in terms of their caching behaviour.

If someone does not even care to mention serious troubles with a cache, then it's pretty obvious that the thing which really matters is the smiley.

The same holds if the hider of a power trail is the recipient of the thanks for a cache hidden by someone else.

Link to comment

I choose to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume their log is sincere, whether it's a 500-word adventure story, or "TFTC."

 

There are cases however where one actually knows that it is not sincere - many logs come from people one knows well enough in terms of their caching behaviour.

If someone does not even care to mention serious troubles with a cache, then it's pretty obvious that the thing which really matters is the smiley.

The same holds if the hider of a power trail is the recipient of the thanks for a cache hidden by someone else.

 

I don't question someone's sincerity because they cache differently than I do, or because they failed to read my mind before logging finds on my caches. I take logs at face value. It's easier than being angry at everybody all the time.

Link to comment

I don't question someone's sincerity because they cache differently than I do, or because they failed to read my mind before logging finds on my caches. I take logs at face value. It's easier than being angry at everybody all the time.

 

I did not say anything about caching style or failing to read one's mind. Maybe it's different in your region, but in my region there are lots of cachers where I know that what they write cannot be trusted. They just log every cache of their tour in the same way.

For example, it could be that they mention how much fun it was to solve the puzzles or to do the climb and in reality they have not been involved in the puzzles or the climb at all (in none of them) and they have no problem to talk about this freely (not in the logs).

If such cachers log a cache with several stages as a find, it cannot serve as the slightest indication that everything is ok with the cache as they will not have dealt with the stages in the intended way anyway.

They do not mention however what they really did in their logs.

There is evidence that makes it clear that the logs are not sincere in many cases - this is not an issue to questioning the sincerity of someone one knows nothing about - it's about cases where there are proofs of the insincerity.

 

If X writes that has found cache C together with Y (and Y writes the same about X) and you met X at the cache without Y and Y was sitting in the car 300m away and did not bother to get out of the car and fight with the nasty and steep slope and such incidents happen often, you know quite well how to interpret the logs of these people.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I don't question someone's sincerity because they cache differently than I do, or because they failed to read my mind before logging finds on my caches. I take logs at face value. It's easier than being angry at everybody all the time.

 

I did not say anything about caching style or failing to read one's mind. Maybe it's different in your region, but in my region there are lots of cachers where I know that what they write cannot be trusted. They just log every cache of their tour in the same way.

For example, it could be that they mention how much fun it was to solve the puzzles or to do the climb and in reality they have not been involved in the puzzles or the climb at all (in none of them) and they have no problem to talk about this freely (not in the logs).

If such cachers log a cache with several stages as a find, it cannot serve as the slightest indication that everything is ok with the cache as they will not have dealt with the stages in the intended way anyway.

They do not mention however what they really did in their logs.

There is evidence that makes it clear that the logs are not sincere in many cases - this is not an issue to questioning the sincerity of someone one knows nothing about - it's about cases where there are proofs of the insincerity.

 

There are very few cachers I trust when it comes to reporting the condition of a cache. That's not an expectation I have for average finders.

 

I don't go looking at other people's profiles or logs, so I wouldn't know if someone is writing the same log on my cache that they're writing on others. I see no need to investigate people for simply logging a find.

Link to comment

I don't go looking at other people's profiles or logs, so I wouldn't know if someone is writing the same log on my cache that they're writing on others. I see no need to investigate people for simply logging a find.

 

I guess it is pretty obvious if you receive a log for one of your caches where the logger reports about the blast he had with the cache series ABC and that he is thankful for the creation and maintenance of this great series.

You need not investigating anything to get irritated.

And now suppose that this is not happening once or twice but up from the time when cache series ABC gets created in 95% of the logs you receive for your cache.

Link to comment

I don't go looking at other people's profiles or logs, so I wouldn't know if someone is writing the same log on my cache that they're writing on others. I see no need to investigate people for simply logging a find.

 

I guess it is pretty obvious if you receive a log for one of your caches where the logger reports about the blast he had with the cache series ABC and that he is thankful for the creation and maintenance of this great series.

You need not investigating anything to get irritated.

And now suppose that this is not happening once or twice but up from the time when cache series ABC gets created in 95% of the logs you receive for your cache.

 

If I really felt that someone hadn't found my cache, I would look at the actual logbook. I wouldn't do some forensic analysis of their profile.

Link to comment

I don't go looking at other people's profiles or logs, so I wouldn't know if someone is writing the same log on my cache that they're writing on others. I see no need to investigate people for simply logging a find.

 

I guess it is pretty obvious if you receive a log for one of your caches where the logger reports about the blast he had with the cache series ABC and that he is thankful for the creation and maintenance of this great series.

