[GeoStL] Re: What Does Your Log say?
- From: Dan Henke <thunder_monk@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 19:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Nancy,
There are always people tht seem to want to analyze everything and make
something of it. That is one reason I don't go to the forums often ...the other
reason is that I forget .
I have signed a log TNLNSL a few times when I was in a hurry or just did not
have much to say it did not mean that I did not enjoy the cache. I have enjoyed
every cache I have ever done and I normally try to say something to encourage
the cache placer in the log. If I take nothing and leave nothing from a cache I
will include the above as part of my log.
I would not put too much worry into something like that....some people are just
in a hurry or that is their normal way of signing the log.
Check out the recent finds feature of SLAGA and find someone who has found a
large number of caches and then check out a few to see what they say....most of
the time it is very similar or identical because they have copied and pasted
the same message into each log to save time. It doesn't mean they didn't enjoy
the cache it just means they had a bunch to log and got tired of being original
with each.
Just my 2 cents worth of course
Dan (Thunder)
TKLNHL <sydstyr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've been reading the forums and there's been a discussion about what finders
write online.
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=70128
There's a strong school of thought that an online entry that reads something
like this:
"TNLNSL. TFTC"
(Took nothing, left nothing, signed log. Thanks for the Cache)
is really geo code for
"Your cache sucks"
Is this true?
If you leave logs like this -- is that what you are really thinking?
How much time do you spend writing in the physical logbook as compared to the
cyber log?
As a placer do you get a kick out of reading logs or do you even care?
I'm just curious. I like reading interesting logs -- whether or not they help
with finding the cache. And naturally, you can imagine, that as the log-writer
on our little family team, some of "our" logs may.. digress... Do those kind
of logs "bother" you?
I swiped this post from the forums:
"I"'m surprised no one has stated the obvious. TNLNSL could be considered what
folks in the quality industry call an indicator.
-If you never see it in the logs the cache is probably stellar.
-If you see it in the logs occasionally, either those individuals either didn't
care for the cache, were tacitern9sp?), or were in a hurry.
-If most of the logs are TNLNSL it may well be a stinker.
-If [b]all[/n] the logs are TNLNSL you probably qant to put the cache on your
ignore list. "
Does this hold true in this area? I think I've seen some TNLN entries on what
others thought were good caches? Is this a "less is more" area LOL?
Just .. things to discuss...
Nancy
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
Other related posts:
