NeecesandNephews

Darn it !!! I said I was done but you guys keep reeling me in!!! I am so easily manipulated!! lol Geo the question I have is- Do you then agree that the Guideline requires signing the log??? Before you answer I am not concerned ( nor was I ever) with the ALR's. It is clear they are gone. Everything I have read seems to say that signing the log is a requirement for posting a find. Again... before you answer... let me clarify I agree with everyone who has posted that there are circumstances I feel should be taken into consideration before deleting a find that doesnt have the corresponding physical log entry. I spent twenty minutes drying one page of one of the few finds we have, just so I could sign it. I am confident the Owner would have let me have the find if I didnt sign the log. If I was hiding a cache, and someone took the time to email me or post the reason he didnt sign, and it was legitimate, I would let his Find stand. I might add if someone sends me an email and says the log was wet, when previous AND subsequent finds made no mention of it, that one wouldn't pass. I am talking within reason in this example. If someone said it was wet and three months later someone said it was fine, this reasoning wouldnt apply. I would hope if someone had logged a FI, then emailed me that they were unable to sign the physical log, that they would also log a NM on the online. At the time we signed the dried out log, I was unfamiliar with the NM post, and simply noted in my Found It post the log was WET. I am not really concerned with whether or not others follow the rules. At least not to any great extent. I am , however, concerned with what those rules actually say. This thread was started as an opinion guage and quickly turned into a rules argument. I am just as responsible for this as anyone. With so many varying opinions I felt the need (my own) to try and sort out what the rules actually say. I guess since its subject to the actual owner of the cache, it doesn't matter. Somehow I think it should!!! OK gimme the fork back!!!

I guess if you all read what the "French Reviewer" said who was not " "around" when these discussions were going on" , but IN them, ON the committee, and you still dont understand it... nothing I say is going to matter. Geo I take it you cant back your "facts " up??? Because you sure dodged that opportunity. Stick a fork in me... I'm done. Astonished with peoples grasp of the language, or lack of, but done none the less.

Geobain you too are welcome to back up your statements that "Groundspeak has been very clear on what that line in the Guidelines means" by posting EXACTLY where they have done that. If I am wrong it wont be the first time, but sorry if I don't just take your word for it. I started this thread asking for opinions. If this is your opinion you might state that in your post. If you are stating this as Fact please be prepared to back it up. toz...... *Upon further reading in the referenced thread YOU, yourself agree that the Guide implies you sign the log, then log online. In more than one instance. You also voice your displeasure about it. Sounds to me like you are still harboring bad feelings towards "the Puritans" and are trying to sway me to your way of thinking. For the record... its NOT working!!! From your French reviewer who you seem to recognize as the designated speaker for the Guideline committee: post 643 in the refered thread>>>>>>> Having participated in the drafting of the new guideline wording, please let me assure you that the first sentence of the section, to which you are referring in this (and a couple of your previous posts in this forum) QUOTE Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed. are not indicative of any change of policy towards cache logging by Groundspeak, whatsoever. They are simply there to clarify that, following the removal of ALRs, there is now no other requirement beyond signing the log to be able to say, online, "Yes, I found this cache". These are the posted words from someone who says he was on the committee that drafted those Guidelines. The rest of you will have to forgive me if HIS words take precedence over yours. I am going to have to question your grasp of the english language if you read ANYTHING into that that indicates signing the log is NOT required. Saying "NOW no OTHER requirement BEYOND signing the log" is about as clear as it gets!!!!!!! There is no way this is my "bad interpretation"

toz... now that I have finished my daily chores, I had the opportunity to go the the forum post you pointed out. I will have to differ with you on this one. I cannot tie ALTERNATE listing requirements or the way they are now handled ( no longer used) as having ANYTHING to do with the signing of the logbook in a cache. Signing the log book is NOT an "alternate listing requirement." And in fact I believe that is the reason it is STILL there. Just my opinion. True there is page after page of discussion about the "alternates". But I fail to find any "clarification" stating signing the logbook is part of these changes, nor been lifted. I will continue searching!