You need not investigating anything to get irritated.

And now suppose that this is not happening once or twice but up from the time when cache series ABC gets created in 95% of the logs you receive for your cache.

 

If I really felt that someone hadn't found my cache, I would look at the actual logbook. I wouldn't do some forensic analysis of their profile.

 

I neither meant that they did not visit your cache nor that you should go for any forensic analysis.

I wrote about the situation that they signed the log book of your cache but the only thing they mention in the online log for your caches are other caches and that this happening often.

I forgot to add the implicit assumption that you are aware of the fact that your cache lies directly on the trail of the ABC series - so there is not so much reason to assume that they did not visit your case in case they visited the trail, but still it's not a sincere thanks to you as a cache owner if the loggers do not even care to rewrite the log to thank you and not the hiders of the ABC series in the online log for your cache.

Link to comment

I don't go looking at other people's profiles or logs, so I wouldn't know if someone is writing the same log on my cache that they're writing on others. I see no need to investigate people for simply logging a find.

 

I guess it is pretty obvious if you receive a log for one of your caches where the logger reports about the blast he had with the cache series ABC and that he is thankful for the creation and maintenance of this great series.

You need not investigating anything to get irritated.

And now suppose that this is not happening once or twice but up from the time when cache series ABC gets created in 95% of the logs you receive for your cache.

 

If I really felt that someone hadn't found my cache, I would look at the actual logbook. I wouldn't do some forensic analysis of their profile.

 

I neither meant that they did not visit your cache nor that you should go for any forensic analysis.

I wrote about the situation that they signed the log book of your cache but the only thing they mention in the online log for your caches are other caches and that this happening often.

I forgot to add the implicit assumption that you are aware of the fact that your cache lies directly on the trail of the ABC series - so there is not so much reason to assume that they did not visit your case in case they visited the trail, but still it's not a sincere thanks to you as a cache owner if the loggers do not even care to rewrite the log to thank you and not the hiders of the ABC series in the online log for your cache.

 

I'd just chalk it up to a mistake. It's easy to get confused when you find many caches in a single day. I don't see why it's necessary to make a bigger judgment about their sincerity over a minor mistake.

Link to comment

I'd just chalk it up to a mistake. It's easy to get confused when you find many caches in a single day. I don't see why it's necessary to make a bigger judgment about their sincerity over a minor mistake.

 

But in those cases I have in mind it's not a mistake, it's a feature by design. They know very well that not all caches belong to the trail but it's so much easier and faster that way (that's the argument used by those people and not something based on my assumptions) and they do not care when the hiders of the few individual caches on the trail give up after receiving hardly any normal logs any longer.

 

That's why I think that this sort of behaviour fits very well to the context of this thread.

Link to comment

I'd just chalk it up to a mistake. It's easy to get confused when you find many caches in a single day. I don't see why it's necessary to make a bigger judgment about their sincerity over a minor mistake.

 

But in those cases I have in mind it's not a mistake, it's a feature by design. They know very well that not all caches belong to the trail but it's so much easier and faster that way (that's the argument used by those people and not something based on my assumptions) and they do not care when the hiders of the few individual caches on the trail give up after receiving hardly any normal logs any longer.

 

That's why I think that this sort of behaviour fits very well to the context of this thread.

 

I lack your ability to read minds, so I don't know if people are doing that or if they're just making a mistake. I assume people are sincere and I'm just happy that people have gone to find my cache. I don't need accolades or engraved thank you notes.

Link to comment

I lack your ability to read minds, so I don't know if people are doing that or if they're just making a mistake. I assume people are sincere and I'm just happy that people have gone to find my cache. I don't need accolades or engraved thank you notes.

 

No mind reading required in the cases I have in mind. When these people are asked about their behaviour they argue that it costs less time for them and is easier and that's what they care about.

The people even do not stop to behave like that if they see that affected cache owners archive their caches. Every cache they have already found that gets archived is no loss for them anyway.

Link to comment

I lack your ability to read minds, so I don't know if people are doing that or if they're just making a mistake. I assume people are sincere and I'm just happy that people have gone to find my cache. I don't need accolades or engraved thank you notes.

 

No mind reading required in the cases I have in mind. When these people are asked about their behaviour they argue that it costs less time for them and is easier and that's what they care about.

The people even do not stop to behave like that if they see that affected cache owners archive their caches. Every cache they have already found that gets archived is no loss for them anyway.

 

So you actually confront other geocachers when you don't like their logs? But you're claiming the cachers are the problem?

Link to comment

So you actually confront other geocachers when you don't like their logs? But you're claiming the cachers are the problem?

