Jump to content

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

I have no problem with someone following the guidelines to a T.    If you are a cache owner I'm sure you've had your share of "Didn't sign the log.   Forgot a pen".  I can't remember the last time I've forgotten a pen but if for some reason I didn't sign the log I wouldn't expect the cache owner to let it slide.   They have every right to delete my find and I'd double check my bag to make sure I had a couple of pens with me next time.      

 

I consider myself a responsible cache owner but I can count on one finger the number of finds I've deleted. 

 

I guess I'm just to darn trusting.  I could never be a judge (or reviewer).....everyone would be innocent.   

 

 

Well, the problem was that they replaced the hide but didn't remove the old container, then deleted my log when I found their geotrash. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
2 hours ago, ByronForestPreserve said:

Well, the problem was that they replaced the hide but didn't remove the old container, then deleted my log when I found their geotrash. 

My comment was responding more to deleting a find because of the "I didn't have a pen" thing.    

 

In your case I don't agree with having your find deleted.     I also think one smiley isn't worth the time and effort. 

 

 

  • Funny 1
Link to post
On 4/27/2021 at 5:40 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

I think I'd classify the one who urinated in my cache as "bad". Even an inexperienced cacher ought to realise that's not how you sign the log.

 

That's not what "wet logbook" means.

Link to post

I was pondering a caching trip to Sydney and saw these most recent four logs on what was going to be a target cache:

 

image.png.ea504ec5a962251df3ae6afdabe26543.png

 

They're happy to claim smileys on a cache they couldn't reach and say it needs maintenance in their logs, but actually log an NM? No way, make it someone else's responsibility. To me, this is what being a bad cacher is really about. I'm almost tempted to make the trip just to log a DNF and NM, but I suppose that would make me an evil cache cop.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 3
  • Love 3
Link to post
3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

They're happy to claim smileys on a cache they couldn't reach and say it needs maintenance in their logs

They may be new and not realize the value in different log types (or even that they posted a find). Also, 'bad cacher' could apply to the CO who isn't contacting them and asking them to edit their log to be appropriate (I try to do that if it's clearly an inconsistent log type).

It also bugs me when there are finds (valid) all saying the cache coords are inaccurate, upwards of 10m off, without really providing any other descriptions, and especially without providing their own coordinates to perhaps make things easier... and then those COs who if it seems many are reporting bad coordinates make no effort to adjust their cache.

Maybe this is an irk topic :P

  • Funny 1
Link to post
5 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

They may be new and not realize the value in different log types (or even that they posted a find). Also, 'bad cacher' could apply to the CO who isn't contacting them and asking them to edit their log to be appropriate (I try to do that if it's clearly an inconsistent log type).

 

One of them is a newbie but the other three have been in the game for several years and ought to know by now what constitutes a find and what an NM log is for. The CO has been inactive for some time and many of their other hides have already been reviewer archived. This one really ought to follow the same fate but people will have to start logging DNFs, NMs and ultimately an NA for that to happen.

Link to post

For me, there are a few bad cacher types, on various degrees of bad. They have one thing in common: No regard for others.

- Cache saboteurs. In the worst case, they damage the cache, intentionally or not. They break locks, pry boxes open, disassemble what should not be taken apart. Others leave it in a bad state that ruins the experience for others, not putting things back properly.

- Throwdowns. Didn't solve the puzzle? Just put in a fake log! Didn't find the cache? Or couldn't reach it? Hang a petling at face hight and pretend it is the cache.

- Copy-pasters. Looong boring logs about nothing (just to fake that author badge) and not a single word about the cache, on a special, unique cache with much work in it. Yes it is legal. Legal to be impolite. I don't mind a TFTC much, but getting piles and piles of these boring copy-paste logs on something I have worked hard on... it makes me considering quitting the hobby. Really.

- People who can't communicate. People who misunderstand everything, takes offense when you try to help them, or don't respond. Can be both COs and finders.

 

But now I'd better think about the good cachers. Cachers who have fun and let me know it. Cachers that are careful. Cachers that you can talk to.

