Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
pwcorg

Multiple "attended" Logs For An Event

Recommended Posts

Just to add my 2 bits, I don't' agree with the current scheme that events are 'attended' and not 'found'. When a caches is completed, the smiley face put on the log and the find count incremented, its 'found'.

 

But more to the point, I can see someone posting multiple notes or DNF's when they try to find a cache or just want to make a comment on it, but there should only be one found log per user per cache, a cacher could certianly try and fail to find a cache multiple times. But if a user attempts to add a second found log they should either be prevented or the older found log should be converted to a note. I think the staff at GC.com should retroactively apply this rule.

Share this post


Link to post

Opinions are like buttholes, we all have them... and here is mine!

 

:)

 

I would never log a cache as a find more than once. After you found it, that's it, done. Returning to a cache you have already found does not entitle you to pad you numbers. An event-cache is much like a multi-cache, you might have lots of "finds" during the day, but it is still just one event, one cache, one find. One. Uno. Temporary, non-listed caches that are found as part of an event are just part of that ONE find, kinda like a multi-stage or puzzle cache may have many waypoints but still counts as a single cache. If folks want to cheat and fool themselves into thinking they have more finds than they really do, who cares! Let them play however they want, just remember that their numbers are bogus! I have no respect for cheaters, but if that's what people need to do to feel good about themselves... Heck, no skin off my teeth.

Share this post


Link to post

The owner can force and enforce any issue related to logging, including deleting them.

 

Not true. Deleting is the only power they have. The cache owner cannot post a find for me if I put in a good effort to find their cache and log the appropriate DNF.

 

There is no plausible reason to log more than one find on any cache. Yes, the cache owner ‘owns’ the cache, but you alone own your stats, and your integrity is reflected therein.

I have a cache which is a series of difficult puzzles where each stage gives you a password to gain access to the puzzle which will result in the coordinates of the next stage. Rather than list each cache separately, I chose to put them all under a single listing. The caches each have their own log and are located in different parks spread over two counties. Since you have to return home after each stage to get the next puzzle, each stage is essentially a separate caching trip. For that reason, I allow a separate find for each stage.

 

Are you saying that the 59 people who have logged more than one stage are cheaters? Please post a link to the specific rule which they are breaking. Perhaps then I'll delete all the duplicate finds so everyone's caching karma is back in sync.

 

I have no reason to question the integrity of any of the people who have found this cache. Apparently you do, and I'm sorry to hear that.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never multi-logged an event yet. It is politically incorrect. :laughing:

However, I have hunted for and found, the same cache twice. :laughing:

I don't know how I did it.... but I thought the cache looked familiar as we approached it.

I guess I missed it when I was logging all my finds.

Even so.... one find per cache seems to be correct.

If we hide caches for events, we still list them. If the owners want to remove them after the event....so be it (but that's another thread).

Share this post


Link to post

[i have a cache which is a series of difficult puzzles where each stage gives you a password to gain access to the puzzle which will result in the coordinates of the next stage. Rather than list each cache separately, I chose to put them all under a single listing. The caches each have their own log and are located in different parks spread over two counties. Since you have to return home after each stage to get the next puzzle, each stage is essentially a separate caching trip. For that reason, I allow a separate find for each stage.

 

Are you saying that the 59 people who have logged more than one stage are cheaters? Please post a link to the specific rule which they are breaking. Perhaps then I'll delete all the duplicate finds so everyone's caching karma is back in sync.

 

I have no reason to question the integrity of any of the people who have found this cache. Apparently you do, and I'm sorry to hear that.

 

Apples and oranges

The thread is about multiple logging event caches

Share this post


Link to post

The owner can force and enforce any issue related to logging, including deleting them.

 

Not true. Deleting is the only power they have. The cache owner cannot post a find for me if I put in a good effort to find their cache and log the appropriate DNF.

 

There is no plausible reason to log more than one find on any cache. Yes, the cache owner ‘owns’ the cache, but you alone own your stats, and your integrity is reflected therein.