I would add as an afterthought... a question to those who would claim "TPTB went to great lengths to clarify this guideline". Why didn't they clarify it IN the Guideline if that is true... instead of on this forum where many an opposite opinion might surface???? Another question... In pointing out "my assumption" the inverse applies... how would it be any different than me pointing out "your assumption" it doesn't apply??????? I dont want to argue any more.... this is getting way off the basis of this thread. toz... I personally don't have the "find count" as part of my playing. At least not in the sense of competing with others. That would be futile. I will never be the top finder. The only weight I give my find count is in my personal accomplishment. I want it to grow, for my own self-satisfaction, not for the competition. I would like to add... I feel there should be circumstances when a person be allowed the find when they did not sign. If it was my cache... and someone posted a NM with a wet log entry, I would no way deny the find. I would expect to see two entries to that instance though. One NM, and one FI. I also take into consideration that there may be handicapped individuals playing who by reason of their disability, were unable to sign. Same thing... I would in no way deny them the find. Forgive me if I appear argumentative, I just like to have the basis for peoples opinion included. You can say "#####" sucks, but I wish you would take the time to explain why you feel that way.

I agree with the bolded bit. However, I think that you are reading into this guideline something that isn't there. Here's the guideline that you referenced: It plainly states that a geocacher can log any cache online if he has signed the physical logbook. No one can take those smilies away from him. However, you are making the assumption that the inverse of the guideline is true; that caches may not be logged online if the logbook is not signed. This is not stated in the guidelines. In fact, TPTB have stated that the arbiter of whether these logs should stand is the cache owner. This gives the cache owner the flexibility to allow a smiley if the finder could not sign a wet log and still be able to delete an armchair find. Sbell111 you are absolutely correct!!!! I totally agree with what you said. I was posting a reply myself at the same time you were so forgive me. I AM making the assumption that the inverse applies!!!!! And I have repeatedly stated this is MY opinion. As I have a couple of times throughout this thread, I have commented on MY views on the subject. You and I both know WE are not going to convince anyone the way they are playing is wrong, or cause them to change it. You play they way you want. So will I. The issue here won't really come into play for me until I hide my first cache. As I have repeatedly said, I was just sampling the acceptance of this pratice with a group I am new to. I certainly dont want to get into a lengthy "argument" about it. As I have pointed out... lots of assumptions are being made here ( some of them my own) and not all of them are correct, nor can some of them be proven to be right or wrong.

TPTB went to great lengths to clarify this guideline. A forum search should turn up what you need. I'm sorry sbell111 but that right there is funny. You are quick to weigh in on a discussion with a "generality" like that??? Instead of qouting the facts, that YOU refer to, you suggest i do a forum search!!! As if peoples opinion is going to change the "intent" of what is simply a black and white one line sentence??? Wow!!!! Thanks for your help. You don't even want to take the time to substantiate your posts.

tozainamboku thank you for weighing in. If I didnt already! You will notice I posted that I wasn't on the original drafting committee, so anything I "interpret" is just my opinion. I did read the ALR you refer to and how that process was handled. I might ask how you came to the conclusion I don't know the history of the guideline, but that would be being contentious wouldn't it?? After all... the information you refer to is still available. So... no argument from me. In MY thinking, the "rule" is posted as is. Despite its "intention" it says what it says. I personally don't understand why anyone would want to practice this driveby logging. For every reason someone has posted for the "basis" of why they Geocache, most of them are contrary to the driveby theory. If I go somewhere for the view, I want to SEE it. Not just say I was there. If I go for the cache I want to log it. This is all my opinion... so its subjective. Not meant to be a point of contention. Why is it too much to ask... if you go the the (hypothetical) memorable sight, and are glad you visited when you might not have otherwise been there... that if you don't find the cache and sign the log, don't log it online???? When we play Monopoly and I land on Park Place I don't insist on buying Boardwalk too...because I was right there... I just didnt land on it!!! As I stated in an earlier post... to ME... its simply a matter of character.

Inmountains I totally agree with you. As a poster pointed out earlier in the thread I "opened a can of worms" (edit) I am new so I am just now looking at the guidelines for hiding. Nowhere near ready to do that yet. I am curious asa hider, can you REQUIRE in your listing that the log be signed before claiming?I have not found anything in the Guide pertaining to this. Seems like it might be a catch-22 situation. You offend by deleting someones driveby... your cache might dissappear. Before I get flamed please note I said "might " With the "passion" that has been displayed on this forum its not a stretch of the imagination to entertain this thought. Your town description is similar to ours. Living in rural Oklahoma we are not as "paranoid" (not meaning to be insulting just lack a better word) about strangers around as we dont have the crime, ect. that bigger cities do. We have a lot of hunters in this area and they are always "scouting". Just not in our backyard!! lol I have been curious why all these people are pulling up next to our property, and when we found out, we had a good laugh about it. The cache was originally hidden by a teen in the neighborhood as a Boy Scout excercise in GPS. I DO wish someone involved had taken the time to mention it to us. The neighbors on the other side of the alley have all got stockade privacy fences so they don't notice it like we do. We have chain link. Several logs mentioned the reluctance of the finders to enter this area, so when I found out I tried to make it apparent in my log, that we were ok with it and encourage others to find it. The CO has since moved out of the neighborhood and repeated attempts to contact him have been a dead end. But its only been a few days so... I talked to the Scout leader who said as long as the cache was in good shape he couldnt do anything about it. I really dont care to have it moved or archived. I kinda like the idea of possibly being able to meet other cachers this way.

Hahahaha I knew it wouldn't take long for someone to tell me I am "misapplying that guideline" sbell111 I don't see how you interpret that one simple line to mean it "requires all cach owners to allow an online find if the log is signed". I didn't see the word "requires " or " allow" any where in that sentence. I didn't even see "must". Only the word "CAN " which implies permission, and "ONCE" which implies "after certain requirements have been met". I love liberal interpretations!!!!!! My interpretation "allows online posters to log it as found ONLY after the logbook is signed" The word ONLY is MINE. Since neither of us drafted the original document I don't claim to be right or wrong. You might want to read the thread again as to the claims of the hunter regarding his name. There is no debate about what name he uses now... used years ago...was born with...ect. The person told me what name he signed with. It is not on the log. I have whipped this horse for the last time. I thanked briansnat for Moderating. Why does this bother you???? Never mind... I don't really want to know. Urkel the cache is not even in a vacant lot. We live (as you can see from the google map) on an "in and out"... not exactly a cul-de-sac, but we are what I consider rural. The cache is located in the alley in a particularly odd quirk in the fencing. You describe the situation exactly. We have been wondering what these strangers are doing when they drive up, as most peoples first attempt at this is from the front of our property. No one has jumped our fences yet that I am aware of. lol They were usually too quick making an exit for me to ask. The nice couple who introduced us to this hobby made the mistake of parking their truck too far away from the actual cache, and I managed to get between them and it in a narrow alley. lol The question was posed " will I regret this?" in reference to a comment I made about ridiculing someone. I regret it already. Thank you for pointing out my error. No I am not being sarcastic.

8.5???? Your kidding??? These judges have been bought!!!! That was a 9.0 at LEAST!!! I'm loggin this one. 8.5 is close enough to say I found it!!! I even signed. lmao This is NOT the worst forum I belong to. We haven't even come close here. Oh and btw (edit) I am not really concerned about this one person. I mean he only has like 22 finds. I was concerned about the practice. I think some posters are missing that point. I am surprised that the number of posts was not more slanted one way. tozainamboku I found this on all eight finds we have logged so far.Thought I had said that earlier in the thread. Not a big deal... like I said... I just want to understand if this is accepted. I am surprised it is tolerated at all.

I really appreciate the posters who have taken the time to read all this, and help me understand some of the "rules" that are (or aren't) followed. Briansnat thank you also for Moderating. I am trying to change it from a thankless job to one that is appreciated. I also had to laff at your pity reference. You are SURELY worthy of pity having to carry the weight of that impressive note under your avatar everywhere you go!!! I laffed at the original post also. I take it those stats weren't earned by driveby??? bflentje I have been roasted to a crisp on another forum for posting on a thread like this one... asking OPINION. Guess mine was wrong!!! My avatar is kind of tongue in cheek but accurate none the less!! Mr. Urkel kindly accept my apologies if I took your post the wrong way. It wasn't my intention to appear to flame you but simply to defend my position. I hope you didn't perceive my post as that way either. I am new, and the last thing I want is to make enemies. That is NOT why I am here. I wasn't really trying to be covert in my references. I assumed anyone who 'cached would have no trouble following those cords!!! I intend to ridicule this person every time I get the chance. While I am not Sherlock Holmes I think its two college kids. One is actually caching, because I have seen his name on the logs. (again this one is an easy find) I think the person I was referring to is a wanna-be. Trying to keep up with his buddy. I think what really irritated me about it was the cache in question is incredibly simple. You can park within five feet of it. And yes... its right behind our house. The cache was placed originally as a Boy Scout excercise. He lived right down the street. I didn't start this thread in an upset frame of mind. I just wondered if this was common. I am sure this is a hobby I can really get into. I'm having some fun with it so far. I really want the wife to be a part of it because she doesn't hunt game. I am secretly trying to brainwash her!!! I think I can fit in easily with this group!!!!! And the hobby fits in with my lifestyle. And my experience. Only problem is I am used to finding things in a scope!!! Thanks again to all who have responded!!

MM thank you for Moderating, most Moderators are un appreciated, and often resented. I reread the post I just put up and it does come off as being written by a red-faced, vein- popping, frothing and spitting typer. Rest assured this is not the case. I was taught to speak my words quietly and clearly, years ago, and I try to do this today. I thank those who I feel need it, and if someone offends me, I try to make them aware of it, as they might not have intended to. If they assume something about me, I correct them if their assumption is wrong. I have not made many comments on this thread as I was asking for opinions, not looking to broadcast my own. I don't like the inference I am a "troll". I found the line in the Guidelines after moving on to the idea of hiding some caches. Had I seen it earlier I might have posted it sooner. I am new, but plan to continue this hobby, and hope to meet others who might be local, or just passing through, who might want to get together. With all the "clues" I don't think I am hard to find!!!! I apologize if my words seemed rude or written in anger. I seldom let anything anger me.

As the OP on this thread I would like to make some comments if my "noobie" status allows me to. Part of the purpose of posting to begin with, was to gather other players opinions on this topic. I wanted to know how others felt. Another purpose was to guage the "feel" of the forum. I belong to several different forums on Hunting, Hotrodding, Antique Vehicles, Firearms, ect... probably 12 total. I post comments and read posts when I have the time, so I am not a frequent poster on ANY of them. (even though I have been a member of a couple of them going on ten years) I have found many of the forums I belong to, to be hostile and dismissive to anyone who doesn't have hundreds of posts. NOT YET being jaded and cynical... I hoped this one would be different. I would like to thank everyone for their responses. (you ask for opinion, you can't expect to agree with all of them) Several posters have sent personal emails that were very encouraging. One told me to "mind my own business". lol I have taken them all in stride!!! EXCEPT the last. I can tolerate light criticism, instruction, chastisement, advice, ect... But when you dismiss me as some sort of dumba** because I have only eight finds... that crossed the line. I have probably spent as much , if not more time, staring at a GPS than you have. I checked your "history" I have hunted, hiked, and camped in every state in a line from the tip of Texas to the Canadian border, and one or two states along side that line. I don't know what exactly you were trying to insinuate. If you want to try and find this cache in question ...look up my profile...get the cords... come find it and feel free to knock on my door. You almost came right out and said I made the whole thing up. At least thats the way I read it. CORRECT me if I was wrong. If YOU had read what I wrote and absorbed it instead of thinking what you were going to respond before you even finished, you might have a little better grasp on the situation I was asking about. The hunter in question sent me a response to my email... he said he signed with a different name... he gave me THAT name he allegedly signed with. IT IS NOT ON THE LOG. So are we clear on this???? He told the world he found it and his name wasn't on it. He told me he found it and gave me the name he said he signed, which ISN'T there either. Nobody who responded with all the possible excuses for his name not being on the log, took into consideration that HE TOLD ME he signed it. Thats a lot different than telling me "I didnt have a pen/cil with me" It is NOT my cache... I am just trying to figure out the reasoning behind this sort of action... and determine if this is widely accepted. Is it going to change the way I cache hunt???? No. Point being I was just curious... I didn't post to be insulted or dismissed. And to everyone who replied... I am amazed nobody pointed out the written words of Groundspeak themselves. Geocaching> Getting Started With Geocaching> Cache Listing Requirements/ Guidelines subheading: Logging of All Physical Caches ..." Geocaches can be logged online as found once the physical logbook has been signed."... I think this sums it all up. At least it does for me. Thank you all for your participation, and especially the ones who would like to get together with us. And feel free to try and convince me that this line from the Guidelines really means "after the logbook has been signed ONCE, after that you can log it as a driveby if you feel like it" And I am being sincere when I thank all of you for voicing your thoughts. I am not going to let one reply ruin my experience with this forum.

I cache because the little man who lives behind my eyes and screams into my brain told me people were hiding things from me and I should do something about it!!!

Ok... I am Brand spanking new to the hobby and my Wife and I were introduced to it by muggling a wonderful couple locating a cache that is hidden right behind our property. I posted on another thread and was refered to this one. Thought I would share here. We logged on the cache hidden behind our property. The couple who introduced us to this hobby logged right ahead of us. They actually logged the find online the next day, after we had logged it. After they left... we signed up.. went and logged in this particular cache..and proceeded with "the hunt" Found 8 so far. In the process I signed up to "watch this cache" on the cache refered to.. Received an email several days later notifying me ###### had found the cache. He didn't elaborate in his online log. I had added some swag to the cache as all it had was the log and a pencil. I was curious if he took anything as it was not noted online. When I checked the cache... everything was exactly as I had placed it, and there were no other names on the log. The hunter ##### had NEVER signed this log, as I had earlier copied the names to try and find some local Geocachers I could befriend. I sent him a polite friendly email reminding him he had not signed the cache log. ( I have since been advised this is the WRONG thing to do). I received a reply the same evening stating " he had signed with a different name than he used online". Excuse me??? This is BS. Several days after finding the few caches we have found... (even posted a DNF on one, which we logged later as a find, after the owner sent us a hint and we returned, found, signed, and logged, ) this same person ##### logged "found it" on two other caches we found late in the day. Neither had his name on the log. All the caches we have found have had the name of the couple who introduced us to the hobby last signature on the log. Me??? I could care less, but my wife is bordering on dropping out, because of this practice. I hunt for MY fun and enjoyment... and while I am new, I would not DREAM of logging a find I didn't hold in my hand and sign off on the log of. But thats just me!!! To me... what would be the point??? If I was going on a trip... I could just search online for all the caches near the highway I was travelling on ... and log them as finds, cause I was right there???? Guess these people are playing for a different reason than I am. I posted on a different thread as "before I become jaded and cynical" seeking others OPINION on this practice. After reading the posts in this thread , some pro, some con, I would pose this question... even if the "purpose" of caching is to go places and see sights I might not have seen, if I go to the Grand Canyon for the first time (never been there) should I then go online and log finds for any caches there??? Where does the line fall between YOUR satisfaction of having gained a new "life experience" and the Owners satisfaction of having someone discover his hide??? I am a NOOB... and I have decided for MYSELF... I will NOT log online that I found a cache I did not actually find. I have even gone so far as posting pics of the finds we have made. No spoilers included. Just weighing in with my .02 worth. January 27 by ###### (22 found) Yeah, fun stuff January 23 by +++++++++++(8 found) My first find as I practicaly live in the box!!! Actually found it by Muggling a wonderful Nebraska couple *********** and his spouse. Thank them again for introducing me to Geocaching!!!! Kevin i wondered why these strangers kept pulling up next to the fence and looking around. Diana and I laffed over this! I am guilty of being the "too many people watching" If you see me wandering around on your side of the street, you'll know why! lol TN left SWOSU card case, a coozie, and round tuit. Excellent location btw! January 24 by ***************(1314 found) What an adventure! First we drove down an alley and ended up in a person's backyard and *************had to back out of the alley. Then we drove over to where it should be and then discovered we had to go down another alley to retrieve it. During this process, we met a curious neighbor and wondered why so many people drove his alley. Taught him about geocaching. Thanks for the challenge.

The point is to have fun. If you're having fun going out and finding caches, signing the logs, and sharing your experiences online by logging found or DNF for the caches you've looked for then you'll be fine. You might from time to time come across somebody who, for whatever reason, finds a need to post Found It logs for caches they never looked for. You will sit and wonder why anyone would do such a thing - after all how much fun could it be to sit at home at a computer post false logs on caches when you could be out and actually finding them. And because this is the case you will find that such cases are rare and that the people who do this will general get tired and stop doing after a few days. In fact you wil find that there are far more people who will find caches and sign their names in the physical log and then never go online to post a Found It log. For them the fun is finding the caches and online logging is unneccessary. Part of the guidelines for cache owners say that the cache owner is responsible for the quality control of posts to the cache page. This includes deleting any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. Rather than sending email to the person who claims the find, you might instead email the cache owner to let them know you think a log is bogus. It is up to the cache owner to decide whether to delete the log or not. There are many reasons why a cacher's name might not be in the physical log. They may have signed with a different name (often a group caching together will sign with a group name to save time and space in the log). They may have forgotten a pen or pencil and none was in the cache. The log sheet may have been wet and they couldn't write on it. They may have found the cache a long time ago and are just getting around to logging it now (sometimes people will get a new account for some reason - caching teams breaking up for example - and go back to relog all their old finds under the new account). They may just have forgotten to sign. Some individuals would not claim a find in these situations. They believe that you must sign to claim a find. I disagree with this view and I think most cache owners do as well. A signature is proof that a cacher actually found the cache, but a cache owner is certainly allowed to accept a cacher's word that he found the cache with an explanation of why he or she didn't sign the physical log. Thank you!!!! I believe you understood the basis for my question!!! I agree with you in that I don't understand why someone would just sit and log finds from home, without ever going outside, (not that that is what I am implying happened in this instance) But what would be the point of that??? Thank you for the positive reinforcement!!!!!!