 

I do not own a cache that happens to lie on a cache trail and if one of my caches gets affected in the future, I'd archive it immediately without waiting for what happens.

What I wrote above is a general and common topic of talks and debates, at events, at other encounters of cachers etc

 

My line is argument is not via the term problem. The message is just that cache owners that have demonstrated that they are perfectly able to maintain caches over many years, can get to the point where they give up and this does not imply that they are not made for cache ownership.

 

It's not about expecting accolades or special thanks. A sincere "Your cache sucked because it's so close to a wasp nest and I got attacked" is not an accolade but much preferred over a log not taking into account the found cache at all.

Link to comment

So you actually confront other geocachers when you don't like their logs? But you're claiming the cachers are the problem?

 

I do not own a cache that happens to lie on a cache trail and if one of my caches gets affected in the future, I'd archive it immediately without waiting for what happens.

What I wrote above is a general and common topic of talks and debates, at events, at other encounters of cachers etc

 

My line is argument is not via the term problem. The message is just that cache owners that have demonstrated that they are perfectly able to maintain caches over many years, can get to the point where they give up and this does not imply that they are not made for cache ownership.

 

It's not about expecting accolades or special thanks. A sincere "Your cache sucked because it's so close to a wasp nest and I got attacked" is not an accolade but much preferred over a log not taking into account the found cache at all.

 

You can have all the preferences you want, but when your preferences become unreasonable expectations, you will always be disappointed in others.

Link to comment

"Time to start putting my hides to rest....the game is changing and not for the good. I feel fortunate to have enjoyed the end of a golden era.

 

Thank you to those who have visited, the quality found logs and the Favorite points!!"

 

Didn't start until '12, so can't guess what "golden era" he's experienced. :)

Not sure what's expected. Not enough long logs and favorite points?

As well as "super creative", there's one heck of a lotta 1.5/1.5s...

 

That's my buddy, Jake. A great guy! You are not alone, Bubbles, by wishing he was still in the game more. He did put out some very fun hides, but has been increasingly frustrated by lowest-effort logging on caches that he put a lot of effort into, by the apparent preference of cachers for a large group of low-effort hides vs. going after a single lone hide that was well done, and frankly, by what seems to him to be inconsistency and poor judgement from our reviewer. He also has recently had several changes to his lifestyle that put geocaching at a much lower priority in his life.

 

So THIS is what happens when you start a thread and then leave the forum for a few days. Lol! Good times.

 

Anyway, my main and only point was I wish he wouldn't go and if he has to, I wish he'd let people adopt his caches.

 

Didn't mean to get you outed, Jake! Sorry! Love your caches!

Link to comment

So you actually confront other geocachers when you don't like their logs? But you're claiming the cachers are the problem?

 

I do not own a cache that happens to lie on a cache trail and if one of my caches gets affected in the future, I'd archive it immediately without waiting for what happens.

What I wrote above is a general and common topic of talks and debates, at events, at other encounters of cachers etc

 

My line is argument is not via the term problem. The message is just that cache owners that have demonstrated that they are perfectly able to maintain caches over many years, can get to the point where they give up and this does not imply that they are not made for cache ownership.

 

It's not about expecting accolades or special thanks. A sincere "Your cache sucked because it's so close to a wasp nest and I got attacked" is not an accolade but much preferred over a log not taking into account the found cache at all.

 

It's unfortunate when a decent cache gets surrounded by a power trail. Doesn't matter how good the cache is, the short copy and paste "finding this series", "tftc" type logs still make their way onto the cache page. I'm sure this occurs more often in cases like this but it's also happening on stand alone caches placed away from power trails. People go out for day of caching for numbers and they log for them the easiest way they can. The use of phones for logging and the ease of copying and pasting, along with the help of apps and such, has made it the lazy man's way of choice. Of course, most caches these days are perfectly fine with copy and paste logs but it's disheartening to see good quality caches get so many of these meaningless "that's one more smiley for me" type logs. :(

Link to comment

Another thing to consider is that they might have technological reasons for leaving shorter logs - for instance, I try to leave longer logs, but sometimes if I'm using my smartphone to log a find they end up being shorter as it's a pain to type out a longer log on the little screen.

 

Then...maybe don't use your smartphone to log. You don't HAVE to log in the field, you know.

 

There's also the ability to edit one's log. I will often put out a short log via my phone to get a particular thought out about my search, but come back later and edit it for errors and to add description. I know the edits don't show up in notifications, but at least they are there for future finders.

 

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!! :mad:

 

 

Why? Why? WHY? Just wait until you can get to a proper keyboard, like we always used to do.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...