I have a cache .....

 

I have no reason to question the integrity of any of the people who have found this cache. Apparently you do, and I'm sorry to hear that.

 

The question asked by the OP was about multiple finds on one event. Your cache is a bit of a conundrum, and makes me wonder why you listed it as a single cache. In fact, if I were to hunt it, I’d log a find on the first stage and ignore the rest, or ignore the entire thing; I simply won’t log any single cache more than once.

 

I do question the integrity of cachers who intentionally cheat. I know what my stats represent, and I know what the stats of the high and low count cachers that I respect represent. It’s a dishonor to them, in my opinion, for cheaters to brag about their find count.

Share this post


Link to post
The Cheeseheads Posted Yesterday, 09:26 PM

 

I have a cache which is a series of difficult puzzles where each stage gives you a password to gain access to the puzzle which will result in the coordinates of the next stage. Rather than list each cache separately, I chose to put them all under a single listing. The caches each have their own log and are located in different parks spread over two counties. Since you have to return home after each stage to get the next puzzle, each stage is essentially a separate caching trip. For that reason, I allow a separate find for each stage.

 

My first thought is... Why would you do this instead of having separate caches? I am asking honestly, not trying to be smart.

 

My second thought then follows.... Why did the Reviewer allow it? Or did you not explain that each 'stage' was loggable? Again, I'm just asking.

 

For me, I like the idea of the pre-requisite cache to find another (I better, my next series depends on it :laughing:)

 

:laughing: The Blue Quasar

Share this post


Link to post

Are you saying that the 59 people who have logged more than one stage are cheaters? Please post a link to the specific rule which they are breaking. Perhaps then I'll delete all the duplicate finds so everyone's caching karma is back in sync.

This site doesn't have rules, it has guidelines :laughing:

 

 

Should have made each stage its own cache. There's a multicache series in New Mexico like that. Lots of people have found the easier stages, but only a few of us completed the whole trip.

 

One cache=one find. You don't get an extra find for finding a 5/5 instead of a 1/1, so why log extra finds for each part of a multi?

Share this post


Link to post
This site doesn't have rules, it has guidelines ;)

The people of Salem can report on what the puritans do to people who don't follow the guidelines. In 1692, 19 people (mostly young women) were put to death. Fortunately getting flamed in the forums is a lot less painful that getting burned at the stake. (I know the Salem witches were hung, not burned - but I wanted to make the getting flamed analogy).

Share this post


Link to post

Are you saying that the 59 people who have logged more than one stage are cheaters? Please post a link to the specific rule which they are breaking. Perhaps then I'll delete all the duplicate finds so everyone's caching karma is back in sync.

 

In fairness, your cache was posted in 2004. We have a cache in my area from around the same time that changes location each time it is found. I am fairly certain neither would be approved today, however both are fair game as of now as they were approved at the time.

 

The uproar is because without the guidelines be adhered to, what's the point of the game. It's kind of like being able to play chess and all the pieces can move wherever they want.

 

If a cache is placed specifically for an event but not approved by GC, great. Post the find on a web page set-up for the event, not on GC.

 

I to am somewhat baffled that logging multiple finds for a single cache or event escapes some as being just plain silly, however it doesn't affect my numbers so I really don't care. Just don't get in a snit (not directed at you Cheesehead) when you are taken to task for it. A previous poster in this thread visted 3 events in which they posted 80 finds, purely physical impossibility.

 

Cheeseheads, I quoted your post however other than the first line, am really responding to others previously posted.

Share this post


Link to post

The owner can force and enforce any issue related to logging, including deleting them.

 

Not true. Deleting is the only power they have. The cache owner cannot post a find for me if I put in a good effort to find their cache and log the appropriate DNF.

 

There is no plausible reason to log more than one find on any cache. Yes, the cache owner ‘owns’ the cache, but you alone own your stats, and your integrity is reflected therein.

I have a cache .....

 

I have no reason to question the integrity of any of the people who have found this cache. Apparently you do, and I'm sorry to hear that.

 

The question asked by the OP was about multiple finds on one event. Your cache is a bit of a conundrum, and makes me wonder why you listed it as a single cache. In fact, if I were to hunt it, I’d log a find on the first stage and ignore the rest, or ignore the entire thing; I simply won’t log any single cache more than once.

 

I do question the integrity of cachers who intentionally cheat. I know what my stats represent, and I know what the stats of the high and low count cachers that I respect represent. It’s a dishonor to them, in my opinion, for cheaters to brag about their find count.

 

I've actually found The Cheeseheads cache he mentioned. Well, the 1st stage at any rate. I only posted a note for it. When I get to the final stage I'll log it as a find. That's just me tho.

 

BTW, I know of one cache that allows you to log it 11 times. It was supposed to be 11 seperate caches (mystery) with one leading you to the next. All ammo cans. All at least .1 apart, some up to .5 apart I've been told. The admin nixed the seperate cache idea saying it was flooding the area (a large, for the area, forest preserve). The one cache/11 finds was suggested as a compromise. When I do that one I'll find em all and only log 1 find also.

Share this post


Link to post

I should go log 500 finds on one of my own caches just to see people's blood pressure rise. ;)

 

Who cares how many times someone logs what? I have better things to worry about.

 

When my number of finds vs the total number of finds in the system starts to affect my pay or my mortgage, then I'll start to worry about it. :)

Share this post


Link to post

I am not sure if this is the proper place for this post or not, but I'm sure that if it is not someone will point me in the right direction. I was Looking at an individual profile in GC.com today and noticed the cacher had a BUNCH of event caches logged. When I clicked on the event icon WAY fewer events showed up. Being naturally curious I checked out a few of the events and found out that numerous cachers had logged each event as "attended" as many as 10 times each? I assume this is to "correct" cache stats for "temporary" caches found within an event. Question is "Is this normal, accepted, legal, etc. ?"

After reading through this thread, I'd like to add another wrinkle. Most of the discussion deals with 'Event' caches when they are a single instance and nor-recurring. Within Oklahoma, there are three event caches which are held each month. These serve as chances for local cachers to get together and swap tales and techniques. My opinion is that once I log the event once, then that is it for 'Attended' logs. Recently at one of the events, it was anounced that the concensus was that if the event was being held at a different locaiton, then a second or more 'Attended' log could be logged, but if the event was at a former location then it should only be logged as a note.

I will continue to play the log game my way, despite other guidance. Who does it affect, if I log or don't log this multiple times? NO ONE!

Share this post


Link to post

IWho cares how many times someone logs what? I have better things to worry about.

 

 

I can see where a casual cacher might have that attitude But when a numbers junkie plans for a day of caching to hit as many caches as they can and they're only logging each and every cache only once its irritating as h-ll to see people logging multiple finds on a single event cache, when they are logging event caches only once. All it is is a numbers padding ploy logging temp caches at event caches

It may not be about the numbers, but a lot of us do care about the numbers.

The cacher that I mentioned earlier in this thread that had logged 568 event caches had only been to 20 some event caches.

And remember the OP was talking about event caches. <_<

Share this post


Link to post

The owner can force and enforce any issue related to logging, including deleting them.

 

Not true. Deleting is the only power they have. The cache owner cannot post a find for me if I put in a good effort to find their cache and log the appropriate DNF.

 

There is no plausible reason to log more than one find on any cache. Yes, the cache owner ‘owns’ the cache, but you alone own your stats, and your integrity is reflected therein.

I have a cache .....

 

I have no reason to question the integrity of any of the people who have found this cache. Apparently you do, and I'm sorry to hear that.

 

The question asked by the OP was about multiple finds on one event. Your cache is a bit of a conundrum, and makes me wonder why you listed it as a single cache. In fact, if I were to hunt it, I’d log a find on the first stage and ignore the rest, or ignore the entire thing; I simply won’t log any single cache more than once.

 

I do question the integrity of cachers who intentionally cheat. I know what my stats represent, and I know what the stats of the high and low count cachers that I respect represent. It’s a dishonor to them, in my opinion, for cheaters to brag about their find count.

I know the topic was specifically about event caches, but you mentioned any cache and I wanted to give an example. This was listed as a single cache because this seemed to be the preferred way at the time, plus I wanted to make it a mystery as to how many steps there actually were. Your statement pretty much globally calls every finder of that cache a cheater.

 

I will continue to play the log game my way, despite other guidance. Who does it affect, if I log or don't log this multiple times? NO ONE!

DING DING DING!!! Team Madog wins the thread!

Share this post


Link to post

Curious. Isn't it up to the owner? They are the arbiters after all!

 

Around here there's a regular event that doesn't allow a new find for each attendance and one that does. The only difference is in the former you can't tell who attended except by the timing of their notes, whereas the later you can.

 

But it's not like this is a a game after all, there's no comparable score or anything. There's just a statistic.

 

I do remember an instance where an event log came through a year and half later! Baffled, I checked the logbook--and the name WAS there?!?? 'Twas someone's son, who was now logging separately.

 

On the other hand, don't other sites provide points based on difficulty and stages? Actually, isn't this site the only one that doesn't?

 

Anyway, I don't endorse computer restrictions that inhibit intelligence. Sure, I may not choose to setup an event that way, but what if land-owner restrictions required it in the future? (Allowing caches during an event but nothing fixed?)

 

It seems the objections folks have are more personal in nature, to which I suggest taking care of yourself and not worrying about how others prefer to keep track of their activities.

 

Enjoy,

 

Randy

Share this post


Link to post
I can see where a casual cacher might have that attitude But when a numbers junkie plans for a day of caching to hit as many caches as they can and they're only logging each and every cache only once its irritating as h-ll to see people logging multiple finds on a single event cache, when they are logging event caches only once. All it is is a numbers padding ploy logging temp caches at event caches

Me, personally, I care about my number only, because there isn't a darn thing I can do about anyone else's number (other than possibly deleting someone log on one of my own caches).

 

It may not be about the numbers, but a lot of us do care about the numbers.

That's somewhat of a contradiction. The way I see it, numbers are free and there are an infinte quantity of them. I tend not to worry about them too much with regard to finds. There are no prizes given for them.

 

The cacher that I mentioned earlier in this thread that had logged 568 event caches had only been to 20 some event caches.

And remember the OP was talking about event caches. :lol:

Now that is a little silly on that person's part. That's more than 25 find logs per event. I don't know too many events that hide 25 temporary caches. I'm sure all the local cachers know who this person is and have an appropriate amount of respect for their find count.

Share this post


Link to post

My find count is pure.

 

Excuse me while I get my local Reviewer to allow me to list the same cache 12 times so everyone can log it a dozen times.

 

Maybe I can articificially crank up my HIDE count and look like a really social cacher.

 

Funny how there are rules about caches being 0.1 miles apart, and you can't have two events listed on the same date in the same area.... but only guidelines about what you can claim as find or attended.

 

:laughing: The Blue Quasar

 

No double logging my Events allowed.... control freak at the helm!

Share this post


Link to post

I do have one find on a cache that I own and it is very legit. I also have a find on a very hard multi that I knew where one stage was because I chose the location. (Although I didn't place the stage and had a *hard* time finding it.)

 

I think if a cache has been moved significantly then loggin it twice is fine (with owner permission), I tried to do this once but the owner said "no" so I didn't.

 

I logged one cache that I didn't sign the log, it was all wet.

Share this post


Link to post
…I have run into a number of circumstances where several logs were appropriate as deemed by the cache owner…

 

Curious. Isn't it up to the owner? They are the arbiters after all!

 

I think if a cache has been moved significantly then loggin it twice is fine (with owner permission)…

 

I don’t get permission to hide a cache, I don’t get permission to find a cache, and I’m certainly not going to get permission from the cache owner to log any cache that I’ve found. Permission to log is implied, if you find it, log it. If you feel like you need to ask, then maybe you really didn’t find it.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't get permission to hide a cache, I don't get permission to find a cache, and I'm certainly not going to get permission from the cache owner to log any cache that I've found. Permission to log is implied, if you find it, log it. If you feel like you need to ask, then maybe you really didn't find it.

 

Yeah, well that's fine, but expect your log to be deleted if you log multiple finds on a cache without the owner's permission. How do you figure multiple finds on a cache are implied? Your reasoning here totally escapes me.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't get permission to hide a cache, I don't get permission to find a cache, and I'm certainly not going to get permission from the cache owner to log any cache that I've found. Permission to log is implied, if you find it, log it. If you feel like you need to ask, then maybe you really didn't find it.

 

Yeah, well that's fine, but expect your log to be deleted if you log multiple finds on a cache without the owner's permission. How do you figure multiple finds on a cache are implied? Your reasoning here totally escapes me.

 

I would never log any cache more than once, regardless of what the cache owner says. With the exception of the one Cheesheads mentions above, I can see no reason for ever logging one cache, event or otherwise, more than once.

Share this post


Link to post

I am just not seeing the logic of multiple logs on event caches to make up for temporary cache found at and around the event.

 

Temporary caches do not meet the guidlines of a geocaching.com cache. Finding a cache that is not listed on geocaching.com should not be counted on your geocaching.com stats...right?

 

Can I log an event 30 times for all my terracaching.com finds? Can I log an event 20 times for all my Waymarking.com finds?

 

Temporary caches at events are not loggable since they are not listed, per the guidlines. They are an extra game to keep you busy and to have fun at an event. Do I get to log extra smilies if I won 4 games of horseshoes? I ate 2 more pieces of pizza than everyone else, do I get 2 extra smilies...it gets a bit obsurd the further you stretch to log one more number.

 

One event. One attended log. Easy.

 

Ed

TB&TB

Share this post


Link to post

What I am understanding so far, people who log an event several times are doing it to increase their total finds, it's just a question of whether or not these temp caches are "real". Yes?

 

And then theres this thing about logging the same event when it's in different locations. That I don't understand (the scenario) . An event on the same day, or different day, different location?

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not pointing any fingers here but if you want the true purist's POV then a cacher should only log a cache that THEY FOUND.

Is standing nearby someone in a group who happens to find a cache really a find? Yeah, sure you signed the log book - great, good for you. Talk about padding your stats now???? :blink:

 

My point in bringing this up that logging group finds is an accepted practice and is not against the rules. Does that make it wrong or right? I suggest that it's really what caching is all about - sharing the outdoors and having some fun with family and friends.

 

As noted earlier somewhere the reasons behind the multiple event logs was to prevent wasting approvers time on a bunch of temporary caches. It was more or less sanctioned at that time, but the implications were perhaps not so clear.

 

One of the great things about geocaching is that the "rules" are in the eye of the beholder. Let's just keep it that way.

Share this post


Link to post

New improved logging rules:

  • Must sign log (Non-micro: provide at least 200 words in the log book of your experience.)
  • Must find cache all by yourself
  • No virtuals
  • No locationless
  • No event find/attended
  • No multiple event finds (see above)
  • No "arm-chair" finds
  • No shorted multis
  • No cheating on puzzle caches
  • No outside-of-the-box solves on puzzle caches
  • No using the hint
  • No phone-a-friend
  • No emails to hider for help
  • Must trade even or up.
  • Must place cache back exactly where you found it.

Did I miss anything? :blink:

 

Also here are the rules for logging a DNF:

  • If you even consider the possibility of hunting a cache in the morning and you never hunt/find it then you must log a DNF.

