I almost don't want to admit this..

[CoyoteRed]

If you head out for any cache with an air of entitlement and an unhealthy dose of expectation, you're gonna fail more often than not UNLESS you do extensive research and CHOOSE your cache hunts wisely.

So, we have to lower our expectations to nothing more than finding an uninteresting cache in an uninteresting location and signing a soggy log?

 

Oh, unless we research the whole hunt first?

 

And then, not say anything negative because it might upset someone.

 

Uh, huh.

 

My latest favorite quote: "I firmly believe that a cache is not great just because it is." ~CurmudgeonlyGal

 

It seems to me that a portion of the geocaching population simply wants poor quality caches for some reason. I'm wondering if it might be so their own attempts may shine that much brighter.

[CoyoteRed]

In business I learned a valuable lesson about failure that I apply to those that work under me. It goes like this: "It's either training or attitude." After 10 years in middle management, whenever there has been a problem with an employee, it has ALWAYS been one of those two things. Always.

ROFL!

 

Was that "training or attitude" of only the employee or does that include the supervisor, as well?

 

Have you ever run into a situation where some employees have either quite or asked for reassignment and the exit interviews show the problem is actually with the supervisor? I've seen it.

 

Of course, I guess an "improper attitude" could include not being able to handle ineptitude, incompetence, bullying, or a whole host of other undesirable traits in a supervisor. But then again, it's never the supervisor's fault. Right?

 

I guess I'm failing to see your point. I was talking about geocaching. I used outside experience to illustrate my point. What are you talking about?

Oh, I don't know. Your example of the fault generally laying at the feet of the employee being the parallel of the cache seeker.

 

I was pointing out that sometimes the problem is not the employee at all, but the supervisor, the person who directs the employee. The parallel of the supervisor would be the cache hider, the one who sets up the hunt and is pretty much telling the seeker what to do or how to find the cache.

 

You real-world thoughts of the problem always being with the employee parallels your thoughts of the hunt satisfaction always being the responsibility of the seeker. This simply isn't my observations of either case.

Edited July 4, 2007 by CoyoteRed

[+Snoogans]

In business I learned a valuable lesson about failure that I apply to those that work under me. It goes like this: "It's either training or attitude." After 10 years in middle management, whenever there has been a problem with an employee, it has ALWAYS been one of those two things. Always.

ROFL!

 

Was that "training or attitude" of only the employee or does that include the supervisor, as well?

 

Have you ever run into a situation where some employees have either quite or asked for reassignment and the exit interviews show the problem is actually with the supervisor? I've seen it.

 

Of course, I guess an "improper attitude" could include not being able to handle ineptitude, incompetence, bullying, or a whole host of other undesirable traits in a supervisor. But then again, it's never the supervisor's fault. Right?

 

I guess I'm failing to see your point. I was talking about geocaching. I used outside experience to illustrate my point. What are you talking about?

Oh, I don't know. Your example of the fault generally laying at the feet of the employee being the parallel of the cache seeker.

 

I was pointing out that sometimes the problem is not the employee at all, but the supervisor, the person who directs the employee. The parallel of the supervisor would be the cache hider, the one who sets up the hunt and is pretty much telling the seeker what to do or how to find the cache.

 

You real-world thoughts of the problem always being with the employee parallels your thoughts of the hunt satisfaction always being the responsibility of the seeker. This simply isn't my observations of either case.

 

 

Okay, I see where you missed MY point.

 

 

When I say "training or attitued," I should have pointed out that training is the responsibility of the supervisor and attitude is the responsibility of the employee. Personality issues aside that's what I meant.

 

 

The supervisor in my point of view for this context is the posted guidelines of the particular cache listing service and NOT the cache hider. The reviewer would be middle management. The cache hider is just another employee as is the cache hunter.

 

 

But you got the rest pretty good when you look at it in the proper context.

 

 

Seen in the proper context, all the angst appears to be petty employee bickering.

 

 

the cache hider, the one who sets up the hunt and is pretty much telling the seeker what to do or how to find the cache.

 

 

I post coords to a cache I've hidden on a cache listing service. I don't twist anyone's arm to hunt for it.

 

 

Other than the most dangerous caches I've placed, I pretty much leave it up to the finder to hunt the cache as they please. For the most part they can figure out where to park and how to approach it. I am not responsible for their personal choices or how happy they are with them. As a hider, I am responsible to list my cache withinin the guidelines and to maintain it.

 

 

Am I wrong? What more should I, as a hider, be responsible for from the Supervisor's standpoint?

[CoyoteRed]

I suppose in your point of view morale has nothing to do with a supervisor's position?

 

I've had or have heard of supervisors providing work environments as loose as "just get the work done" to "everything has to be done exactly like this with no deviation." This parallels your desire to place a cache and let the cacher decide how to "get the job done."

 

Quite frankly, I can't see the parallel between the site's guidelines and a supervisor. The site is more like the building the business is in. It sets basic criteria of the types of caches that can be listed and generally says nothing about the quality of the cache.

 

It is the responsibility of the cache hider to provide some semblance of entertainment value to the seeker. We're out there to entertain ourselves. It isn't suppose to be a chore or work. It's play.

 

This quote...

As a hider, I am responsible to list my cache withinin the guidelines and to maintain it.

...details your responsibility to Groundspeak, not your fellow cachers. Of course, if you're not wanting to provide an entertaining playground for your fellow enthusiasts...

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

Other than the most dangerous caches I've placed, I pretty much leave it up to the finder to hunt the cache as they please. For the most part they can figure out where to park and how to approach it. I am not responsible for their personal choices or how happy they are with them. As a hider, I am responsible to list my cache withinin the guidelines and to maintain it.

 

 

Am I wrong? What more should I, as a hider, be responsible for from the Supervisor's standpoint? unsure.gif

 

Though you didn't agree with my analogy of a dinner, I think it was pretty accurate. Because a cache (like a dinner) is something freely given, it's understood that you're not owed anything. However you host the dinner, (and place the cache) with the idea of providing some form of pleasure. That's why I'd never tell you your meal is awful or you cache is bad. That's called social tact.

 

But later, if I'm discussing cache types (or dishes) I don't think it's inappropriate to discuss the details of the object in question.

 

If we're talking management, one of my favorite statements is "love the person, fix the procedure." I love my fellow cachers- doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to discuss waterproof containers or anything.

 

The difference is that I save most of my harshest criticism for OFFline.

 

Not sure what this means. I don't have anyone to criticize at all. Both activities- caching and forums- are fun to me.

[+Snoogans]

Of course, if you're not wanting to provide an entertaining playground for your fellow enthusiasts...

 

 

Careful. You're wearing your expectation on your sleeve.

 

 

Personally, I DO wish to entertain with my caches. I think the majority of my cache listings try to provide that and the majority of the finder's logs will prove that effort. I also host a lot of events.

 

 

Now, I think a lot of people hide caches just because they want to hide a cache to participate by whatever internal criteria moves them to participate. I don't feel the need to discourage them from hiding caches I might not enjoy just because I perceive that I put more thought/effort into my own.

 

 

I'm certainly not currently interested in placing a cache in a wally world parking lot, but it's not an afront to my senses that someone else might think that's a nifty place to hide a cache.

 

 

I'll watch the rest of the peanut gallery whine and complain about cache quality and comment my tired speech when I feel like posting it. Who knows which side of the fence does more good? From the bookmarks and comments on my own caches, I would venture to assert that I am leading by example.

[+geomann1]

I don't have anyone to criticize at all. Both activities- caching and forums- are fun to me.

 

I agree with this point. Placing a cache is a generous act that is done in support of the sport, for which all participants should be appreciative regardless of their opinion of the quality of the cache. If you find the cache, you should thank the owner. One should not criticize someone who did something for your enjoyment.

 

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

 

In my opinion that only reason for any criticism, which should be expressed first off-line is if the cache presents a danger (not noted in the log) or is in a grossly inappropriate location. I may think a cache is poor quality and boring, but I will keep that to myself.

[CoyoteRed]

Of course, if you're not wanting to provide an entertaining playground for your fellow enthusiasts...

Careful. You're wearing your expectation on your sleeve.

~Wink~ ~Wink~ ?

 

I'd think that's more like ~Duh!~

 

I do expect to be entertained in some fashion when I go after a cache. (...and I don't mean to point and laugh kind of entertainment, either.)

 

I'm certainly not currently interested in placing a cache in a wally world parking lot, but it's not an afront to my senses that someone else might think that's a nifty place to hide a cache.

I'm not so sure some of the placements out there have any thought of the location. Some I've rolled up to I simply look around and wonder just what the placer was thinking when he placed it.

 

Remember back here...

If it wasn't for micros, skirt lifters, and wally world caches, I wouldn't have gotten a cache in every state I passed through (15) on my way to and from GW5.

Did any of those caches provide you with anything more than an excuse to color in another state? Maybe a little stretch of the legs.

 

Hey, I could have done the same thing on numerous occasions. I could have a fairly impressive map or stats--if I cared to impress anyone. I just don't cache to impress others.

[CoyoteRed]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

 

Maybe we could log the cache we didn't enjoy with "TFTS." "Thanks For The Smilie" because I certainly didn't get anything else out of it.

[Mr.Yuck]

So, is the problem micros, or lame hides? I know, I know; overwhelming chorus replies "It's micros, you fool!"

 

And I would agree that some of the lamest hides we have found in our brief caching career have been micros.

 

I guess that caching career (or more likely forum reading career) has been brief! The overwhelming chorus replies, "it's lame hides you fool". Not that I'm calling you a fool or anything.

[Mr.Yuck]

I have the week off and the house to myself (offspring with the Ex at the beach this week), so I decided to hop in the car and go on a caching road trip to the SW corner of Virginia and the Eastern part of TN. Not too far from me, but far enough I wouldn't drive here all the time.

 

Spent the night before downloading the Pocket Queries to my GPS and the ebook to my mobile phone. Took off Sunday morning looking forward to some fun.

 

Loaded up a waypoint in my GPS, then got started. Found a couple, kept hitting "find next" after each successful find. Things were going great, until...

 

...I could take it no more. It was one mind numbing micro after another. I got to a point where I could tell who the owner of the cache was by the particular brand of micro container he was buying. I figured out another person by the total lack of creativity in his hides. Quantity was his goal, not quantity. One hide area dragged me thru the middle of an illegal dump, just off the interstate--just outside the 528' boundary for placing another cache (My GPS said that cache was .12 miles from the hide I where I was standing). From the hide, I could see the phone booth where someone else had also placed a micro. I didn't even bother looking for that one, I just took the DNF and moved on. As I was standing at a broken open electrical junction box (Yes, that was supposed to be where it was hidden, in or around a live junction box) in a shopping center, within eyesight of two other micros at opposite ends of the same shopping center, I finally had my fill.

 

Unfortunately, while making my pocket query, in my "youthfulness" as a cacher I did not attempt to filter out micros. Having no idea that almost every single one of these hides was a micro, I didn't know any better. With literally 2,000 waypoints in my PQ, and no way to sort them, I was drowning in them.

 

There were a handful of truly wonderful caches, however. There was a gorgeous virtual that took me to a 100 year old limestone bridge, a small container hide that brought me to a 150 year old church and spring, among many others. Hidden among the alphabet soup of micros under lamp skirts (I dodged more wasps than I ever care to admit) I found a few that made the trip worthwhile.

 

I hate to sound like some of the crotchety old timers that haunt this forum (never thought I would agree with them) but after spending 2 days sifting through micros, I'm not a big fan of them. I used to be indifferent, now I prefer to leave them alone.

 

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy a micro--when its placed somewhere that is enjoyable! I took a DNF on one this morning just off the Appalachian Trail in Virginia. Beautiful site, great hike to reach it. It stinks that I didn't find it, but I enjoyed myself completely. A local cacher in my area uses micros quite a bit, but they all seem to have a purpose, a nice location, or are the clue to a much larger container. Taking a DNF on a guardrail micro just doesn't give me the same feeling of appreciation.

 

I have no regrets, I learned what I enjoy and what I don't enjoy about this game. The numbers folks can have the micros, I suppose, I bear them no ill will. (And I highly recommend the Tri-Cities/Bristol/Abingdon, VA area for those folks, you'll be in heaven!)

 

Now if you'll excuse me, I received a shiny new Red Jeep TB in the mail yesterday, I have to scout out a few caches in the area worthy of its placement. I'm off all week, I think I can find a good place for her.

 

I'll value the customized filter on my Pocket Query builder from now on.

 

Cheers and thanks for the opportunity to share my travels.

 

[/rant]

[coldbeer]

 

Nice post. I won't get into the whole Snoogans vs. CR thing, which is where this seems to be headed. I'm no world traveler, but in my modest travels in the Northeastern U.S., and Ontario, I can spot a parking lot or payphone micro in the listings no problem, everytime. It does however, require careful study of the listings long before the trip. I could be wrong, but there could be several voices out there calling for a better way?

[+Snoogans]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

 

 

I agree with you here. I was lucky enough to get some thoughtful finders on my first few caches and that encouraged me to put even more effort into my hides.

 

 

Maybe we could log the cache we didn't enjoy with "TFTS." "Thanks For The Smilie" because I certainly didn't get anything else out of it.

 

 

My, my, we are wearing our entitlement and expectation close to the surface today.

[+Snoogans]

Hey, I could have done the same thing on numerous occasions. I could have a fairly impressive map or stats--if I cared to impress anyone. I just don't cache to impress others.

 

 

Hmmmm. You want people to impress you with their caches and then you make a statement like that.

 

 

I'll freely admit that I hide caches to impress others. I enjoy good logs on my caches and I try for hides that generate good logs.

 

 

I manage my stats to impress myself. I can't wait for a chance to color in the rest of the map even if it's just one wally world cache in every state and one skirt lifter or virt in every country. It means I got to go there and go cachin'. I could care less who it impresses and who it doesn't.

Edited July 5, 2007 by Snoogans

[+TrailGators]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

I agree with you here. I was lucky enough to get some thoughtful finders on my first few caches and that encouraged me to put even more effort into my hides.

I also agree. However, I have seen cut and paste logs on good caches. The numbers hunters typically log like that...

[+Team GeoBlast]

Now, I think a lot of people hide caches just because they want to hide a cache to participate by whatever internal criteria moves them to participate. I don't feel the need to discourage them from hiding caches I might not enjoy just because I perceive that I put more thought/effort into my own.

 

Don't you think that for the most part that "the critera that moves people to hide caches" are that they think/hope/intend other cachers to enjoy them? How do you cache hiders improve if they do not encounter other cachers that express what kind of caches they like and the reasons for why?

[+Snoogans]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

I agree with you here. I was lucky enough to get some thoughtful finders on my first few caches and that encouraged me to put even more effort into my hides.

I also agree. However, I have seen cut and paste logs on good caches. The numbers hunters typically log like that...

 

 

I have a few cut and paste logs on my best caches. I don't take it personally. Most of the cut and pastes I've received have been from cachers that came with a big group and it had all been pretty much said by those of their group that logged before.

 

 

I honestly don't need to see "Thanks" written down. If someone takes the time to say a few words extra about their experience, I'm happy. Lots of folks ghost cache and never bother to participate online and I appreciate the one's that do. It saves me going out to check as often.

[+tokencollector]

There has been a shift in the game in the few years that I’ve been playing it. When I got started, almost every cache in my area was large enough to hold trade items. The hiding of micros has been increasing in popularity. Many cachers want to give back to the game by hiding caches for others to find. For better or worse, I think many new cachers have most of their experience with “lame” micros and end up hiding them as well.

 

I like a variety of caches. When I travel, I’m particularly happy for relatively easy caches that can get me out of the hotel in the evening. Even the “lame” micros can provide a nice, brief diversion when driving a long distance. Still, I prefer caches that serve a purpose other than just helping me increase my cache count. A skirtlifter near a historical landmark or a guardrail cache near an interesting view or special place is great. “Easy” caches with an unexpected twist can be fun too.

 

I found several great caches today. My last find on the way home was a clearly visible film can in a Wal-Mart parking lot. It was rather unfulfilling. The lot was huge and there were a variety of potential hiding places outside the perimeter of the guardrail. A little creativity could have taken a boring hide and turned it into something quite a bit more memorable.

 

Hmmm. That was a brief little rant before bed. I’d like to follow it with a (hopefully) useful thought or two.

 

Before going on a trip, I choose caches that I’d like to visit. I usually use the Geocaching google maps and explore caches near my route and where I’ll be staying. I’ll generally take a moment to look over the cache description before bookmarking it. That way, I know that I won’t be too disappointed with the results of my PQ.

 

For those that enjoy hiding caches – please try to be creative with your hides. Locally we have a cacher who hides many micros – often in mundane locations. But, they are fun to find because they are usually super creative. Micros can be, and are fun to me – especially those where the cacher has made a little more effort to do something beside hiding another bison tube in another holly bush.

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

The posts above seem a little too serious to me.

 

This is nerdfest, man.

 

Me saying I like ammo cans more than film cannisters is like me saying I like the X-Men waaayyy more than Fantastic Four.

 

Gandalf would whup Obi Wan hands down.

 

My Vorpal Longsword will TOTALLY beat your Mace of Disruption.

 

It's just nerds discussing nerd things.

 

No one should take it too seriously.

[+TrailGators]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

I agree with you here. I was lucky enough to get some thoughtful finders on my first few caches and that encouraged me to put even more effort into my hides.

I also agree. However, I have seen cut and paste logs on good caches. The numbers hunters typically log like that...

I have a few cut and paste logs on my best caches. I don't take it personally. Most of the cut and pastes I've received have been from cachers that came with a big group and it had all been pretty much said by those of their group that logged before.

 

I honestly don't need to see "Thanks" written down. If someone takes the time to say a few words extra about their experience, I'm happy. Lots of folks ghost cache and never bother to participate online and I appreciate the one's that do. It saves me going out to check as often.

 

I wrote that from the perspective of what kinds of logs I write. The better the cache the longer the log I typically write. As far as my caches, I don't take short logs personally. I do however appreciate when somebody takes the time to write a nice log!

[Clan Riffster]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN"

Yeah, that is kind of a downer. I'm of the opinion that some caches are stinkers. When I would find a stinker, I would post a simple "Thanx for the cache", and move on, typing verbose logs for caches which better suited my bias. I've now reached the point where, if I find myself hunting a stinker, I simply stop. Once my fun meter hits zero, it's time for me to be elsewhere. I won't post anything at all on those caches, under the "Thumper" principle; "If you can't say nuthin' nice, don't say nuthin' at all".

[+The Jester]

 

It is the responsibility of the cache hider to provide some semblance of entertainment value to the seeker. We're out there to entertain ourselves. It isn't suppose to be a chore or work. It's play.

 

The only "semblance of entertainment" that a cache hider has to provide is a cache hidden according to this site's guidelines (for those listed here, other sites may vary). The cache hunter is responsible for the entertainment he experiences. Just because you don't like/enjoy/are entertained by a cache has no bearing on what I like/enjoy/am entertained by - I may really love it. Personally, I don't expect any cache to entertain me, the act of caching is the entertainment.

[+geomann1]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN"

Yeah, that is kind of a downer. I'm of the opinion that some caches are stinkers. When I would find a stinker, I would post a simple "Thanx for the cache", and move on, typing verbose logs for caches which better suited my bias. I've now reached the point where, if I find myself hunting a stinker, I simply stop. Once my fun meter hits zero, it's time for me to be elsewhere. I won't post anything at all on those caches, under the "Thumper" principle; "If you can't say nuthin' nice, don't say nuthin' at all".

 

I've definitely adopted that strategy of being more selective; I've driven to sites and never left the car having decided that searching for the cache just wouldn't be fun for me.

 

"Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?"

 

Coyote - guidelines say one must talk about it. I know the "community' has decided that "TNLN" is acceptable talking about it. That's a great definitive answer to all issues, which I should adopt; "the community has decided", sort of like "it is written". Good manners goes beyond making value judgements. Using the dinner analogy previously made, if someone serves one a free meal which turns out to be slop, good manners still dictates that you properly thank them (and hopefully throw up out of site).

[CoyoteRed]

My, my, we are wearing our entitlement and expectation close to the surface today.

Heck, I might make a t-shirt or a hat.

[CoyoteRed]

Hey, I could have done the same thing on numerous occasions. I could have a fairly impressive map or stats--if I cared to impress anyone. I just don't cache to impress others.

Hmmmm. You want people to impress you with their caches and then you make a statement like that.

What? You saying there's an inconsistency? I wouldn't say "impress" is the same as "entertain" which is the term I've used forever when referring to what I expect to get out of a cache.

 

Keeping this sub thread on topic, which was finding caches, no, I don't find any particular cache to impress others. We didn't hunt the original Tube Torcher to boost that we did it. We did it because we thought it would be highly entertaining and we were not disappointed.

[+Kiwi Nomad]

If I wanted to go to a carpark I would be shopping not geocaching.

As far as going to an area next to some bussiness rubbish bin, I get my rubbish collected for me from my gate so I don't need to be showen where to take it.

 

When I first started I didn't know you could use large containers! First find was a micro, then a number of finds with containers big enough to fit a couple of biscuits but certainly nothing as big as an apple (200ml to 500mls). Nearly fell over in surprise when I found my first 'big' cache as at that stage I thought only tb hotels were big caches and every thing else was either small or micro.

 

If you come across one that you can tell is lame ignore it and then do something to help the community out. Make a booklist of the cache you did like so if anyone has simular tastes as you they can see what you would recommend if they asked. I would hope that my hides would be good enough to end up on someones elses booklist as a cache worth recommending.

[CoyoteRed]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN"

Yeah, that is kind of a downer. I'm of the opinion that some caches are stinkers. When I would find a stinker, I would post a simple "Thanx for the cache", and move on, typing verbose logs for caches which better suited my bias. I've now reached the point where, if I find myself hunting a stinker, I simply stop. Once my fun meter hits zero, it's time for me to be elsewhere. I won't post anything at all on those caches, under the "Thumper" principle; "If you can't say nuthin' nice, don't say nuthin' at all".

I've definitely adopted that strategy of being more selective; I've driven to sites and never left the car having decided that searching for the cache just wouldn't be fun for me.

 

"Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?"

 

Coyote - guidelines say one must talk about it. I know the "community' has decided that "TNLN" is acceptable talking about it. That's a great definitive answer to all issues, which I should adopt; "the community has decided", sort of like "it is written". Good manners goes beyond making value judgements. Using the dinner analogy previously made, if someone serves one a free meal which turns out to be slop, good manners still dictates that you properly thank them (and hopefully throw up out of site).

Hey, you're catching on!

 

So tell me Grasshopper, at what point can you allow your fun meter stop you from continuing in the cycle of select-a-cache-to-hunt through logging-it-online? You can stop before you load the GPS, before you hit GoTo, before you hunt the cache, before you find the cache--these are pretty much a given. Beyond that, just where can you stop?

[+edscott]

This issue reminds me of an engineering company I formerly worked for, in which the project managers had to rate people's performance as to the degree they missed, met, or exceeded expectations. Turned out everyone exceeded expectations and to say that someone did an average job was construed as a negative rating.

That's how it is where I work.

 

The best way to implement a rating system that doesn't step on toes is to have a awards system. People pick their favorite caches and the results are tallied to show the consensus favorites. We have been doing this in San Diego and it works. Some people are trying harder to make the list. This has a positive influence on the game without any negative side effects.

 

I like this idea... only problem is that a great cache in an out of the way location may never get enough visitors to make the list.. but all in all this seems like something that could work.

[+TrailGators]

This issue reminds me of an engineering company I formerly worked for, in which the project managers had to rate people's performance as to the degree they missed, met, or exceeded expectations. Turned out everyone exceeded expectations and to say that someone did an average job was construed as a negative rating.

That's how it is where I work.

 

The best way to implement a rating system that doesn't step on toes is to have a awards system. People pick their favorite caches and the results are tallied to show the consensus favorites. We have been doing this in San Diego and it works. Some people are trying harder to make the list. This has a positive influence on the game without any negative side effects.

 

I like this idea... only problem is that a great cache in an out of the way location may never get enough visitors to make the list.. but all in all this seems like something that could work.

It only takes 3 people to get a cache on that list. Normally even tough caches get visited more than 3 times. The problem is getting everyone to participate in adding caches to their favorites. The good news is that this is what Jeremy said that they were working on to add to the site down the road. I just don't don't know how long that road is....

[Luckless]

I like this idea... only problem is that a great cache in an out of the way location may never get enough visitors to make the list.. but all in all this seems like something that could work.

 

If you are a premium member you can make a bookmark list that will help to filter out the caches.

Over in the Northeast forum there is a pinned thread for such lists. This is a great idea.

There are bookmark listings for train enthusiasts, bicycle riders, boaters, covered bridge enthusiasts, favorite cache finds in each state, etc. If the cache is a good one but way out in the woods there could be a bookmark listing for those lovers of long hikes too.

 

I've even seen bookmarks on this site for lame micro spew for the numbers folks. Although in the interest of avoiding arguments it is probably best to not to rate something that will be taken as criticism of their caches and instead just stick to praising the good ones.

I like the idea of a listing for caches that have been rated the best. I believe people will try to make better caches to get on the list. Many local geocaching groups are already making these lists which award the caches the destinction of being voted one of the best to as a way to encourage their members and others.

Edited July 5, 2007 by Luckless

[+Kit Fox]

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

 

Maybe we could log the cache we didn't enjoy with "TFTS." "Thanks For The Smilie" because I certainly didn't get anything else out of it.

 

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN", which shows a lack of class, as it is not a proper way to say thanks.

Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?

I agree with you here. I was lucky enough to get some thoughtful finders on my first few caches and that encouraged me to put even more effort into my hides.

I also agree. However, I have seen cut and paste logs on good caches. The numbers hunters typically log like that...

 

My pet peeve is log entries such as "8 of 23 today, easy, TNLN"

Yeah, that is kind of a downer. I'm of the opinion that some caches are stinkers. When I would find a stinker, I would post a simple "Thanx for the cache", and move on, typing verbose logs for caches which better suited my bias. I've now reached the point where, if I find myself hunting a stinker, I simply stop. Once my fun meter hits zero, it's time for me to be elsewhere. I won't post anything at all on those caches, under the "Thumper" principle; "If you can't say nuthin' nice, don't say nuthin' at all".

 

I've definitely adopted that strategy of being more selective; I've driven to sites and never left the car having decided that searching for the cache just wouldn't be fun for me.

 

"Maybe that's all the cache deserves. Some owners don't put much effort into the hide. Why should the finder put more effort into thanking the owner than the owner did in thinking about the hide?"

 

Coyote - guidelines say one must talk about it. I know the "community' has decided that "TNLN" is acceptable talking about it. That's a great definitive answer to all issues, which I should adopt; "the community has decided", sort of like "it is written". Good manners goes beyond making value judgements. Using the dinner analogy previously made, if someone serves one a free meal which turns out to be slop, good manners still dictates that you properly thank them (and hopefully throw up out of site).

 

Sadly many of my good caches get the #1 of 123 today TFTC. I attribute this to cachers that are too busy racking up smilies, to be bothered with writing a genuine log. They remind me of a robot signing the log. You know you have a good cache when someone like Team Alamo / Dgreno actually take the time to write this on your cache, "This was find 1 of 250 for the weekend, Nice Camo Job!"

 

On the other hand, writing "thanks for the cache," on really bad caches is counterproductive. If you think about it, the owner of the crappy cache keeps receiving keeps receiving emails telling him "thanks," he assumes that he is making people happy, and they appreciate his "contribution" to geocaching.

 

Caches that failed to delight me, (but I found them anyway ) get nothing more than my find number on the online log.

[+Team GeoBlast]

If you head out for any cache with an air of entitlement and an unhealthy dose of expectation, you're gonna fail more often than not UNLESS you do extensive research and CHOOSE your cache hunts wisely.

l

 

It seems to me that a portion of the geocaching population simply wants poor quality caches for some reason. I'm wondering if it might be so their own attempts may shine that much brighter.

 

I am not sure that this is the exact reason for it (but don't ask what it is) but it does seem that there are a few that take this position;

 

Any cache placement is a good cache. If a person places a cache, any cache, he or she is beyond reproach because it was a gift he presented to the caching world. Anyone who dares discuss the quality of any cache is evil and negative and must take responsibility for keeping thousands of well intended cachers from posting in this forum.

 

This is an attitude that breeds more caches just like the last one and suggests that a discussion forum should consist of a lot of people blowing sunshine in all directions. I'm completely at a loss at what is wrong with encouraging people to do better in a constructive way.

Edited July 5, 2007 by Team GeoBlast

[+CurmudgeonlyGal]

 

Sadly many of my good caches get the #1 of 123 today TFTC. I attribute this to cachers that are too busy racking up smilies, to be bothered with writing a genuine log. They remind me of a robot signing the log. You know you have a good cache when someone like Team Alamo / Dgreno actually take the time to write this on your cache, "This was find 1 of 250 for the weekend, Nice Camo Job!"

 

On the other hand, writing "thanks for the cache," on really bad caches is counterproductive. If you think about it, the owner of the crappy cache keeps receiving keeps receiving emails telling him "thanks," he assumes that he is making people happy, and they appreciate his "contribution" to geocaching.

 

Caches that failed to delight me, (but I found them anyway ) get nothing more than my find number on the online log.

 

Well, I started out to say... if someone's cache was number *any* out of 123 someone did in a day, it probably wasn't THAT great. Truly, how can you do 123 caches in a day and have some Really Great and Memorable caches in that list? But then I realized you were talking about yourself, personally, and I didn't want to seem quite that rude... so I won't say it.

 

 

Granted, it does depends on what one qualifies as being 'good'... and given the tack this whole discussion has taken, it's obvious people have different opinions on that.

 

It is my opinion that a near-death experience truly makes for a great caching experience. (Ok, my definition is a little larger than that, but the near-death ones are the best!)

 

-=-

 

That said (or not), I agree, 100% that positive reinforcement on every cache is a BAD move.

 

Keep in mind, of course, that you are free to express your general discontent with the cache suckage factor, but you better be prepared to have your logs deleted (personally, one of my favorite actions to have taken against me when someone doesn't like my log), have your log permanently encrypted (easy to thwart, just ask me how!), and then expect hate mail telling you that you've become a carbuncle on the face of humanity.

 

After a rash of p*ssing and moaning (sent to me via email) about my cache logs for a particular string of vacation caches & another string of _intentionally_ bad caches, where I explained that they were pretty poor, I decided to help everyone out and made a 'cache log form' that I could cut and paste into my found logs. I checked the appropriate box, submitted it, and moved on.

 

You can see one here at NRV Spawn #5 - Right On!

 

Or here at ScrabbleMania - Schmidt

 

 

Jadedly yrs -

michelle

[Clan Riffster]

Caches that failed to delight me, (but I found them anyway) get nothing more than my find number on the online log.

You're a whole order of magnitude nicer than I am. There's at least a dozen caches around here that simply didn't rate a log of any kind from me. If, at the end of the day, a particular cache was so pathetic that it couldn't inspire even one memory, why should I bother writing about it? As GB mentioned, thanking someone for carp only encourages more carp. I wonder, if some time down the road, the owner(s) of those caches will see my name on their scrap of paper and wonder why I didn't log a find?

[+Team GeoBlast]

Caches that failed to delight me, (but I found them anyway) get nothing more than my find number on the online log.

You're a whole order of magnitude nicer than I am. There's at least a dozen caches around here that simply didn't rate a log of any kind from me. If, at the end of the day, a particular cache was so pathetic that it couldn't inspire even one memory, why should I bother writing about it? As GB mentioned, thanking someone for carp only encourages more carp. I wonder, if some time down the road, the owner(s) of those caches will see my name on their scrap of paper and wonder why I didn't log a find?

 

I consider this the high road when the situation is without opportunity to be proactive and I've done the same thing many times.

 

I'm pretty sure that I've seen you say that you were a supporter of education and I think if given the opportunity, you would probably still practice this. Sure, it's work, but it is productive and it is far more proactive than saying nothing. Although the feedback is hard to hear at first, the possibility of helping someone get closer to what they really want.. to put out a cache that more people will enjoy is truly helping the game

 

Saying something nice about a cache that you thought was a waste of time is not being honest. It gives the false impression that 10 more of the same type of cache would be enjoyed 10 times more than the last one.

[+TrailGators]

Caches that failed to delight me, (but I found them anyway) get nothing more than my find number on the online log.

You're a whole order of magnitude nicer than I am. There's at least a dozen caches around here that simply didn't rate a log of any kind from me. If, at the end of the day, a particular cache was so pathetic that it couldn't inspire even one memory, why should I bother writing about it? As GB mentioned, thanking someone for carp only encourages more carp. I wonder, if some time down the road, the owner(s) of those caches will see my name on their scrap of paper and wonder why I didn't log a find?

 

I consider this the high road when the situation is without opportunity to be proactive and I've done the same thing many times.

 

I'm pretty sure that I've seen you say that you were a supporter of education and I think if given the opportunity, you would probably still practice this. Sure, it's work, but it is productive and it is far more proactive than saying nothing. Although the feedback is hard to hear at first, the possibility of helping someone get closer to what they really want.. to put out a cache that more people will enjoy is truly helping the game

 

Saying something nice about a cache that you thought was a waste of time is not being honest. It gives the false impression that 10 more of the same type of cache would be enjoyed 10 times more than the last one.

About a week ago, my oldest son and I drove up to a cache that was located in an apartment complex. I figured it was hidden in a little park in the middle of the complex and that is where my GPS was pointing. However, when I got close enough, I could see that the darn thing was actually hidden right outside someone's apartment door. My son rolled his eyes and I agreed that that cache was stupid, and we went home. I added it to my ignore list. So I'm boycotting YNWs.

[+Kit Fox]

Caches that failed to delight me, (but I found them anyway) get nothing more than my find number on the online log.

You're a whole order of magnitude nicer than I am. There's at least a dozen caches around here that simply didn't rate a log of any kind from me. If, at the end of the day, a particular cache was so pathetic that it couldn't inspire even one memory, why should I bother writing about it? As GB mentioned, thanking someone for carp only encourages more carp. I wonder, if some time down the road, the owner(s) of those caches will see my name on their scrap of paper and wonder why I didn't log a find?

 

Here is an example log:

 

#1037

 

Ironically, the three finders after me said "thanks for the cache," which illustrates my point.

 

Recently, I posted an honest DNF log, and I got flamed by the "resident defender of newby cachers." It turned out my hunch was correct, but the "defender of newbies still hasn't retracted his log.

Edited July 5, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+sbell111]

Now I am not suggesting you should interfer with other peoples hides but...

 

if you happened to come across a particuly 'why the f*** did they put it here?!?!' lpc / tossed out a window / middle of local tip cache. It would be very sad if you had to log a dnf of course the correct thing to do would be to CITO because people shouldn't leave rubbish lying around for others to find when the geocache especialy small grey plastic containers that are just rubbish and not serving any purpose.

CITO!

Be careful what you ask for. I can imagine few ideas that have as much potential for destroying the game as yours.

[+The Jester]

If you head out for any cache with an air of entitlement and an unhealthy dose of expectation, you're gonna fail more often than not UNLESS you do extensive research and CHOOSE your cache hunts wisely.

l

 

It seems to me that a portion of the geocaching population simply wants poor quality caches for some reason. I'm wondering if it might be so their own attempts may shine that much brighter.

