Tnln

[+makerofthingsup]

Today I found myself in the unusual situation of having forgotten to take swaps out with me in my hurry to get out. I had just my GPS and what I stood up in. Consequently I did two caches and had to do the dreaded TNLN thing which I hate doing. Geocaching rules say the following:-

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

I always, except today, do this as it is what caching is, isn't it? I hate to see TNLN in a log, it seems to somehow cheapen the whole thing in my eyes, you can't even take the time to write "took nothing left nothing" in your haste to get to the next one. I hate TLA let alone FLA it's like you can't realy be bothered. Anyway was just wondering what popular opinion was on this subject?

[+Mad H@ter]

Ahg NO put the lid back on that can of worms

[+John Stead]

Sorry to disagree but I see nothing wrong with TNLN.

 

But I do think it discourteous not to write some sort of comment in the logbook and on the cache page, either about the cache itself or the neighbourhood or some experience in the hunt. At least that way the owner has some feedback as to whether it is appreciated or not and maybe if not so good he can learn from the logs. The joy of caching for me is the hunt and the places it takes me to - but having placed caches I do like to know how they are being received.

 

Slightly off topic but am I alone in feeling slighted by logs (and recently a cache description) which are unpunctuated, badly spelled and generally sloppy? I fully understand the advantage of abbreviation in texting but not when what is written is for all to enjoy. I do understand that some of us do have difficulty spelling but there is a difference between making a simple spelling mistake and not even trying.

[+minstrelcat]

I'll only take something if there is something I want to keep. Otherwise I'll just be moving stuff from cache to cache which is a bit pointless. Apart from TBs of course!

 

Lisa

[+sTeamTraen]

I interpret the rules as:

 

1. Sign the log.

 

2-98. See 1

 

99. If you want to, put something in the cache.

 

100. If you put something in, you may take something out.

 

I only take items (excluding TBs) from about two caches in ten unless my kids are with me. I leave something (with or without taking) in maybe four out of ten. The rest, I don't trade.

[+littlejim]

I traded through my early finds, then like somebody else noted, realised I was just moving items around. I now like going for more 'out of the way' caches and I mostly tnln - I also don't like tla/fla (see my signature), but when at the cache try to keep cache exposure to a minimum. Yesterday for example, I reached a cache, only to realise I could hear a muggle slowly approaching. A brief comment was in order!

If, on the other hand, I still had young children, I would fully expect to make the most of the trading experiance of geocaching! I suppose that sums up geocaching's success - it's many things to many people!

ps I am now also setting 'out of the way' caches - these have minimal trading content- is this a bad thing?

[+McDeHack]

It seems that we are going around and around with these threads. I expect the newbies must be excused.

In this hobby you do what you want to do. TNLN if you want (I have enough junk in my house and I don't realy need any more from caches)

Try and write something in the logbook and something better when you log online.

I also get the feeling that when the cache is found, a muggle might approach so I have to be quick to write in the log and rehide the cache. Yesturday I did a couple that were out of the way ones, and I felt that I had all the time in the world to do what I had to do.

[+badger]

I rarely trade items from a cache, although I do carry trade items in case there is something that I would like to take with me. Mainly I pick up and drop of TB's when caching.

 

I am in the process in setting my second cache, the first was a micro for the actual location, although the site wouldn't have supported a larger cache. The second cache will be larger and carry trade items, all of which I have already sourced. The reason for this, because I realise many family's cache together, and finding treasure is a real boost to keeping their children interested.

 

For me, it is mainly about finding the cache and the surrounding location.

 

Matt

[+littlejim]

Newbies haven't been round and around!

I did a cache yesterday (the highest traditional cache in England) which I thought I would have all the time in the world to filll in the log, but guess what...

[Beer Monster]

When I first started, I religiously traded at every cache, even those that had nothing I particlarly wanted in them.

 

Then, as with many others, I realised I was just shuffling the contents from one box to another.

 

Now I take a few trades with me, but usually only swap if there is something I particularly like in the box. There are a few particular types of things I look out for - unusual coins, for instance.

[+MarcB]

With my caches as long as it's not the logbook, pen or something essential to the cache, I don't care what is taken, even if nothing is left - it's all a pile of crud and crud = leaky caches.

MarcB

[+jochta]

I find this odd that TNLN is frowned upon by some cachers. I set caches so that people can enjoy the location I have chosen, maybe it's a place I know about and want to share it with others, maybe it's a place that will teach the visitor something.

 

If the children are with me they like to swap, I stock my caches with items which will mostly (but not exclusively) appeal to children - and I see many other caches set to appeal in this way. When I'm on my own I almost always TNLN (actually TNLCC) but I do carry a few items with me to boost a cache stock or to swap for a TB if I want.

 

The joy of caching for me when I'm on my own is the hunt and the location, definitely not the swapping. It doesn't take swapping of trinkets to appreciate a cache, it is definitely not a sign of laziness.

 

If the sole purpose of visiting a cache is to swap items (TB hotels etc excluded) then I think the sport would be much less appealing for most adults.

 

I get the feeling that this subject had been done to death already though!!

 

BTW I have absolutely no idea what TLA or FLA stands for!!

[+badger]

BTW I have absolutely no idea what TLA or FLA stands for!!

TLA = Three Letter Abbreviation

FLA = Four Letter Abbreviation

 

HTH

Matt

Edited April 3, 2005 by mattwaggie

[+Bill D (wwh)]

John Stead wrote:

Slightly off topic but am I alone in feeling slighted by logs (and recently a cache description) which are unpunctuated, badly spelled and generally sloppy? I fully understand the advantage of abbreviation in texting but not when what is written is for all to enjoy. I do understand that some of us do have difficulty spelling but there is a difference between making a simple spelling mistake and not even trying.

No, John, you're not alone - I agree absolutely!

 

As to TNLN, I rarely trade. I did at first, but like Beer Monster I found I was mostly just moving things from cache to cache. And though I often write short notes and use abbreviations in the logbook, I always aim to make my online logs substantial.

[nobby.nobbs]

i'll often not swap as there's often sod all worth swapping. when taking my daughter i'll swap as she's still young enough to find mctoys and cheap plastic gadgets fun. log book logs often short if speed necessary becasue of muggles. but online log always tend to be longer.

whether they are punctuated, spelt or gramatically correct is another matter. don't blame me, blame the trendy early 80's teaching techniques and teachers!

[bigspacemonkey]

The priciple I work on is to trade up if possible. Leave something more useful or valuable than you take, that way nobody should have a reason to TNLN because the cache is full of crap. I suppose micros are a different story, but you can always leave 20p or something - people always need small change.

[Lactodorum]

Slightly off topic but am I alone in feeling slighted by logs (and recently a cache description) which are unpunctuated, badly spelled and generally sloppy? I fully understand the advantage of abbreviation in texting but not when what is written is for all to enjoy. I do understand that some of us do have difficulty spelling but there is a difference between making a simple spelling mistake and not even trying.

Oh yes! I absolutely agree.

 

Now to open the proverbial can of worms even further When I am reviewing new caches (and no dobt Eckington sees this as well) I am sometimes tempted to correct cache descriptions that suffer this affliction. I'm not talking about the odd speeling mistake (even I make those ), rather a completely sloppy bit of text. Up until now I have done nothing but it does grieve me to see what I think is a good cache spoiled.

 

What do you think? Should I leave things as they are or should I ask the cache owner to make corrections? Or am I just being a G.O.G.?

[+Pasha]

Grammar and spelling are two of my hot buttons; careless writing makes me nuts. If it were up to me everyone would have to pass a written test before they'd be allowed to post on the net.

[+Mad H@ter]

Slightly off topic but am I alone in feeling slighted by logs (and recently a cache description) which are unpunctuated, badly spelled and generally sloppy?  I fully understand the advantage of abbreviation in texting but not when what is written is for all to enjoy.  I do understand that some of us do have difficulty spelling but there is a difference between making a simple spelling mistake and not even trying.   

Fully agree with you on this John, and as one who has appalling spelling and grammar I always try to ensure that at least my spelling is correct, if not my grammar. There are spell checkers available in most word processing programs, so spelling can be checked via that route, or you can (as I do) use the excellent ieSpell, (or possibly others).

So no excuse for poor spelling

Edited April 5, 2005 by Phillimore Clan

[+McDeHack]

If I am going to write a long post, I do it in 'word' with the help of the spell check. then cut/copy and paste.

[+MarkGPX]

What do you think? Should I leave things as they are or should I ask the cache owner to make corrections? Or am I just being a G.O.G.?          

 

Yes please! Ask that poor spelling and grammar are corrected.

 

At the very least insist that the title of the cache is spelt correctly. There's a cache very near me where the title is incorrectly spelt and it winds me up every time it appears.

 

MarkGPX

Certified GOG

[+Alibags]

Does this mean that dyslexics are to be excluded from placing or logging caches? Or else, "I am sorry but you are not well-educated enough to log my cache". Hmm.

 

I like good grammar and spelling, but I myself am often guilty of typos. I can spell prefectly well, but I do sometimes suffer from the usual tranposition of adjacent letters, due to lack of typing skills. I correct them as and when I spot them. If somebody decided to take it upon themselves to castigate me as a result, then I would not be impressed. In fact, I would regard them as a bit of an *rse!

 

I do see what you are saying, and I would prefer to see a nicely laid out cache page, perhaps with a picture or two. I have in the past almost been put off by cache descriptions that were all in a solid block of text and/or all on lower case. On doing one such cache, I found it to be a very pleasant little cache and my fears were unfounded. Appearances did not represent actual cache quality.

 

There does seem to be a recent propensity on this forum to attempt impose one's own ideology as 'geocaching rules'. I do wish everybody would just chill. Several people have remarked to me that recent handbag fights on the forums have been very offputting to them.

 

Ho hum!

[+mongoose39uk]

Today I found myself in the unusual situation of having forgotten to take swaps out with me in my hurry to get out. I had just my GPS and what I stood up in. Consequently I did two caches and had to do the dreaded TNLN thing which I hate doing. Geocaching rules say the following:-

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

I always, except today, do this as it is what caching is, isn't it? I hate to see TNLN in a log, it seems to somehow cheapen the whole thing in my eyes, you can't even take the time to write "took nothing left nothing" in your haste to get to the next one. I hate TLA let alone FLA it's like you can't realy be bothered. Anyway was just wondering what popular opinion was on this subject?

Geocaching has rules I thought it has guidelines.

 

I did your new Cache at Hollingworth the other day and I reallly enjoyed it. My entry was longer than TNLN but did have that in it.

 

I rarely swap unless I am with my daughter. It is the hunt for me not the swap. From experience with my own caches it would seem that some swap, some don't, some take and leave nothing.

 

I will continue to use TNLN and sometimes my log entries wont be very long. I am not an imaginitive person and sometimes find it very difficult to think of something original to say. It's not that I cannot be bothered.

 

Cheers

 

Tony

[+steviep]

I rarely swap unless I am with my daughter. It is the hunt for me not the swap. From experience with my own caches it would seem that some swap, some don't, some take and leave nothing.

 

I will continue to use TNLN and sometimes my log entries wont be very long. I am not an imaginitive person and sometimes find it very difficult to think of something original to say. It's not that I cannot be bothered.

 

Cheers

 

Tony

ditto! just what i was thinking thanks Tony

 

I rarely swap unless I am with my grandaughters. It is the hunt for me not the swap. From experience with my own caches it would seem that some swap, some don't, some take and leave nothing.

 

I will continue to use TNLN and sometimes my log entries wont be very long. I am not an imaginitive person and sometimes find it very difficult to think of something original to say. It's not that I cannot be bothered.

 

Cheers

 

Steve

[+mongoose39uk]

I rarely swap unless I am with my daughter. It is the hunt for me not the swap. From experience with my own caches it would seem that some swap, some don't, some take and leave nothing.

 

I will continue to use TNLN and sometimes my log entries wont be very long. I am not an imaginitive person and sometimes find it very difficult to think of something original to say. It's not that I cannot be bothered.

 

Cheers

 

Tony

ditto! just what i was thinking thanks Tony

 

I rarely swap unless I am with my grandaughters. It is the hunt for me not the swap. From experience with my own caches it would seem that some swap, some don't, some take and leave nothing.

 

I will continue to use TNLN and sometimes my log entries wont be very long. I am not an imaginitive person and sometimes find it very difficult to think of something original to say. It's not that I cannot be bothered.

 

Cheers

 

Steve

Nice one!

[Alan White]

I no longer write TNLN. I asked myself why I needed to say what I hadn't done, and decided I didn't. Instead I write what I swapped (though I'm not sure why I do that, either). If indeed I did swap, as the swapping is done by the youngster, and unless there's something in the cache that he wants then we don't swap.

 

As for spelling and grammar, yes it's important. In life, not just geocaching. But there needs to be a balance. As Alibags says, we don't want to disadvantage those who find spelling difficult. OTOH, there are those who simply don't care whether they can communicate effectively. Can you imagine someone like that accurately documenting a multi-stage puzzle cache?

[+mongoose39uk]

Edited for stupidity

Edited April 4, 2005 by mongoose39uk

[+mongoose39uk]

Appologies realised finds as the White family

[Alan White]

Appologies realised finds as the White family

No apology necessary. Mea culpa. I keep forgetting to put a proper sig on this account. I'll go and do it now....

[Alan White]

Appologies realised finds as the White family

No apology necessary. Mea culpa. I keep forgetting to put a proper sig on this account. I'll go and do it now....

 

Does it work?

[Deego]

So I cant put TNLN (which I dont)? I TRY to write an interesting web log for each cache, BUT if my spelling and grammar are poor (which they can be ) I am just as wrong

 

Not everyone is a literary genius

 

Looks like something else to add to my next confession list :-

 

13) I have posted web logs with bad spelling and grammatical errors , With the belief that the story and effort made up for them.

[Lactodorum]

Does this mean that dyslexics are to be excluded from placing or logging caches? Or else, "I am sorry but you are not well-educated enough to log my cache". Hmm.

 

I like good grammar and spelling, but I myself am often guilty of typos. I can spell prefectly well, but I do sometimes suffer from the usual tranposition of adjacent letters, due to lack of typing skills. I correct them as and when I spot them. If somebody decided to take it upon themselves to castigate me as a result, then I would not be impressed. In fact, I would regard them as a bit of an *rse!

 

I do see what you are saying, and I would prefer to see a nicely laid out cache page, perhaps with a picture or two. I have in the past almost been put off by cache descriptions that were all in a solid block of text and/or all on lower case. On doing one such cache, I found it to be a very pleasant little cache and my fears were unfounded. Appearances did not represent actual cache quality.

 

There does seem to be a recent propensity on this forum to attempt impose one's own ideology as 'geocaching rules'. I do wish everybody would just chill. Several people have remarked to me that recent handbag fights on the forums have been very offputting to them.

 

Ho hum!

Sorry if that's how my comment came across. I am absolutely NOT trying to impose an "English Grammar" test for cache pages.

 

What I was trying to ask was whether, when presented with a page that is obviously full of errors, the reviewer should suggest to the cache owner that they might like to consider correcting it or even offer to help them do so?

 

Far be it for me to criticise occasional spelling errors, transposed letters etc., as I'm as guilty as anybody (especially after a glass or two of "laughing juice ).

 

What I wanted to know was whether people found it annoying enough to try and do something about it or whether they felt that trying to "impose" some sort of compliance with normal spelling/grammar is beyond our remit. I'm certainly not trying to start a new "Handbag War"

 

So let the opinions roll.........................

[+Alibags]

Drat I was looking forwards to a nice handbag fight with Lacto!

 

Okay, on a more concilliatory note, I would be very pleased if somebody pointed out my typos and other errors and even, at times, my numeric errors. I am more inclined to respond with a blush than a rant.

 

I am sure it is not beyond the diplomatic skills of our lovely approvers to put such a suggestion in a non-offensive way.

[+Eckington]

I'll add my 2d's worth.

 

As a teacher I am often appalled by some of the cache pages and, sometimes, the forum posts I read.

 

I am not talking about the odd typo (check out my emails ref your caches to see I make a million of those ), or the odd spelling mistake.

 

What tends to make me cringe are those posts/cache pages that, deliberately or otherwise, ignore many of the basic rules of grammar.

 

The lack of capital letters and the seeming refusal to use punctuation.

 

I find these submissions/posts very difficult to read fluently.

 

Yet what right have I to correct what could well be a person's deliberate choice to ignore convention as a statement of their feelings on that matter? How arrogant would it be for me to correct what could be the result of a systemic or psychological problem a fellow human has?

 

So all in all, no, I may find some peoples' grammar etc difficult to understand, but I have no right to correct them (unless they happen to be in my Year9ii ICT group Team Raymondo69 )

 

Cheers and Cache Well,

 

Eckington

[Alan White]

Moving even further away from geocaching...

 

We may not have a right to correct the grammar and spelling of others, but do we have an obligation? Is it not the case that most people make grammatical errors through ignorance, rather than to be perverse?

 

Perhaps those who err would be very happy to have their errors pointed out, provided this is done in a sensitive manner?

 

After all, if being part of a society doesn't involve helping others, what does it mean?

[Lactodorum]

Yet what right have I to correct what could well be a person's deliberate choice to ignore convention as a statement of their feelings on that matter? How arrogant would it be for me to correct what could be the result of a systemic or psychological problem a fellow human has?

As usual, I agree with you

 

the reviewer should suggest to the cache owner that they might like to consider correcting it or even offer to help them do so?

 

However I was wondering whether we should ask the question rather than just accepting what was dished up in front of us. I honestly don't know what the wider geocaching community thinks. I know what I think but it is not my job to impose my own views if no geocaching guidelines are being breached

 

So as I said - Opinions please ........................

[+wigglesworth]

I would welcome suggestions to correct the spelling and grammar on my cache descriptions. However I feel that logs are frequently 'dashed' out and we should tolerate errors.

Peter

[+mongoose39uk]

I would welcome corrections of both my spelling and grammar on my cache descriptions.

 

All that I would ask is "ask first".

 

I would not take offence.

 

I am aware that I make plenty of errors.

 

Cheers

 

Tony

[Omega2]

It would seem reasonable to me if reviewers offered suggestions for improving the appearance of a cache description page. Some cache pages are difficult to read due to multiple spelling errors, lack of punctuation and too many sentences in a single paragraph. I've only noticed two caches in my area where their names had the wrong spelling.

 

The writer of the cache page would then have the choice of accepting the reviewer's suggestions or leaving the description looking like a regurgitated dog's dinner.

[+68 GUNS]

I have no objection and would in fact welcome spelling; and where it would make the description more reader friendly, grammer corrections to cache pages I submit.

 

I can think of one example of a new cache which went live near us, for which the word "cache" was spelt incorrectly in two different ways, one of which was in the name of the cache itself!

 

The same cache also has a spelling mistake in a place name which appears twice in the description.

 

I know everyone makes mistakes, but as has been previously said, there are plenty of spell checking programs available, or you could always get a family member or friend to proof read before submitting the final details.

[MCL]

I get irked by the mentality that people should not have their grammar corrected because "they might be dyslexic or poorly educated, and it's not their fault"...

 

..No-one said is was their fault, yet the fact remains that the way they did something was wrong and can be easily put right.

 

Just because someone makes a mistake because they have not been taught the correct way of doing it, doesn't mean it is not the responsibility of their friends and neighbours to (effectively) carry out the education that they are missing. God knows there are enough things that I wasn't taught and if someone is going to come along who does know those things and teach me them then I am all ears!

 

You can claim poor education to explain why you don't know something *now* but that is no excuse for not allowing someone else to fill in that education so you are then that bit better educated and don't make the same mistake again. It seems so very depressing to think that because you weren't taught something at school, you can go through life never learning it.

 

Now I turn to dyslexia, something I suffer from to some extent in that though I can read and type and compose text, I cannot write (handwriting) without a great deal of difficulty. Such afflictions are in my opinion no different from not being able to cross the road when elderly so it is expected that someone more able and usually younger, should help the person across the road. We don't turn round and say "don't do that because you'll make them feel bad about their age affliction".

 

Look, lets cut the nonsense and just help out by pointing out (gently) alternate and better ways of putting things if the original is blatantly not right. You can usuall tell the difference between a genuine missed typo (a couple of letters switched round) and a complete mess of a sentence because someone was either not thinking or has a genuine problem with composition. I am open to such help and I don't see why anyone else shouldn't be. However such help needs to be diplomatic of course, so in the case of a cache page, I would say email the owner and ask if they really meant to put so-and-so in that way, or did they really mean such-and-such? Lets all learn and move forward together eh?

[nobby.nobbs]

i can't see why anyone would be upset with corrections being made to new caches. certainly feel free to amend any of mine.

 

if you were to post a note telling me to see teacher and grading my work then that could be a different matter

 

otherwise feel free. i wish my grammer was better and i'm as prone to spelling mistakes as others especially at this time in the morning.

 

as regards the forums, well do we really need to worry too much? most will add comments quickly and mistakes can be made easily. good manners would suggest we forgive each other's errors. life's too short to get worked up about the little things.

[+MartyBartfast]

... appalling spelling and grammer I always try to ensure that at least my spelling is correct, if not my grammar. There are spell checkers available in most word processing programs, so spelling can be checked via that route...

 

So no excuse for poor spelling 

Do the spell checkers also check inconsistent spellings too?

 

Go on, which one are you going to plump for, is it "er" or "ar" ?

 

Note: this isn't a personal attack on the poster above but a general comment on some of the points raised in the discussion.

 

Speaking personally I get pretty miffed by people who bang on all the time about poor spelling and grammar. I think you should all consider that:

 

1. Not everyone has english as a first language, so just consider when criticising whether your spelling and grammar in another language would be any better than that which you are commenting on. Admittedly this isn't often the case in this forum.

 

2. Not everyone had the benefit of your education, or your genes. Some people find it difficult enough using the english language as it is for various reasons without people having a go at them every time they post.

 

3. The english language is a pretty complex thing and some people are just good at other things. When your maths, science, music, artistic, etc... skills are such that you can pontificate on ALL subjects without fear of criticism then fell free to have a go at other peoples use of english.

 

All this was written from the hip, with no use of spell or grammar checkers. There may be some errors in it, but I don't feel the need to waste time checking it.

 

Feel free to nit pick

[+Mad H@ter]

Do the spell checkers also check inconsistent spellings too?

 

Go on, which one are you going to plump for, is it "er" or "ar" ?

What you on about

 

Now how did that one get through , you should have seen it before the spell check! I must have just overloaded ieSpell. A spell checker is not a cure all but it certainly helps, and great care should be used before clicking on the accept/change button, I have seen some very embarrassing errors (particularly on names) caused by spell checkers.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should all have perfect English (I'm certainly not going to through any stones in that glasshouse!), but sometimes you see cache's where very little care has been taken in the text which leads you to think a similar amount of care has possibly been given to placing the cache. It just seems a shame to spoil a potentially good cache with poor text.

As for forums, well its much like speaking, and I'm sure most of us are guilty of poor speech at times.

 

So at the end of the day I don't believe we should have any spelling/grammar cops (particularly on the forums), but just believe that people should take a little more care on important documents (in our case cache write ups) and if they have a problem (like me) make full use of the tools and resources available to them.

 

As for having my cache pages corrected, I would very much appreciate it if it was done in a constructive and friendly way. This could well save me latter embarrassment, and yes I do at times find my poor English an embarrassment, especially when my kids ask for help with homework.

 

Would have been interesting to count the number spellings ieSpell corrected on the above, must have been 15 to 20

 

Doh, editing for spelling.

Edited April 5, 2005 by Phillimore Clan

[+Alibags]

Well, of course everyone on this forum is capable of diplomatically making any constructive criticism in a way that is not going to cause offense. We never get any of that sort of thing here, do we? Obviously my fears are unfounded and nobody will ever get offended when they are told that their spelling and grammar does not come up to scratch. Pink fluffy loveliness all round then!

 

Good luck Lacto and Ecks! (but feel free to correct my errors and I promise not to bite!)

 

oh, obligatory smiley -

[+Pieman]

Can't see a reason why anyone should argue with reviewers suggesting corrections for spelling and grammar in cache descriptions. The idea about spelling and grammar rules are that they make things easier to understand, which is surely what should be the aim of a cache description.

 

Moving back a few replies in the thread I am always quite intrigued when cachers mention that they have filled in logs quickly because "muggles" were approaching. In the vast majority of caches I have done if someone sees me with a tupperware or ammo box they are not going to assume that I was about to hide it in a hole nearby or under a pile of twigs- that would clearly be a stupid thing to do! In fact, I have been "caught" close to one of my cachers with a paint brush painting "harmless" on an ammo box. I admit I got a very strange look, but not related to the fact that I was about to hide that particular ammo box under a stone! (I smiled at the guy and said "hello", which probably disturbed him further).

 

It's the searching, the removing and replacing that are the real problems- not the log filling!

[+Happy Humphrey]

The issue of poor grammar and spelling in forum postings is quite different from the one about cache descriptions.

 

I think forum posts can be much more informal, and are self-policing to some extent. Unclear and careless English will be punished by much re-work explaining what you really meant. Badly-written posts will simply be ignored, as people can't be bothered to read something which takes too much effort to decipher.

 

Cache descriptions need to be written in reasonably clear language, and if they look like they are carelessly composed reflect badly on geocaching in general.

 

I'm aware that some very intelligent people really cannot write good English, but I'd hope that they'd respect their "customers" (cachers) enough that they'd allow someone else to check their work and suggest improvements.

 

A final check by the approvers would seem like a good move. If the description is really poor a note could be posted - along the lines of "I'm ready to allow this cache to go live, but have a few suggestions to improve the clarity of the text: see below. Please get in touch if you disagree with any of these suggestions, otherwise I'll delay the cache release until you've made the amendments".

 

HH.

[+MartyBartfast]

In the vast majority of caches I have done if someone sees me with a tupperware or ammo box they are not going to assume that I was about to hide it in a hole nearby or under a pile of twigs

If it's a tupperware box, then they're probably thinking "What on earth has that bloke got in his sandwiches?"

 

For me I always keep the written log very brief, mostly because my handwriting is truly awfull and I'm never comfortable writing stuff by hand whatever the weather and regardless of who's about, so it's usually confined to my name (& anyone who was with me), what I took & left (if anything) and always a TFTC. I always try and make the web log a bit more chatty, with some comment on the location, difficulty, weather, what else I was up to at the time and some feedback for the cache owner if appropriate.

[dodgydaved]

For me I always keep the written log very brief, mostly because my handwriting is truly awfull and I'm never comfortable writing stuff by hand whatever the weather and regardless of who's about, so it's usually confined to my name (& anyone who was with me), what I took & left (if anything) and always a TFTC. I always try and make the web log a bit more chatty, with some comment on the location, difficulty, weather, what else I was up to at the time and some feedback for the cache owner if appropriate.

.....and that, my friends, is exactly as I feel.

 

On a smooth surface, in the perfect conditions of my study, my handwriting is vitually illegible (ask my colleagues about my log entries ). In a small book, balanced in my hands, often chilly hands at that, forget it!

 

That's why, for me, it is often TNLNSLTFTC, and I try to be a bit more chatty and infomative on line, but I am afraid I don't always achieve it.

[+John Stead]

I certainly opened this up by going off topic!

The last thing I wanted was to discourage anyone who has any difficulties in expressing themselves and think I worded my original comments to make that clear. My concern was with those who don't bother to try.

HH was quite right to draw a distinction between cache pages and log entries. The former are to some extent the showcase for Geocaching and should be checked with care.

As for entries in the log book I am another of those whose handwriting leaves a lot to be desired, i.e. it is illegible, and so usually print in the log book and therefore entries are often brief. But I do try to say something interesting especially on the log posting - maybe not always very successfully but I do try.