Share this post


Link to post

oops, probably not the forum to be off topic/silly.

 

removing post.

Edited by BlueDeuce

Share this post


Link to post

New improved logging rules: ...

 

Not bad for the puritan persuasion. I prefer my rules :P

 

WOW/ What a difference experience makes!

Share this post


Link to post
Temporary caches do not meet the guidlines of a geocaching.com cache. Finding a cache that is not listed on geocaching.com should not be counted on your geocaching.com stats...right?

WoW! :P

Maybe I'm naive but I didn't realize all this "double logging" was going on. I was under the impression that if it had a GC number it was loggable. Once. If it didn't, it wasn't a "real" cache and therefore not loggable. Anything "temporary" like at an event cache was never "approved" and therefore isn't a cache under GC guidelines.

 

If this "temporary caches allowed" is the case I'm gonna run out in my back yard and make about 50 temporary caches the day of an event to log them under! I'll just tell people to drive by my house, look at all the temps and log 50 finds under the event! According to what you guys are saying, this would be acceptable. How about 100? 200? After all, these aren't looked at by a reviewer. Do people really need to pad thier egos that much? :P

Guess I gotta go treble up all my event caches! :P

Edited by Crusso

Share this post


Link to post

The next event I go to I'm going to bring a trash bag full of film canisters. That'll be a quick several hundred to everyone's find total (for those who would do that sort of thing). :smile:

Share this post


Link to post

New improved logging rules: ...

 

Not bad for the puritan persuasion. I prefer my rules :smile:

 

Yeah, your rules are better. With the rules I outlined my find count would be cut in half.

 

My only quibble with your rules is that TB's are definitely not trade items. I realize there may be misguided individuals who think otherwise. :)

Share this post


Link to post

New improved logging rules: ...

 

Not bad for the puritan persuasion. I prefer my rules :smile:

 

WOW/ What a difference experience makes!

 

Someone is equating find count with experience. I will grant that tozainamboku has experience but I wish you wouldn't discount mine. Not to mention the fact that I believe you missed the point of my post...

Share this post


Link to post

If they have no GCxxxx number and only existed for a day or two - they were for fun not stats. Silly to try and claim them in such a bizarre fashion.

I much agree. My own two cents is that if we are gonna allow or condone such bizarre and ridiculous behavior, then the following behaviors must be allowed as well, because they are no more bizzarre and are very much analagous situations, where folks who have accounts at geocaching.com should start logging multiple finds on regular or event caches listed at the site, one for each cache they ever found which was not listed at geocaching.com but which was:

  • listed at or by navicache.com, terracache.com, vigps/Xtreme Team, gpsgames.com, movingcache.com, the Ireland cache listing site or the Australian cache listing site.
  • created by their best friend for just one day and not only was never listed anywhere but was in MAJOR violation of the placement guidelines at geocaching.com.
  • created by themselves or their kids and placed in the family backyard for just a few hours, and never listed anywhere.
  • multiple finds on the same cache, not because it has changed or moved in any way, or (if a multistage) had a new stage added, but rather just because the "finder" happened to visit the cache again.

In fact, I feel very tempted :rolleyes::laughing:;) to create an special event cache or regular cache listing page right now, just for the express purpose of allowing all of us to claim a new find on it every time any of us makes a find which meets any of the criteria listed above, as well as every time we use our GPS receiver to find our way to a store, a relative's house, a ball game, or a pub. :angry::ph34r::P

Share this post


Link to post
Temporary caches do not meet the guidlines of a geocaching.com cache. Finding a cache that is not listed on geocaching.com should not be counted on your geocaching.com stats...right?

WoW! :laughing:

Maybe I'm naive but I didn't realize all this "double logging" was going on. I was under the impression that if it had a GC number it was loggable. Once. If it didn't, it wasn't a "real" cache and therefore not loggable. Anything "temporary" like at an event cache was never "approved" and therefore isn't a cache under GC guidelines.