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Ragnemalm said:

- Copy-pasters. Looong boring logs about nothing (just to fake that author badge) and not a single word about the cache, on a special, unique cache with much work in it. Yes it is legal. Legal to be impolite. I don't mind a TFTC much, but getting piles and piles of these boring copy-paste logs on something I have worked hard on... it makes me considering quitting the hobby. Really.

 

"One of 35 caches I found today with Cacher A, Cacher B, and Cacher C.  Signed as 'TeamABC'.  Thank you to all the COs to placed and maintained these geocaches."

 

:mad:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
14 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

 

"One of 35 caches I found today with Cacher A, Cacher B, and Cacher C.  Signed as 'TeamABC'.  Thank you to all the COs to placed and maintained these geocaches."

 

:mad:

 

I was with a group like that once.  They sign it as "Everybody", and now they're back in the van, impatiently waiting for me.  I think I might have seen the cache box for a moment.

  • Surprised 1
Link to post
8 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

 

"One of 35 caches I found today with Cacher A, Cacher B, and Cacher C.  Signed as 'TeamABC'.  Thank you to all the COs to placed and maintained these geocaches."

 

:mad:

And that's one of the good ones! The ones I complain about are the ones that go on for a paragraph, not about the cache or the experience, but all about the vacation they're on, then ending with "thank-you" translated into 37 languages.

 

Having said that, I don't consider that a bad cacher. That's mainly laziness and not thinking. I don't think it shows what Ragnemalm called "No regard for others." In fact, I think they believe people will value the description of their trip and the fact that they say "thank you" so that anyone in the world can understand them....over and over and over in log after log after log.

Link to post
35 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

One of 35 caches I found today with Cacher A, Cacher B, and Cacher C.  Signed as 'TeamABC'.

If I'm with a group and we're signing with a team name, then I'll copy-paste something like this into every log. But the rest of the log will be about that cache.

 

 

20 minutes ago, kunarion said:

I was with a group like that once.  They sign it as "Everybody", and now they're back in the van, impatiently waiting for me.  I think I might have seen the cache box for a moment.

I've been in one group that drove from cache to cache, but that was an Evil Cache Run™. Since the point was to find "evil" caches (well-camouflaged caches, often hidden in plain sight), everyone saw every hide, and we mostly played "huckle buckle beanstalk" style so everyone who wanted to could spot the hide before it was spoiled. We weren't after numbers that day, so the pace was relaxed and friendly, with much oohing and ahhing at the clever cache designs. And rather than fill up the logs with all our names, we signed "Evil Cache Run" or "ECR" depending on how big the log was.

Link to post
5 minutes ago, niraD said:

everyone saw every hide, and we mostly played "huckle buckle beanstalk" style so everyone who wanted to could spot the hide before it was spoiled. We weren't after numbers that day, so the pace was relaxed and friendly, with much oohing and ahhing at the clever cache designs.

 

That's more my pace.  I'm definitely too slow for the power caching group in a van.  They look for 5 seconds, then they're on the phone for the spoiler info, grab the cache I'd been pondering for ten years, and they're onto the next one.  Or they hand me the cache box and now they're back in the van.  ...I wonder where this box goes...?

  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1
Link to post

Around my community there is a type of bad geocacher - the muggle. It is a wild creature that can be domesticated and indoctrinated, but the muggle species without training can remove and destroy many caches. Just one multi of mine has had stages replaced 9 times due to muggle activity. 
But for real, I hear stories but haven't met anyone who was a bad geocacher yet (knowingly armchair logging and such).

  • Funny 1
Link to post

One of my friends has an excellent Arduino-based PMO gadget multi (91% FPs) that someone recently decided to smash, but only after playing the game on it to get the final coordinates as they then proceded to smash the final as well. There's not much you can do to stop that sort of determined vandalism, one can only hope the caching gods take vengence upon the perpetrator.

  • Surprised 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
On 5/19/2021 at 4:47 PM, kunarion said:

I was with a group like that once.  They sign it as "Everybody", and now they're back in the van, impatiently waiting for me.  I think I might have seen the cache box for a moment.