 

I am not sure that this is the exact reason for it (but don't ask what it is) but it does seem that there are a few that take this position;

 

Any cache placement is a good cache. If a person places a cache, any cache, he or she is beyond reproach because it was a gift he presented to the caching world. Anyone who dares discuss the quality of any cache is evil and negative and must take responsibility for keeping thousands of well intended cachers from posting in this forum.

 

This is an attitude that breeds more caches just like the last one and suggests that a discussion forum should consist of a lot of people blowing sunshine in all directions. I'm completely at a loss at what is wrong with encouraging people to do better in a constructive way.

So, having a position like;

 

Any cache I don't like is bad. I can tag it with any label I want - such as "lame" or "ODiouS" - and claim it is destroying/ruining/bad for geocaching. Anyone so foolish to disagree with me and actually defend said horribleness, can also be tagged with some derogatory label (i.e. Defender of all things lame).

 

is seen as "constructive"? And will encourage thousands of cachers to post in these forums?

[+briansnat]

That said (or not), I agree, 100% that positive reinforcement on every cache is a BAD move.

 

At one time I looked at every cache as a gift to the community and was loath to say anything negative. Since the micro spew explosion I've decided that a lot of them are just placed to boost someone's hide count and ego, so I'm more likely to be somewhat honest.

 

It's not in me to be "brutally honest", but I now will leave logs that say "Found it, great view of the dumpster", or "Found it, lovely parking lot" . Some owners will get the sarcasm and I'm sure some won't.

[+TrailGators]

That said (or not), I agree, 100% that positive reinforcement on every cache is a BAD move.

 

At one time I looked at every cache as a gift to the community and was loath to say anything negative. Since the micro spew explosion I've decided that a lot of them are just placed to boost someone's hide count and ego, so I'm more likely to be somewhat honest.

 

It's not in me to be "brutally honest", but I now will leave logs that say "Found it, great view of the dumpster", or "Found it, lovely parking lot" . Some owners will get the sarcasm and I'm sure some won't.

I'm not sure how many people really get sarcasm. I once sarcastically logged an LPC with: "Out doing some night caching with Duganrm, Jahoadi and John, Miragee. We all looked and looked for this one for 5-6 hours. Not! " The cache owner emailed me after I logged my find and told me the cache was under the lamp post cover. Edited July 5, 2007 by TrailGators

[+geomann1]

This is an attitude that breeds more caches just like the last one and suggests that a discussion forum should consist of a lot of people blowing sunshine in all directions. I'm completely at a loss at what is wrong with encouraging people to do better in a constructive way.

 

There is are old sayings that (1) nothing is less appreciated than unsolicited advice, (2) a wise man does not need advice and a fool will not heed it, and (3) trying to reason with someone who thinks tossing film canisters in the bushes and under dumpsters is fun will get you as far as trying to reason with a barnyard animal (OK, I just made the last one up).

 

How one logs a cache will not change anyones behaviour; if someone puts out a bunch of lame caches its easy enough to ignore them.

 

Unfortunately, in my neck of the woods, we have not yet had the problem of an excessive number of poor quality caches. Where I have encountered one on the road, I've left before finding, so the issue of how to log is moot. If I do find a cache, out of politeness, I will give a simple thanks, because in all honesty I have yet to have found a cache that did not deserve that (although perhaps after a 1000 finds I might change my tune).

Edited July 5, 2007 by geomann1

[+Snoogans]

On the other hand, writing "thanks for the cache," on really bad caches is counterproductive. If you think about it, the owner of the crappy cache keeps receiving keeps receiving emails telling him "thanks," he assumes that he is making people happy, and they appreciate his "contribution" to geocaching.

 

 

When I had only been caching a couple of months (May 2003) I was at a camping event with a well known and well respected local cacher who was ranting about the "lame virt" explosion. (virts were the redheaded stepchildren before micros) He was being particularly mean with descriptive language toward one local virt hider who plain as day stated on the page and in her profile that her virts and most of her caches were for handicapped people.

 

 

When I suggested that he just ignore her caches, his reply was, "I can't NOT log a cache!" I stopped looking up to him at that point, but I still greatly respect his skill for placing awesome caches. His caches are really something special to experience.

 

 

I have been told that I place some good caches in my cache logs, by email, and the fact that many of my caches are on bookmark lists. I have one cache where people thank me for the opportunity just to BE at the location I shared even though they got a DNF. That doesn't give me the right to crap on someone else's effort to partricipate.

 

 

If I say nothing else on one of my finds, I'll say, "thanks." If I don't actully write the word, then it's implied if I write about a good experience.

 

 

I won't tax a braincell to wonder whyyy a cache is posted. What's the point other than to show off your (the royal your) own sense of entitlement and expectation?

[+geomann1]

"When I suggested that he just ignore her caches, his reply was, "I can't NOT log a cache!" I stopped looking up to him at that point, but I still greatly respect his skill for placing awesome caches. His caches are really something special to experience".

 

You raise a good point, a lot of people will harp about lame caches but still look for, find, and log them.

 

Reminds of a joke story, when someone gave wine connoiseur a bottle containing horse piss. He took a drink and pronounced "this wine is horse piss". He then proceeded to drink the rest of the bottle.

 

It would seem that there are a lot of cache connoiseurs out there who have strong opinions, but will still log what they believe are very lame caches because they want another smiley. If no one logged caches they felt were lame, the problem would be reduced because nothing would deter a cache hider more than to have none of his/her caches logged. Instead some choose to whine and "drink the horse piss" (did not mean the pun, just got lucky).

[Clan Riffster]

So, having a position like;

 

Any cache I don't like is bad. I can tag it with any label I want - such as "lame" or "ODiouS" - and claim it is destroying/ruining/bad for geocaching. Anyone so foolish to disagree with me and actually defend said horribleness, can also be tagged with some derogatory label (i.e. Defender of all things lame).

 

is seen as "constructive"? And will encourage thousands of cachers to post in these forums?

Exactly right! Glad we could straighten you out on that.