Just for the record... I was simply asking out or curiosity if this was a common practice. I am VERY new to the hobby. Myself... I find the thrill of the hunt as much fun as the actual find. I live my life trying to keep a positive outlook. We have enough negativity in this world for all of us. My wife is very supportive of anything that brings me happiness, although she does not hunt game with me. I am including her in this hobby to encourage her to participate with me in any outdoor activity, and at the same time enjoying some quality time together. I realize people have different ways of approaching things, and what others accept as "ok" does not and should not influence my opinion. I wasn't as much criticizing someone elses opinion on how they should play, as I was just asking if this is how its done. Thanks for all the replies!!! I am not playing for the "numbers" or anything besides a sense of accomplishment in achieving the "find". To me...(and I do NOT mean to offend anyone) its a question of character. If you cheat at something so simple as a game... do you excercise this same mindset in your entire life??? Not trying to start a philosophical discussion here... it was a rhetorical question. Its not my cache... I don't really care... just curious about the unknown aspects of the game. Like I said... I am new... and have spent hours pouring over all the Guidelines, forum posts, and logs on the caches near us. Guess I just want to learn the " common practices" in playing. I have already concluded that this is a hobby I can thoroughly enjoy , and plan on playing regardless. I just wanted to get others "take" on this subject. I hope I wasn't misunderstood on the reason I posted this question. I don't want to appear too serious in my attitude towards Geocaching... its a game!!! And I play for the fun of it!!! Like I said.... I was just curious. That and I find myself with a lot of free time today since we are having an ice storm. LOL Thought I would pose the questions... thats all.

My Wife and I just started Geocaching. Story of our introduction to the hobby is posted on another thread so I won't go into it again. Here is a question I have and I am looking for opinions. (hope I don't regret this). There is a cache right behind our property. We signed the log and it was sort of our first. I don't really consider it our first real find as we muggled another couple who showed it to us. That couple introduced us to Geocaching and signed right ahead of us. This has been the experience we have had on every cache (all 8 of them lol) we have found. We found their name on the log ahead of us. Because it is right behind us, I clicked on the option to "watch this cache". I recieved email notification another person logged online that they had found it. I left some swag and wanted to see what they chose to take, if anything. Nothing was mentioned in the online log. Upon checking the cache, there was no name under ours on the log. Everything I put in the cache was still there. So... I began to wonder if the person who logged online," found it" actually DID. I sent him an friendly email reminding him he did not sign the log, and was very upbeat and pleasant in the way I said it. Received a response that " he signed the log with another name"!!!! See above. No name on the log after ours. He posted his "find" several days after ours. So... my question to others is... do you actually lay your hands on the cache... sign the log... and then post online that you found it??? Or do you just log a "found it" when all you actually did was a driveby??? I guess I dont understand ( and probably shouldnt care) why someone would post a "found it" when they really did not. My wife and I posted a DNF on one of ours, and after the owner giving us a hint, we went back the next day and found it and signed the log in the cache. We posted both online. I guess it took some of the enjoyment of that find away when this goober posts "found it" and his name is not on the log. He posted this on the online logs of three different caches, and his name did not appear on any of the logs we found and signed, supposedly after he did. So my wife says "well if thats how it works, I don't think I care to play... whats the point?" I suppose what I am asking is... how do others feel about this sort of practice???

Just wanted to take a sec and introduce ourselves. My spouse and I just recently got into the hobby. I would like to take the opportunity to thank Antelope_Hunter and his spouse for introducing us to the hobby. Turns out we have a cache hidden (by someone else) right behind our property. After weeks of seeing strangers come and go, I sort of trapped the couple mentioned into telling me what they were up to. While they were initially reluctant to do so... they explained it to us! I have to say, we live in Oklahoma and they are from Nebraska and we would have never met if it wasnt for geocaching. They are wonderful people, and we now have some new friends!! I and my son hunt so we were already familiar with the Garmins, and this is already turning into an obsession. I have read a lot of info here, and haven't yet been entangled in the "nastiness" people keep mentioning. We are already corresponding with others in our area and across the country. So far... I have found the people involved with hunting or hiding to be of a "certain type". i.e. Honest, friendly, adventure loving, ect... I would like to take this time to thank all the people who hide, Review, and hunt these caches. Most of us have busy lives, and for people to take the time is something to be applauded. Thank you... all of you who have helped us get started, and given us something to hunt when other hunting seasons are closed!!!!!!!!! Steve and Diana p.s. if you are in the Western Oklahoma area... drop us a line!!!

Darn!! I thought the Vampire was gonna be the cache. Good place for "bugs" lol