Spot on! They might have seen the cache! How about at least touching the cache that you log? Or in some way contributing?

  • Funny 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Ragnemalm said:

Spot on! They might have seen the cache! How about at least touching the cache that you log? Or in some way contributing?

Most of the group caching that I have done has used the "Huckle Buckle Beanstalk" method, so everyone has a chance to spot the hide before it is spoiled by someone revealing it. Often, the only person to touch the cache is the last person to spot it. That person retrieves the cache, signs the log and then passes the log around (or just signs for everyone), and replaces the cache.

 

Everyone is participating, even if only one of us actually touches the container.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 5/25/2021 at 6:20 PM, niraD said:

Most of the group caching that I have done has used the "Huckle Buckle Beanstalk" method, so everyone has a chance to spot the hide before it is spoiled by someone revealing it. Often, the only person to touch the cache is the last person to spot it. That person retrieves the cache, signs the log and then passes the log around (or just signs for everyone), and replaces the cache.

 

Everyone is participating, even if only one of us actually touches the container.

Actually, the case when touching the cache has a point is for high T, like swimming, boating, climbing etc. Unless we need to keep the time short, we insist on touching the cache even if the log is already signed. No "logging from ground/shore" if I can avoid it.

 

Groups that don't do this are easily spotted. At most one log actually notes the design of the cache. The others log "one of the ones we logged today", clearly not knowing or caring about the point of the cache.

 

But at least they didn't damage it.

Edited by Ragnemalm
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Bad cachers to me are COs that ignore NM requests and let caches go months or years with DNFs, as far as finders go then people that log a find that truly didn't find it, just recently saw one where the cache was gone but after a few DNFs someone said they found it with a quick log, nothing else and turns out the CO said it wasn't there...LOL.  That's a bad cacher.  

 

Good cachers log DNFs and NM requests and if they have the means will happily replace a bad or missing log, O-ring, pencil etc and keep up on any caches they own.  

 

Just my $0.02 worth.  :antenna:

Link to post
On 5/19/2021 at 10:47 AM, dprovan said:

The ones I complain about are the ones that go on for a paragraph, not about the cache or the experience, but all about the vacation they're on, then ending with "thank-you" translated into 37 languages.

 

Only one paragraph? Amateurs. To really pad your log length you thrown in several paragraphs of quotations that have nothing to do with geocaching or the location at all.

 

But every geocacher is a special snowflake entitled to log however they want...

  • Surprised 1
Link to post
6 hours ago, BOTOCH said:

Bad cachers to me are COs that ignore NM requests and let caches go months or years with DNFs, as far as finders go then people that log a find that truly didn't find it, just recently saw one where the cache was gone but after a few DNFs someone said they found it with a quick log, nothing else and turns out the CO said it wasn't there...LOL.  That's a bad cacher.  

 

Good cachers log DNFs and NM requests and if they have the means will happily replace a bad or missing log, O-ring, pencil etc and keep up on any caches they own.  

 

Just my $0.02 worth.  :antenna:

 

Hey, keep in mind that DNFs are not actionable by themselves and don't imply that there's anything wrong. They only mean that THAT cacher on THAT visit didn't hold it in his or her hand: nothing more.

 

If I get DNFs on one of my caches, i DO NOT go check on it. Sure, to be reasonable, if I get a string of them I might stop by and if all is well, file a reassuring OM log, but don't consider a CO a 'bad cacher' because someone couldn't find their cache.

 

I know, I know, I read here that many people are only filing DNF's when they think it's missing or there's a problem and if that's how they want to play, that's fine, but it's not how I play. Five of my six hides are rarely found, and a year isn't uncommon. In my opinion, they're worth the wait and people who seek them have a good time doing so.

 

There's the dreaded Cache Health Score, which some people blame for the 'Death of DNFs',  That's nonsense; even the CHS when evaluated correctly only encourages COs to respond to STRINGS of DNFs. Yes, in its early stages it needed tweaking, but I think it's better now. There's always an anecdote of a CO whose cache was archived after a single DNF, but I'm skeptical.

