Cache Logs

December 27, 2003

My team did four caches yesterday: 2 traditional and two virtual. I spent about two hours writing up the cache logs, emailing the answers for the virtuals, etc.

My wife, who is finally starting to enjoy the whole caching experience, wanted to join me in writing the logs, though she didn't want to write any herself.

I understood, when I was introduced to geocaching by my brother-in-law, that one was supposed to write a "story" or something interesting reflecting ones experience seeking and (with luck) finding the cache. I have been trying to do that. My wife looked at what I had written and looked at what others had written and wondered if I was taking up too much "space" on the cache pages with my logs, whether anyone would bother to read the crap (She didn't really say crap, but that's what it amounted to.) I wrote, whether I might be annoying the people whose cache pages/logs I was filling up with my writing.

My question boils down to these: what is one expected/supposed to write when one logs a cache? What would be the quintessential cache log? Suppose someone found your cache: what would you like to read about their find/visit?

My wife looked at my writing and said, of the last two sentences, "That's what everyone else is writing. Why don't you just write that?" My last two sentences were: Thanks for the hide. We enjoyed the find. That seemed a little stark to me. I would want to hear about people's adventures looking for my caches. I take "Thanks for the hide. We enjoyed the find." as given. Tell me what was special about YOUR experience.

I'm sorry this is so long. I just can't seem to shu

December 27, 2003

I think your logs are great, don't change a thing. I love it when someone finds one of my caches and puts some story into their log. Personally my logs run more along the lines of "Thanks for the fun, TNLNSL" but that's just 'cuz I'm boring. :unsure:

Rusty...

1.1k · December 27, 2003

One of my favorite things about this sport is returning to our cache to read the logs. We also leave a camera in ours so cachers can snap a pic of themselves. Just got the first set of pics back. Kinda fun trying to play match the faces, and it helps us know the other cachers in the area.

If you have the gift of gab and a tail to tell, then write your heart out Shaky. I think the only thing you can do wrong with a log book is get it wet or use it for a call of duty. (which I guess would apply to rule 1) But most cachers are the outdoors resourcefull type. If you need a sheet or two from my log book for a potty break then by all means, just don't include that in your story. :unsure:

IMHO....

2.3k · December 27, 2003

Don't you change a thing... the stories are one of the best parts!! :unsure:

4.8k · December 27, 2003

That's perfect I love to get logs like yours. That's nearly half the fun of geocaching. As far as filling up to much space: Go For It! I wrote one log that exceeded the limit on the little log box. I learned later that some cachers (like Oregone) post the find log, and if they run out of room, post an additional note to continue the story.

Don't be shy, and fictional accounts are OK too in my book. :unsure:

5k · December 27, 2003

A vast majority of cachers, as observed by your wife, fail to take the time to write out a descriptive cache hunt, and that's too bad. I like to read about people's adventures to get to a cache. The longer stories are (usually) far more interesting than the standard thanks-for-the-cache logs.

It also shows to the cache owner that you enjoyed the cache enough to spend the time to write about your find (or no-find, as it may be) rather than tack another find to your count.

Tell your wife not to be such a conformist.

Jamie

Edited December 27, 2003 by Jamie Z

3.8k · December 27, 2003

Nice job :unsure: I try to be as descriptive as I can, but usually only write a paragraph or two. As others have said, cache owners really appreciate these kinds of logs.

38.2k · December 27, 2003

It doesn't matter what you write as long as you write something. If you aren't comfortable writing long logs, then "found it, thanks for the cache" is fine. If you prefer writing about your adventures, then that's even better. A lot of us like to read the longer logs.

December 27, 2003

if the cache/hunt was uneventful, i usually just write a quick note. if the cache is unusual or unique or the hunt was fun and interesting, i tend to write something a little more involved. whatever you feel is appropriate to the cache or the day. i like to see the paper logs from cachers who don't post online. thats one of the good things about cache maintenance.

3k · December 27, 2003

My question boils down to these: what is one expected/supposed to write when one logs a cache? What would be the quintessential cache log?

Your log should be an accurate appraisal of your caching experience.

The more fun you had, the more descriptive you should make your log. Similarly, badly thought out/implemented caches that weren't worth your time or gasoline money deserve nothing more than a "TNLNSL thanks."

Speaking from practical experience, however, it is very important not to be too honest in your online logs ... some cache owners only want to hear how wonderful their cache was, even if it wasn't. That type of cache owner is so sensitive to even the mildest of criticisms, no matter how delicately stated, that they immediately delete your log or send you a venomous e-mail telling you how unappreciative you are and demanding that you edit your log. That's why it's important to write what you really think of the cache in the logbook.

