Jump to content

Read the description of every Cache!


Spotted: Correze

Recommended Posts

This seems like common sense to almost everyone?

However, where I am right now, it seems that no one bothers to read descriptions.

They look at compass on phone or GPS device and go there. And then post 'better' co-ords to prove it was not +/- 3m from where it said it was. Eek!

 

Behaving like newbies yet they all have more than 2k finds. Wierd folk around me.

 

"Get to 10m radius and then put yer phone/device away and start using your Geo-skills!"

Tell me I'm wrong.

Edited by Spotted: Correze
Link to comment

This seems like common sense to almost everyone?

However, where I am right now, it seems that no one bothers to read descriptions.

They look at compass on phone or GPS device and go there. And then post 'better' co-ords to prove it was not +/- 3m from where it said it was. Eek!

 

Behaving like newbies yet they all have more than 2k finds. Wierd folk around me.

 

"Get to 10m radius and then put yer phone/device away and start using your Geo-skills!"

Tell me I'm wrong.

 

Nope.. Except for puzzles, LB's and Multi's, we read the description as a next-to-last resort with the last being the hint.

 

Most cache descriptions (even mine) are rarely descriptive about the cache. It's usually some sad tale like "there wasn't a cache nearby so I put one here" or some long diatribe about the mating cycle of the Hefalumpapus. And yes, on a Trad, whenever the posted coords are more than say 20 feet off, I will post updated coordinates. With GPSr's being as accurate as they are in this day and age, especially with the quad helix receivers with WAAS and GLONASS, there's really no excuse for posted coordinates to be more a few meters off except for under really dense tree cover or next to some massive structure. Even then, Google Earth can be fairly accurate and at least get someone on the correct side of the road.

Link to comment
This seems like common sense to almost everyone?

However, where I am right now, it seems that no one bothers to read descriptions.

They look at compass on phone or GPS device and go there. And then post 'better' co-ords to prove it was not +/- 3m from where it said it was. Eek!

 

Behaving like newbies yet they all have more than 2k finds. Wierd folk around me.

 

"Get to 10m radius and then put yer phone/device away and start using your Geo-skills!"

Tell me I'm wrong.

Well, if "no one bothers to read descriptions", then it sounds like you've answered your own question. No, it is not "common sense to almost everyone".
Link to comment

This seems like common sense to almost everyone?

However, where I am right now, it seems that no one bothers to read descriptions.

They look at compass on phone or GPS device and go there. And then post 'better' co-ords to prove it was not +/- 3m from where it said it was. Eek!

 

Behaving like newbies yet they all have more than 2k finds. Wierd folk around me.

 

"Get to 10m radius and then put yer phone/device away and start using your Geo-skills!"

Tell me I'm wrong.

 

Nope.. Except for puzzles, LB's and Multi's, we read the description as a next-to-last resort with the last being the hint.

 

Most cache descriptions (even mine) are rarely descriptive about the cache. It's usually some sad tale like "there wasn't a cache nearby so I put one here" or some long diatribe about the mating cycle of the Hefalumpapus. And yes, on a Trad, whenever the posted coords are more than say 20 feet off, I will post updated coordinates. With GPSr's being as accurate as they are in this day and age, especially with the quad helix receivers with WAAS and GLONASS, there's really no excuse for posted coordinates to be more a few meters off except for under really dense tree cover or next to some massive structure. Even then, Google Earth can be fairly accurate and at least get someone on the correct side of the road.

 

EDIT: Oh, and yes... Once you're within reasonable range, start the hunt! you shouldn't be looking at some stupid phone when you're geocaching anyway ;-)

 

Link to comment

This seems like common sense to almost everyone?

However, where I am right now, it seems that no one bothers to read descriptions.

They look at compass on phone or GPS device and go there. And then post 'better' co-ords to prove it was not +/- 3m from where it said it was. Eek!