 

If this "temporary caches allowed" is the case I'm gonna run out in my back yard and make about 50 temporary caches the day of an event to log them under! I'll just tell people to drive by my house, look at all the temps and log 50 finds under the event! According to what you guys are saying, this would be acceptable. How about 100? 200? After all, these aren't looked at by a reviewer. Do people really need to pad thier egos that much? :rolleyes:

Guess I gotta go treble up all my event caches! :angry:

 

Crusso, I agree with you, and in fact, since I live too far from your house to visit your backyard and actually find those 50 temporary unlisted caches (and since you likely would not want a funny-looking wacko like me poking around in your backyard anyway), I am gonna log 50 finds on some local event in my area held recently, because, after all, I did think of your 50 temporary caches, and I would have found them if it had been practical! So I deserve the finds! Thanks for the 50 caches -- they were great caches, if only I had seen them! ;):P:P:D:ph34r::P

Share this post


Link to post

I assume this is to "correct" cache stats for "temporary" caches found within an event. Question is "Is this normal, accepted, legal, etc. ?"

 

I have been to many events where that has been done. I could have many more if I did that my self. I look at it this way. If the cache does not have a log book and is only temporary it is part of the event. It is a event game and part of the event. To me the only numbers that matter are the friends you make. I just put on a event and that was the theme for the event. To me if a person want's to log a cache put out for event only that is for them to deceide if they want to log them not me.

 

Richard

Share this post


Link to post

OK, just to throw in my 2/100 of a buck..

 

When it comes to loggging events, I typically will not log an event even as "attended" because it bumps my find count when I actually didn't "find" the event...I just went to it. However, in cases such as the Texas Challenge, where finding caches (temporary caches as part of a state-wide competition in this case) are an integral part of the event, then I will log the event as attended (but only ONCE, NOT once for each cache I found or had a hand in finding).

Share this post


Link to post

 

... as well as every time we use our GPS receiver to find our way to a store, a relative's house, a ball game, or a pub. :anibad:<_<:anibad:

 

Don't be silly. That's Waymarking :anibad:

Share this post


Link to post

This topic has pretty much died. Sorry for dredging it up again but I feel that we must do what is right. Our find count is important to us but our reputation is even more important. We have multi-logged some of the events that we have attended. When we first started we were told that this is the way it was done with temporary event caches. We know ignorance is no excuse! We thought this was normal, what everyone else does. We also felt that it was justified because we truly "worked" for some of these caches. I think we hiked about seven miles that day and almost all the coords were awful. After reading some of these threads about this and other types of logging that is considered cheating, we agree that this practice is not right. We will be deleting the temporary caches that we have found. I know its silly but our find count is important to us and we will delete an event find for every future cache find until we are down to one attended log per event. That is just pure ego on our part, but it will get done. It gives us an excuse to do alot of caching on our vacation to make up for the deleted logs. :lol: It took us some time talking about this practice and reading threads of this nature to bring things to light. We want to say that it really doesn't matter to us what anyone else counts as a find or attended. We are not passing judgement on anyone else. We are just doing what we feel is right. What someone else does is no concern to us. I hope everyone enjoys the game as they see fit.

Share this post


Link to post

No matter what anyone says, a viable cache you've found whether it is listed on gc.com or not, is an increment on your own personal find count. You found it, it's yours. The find count here only reflects the number of logs you've written that add to your find count.

 

Don't let anyone take legitimate finds away from you.

Share this post


Link to post

No matter what anyone says, a viable cache you've found whether it is listed on gc.com or not, is an increment on your own personal find count. You found it, it's yours. The find count here only reflects the number of logs you've written that add to your find count.

 

Don't let anyone take legitimate finds away from you.

 

You know we really appreciate that post. But our personal opinion has changed about our find count. Like we said this doesn't affect anyone else but us.

 

Everyone else can do as they choose.

Edited by kentuckygirls

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...