The Jester

Funny how you assume every story on here is about white people. This started as a discussion about an article with the same/similar title about one particular cacher who is black. If it is to be restricted, then only that guy and the article can be discussed, not "black" caching in general, or police interactions with cachers.

There is no way to tell. There are so many factors that lead to the meeting. Did the cop have a good breakfast? Did he have a fight with his wife? Did the white dude respond the same way as you did? Act the same? Will the black cacher act/respond the same? The frame of mind (on either side), posture, tone of voice, facial expression all can affect the interaction - heck, even the day of the week may contribute (how many here don't like Monday's?). No way to predict.

Nope, but the goal of geocaching hasn't changed (find the cache) but they've added their own personal goal (numbers/stats). Just as if a solitaire player is in a tournament the goal of the game is still win that hand, but the goal of the tournament is added (win more hands than others). But this is all going way off course - can geocaching be called a game? I say yes, it has all the elements needed for a game. Maybe not every element for every game, but what game does?

In either case (not found or broke leg) I 'report' I didn't get it. It had nothing to do with searching/looking, only if I got it or didn't get it. If I come back with the box "Got it. Here" or maybe "Got it! I almost couldn't find it, the dog/cat/kid knocked under the bed". If I didn't see it "Sorry, didn't get it, I don't see it, maybe the dog/cat/kid moved it". If I broke leg "Sorry, didn't get. I broke a leg, you'll have to get yourself". The content of the report let's you know the details, not the type of report. Of course, "Found it" in caching is more than just finding a container. A Find involves getting to GZ, locating the container, accessing the log and signing it. Not doing one of those means no "Find". So either you report you made a "Find" or you report you Did Not make a Find. I think the common meaning of find something is confusing people with the caching meaning of Find something. Maybe it would be better if a different term was used - such as: "Access Log" or "Did Not Access Log" - but back when this game started, it was about if I hid something with a GPSr, would someone else be able to find it using theirs, so I guess we're stuck with the terminology.

So that game isn't like geocaching. Microsoft Solitaire Event isn't like the game of football either. Your point?

How do you win? By finding the cache. As with solitaire, it not how many [whatever's], it's that hand - win or lose. Sure, the solitaire app I use lists the total wins, but that's not the goal of the game. Neither is the find count (or other stats) the goal of geocaching (although, some may try and make it that). I see "win the hand" the same as "find the cache".

My take away from that blog wasn't that you searched but that you "gave up". A few examples of why you might give up, but I don't see that as a definite list of the only reasons. I also don't take blogs as final answers to any question/practice, just one writers opinion.

Not all games are about teams and competition. Solitaire is a game played by individuals. Many game apps are for individuals. Sure there may be stats but no formal competition (generally). Most hobbies that I can think of don't have "rules/guidelines for play". I have no problem calling the activity a "game".

So glad I could add to you mental illness. With that idiotic mindset why are you bothering to log fake DNF's? Why not jump straight to fake Found It, it so much more satisfying. Oh, let me add one more layer, I suspect every cache is missing, so until I find it any level of "searching" means I couldn't find it and think it's missing thereby it's a valid DNF. Just to be clear I only load the GPSr with caches I can hunt for (unsolved puzzles, Challenge Caches I don't qualify for, caches I can't reach (such as Vashon Island in Puget Sound - needs a ferry ride), your ridiculous examples and such are left off).

To me it's a binary selection - either I Found the cache or I Did Not Find the cache. Found meaning I can access and sign the log from the container*. Whether I think the cache is missing or not is not part of the binary choice so has no bearing on the log type. I'm started this game back before onboard road/trail maps, so getting to the cache was sometimes as much (or more) work as searching GZ. So my mindset is the hunt/search starts with the GOTO button - anything that cause me to not find the cache means I Did Not Find the cache. It's not my job/responsibility to maintain the CHS of caches I seek. My job is to report (in as much detail I wish) my experience with said cache. If others want to ascribe more meaning to the type of log I use, that's on them, I'm just telling my story. *We had one cache recently where my wife was two inches too short to grab the cache. We were in our inflatable kayak and standing she couldn't reach, it was windy so I couldn't try as I was holding the 'yak in position against the stump using grips that as a climber were good, but the wife wouldn't be able to use (strength and training). Did we Find the cache? No, no access to sign the log. Was it missing? Obviously not, but did we Not Find the cache? Yep, it's a DNF.

Sorry, you can't tell me that my feelings are wrong, it's just how I'm wired. Just like you've been complaining people are telling you that you're wrong when you can so clearly see that you're not. I was just hoping that you'd back off the hard line that fake logs never affect the cache finder and admit that some cache finders are affected by them. But go on with your life, believing your opinion is world wide truth, and I'll go on with mine where some negative things affect me more than they "should", I've learned to live with it.

How about you play by the same rules - no "what-ifs" or contrived scenarios (i.e.. 'one fake found log after a long series of DNF's') - use only concrete examples of real caches. Most of the quote above is 'contrived scenarios'. I know how DNf's sometimes affect my feelings for the whole day. I've had one DNF throw a pall over the whole day of mostly successful caching. So a fake find log (to me saying 'it's here come find it') causing me to try to clear a previous DNF, resulting in another DNF can have a very negative impact on my feelings for the the day. So your spouting the 'big lie' (fake finds don't have an effect on cache finders) over and over isn't going to change my feelings, thereby 'proving' you wrong. I've been the guy that posted a found log after a series of DNF's, so I know it happens. One of my favorite FTF's was after the whole local FTF crowd posted DNF's on a new cache, I had to try it and within a couple of minutes at GZ spotted the cache (and I know the CO hadn't been late in placing it before publishing, as one of the FTF crowd was still there searching). I've done it recently on a couple of Rest Area caches - well, a short series of DNF's (2-3 - how many is a series in your contrived scenario?). So I know it's possible and it doesn't automatically raise a red flag saying 'this might be a fake find log'.

One example: A statement of opinion as hard fact.

And you're not trying to tell us that your opinion/way of caching is the "proper" way to look at things? Kettle meet black, black meet kettle.

Nope, they left in cache for you to find - after you out which cache!

It does feel like you redefining what "fake log" you want to talk about: A - fake find when dropping a throwdown? B - fake find after series of DNFs? C - fake find amongst real find logs? D - all of the above?

Then have the courtesy to stop stating your opinion as absolute fact. I've heard and understand your opinion, but hold a different one: Fake logs can have an effect on a finders experience, but not always. But also understand that part of emotion that can come from a fake log may include some towards the CO who didn't maintain the cache listing properly. It's all interconnected.

That is your opinion but is not a universally shared opinion. So for what seems like the eleven millionth and one time: For some cache finders one fake log does have an effect on their caching experience. You keep "yelling" your opinion so much, you are not listening to some of us who have had fake logs effect our experience. Just accept that some of us have differing experiences than you and so do not share your opinion (I doubt this will change your mind or your opinion spouting but I had to say it).

Thanks. I'll add it to our list.

Wrong phase of the moon, or you were holding you tongue wrong! Both???

Which waterfall is that in the first picture? We missed that one on our trip a few years back, and I'd like to 'catch' it on our next trip. Thanks.

I've seen the same thing, and just stop for a moment and it settles down. Generally the swings are equal to both side of the direction I want, so I just keep heading towards the middle of the swing. When you're close enough using your eye's is better than the GPSr anyhow.

It's not waste if there is something to found.

I've DNF'd a "special" (for whatever reason) cache (sometimes the first one to do so) and put it on my watch list to see if it is found again. A fake find would have me planning to go there and try again - some of these are a distance from home (in the last 6 years we've put more than 75,000 miles on our trailer) - so a false log would impact me greatly at times, costing money and time I could use for other places. Yes, if there were a string of other DNF's it would have less impact, but that's not always the case. I've seen the next log after my DNF to be a find and then confirmation the cache is/has been missing.

There are many caches that go a lot longer than two years before needing a OM log, or even a check up. If a cache is being found regularly (depending on the cache, that could be once a year...) and no problems are reported, why would you be trying to give it away to some other owner?