 

Behaving like newbies yet they all have more than 2k finds. Wierd folk around me.

 

"Get to 10m radius and then put yer phone/device away and start using your Geo-skills!"

Tell me I'm wrong.

Around here, seems it depends...

Few read "descriptions" if the cache is part of a series or power trail, figuring what could be different about a cache dropped the same way every 530'.

- Maybe the first couple until you get an idea...

Many in my area admit they don't read descriptions for any traditionals less than 2/2.

Most other cache types, it'd be tough (in some cases) to do without reading the cache page.

 

We often get a chuckle out of the (usually) new cacher (but some older...) who can't believe that their brand-new wiz-bang top-o-the-line GPS unit (phone or GPSr) could possibly be off more than 20 feet or so.

Consumer GPS is only accurate to around 10' in "ideal conditions".

The odds that the CO and the finder had a perfect day are iffy, and 20' isn't that much of a reach. :)

Link to comment

This seems like common sense to almost everyone?

However, where I am right now, it seems that no one bothers to read descriptions.

There's a trade off. I've found that in most cases, the description of a traditional cache provides very little information. When I'm planning I never exactly know which caches I'll make it to, so, no, I don't read all the descriptions ahead of time. I get to GZ and search, and only if I don't find it do I look at the description to see if it says anything helpful. Maybe one in thirty caches I miss something important in the description, and even then the cost of missing something is near zero.

 

When I'm at home logging my finds, I normally read all the descriptions for interesting information unrelated to the searches.

 

And then post 'better' co-ords to prove it was not +/- 3m from where it said it was. Eek!

I'm not sure what you're talking about here. In my area, other than newbie mistakes, suggested coordinates are posted when there's a real problem. If you're suggesting that something in the description can make up for bad coordinates, you're wrong.

Link to comment

We read every listing for caches we are planning to do. I must admit, we hardly do any "run of the mill" caches so not reading listings will result in more DNFs since required tools and other info is something to know before leaving on a cachetrip. Only exception is during holidays as we don't know where we'll have time to find a cache but even then we have some "prepared" in advance.

 

BTW, we read logs too before going out ;)

Link to comment

I read the descriptions of caches I hunt. Every one.

 

Actually, I LOOK AT the descriptions, and decide if I want to commit to reading them.

 

People have said above that few trad descriptions have useful information, and that may be true, but I'm in this for the experience that the CO intended, not just the 'find', so I give him or her the benefit of the doubt and sneak a look, at least.

 

I think it's the least I should do when somebody does something for me, meaning creating the cache.

 

I have three caches, and spent a lot of time and effort to craft the pages to make them entertaining if not downright funny. So, if you go after one of my caches and don't read it first, I hope you enjoy finding it. If you do take the time to read it, then I think you might enjoy it more.

Link to comment

I find it useful to read the description, but also the logs. The description might say, "cache is a lock-n-lock container", but then an owner maintenance might say, "replaced with bison tube", or another cacher might have done a throwdown.

 

One of my pet peeves. Owner replaces a missing Regular with a Micro and doesn't update the cache description. The OM log might be quite a ways down in the cache logs before you notice you're now looking for a micro.

Link to comment

I don't read rhe description until i have been unable to find it. Most descriptions nowadays don't have any useful info snyhow.

Maybe that's where I'm going wrong! I live in a stranger Geoplace than most (these days). Spelling it out is often desirable - especially with my trad physical field puzzle caches few people here have ever seen before. Saves them being destroyed & 'owner maintenance'.

Hence why I placed this post in Getting Started.

 

If the only way to sign a log is to destroy the cache? Don't. Simply ask the CO for another hint in real time or when you get home.

This CO sends them an extra hint for every DNF by default.

Whether they ask or not.

Fully appreciate I'm not reinventing the wheel.