[+Kit Fox]

On the other hand, writing "thanks for the cache," on really bad caches is counterproductive. If you think about it, the owner of the crappy cache keeps receiving keeps receiving emails telling him "thanks," he assumes that he is making people happy, and they appreciate his "contribution" to geocaching.

 

 

When I had only been caching a couple of months (May 2003) I was at a camping event with a well known and well respected local cacher who was ranting about the "lame virt" explosion. (virts were the redheaded stepchildren before micros) He was being particularly mean with descriptive language toward one local virt hider who plain as day stated on the page and in her profile that her virts and most of her caches were for handicapped people.

 

 

When I suggested that he just ignore her caches, his reply was, "I can't NOT log a cache!" I stopped looking up to him at that point, but I still greatly respect his skill for placing awesome caches. His caches are really something special to experience.

 

When I first started caching, I had to find every nearby cache. I was akin to a compulsive disorder. Of course this was way back in 04, when there was no such thing as an ignore list, to get those menacing caches off of my list. With the advent of the ignore list, caches with zero fun factor quietly disappear.

 

 

If I say nothing else on one of my finds, I'll say, "thanks." If I don't actully write the word, then it's implied if I write about a good experience.

 

I won't tax a braincell to wonder whyyy a cache is posted. What's the point other than to show off your (the royal your) own sense of entitlement and expectation?

 

I'm one of those cachers that can decide "on the spot" whether I want to find the cache or not. Lately, I would rather skip caching all together, than find caches that don't appeal to me. My favorite type of caches involve hikes in excess of five miles, but with today's temperature exceeding 112 degrees, i'm not in the mood to hike. If I don't have fun while geocaching, I blame myself.

[+briansnat]

That doesn't give me the right to crap on someone else's effort to partricipate

 

Ummm, you do have that right. I've yet to find the passage in the guidelines and TOS that prohibits honesty. You may choose not to exercise it but that's a horse in a different garage.

Edited July 6, 2007 by briansnat

[+TrailGators]

So, having a position like;

 

Any cache I don't like is bad. I can tag it with any label I want - such as "lame" or "ODiouS" - and claim it is destroying/ruining/bad for geocaching. Anyone so foolish to disagree with me and actually defend said horribleness, can also be tagged with some derogatory label (i.e. Defender of all things lame).

 

is seen as "constructive"? And will encourage thousands of cachers to post in these forums?

Exactly right! Glad we could straighten you out on that.

[+Team GeoBlast]

If you head out for any cache with an air of entitlement and an unhealthy dose of expectation, you're gonna fail more often than not UNLESS you do extensive research and CHOOSE your cache hunts wisely.

l

 

It seems to me that a portion of the geocaching population simply wants poor quality caches for some reason. I'm wondering if it might be so their own attempts may shine that much brighter.

 

I am not sure that this is the exact reason for it (but don't ask what it is) but it does seem that there are a few that take this position;

 

Any cache placement is a good cache. If a person places a cache, any cache, he or she is beyond reproach because it was a gift he presented to the caching world. Anyone who dares discuss the quality of any cache is evil and negative and must take responsibility for keeping thousands of well intended cachers from posting in this forum.

 

This is an attitude that breeds more caches just like the last one and suggests that a discussion forum should consist of a lot of people blowing sunshine in all directions. I'm completely at a loss at what is wrong with encouraging people to do better in a constructive way.

So, having a position like;

 

Any cache I don't like is bad. I can tag it with any label I want - such as "lame" or "ODiouS" - and claim it is destroying/ruining/bad for geocaching. Anyone so foolish to disagree with me and actually defend said horribleness, can also be tagged with some derogatory label (i.e. Defender of all things lame).

 

is seen as "constructive"? And will encourage thousands of cachers to post in these forums?

 

Yes absolutely. I am not sure I have ever seen anyone take that position but yeah, that's not constructive in the least.

[+Team GeoBlast]

This is an attitude that breeds more caches just like the last one and suggests that a discussion forum should consist of a lot of people blowing sunshine in all directions. I'm completely at a loss at what is wrong with encouraging people to do better in a constructive way.

 

There is are old sayings that (1) nothing is less appreciated than unsolicited advice, (2) a wise man does not need advice and a fool will not heed it, and (3) trying to reason with someone who thinks tossing film canisters in the bushes and under dumpsters is fun will get you as far as trying to reason with a barnyard animal (OK, I just made the last one up).

 

How one logs a cache will not change anyones behaviour; if someone puts out a bunch of lame caches its easy enough to ignore them.

 

Unfortunately, in my neck of the woods, we have not yet had the problem of an excessive number of poor quality caches. Where I have encountered one on the road, I've left before finding, so the issue of how to log is moot. If I do find a cache, out of politeness, I will give a simple thanks, because in all honesty I have yet to have found a cache that did not deserve that (although perhaps after a 1000 finds I might change my tune).

 

An unsolicited instructive log is not my idea of encouragement. I'm not talking about giving people advice that they didn't ask for. There is a lot of ways that aren't so in your face that the cacher has the option of taking or leaving as he or she chooses. Invite the cacher to go out with you, get to know them would be a good start. But welcoming them to the game (mostly these are new cachers) and suggesting some of the areas better caches works well. Seeing them at an event and talking to them about caching in the area and asking them to help you on a caching project. Sending them a bookmark of caches that won awards. Inviting them to post on your local bulletin board. The list is long but nothing on it would offend someone like you are suggesting.

 

Do you hide caches that people like? How did you learn?

Edited July 6, 2007 by Team GeoBlast

[+Team GeoBlast]

I have been told that I place some good caches in my cache logs, by email, and the fact that many of my caches are on bookmark lists. I have one cache where people thank me for the opportunity just to BE at the location I shared . That doesn't give me the right to crap on someone else's effort to partricipate.

 

I've never found one of your caches but I will take your word that they are as good as you say. So assuming that they are, no, that doesn't entitle you to bag on anyone else. I don't think many feel that it is okay to bag on someone else, I know I don't But how did you acquire this skill? Did someone help you? How would you have responded if someone extended a helping hand to you when you were new or inexperienced? Would this leave you offended?