This topic contains 172 replies, has 51 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
you’re right, J&L that caches can be archived for any reason.
I pulled almost all of my urban caches last year on the heels of the Ashwaubenon Bomb Scare. And after re-thinking about caching in cemeteries, I pulled my cemetery caches as well.
The rest of my caches either involve a walk/hike in the woods or placed in areas not likely to have many muggles around such as a small boat launch.
Everyone does the game their way. I do mine. But just because I don’t like the “TFTC”‘s on my caches doesn’t mean I’ll archive them. I only archive if it keeps getting muggled or I can’t maintain them.
To each his own.
When someone gets a sliver in their finger, they pull it out.
If Tim (OPS) left his caches active, he would just continue to be upset about something that really bugs him. When it’s so easy to eliminate a major irritation, why would anyone choose not to?Tim was a huge inspiraton when I started caching. He’s placed some of the nicest caches in the area, but no cache needs to last forever.
I don’t think it’s a dumb reason for archiving at all. We pulled a ton of puzzle caches a while back for a similar reason, because certain people were set out to basically spoil puzzles and couldn’t understand how someone could possibly feel that actually solving puzzles, rather than just handing out final coordinates, was important. We lost that argument so, rather than sit and stew, we went out and pulled. Now I try to take a different view on the actions of others, as I’ve outlined here.
And that is also a value to this forum and why this discussion should continue even though some might not wish it to. I think it is very helpful for the caching community to know that this issue is important to some owners and that some owners will choose to say forget it and pull caches.
I was once told by a prolific cut and paster when I brought up the subject, “If I had to write a unique log for every cache I found I would have quit this game long ago.” I guess we see there is a flip side to that sentiment as well.
On the Left Side of the Road...Yeah..writing unique logs can be difficult for a numbers run…that’s why I don’t do numbers as much as others do. I’ll take one cache on a 5 mile hike over 10 of them in a 2 mile trail any day.
@todd300 wrote:
Yeah..writing unique logs can be difficult for a numbers run…that’s why I don’t do numbers as much as others do. I’ll take one cache on a 5 mile hike over 10 of them in a 2 mile trail any day.
I confess to copy and pasting on numbers runs. I feel that if the CO is content to place 100 film cans in sign posts, or even on the ground next to the post, and then copy and paste the cache pages, they shouldn’t mind copy and paste logs. If the CO shows that they put some effort into the hide and the write-up, then I will write more in my logs.
All opinions, comments, and useless drivel I post are mine alone and do not reflect the opinions of the WGA BOD.
One of my favorite quotes: “what becomes tolerated today, becomes accepted tomorrow”.
How long should cache owners tolerate TFTC or no logs on their caches? If no one bothers to stand up and say this isn’t acceptable, then we as COs need to accept (and stop b*tching) about the lack of logs on every cache regardless of difficulty, uniqueness or specialness of the cache.
While I’m saddened to see some great caches gone, I applaud OPS as they took a stand in not tolerating these crappy logs from lazy cachers.nice!
I saw that poem as it was just above one that I had done this weekend. This poem is excellent, it’s like a combination of two things I love: geocaching and Dr. Seuss!
Not all who wander are lost. -J.R.R. Tolkien
I just filled out a survey from Groundspeak. It had to do with Premium Memberships but there were several places where you could give feedback about other aspects of Geocaching.
One question asked “What was the worst thing they had done wrong in the last year”. I answered that allowing blank logs was the worst thing they had done wrong.
I also made several comments about how poorly Groundspeak treats cache hiders. They brag about how many caches there are worldwide but none of them are Groundspeaks caches. I suggested that cache hiders should receive a “find” for every cache hidden or maintenance checked.
We have decided that we won’t accept a blamk log as a valid log even though Groundspeak allows it. We have had three blank logs and in each case I sent the logger an email explaining Team Sloughfoots policy about blank logs and gave them two days to edit their log or it would be deleted. I had to delete all three of them and only one of them relogged with a very nice log. Just our own policy and if GS don’t like it tough! We can also archive our 135 active caches if need be. We do accept TFTC logs.
I had a cacher just write her name as a found it log.
I’m happy that people find my caches.
Sure I don’t like blank logs, TFTC’s, cookie cutters, etc.
Am I gonna delete them?
No.
@smashing ground wrote:
I had a cacher just write her name as a found it log.
Well at least the online log and the cache log will match.
@sloughfoot wrote:
I just filled out a survey from Groundspeak. It had to do with Premium Memberships but there were several places where you could give feedback about other aspects of Geocaching.
One question asked “What was the worst thing they had done wrong in the last year”. I answered that allowing blank logs was the worst thing they had done wrong.
I also made several comments about how poorly Groundspeak treats cache hiders. They brag about how many caches there are worldwide but none of them are Groundspeaks caches. I suggested that cache hiders should receive a “find” for every cache hidden or maintenance checked.
We have decided that we won’t accept a blamk log as a valid log even though Groundspeak allows it. We have had three blank logs and in each case I sent the logger an email explaining Team Sloughfoots policy about blank logs and gave them two days to edit their log or it would be deleted. I had to delete all three of them and only one of them relogged with a very nice log. Just our own policy and if GS don’t like it tough! We can also archive our 135 active caches if need be. We do accept TFTC logs.
Sounds like a reasonable policy to me. After all, a blank log is probably posted in error anyways, so it gives the person who “accidently” posted a blank log a chance to correct it.
z
The topic ‘Crappy Logs’ is closed to new replies.