My peer group (90% French) think I'm odd for going the xtra mile always. #shrug

Edited by Spotted: Correze
Link to comment

Spelling it out is often desirable - especially with my trad physical field puzzle caches few people here have ever seen before. Saves them being destroyed & 'owner maintenance'.

The best way to prevent unwanted destruction by finders trying to get into a Traditional field puzzle is to not list it as a Traditional field puzzle. The Traditional cache type is most-commonly understood as "container is at the posted coordinates, you just have to find it and sign the log". When you throw in the added complication of a field puzzle, you're effectively misleading finders and it isn't uncommon for people to try to force their way into a container that's listed as a cache type that should be easy to get into. The best thing to do to would be to list it as a Mystery, because finders will already understand by default that there's something more to the cache than just finding the container and signing the log.

Link to comment

Because so many caches are just routine these days, i opt not to read all cache descriptions. I do note difficulty readings which in turn trigger whether or not i want to read. Traditionals above a 2 difficulty rating usually get read but i don't bother with ones below that unless i have a problem finding. I do read descriptions on other types of caches no matter what their difficulty ratings are.

 

As far as posting corrected coordinates, that only happens if i'm a good 50 feet off or so where i'm pretty sure there is a problem.

Link to comment

I skim the description and browse the logs to make sure there isn't a string of DNFs. I also look at the hint every time if available.

I read everything because otherwise I'm unlikely to find it, unless the cache has a red flashing neon arrow pointing it out.

 

But I do not enjoy having to scroll through five paragraphs of Wikipedia pasted text about the Swedish Freckled Cave Rat, to get to the one phrase that is actually related to finding the cache.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

If the only way to sign a log is to destroy the cache? Don't. Simply ask the CO for another hint in real time or when you get home.

First of all, let me say that I agree with this completely. There's no excuse for hurting the cache. Yes, if you can't get it open and you think that's by design, of course you should read the description. And if you can't get it open but that isn't by design, then DNF it and file an NM so the CO can deal with it. This is absolutely true and has nothing to do with whether you read the description before searching for the cache.

 

I live in a stranger Geoplace than most (these days). Spelling it out is often desirable - especially with my trad physical field puzzle caches few people here have ever seen before. Saves them being destroyed & 'owner maintenance'.

Hence why I placed this post in Getting Started.

I'm so sorry some people are jerks, but let me explain what's going on. Since your caches are listed as traditional, people are assuming they're traditional. The field puzzle attribute doesn't really alert them that this is not traditional. I (and I bet most people) rarely notice attributes when I'm on the web where they're clearly displayed, but my GPSr doesn't show me them at all when I'm in the field, so unless I've specifically targeted your cache, I'm going to walk up expecting a search-and-sign cache.

 

Now, me, I'll find you puzzle and have a good time trying to solve it. (In rare cases I'll decide I don't have the time to spare on it and skip it, perhaps planning to allocate the time at a later date.) But some people will be mad and feel entitled to get to the log. And other people will be stupid and not recognize that it's a puzzle, not a stuck door. So, as much as I hate to admit it, I'm not surprised you have people damaging your cache.

 

But the solution is reasonably simple: publish it as a puzzle cache. That tells everyone they have to read the description before they go look for your cache, which is exactly what you want. Now when someone arrives at GZ, it's because they decided to go there, so not only are they informed and prepared, they've also allocated some extra time because they know they'll need it. Yes, it will likely reduce the number of people at your cache, but among the people discouraged will be those that hurt it.

 

I only look at the hint if it turns out I need it.

 

By my thinking, that's the intent. If the CO wanted me to know this info going into the hunt, it would be in the description.

It's perfectly reasonable to savor the hunt, of course. Me, while I won't shirk a hard search, that's not my main pleasure, so I read the hint as I walk up so I can find the cache as quickly and unobtrusively as possible. I'm sure this varies from area to area, but where I normally hunt, CO's tend to expect that so if they give a hint, it normally tells you pretty much exactly what to look for and where to look.

Edited by dprovan
Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...