 

They don't say anything else about you as a cacher, either. 

 

So, don't demonize the "DNF" and get over it; file more of them yourselves.

  • Upvote 3
  • Surprised 1
Link to post
On 5/27/2021 at 1:45 PM, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

Hey, keep in mind that DNFs are not actionable by themselves and don't imply that there's anything wrong. They only mean that THAT cacher on THAT visit didn't hold it in his or her hand: nothing more.

 

If I get DNFs on one of my caches, i DO NOT go check on it. Sure, to be reasonable, if I get a string of them I might stop by and if all is well, file a reassuring OM log, but don't consider a CO a 'bad cacher' because someone couldn't find their cache.

 

 

Yes I agree and should have clarified meaning multiple DNFs as I highlighted what you said. for the most part mine are quite easy and geared towards families out so if I get a DNF or especially a couple I will go check it out.

 

Thanks!

Link to post

Abother example of a bad cacher would be one who finds a TB and travels with it for a while.  Then just keeps the thing.  I found a TB shortly after my wife died.  I brought it from Hawaii to NY.  This woman took it all over for about six months.  Hasn't logged it in about five years now but it is still "in her hands".  That is a bad cacher.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 6/2/2021 at 12:09 PM, Seadog6608 said:

Abother example of a bad cacher would be one who finds a TB and travels with it for a while.  Then just keeps the thing.  I found a TB shortly after my wife died.  I brought it from Hawaii to NY.  This woman took it all over for about six months.  Hasn't logged it in about five years now but it is still "in her hands".  That is a bad cacher.

I quit trackables because of this. My first one immediately got taken to Europe and traveled around for a while (to caches & events that had nothing to do with the goal) but now has been with the same person who essentially quit the game and still has it. Not one person ever posted a photo of any of the places it had been or mentioned the goal of the trackable in any way. I'm done with them.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
On 5/27/2021 at 12:58 PM, BOTOCH said:

Bad cachers to me are COs that ignore NM requests and let caches go months or years with DNFs, as far as finders go then people that log a find that truly didn't find it, just recently saw one where the cache was gone but after a few DNFs someone said they found it with a quick log, nothing else and turns out the CO said it wasn't there...LOL.  That's a bad cacher.

Definitely. "DNF cheating" is the worst kind, they indicate that the cache is still there, that everything is fine. A non-caring CO is causing this, but is not helped by ordinary-looking logs.

 

Another kind is the kind who see a desperate need for maintenance and ignore it. We once found a T5 on the ground. Recent finders logged TFTC. Yes, we alerted the CO.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
56 minutes ago, Ragnemalm said:

Definitely. "DNF cheating" is the worst kind, they indicate that the cache is still there, that everything is fine.

 

A part of this is due to "Found it" being the default log type on the website. I've had a few finds logged on my caches where it's been clear from the content of the "found" log that it was meant to be a DNF. Most times they've spotted the error straight away and corrected it, but occasionally I've had to send a message querying it. I've been caught myself, logging an accidental find on a cache I was intending to post a WN on. I really really wish they'd do away with default log types and go back to the old system where you had to select a log type before submitting it.

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 2
Link to post
4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

A part of this is due to "Found it" being the default log type on the website.

 

 

Yep.  Which is yet-another of a ton of reasons, we still prefer (and use)  the "old" log form.  We thought default logs were limited to "the app"...

It feels like the "old" log page was created when people were able to think for themselves, but of course probably not so.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2
Link to post
23 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

A part of this is due to "Found it" being the default log type on the website.

 

And this is probably one of the BIGGEST, most enormous curiosities I've had with the web design decisions on GC.com, because this isn't just aesthetic, it's a functional choice that leads to many errors/mistakes and even from a 'business logic' standpoint it just does not make sense to default an action log on an item to "Found" when "Post a log" could mean any number of things - "Found" being the potentially most misleading.  I would love to hear the reasoning behind this decision - assuming it was consciously decided, and not just an oversight that hasn't been corrected in so long...

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to post

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...