GorgonVaktmester

Again: The number of finds on your caches has nothing to do with how well liked or popular or unpopular you are! It just states that you have "more than hundred caches" that is placed so that they are easy to find. Nothing more, nothing less...

You have a very special way of debating yourself. In my last post above I quote something you wrote, but now that post is gone! And instead you added your statement there to the post that I'm quoting now... When you own a lot of caches, and they are placed in urban places, of course you get a lot of found it logs! But the amount of found it logs doesen't say anything about you as a person and how well liked or not you are, it just say that you have a lot of caches of average quality that is easy accessible. You have slightly more favourite points than you have caches you own (124 fp on 111 hides) And with a total of 10.135 received logs that's not very impressive. So say that this makes you as a person very well liked is a bit strange...

I I have found some of your caches myself, and given you my honest opinion about them. I also thanked you for putting the cache out. And most of the cachers in Norway probably don't know who you are. But those of us who has tried to discuss your interpretation of the guidelines with you know that they are (how shall I put it) a bit special... And since you are quite trigger-happy with the delete-button on people's logs you have made a lot of norwegian geocachers angry.

Like thomfre said quite early in ths thread: And now he has deleted the logs again after he has seen the picture.

Local? Well, yes this is a problem we have here in Norway... Private? Absolutely not! This is not a private feud between the two of them. This is one person against the rest of the norwegian geocachers.

No they are not! As a CO i would think that the cache is OK as long as I receive "Found it" logs, an no mentioning of problems in the log or in a NM log. So would also the next person that tries to find the box, and might use a long time searching for a cache that might be gone or broken because "someone found it yesterday". So the cheaters do have anegative impact on other cachers as well!

Sorry, but that actually isn't good enough. Check the guidelines: https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=107&pgid=534 Snapping a photo isn't signing the logbook.

And in this case the logger did exactly that, he took a picture and was ready to send that if asked. But he wasn't asked! CO just deleted his log with no comments or questions. When the logger asked why he had deleted his log he provided texual description of his logs placement in the logbook as proof. But again his log was deleted.

@Rikitan: This is a part of what I meant when I said thet you don't know the story behind!

Exactly!! And Korsgat was also prepared that there would be questions so he stated in his original log that ha had signed with an UV pen and he stated it in his blog from the trip. He also took a picture for when an eventual question came, but instead of asking a simple question CO just deleted the log without any comment. Is that good behaviour?

But you still know nothing about the story behind...

Did he say that hexepected CO to make a spescial trip? No, that's your assumption. He just said that he expected "the CO to check the logs". Isn't that quite normal?

It's easy to make fun of something when you don't know the whole story behind... Maybe "he wanted to" for a reason?

If caches that needs UV light is so rare that you make it look, why is there an attribute for caches that needs it? https://www.geocaching.com/about/icons.aspx

You make it sound like buying an UV light is a huge investment. I made a quick search on eBay for "UV light", and the second hit (of 116,941) was this one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mini-Aluminum-UV-Ultra-Violet-9-LED-Flashlight-Torch-Light-Lamp-Blacklight-Lamp/282520950381 This lamp should be more than good enough to read the loggers log. I see the some of the ones believe that the logger hasn't really logged the cache. And if that just was an explanation when confronted with CO not finding his log I woul tend to agree, but he both stated it in his original log and wrote about it in his blog, why bother doing that if it wasn't true? And why make up a story that is so easy to verify? The next logger probably could have done that tf they had read his log. (I know I would...) In my experience most of the dedicated geocahcers has an UV light as a part of their standard equipment. There are so many field puzzles and multies with the need of UV out there...

Finding my ID