24.7k · December 27, 2003

TNLN logs along with "Des Palourdes Mortes" have become universal signs that the cache wasn't that great. TNLN logs at least let the cache owner think the log writer didn't have a lot to say. There are plenty of those types out there.

"Des Palourdes Mortes" leaves no doubt.

A good log as described is the reward for the hider placing the cache.

Often the only difference between a bad cache and a good one is the attitude the finder brings to the cache. Some people can have fun and some people expect fun to be spoon fed to them.

3.8k · December 27, 2003

By all means write a long log if you have something to say. I routinally read Oregones logs and I don't even live close to him. There are also cachers in my area that I will read their logs just for fun.

3k · December 27, 2003

Often the only difference between a bad cache and a good one is the attitude the finder brings to the cache. Some people can have fun and some people expect fun to be spoon fed to them.

I see. That was "fun" I've had to spoon out of so many caches. :unsure:

I would say the difference between a good cache and a bad cache might just have something to do with the time and effort that went into creating the cache. If you are in an area with no "bad" caches, then you are very fortunate indeed.

No, I think all cachers are looking forward to having fun when they leave the house to go caching, but all too often are disappointed by what they find and where they find it.

4.2k · December 27, 2003

As you can see, the sentiment is: Write whatever you like.

As a cache owner I love to read great stories about the hunt, the hike, the find, etc. I'd prefer to NOT see the TNLNSL - I take that as a "Des Palourdes Mortes" :-)

Part of the reason that I hid some of my caches was for the logs. One of mine is located right near (30 yards) a local nude-beach that is not well-known. I got the cache out late this year, but expect the logs of next summer to be very entertaining!

1.1k · December 27, 2003

"Des Palourdes Mortes"

I finally looked that up. Strange expression, but it fits.

December 27, 2003

I just read though some of your logs and they are great.I wish I was this creative,

keep up the good work :unsure:

24.7k · December 27, 2003

...I would say the difference between a good cache and a bad cache might just have something to do with the time and effort that went into creating the cache....

It's only one part of the equation.

If I have to spoon the logbook out of a wet soggy cache after the road trip of a lifetime the fun time I had wouldn't be diminished.

So no; cachers will either have fun as soon as they leave the door to go caching, or they won't. As for that soggy log book there is some satisfaction to be had in helping out the cache. People prepared to do that are probably going to have more fun than people who take time to ponder the lameness of caches.

I suspect lame attitude are more common than lame caches. A cool cache is only icing on the cake. The cake is what a cacher brings to the experience.

December 27, 2003

read your log for "The Town Before Time," wouldn't change a thing. When you're the cache hider, an entertaining story like that always feels better than a one-liner.

December 27, 2003

A well written log enriches the experience for everyone in this game. Writing is such a great form of communication. Its great to see the resurrection of writing with the advent of email, these forums, and logging finds. By all means write, then write some more.

December 27, 2003

First off, Kealia, your avatar looks like an art teacher I had in Jr. High.

Secondly, I would say that as long as a person writes that they found it, and the condition it was in, then they're good to go. That's what the owner needs to know. But I love stories about finding the cache. I tend to leave semi long logs, but there's a guy near me who leaves these wonderful novels as log entries. I love to read them. When he found my cache, I got the biggest kick out of it. Long logs are fine in my book...that's kind of a pun I guess. :unsure:

~~Trudger

Edited December 27, 2003 by Trudger

1.2k · December 27, 2003

A good log as described is the reward for the hider placing the cache.

Often the only difference between a bad cache and a good one is the attitude the finder brings to the cache. Some people can have fun and some people expect fun to be spoon fed to them.

I like that comment. The log being the reward for the hider for his efforts. I certainly have enjoyed most of the logs that cachers left for me!

(But what do we do when our fingers are frozen? :unsure: )

1.2k · December 27, 2003

Lame attitudes are more common than lame caches. A cool cache is only icing on the cake. The cake is what a cacher brings to the experience.

(grammar corrected)

What are these words of wisdom coming from you all of a sudden, RK? You ought to make that one your sig!

1.2k · December 27, 2003

A strange surprise I had was finding out that the logs of one particular geocacher, whom I know as very eloquent in these forums, in his own cache descriptions and in his on-line logs, consisted only of the date and his handle, no text whatsoever.

December 27, 2003

I love reading logs that say more than "thanks for the cache!" or something similar... When I first started caching I didn't write much on my "found it" logs, but after hiding my own, I realized how much it means to the owner to have a nice log entry. Even if I don't go "WOW" at the cache site, I usually have some kind of story to tell about the experience. If nothing else I describe the condition of the cache and what the site was like that day, my impressions of it, or how the hunt went. :unsure: I don't think I would ever write a negative log, though, or chastize somebody, however subtly, in a log for their cache-- that's just not me!

6.5k · December 27, 2003

Keep the great logs going. Not everyone has the gift of pen or gab so use it for our amusement. I'll write something interesting if the cache or hunt was. If it was mundane then my log tends to be as well. If I'm going for a many find day I may be a bit more terse in the physical log than the online entry.

1.1k · December 27, 2003

Took: McToy

Left: The gift of gab

3k · December 28, 2003

If I have to spoon the logbook out of a wet soggy cache after the road trip of a lifetime the fun time I had wouldn't be diminished. ... I suspect lame attitude are more common than lame caches. A cool cache is only icing on the cake. The cake is what a cacher brings to the experience.

And if you spooned that logbook out of a wet, soggy cache that had been rated a 5/5 that in reality turned out to be nothing more than a 75 ft walk from the car over flat ground directly to the cache, you would be satisfied?

We agree, Renegade Knight ... if one has very low standards and absolutely no expectations when they leave their house, they will seldom be disappointed by whatever they find or encounter along the way. If you find satisfaction in being that type of geocacher, then I am happy for you. I am not that type of geocacher.

Edited December 28, 2003 by BassoonPilot

December 28, 2003

Let's see, who would be more fun to hang out with on a long road trip? Renegade Knight or BassoonPilot?

5.3k · December 28, 2003

I find myself in an odd place here; I usually agree with RK and almost never with BP, but here it's the opposite!

I have been critical of gc.com for their treatment of cache hiders, but here I think that the community's treatment is too gentle.

In my opinion, online logs are not there only for the ego gratification of the cache hider. They are also there to help future cache seekers know what to expect and to decide whether a cache is worth seeking or not. I think that logs should contain both a description of the adventure of finding the cache and an honest assessment of the cache hide and condition.

Perhaps if we were more honest in our logs there would be fewer lame caches. And I think everyone agrees that there are lame caches out there.

Personally, I have found that the less-than-glowing logs that my caches have received have helped me make them better. For example, the first finder on my "Hexpedition #1" cache was annoyed that I had made the hide so dificult after making a difficult puzzle to even get the cache location. And they were also annoyed that I had placed text in the description that, while technically true, was very misleading.

Instead of deleting the log because it was critical, I tried to listen to what the finder had written, and I made changes to that cache that I think improved it greatly.

I guess the point here is that while Renegade Knight is correct in saying that the log may reflect the attitude of the finder as much as the reality of the cache, it is also true that the interpretation of the log by the hider has just as much to do with the perception of a log as "negative."

3k · December 28, 2003

Let's see, who would be more fun to hang out with on a long road trip?

I vote for Majicman, followed closely by Criminal. Actually, I think Renegade Knight and I would have a ball going on a road trip, as long as CarleenP sat between us agreeing with everything either of us said.

Edited December 28, 2003 by BassoonPilot

December 28, 2003

Road trip? I'm thinking, "Planes, Trains and Automobiles" only with GPSrs!

December 28, 2003

with, of course, RK in the John Candy role, and Bassonpilot as Steve Martin.

1.2k · December 28, 2003

Some people write just somethink like: "Easy. TNLN"

If they writing anything else, then you can feel lucky, if the write like: "It took a while. TNLN" then you have a challenging cache

9.4k · December 28, 2003

Many times a short log is a code for 'this cache stinks', and I don't mean odor.

A longer log (even three or four sentences) lets the cache owner know that you enjoyed the experience enough to share a bit about it.

December 29, 2003

Team GPS, I don't think this is always true... if so, I think it's a bad "code"!! How are you supposed to tell a short log means "this cache stinks" or is just a short log? some people just don't write much, naturally... unless you have a whole string of monosyllabic logs, but then is that the cache or just the people? hard to tell.

Edited December 29, 2003 by mozartman

1.6k · December 29, 2003

My question is, is it bad to write a short log with maybe just what you took and left in the logbook and then post the whole story at the site. Cause I mean today I logged my first find and all the time I was afraid of being stumbled upon by muggles, and I don't have very nice handwriting, so I didn't write much, but then on the actual log page here, I posted a nice story of how I spent the afternoon. I know it's not wrong, but was this stupid?

December 29, 2003

In my opinion, (as a relative newcomer to the game) you did fine! the online logs are what I check most often on my caches. that's where I would like to find a more detailed, descriptive log, not in the cache itself... but then, mine are all micros, so... :unsure:

December 29, 2003

Team K-9, that is NOT stupid. I ussually leave shorter logs at the cache and add to it on the cache page. Sometimes you can't leave long logs for fear of being spotted. I try to tell of the journey or something humorous that happened along the way. I don't like to leave TNLNSL Thanks logs except once, the skeeters were eating me alive just opening the box.

9.4k · December 29, 2003

Team GPS, I don't think this is always true... if so, I think it's a bad "code"!! How are you supposed to tell a short log means "this cache stinks" or is just a short log? some people just don't write much, naturally... unless you have a whole string of monosyllabic logs, but then is that the cache or just the people? hard to tell.

No, it isn't always true. BrianSnat came up with using DPM to signify a bad cache (it's french for something).

What I mean is that many cachers write more on an enjoyable cache and much less on a stinker.

4.2k · December 29, 2003

What I mean is that many cachers write more on an enjoyable cache and much less on a stinker.

I'll second the smurf's sentiments. This seems to be true in my area as well. There are a few local cachers that usually write long entries so I know to watch out for any caches that just have the TNLNSL entry.

Luckily, "DPM" has yet to make it out this way, and I'm not sure if anybody would know what it was is they saw it!

December 29, 2003

OK, I understand what you mean, now...

Edited December 29, 2003 by mozartman

1.1k · December 29, 2003

Log I have not seen yet:

Was really easy to get to, we fell asleep on the way. Container was so poorly hidden it wasn't worth getting out of the car to pick up. We didn't take anything because the cache was full of crap. We didn't leave anything because it would be like throwing a $20 into a pile of S*** and then stepping in it on purpose.

Log I see and write quite often:

TNLNSL

Really the same thing, right? RIGHT?!?!

1.2k · December 29, 2003

In micro caches do we normally just write our username and date, and then write more in the internet log.

December 29, 2003

For what it's worth... I do write something along the lines of - GroundClutter was here, (date and time found) took...left...nice spot etc... Most times, it's short and simple because I don't want to be seen. It would be terrible if I wrote a nice long missive and no one read it except the thief who saw me. I leave the story telling for the on line log. That way, people who haven't found it, will see what a terrific cache they are missing, or if they need boots and a lunch etc.

I do feel guilty now, for the ones in which I wrote TNLN. I don't want to give the impression to the owner that his/her cache is no good. 9 times out of 10 it's just a quick in and out without giving the location away. There was one cache that I hated, and I said so on the on line log. It was not a good day. :unsure:

I will try to put a bit more in the cache log from now on. That's the thing that the owner will keep. I will do unto others....etc

9.4k · December 29, 2003

OK, I understand what you mean, now... but it seems kind of vague and/or passive-aggressive! wouldn't the people who thought strongly that the cache was crappy just email the owner? bottom line, there's no way to tell if they hate your cache or not unless they tell you, right??

I wouldn't want to offend the cache owner with emailing them that their cache was 'crappy'.

December 29, 2003

DPM hasn't made it to Austin. I've never seen such language used in Texas. For a lame cache, I'll usually provide a couple of constructive suggestions in the online log on what could improve the cache rather than just writing "This cache sucked." Often on a bad cache I'll just write XNSL. (eXchanged Nothing, Signed Log). I used SQ when I want outta there fast, like it's in a mosquito-infested swamp or there are alligators heading my way. For a really good cache I'll come up with something creative and funny to write to give the cache owner a chuckle.

If the cache hider has provided an obvious and comfy place to sit while signing the paper logbook, and there are no clouds of bugs biting or gators growling, I'll write something more substantial in the paper log. Otherwise it gets rubber-stamped LOWRACER in big red block letters.

December 29, 2003

Don't always assume a TNLN log means the finder thought it was a bad cache. I often put very little in my logs just because I'm not a "talker". Doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the cache.

However, like most I do enjoy reading stories people post in logs of caches I've placed but I don't take it as an insult if people just post a short log. I placed the caches in places I thought were interesting or worth visiting.

1.2k · December 29, 2003

Writing SL on a log sheet is a bit silly, isn't it?

Cache Logs

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation