Jump to content

Does This Seem Wrong To You?


Shop99er
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

I have noticed here of late, a tendency for people to claim finds on caches without signing the logs, or in one case that I just noticed, even (and they admit this!!) laying hands on the cache. ;)

 

Now, I have claimed finds without signing a log book, but not until the cache owner gave me permission, and I have always mentioned that I had their permission.

 

I sort of find this new trend a tad disturbing. The vast majority seem to be relatively new cachers, with 50 or less finds under their belts, but that doesn't excuse it. When we first started, we would have never thought of claiming a find with no log signing. It was a long time before we realized that this can be done, but only under certain conditions. Those being:

 

1) The log is soaked to ruin.

2) You can prove via a photo that you were at the exact spot. A side-bar to this--if you have a piece of the cache, this is very helpful, and will most likely sway the cache owner in your favor.

3) And, really, this is the ONLY ONE that matters. The owner gives you permission, AND you state that you have permission in the on-line log. Without this one, 1 and 2 are moot points.

 

The instances that I'm seeing do not fit lately do not fit any of these.

 

I know that there isn't anything that we can do about it, short of inspecting our log books after every find gets logged, and deleteing the finds that aren't legit. I don't know about you-all but I don't have that sort of spare time.

 

That's it, just needed to vent a little.

Link to comment

The problem is that everyone has a different definition of what “found it” means. I would never log a found it unless I found the cache and signed the logbook, the only exception would be the one you listed above, the logbook was too wet to take the ink. I would not count a cache as found with a photo because I wasn’t looking for a location, I was looking for a cache. If I didn’t find it, regardless of the reason, I log it as a DNF. The cache owner cannot change reality by giving me permission to log something as found that I know I did not find. I hiked over 20 miles, took over 11 hours, some of that in deep snow and damnn near killed my hiking partner looking for one. I later found out we were practically standing on top of the cache at one point, and even though permission was given, it doesn’t change the fact that I didn’t find the cache.

 

Since geocaching never defined exactly what “found it” means (and I doubt they ever thought it would be necessary) it’s up to each player to decide what their stats numbers reflect.

Link to comment

The only time I have logged a cache without signing the onboard log was when I couldn't get the container open. I still have a jammed middle finger from WWII and I have lilttle strength in my left hand. But I didn't log it until I had permisson to do so from the owner. That just didn't seem right so I went back with a big C clamp and opened the screw on plug to a PVC pipe and signed the log. What I really hate is not being able to log some Virtuals on a trip without the owner's permisson. When you are traveling across the country you may go several days without a chance to get online to log your caches. Sometimes I just go ahead and log them without permisson. I do send the cache questions before I log it. Seems like it is only the old Virtuals that require previous permisson for logging.

Link to comment

If I don't sign a log, I don't count the cache as found. In a couple of cases when the log in the cache has bee soggy or missing, I leave a new log.

 

There have been a couple of cases in which there was no pen/pencil, and/or mine was broken or frozen. In these cases, I made a mark in the log (with dirt or mud, and in one case blood).

 

I would never insist that everyone has to abide by the rules that I follow, that's just how I play the game.

 

Jamie

Link to comment

When I started caching I made the same mistake a couple times. It took me awhile to figure out what a DNF was and how to log one. I went back and either found the cache or made the change to a DNF after a cacher e-mailed me and patiently explained the protocol for logging a find. They went on to add that DNF's can be helpful to a cache owner as to the viability of their cache.

 

I've recently seen a few logs that appear to fall in the same category. Based on the logs I've seen the persons involved appear not to know the protocol or how to log a DNF.

Link to comment

The default for a log entry used to be "found it". More than once I forgot to change the log type before submitting obvious DNF comments. Of course I went back and changed the type once I noticed it. At least now you must explictly select a log type before you can submit.

 

Also before Ignore lists some people used to log finds on caches just to get them off thier closest list. You can see examples of that in the thread that Weightman linked.

 

I wonder how many cache owners actually compare the paper logs to the online logs.

Link to comment

If I don't sign a log, I don't count the cache as found. In a couple of cases when the log in the cache has bee soggy or missing, I leave a new log.

 

There have been a couple of cases in which there was no pen/pencil, and/or mine was broken or frozen. In these cases, I made a mark in the log (with dirt or mud, and in one case blood).

 

I would never insist that everyone has to abide by the rules that I follow, that's just how I play the game.

 

Jamie

LOL. I've been known to use the "Stick and Dirt" logging method more than a few times.

Link to comment

I once participated in a "Cache Machine" in which everyone present gleefully signed some sixty plus logs. On each and every one of those only one person actually "found" the cache. For everyone else present it was a virtual find at best. Yet each person there (myself included) signed, stamped, or pasted a sticker in the logs without benefit of a find. How or does that differ from not signing a log? In my mind it doesn't. For that reason I only did that one cache machine but they seem to be very popular and a way of building huge cache find numbers. Same could be said of "team" finds. Again only one member of said "team" actually finds the cache but all log the find. I've logged some finds without benefit of signing the log (gasp!!) - mostly micros when there was no pen provided and, on occasion noted logged finds where I didn't see a signature (or at least remember seeing one). What I have never done is take one of the logs out of one of my cache hides and compare it to the list of finds on gc.com - never have, never will. It is after all only a game lets not forget that.

Edited by MedicOne
Link to comment

If you are out by yourself and find the cache that’s the end of it… you found it you sign it. What if there are two of you? You probably don’t take turns finding it. Or maybe there are four cachers or 6? At what point do you draw the line between 2,4 6, or however many there may be in your party? Cache machines are an exaggerated example but even the machines thin out to small groups after the first few stops but they also add a social dimension to the game which we would not want to give up.

 

As for not signing the log and yet still making a claim… no way except for the very limited exceptions noted in earlier posts. We also have used the ‘stick and mud’ system a couple of times so it’s either sign or make your mark for us.

Edited by Wienerdog
Link to comment

I have a guy who wanted to claim a "found it" on a cache that he took and turned into the Park Headquarters because he did not know what it was at the time.

 

He is a cop and a sliverslinger.

 

Must be a nice guy, right?

 

I politely asked him if he was going to replace the cache.

 

No response in close to a month so I was going to delete his find.

 

Guess what. He has deleted his account, let alone the find.

 

I guess I ticked him off by asking him to replace the cache.

 

Some people are thin skinned I guess.

 

Logscaler.

Link to comment

I did once log a "Found It" when I did not actually sign the log. I had found the cache (no question about it). It was in an inexplicably-miserable location within a park that offered a thousand better hiding spots - but was clearly where the hider intended it to be. I was grumpy and it ticked me off, so I declined to sign the log. I politely included my constructive criticism in my online log. I suppose in retrospect I could/should have just posted a "Note".

 

Now, what about that OTHER group of non-loggers - those who find the cache, sign the paper log, but don't ever seem to get around to logging their finds online? :D

Link to comment

Guilty and don't feel bad about it. What is the objective of caching? Finding the cache, signing the log or both? Most of the time I do both, but there have been a few times I didn't sign the log. For instance to wet, found container but no log in it, or could not open container. That just happened last week. Found container but do to sand and/or last finder tightening it beyond my strength I claimed the find. I emailed the owner discribed container and they okayed it. Another one container was missing but we found the attachment item and with owners approval claimed find. I feel no guilt about doing this and I also claim my share of dnf's. I also know people who sign the log book and do not take the time to log on line. That is not the important part of caching to them they get enough pleasure out of the hunt and need no further interaction. That is the great part of this sport.

Link to comment

I believe the objective of geocaching is finding the cache and signing the log. Now if you are with a group of other geocachers, such as at a cache machine, and one person finds the cache while you are there, I believe it is ok to claim the find, as long as you were at the cache. Even someone else can sign the logsheet for you, so long as you are at the cache. What rubs me wrong is an individual who claims a find because someone else in their party got to the cache and signed the logsheet for them, however said person is nowhere near the cache, not even close, not even 0.1 miles close. I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it for myself, first hand....twice in the same day. To me, thats stretching the rules...a lot. So then what does that make the objective of geocaching? To run up your numbers, no matter how? Not me...goes against my principals.

Link to comment

I believe the objective of geocaching is finding the cache and signing the log. Now if you are with a group of other geocachers, such as at a cache machine, and one person finds the cache while you are there, I believe it is ok to claim the find, as long as you were at the cache. Even someone else can sign the logsheet for you, so long as you are at the cache. What rubs me wrong is an individual who claims a find because someone else in their party got to the cache and signed the logsheet for them, however said person is nowhere near the cache, not even close, not even 0.1 miles close. I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it for myself, first hand....twice in the same day. To me, thats stretching the rules...a lot. So then what does that make the objective of geocaching? To run up your numbers, no matter how? Not me...goes against my principals.

I agree. I've seen this in action. It just doesn't agree with me at all. I've had others sign the cache for me, but I was at the cache. I'll never log a cache that I didn't actually visit.

Link to comment

This is the same principal as logging a Locationless without checking to see if it had been logged before. Which was one of my pet peeves. I was glad to see them move over to Waymarking. Before that I had to remind myself it's just a game and "to thine ownself be true".

Link to comment
Patudles Posted Feb 15 2006, 11:44 PM

Guilty and don't feel bad about it. What is the objective of caching? Finding the cache, signing the log or both? Most of the time I do both, but there have been a few times I didn't sign the log. For instance to wet, found container but no log in it, or could not open container. That just happened last week. Found container but do to sand and/or last finder tightening it beyond my strength I claimed the find. I emailed the owner discribed container and they okayed it. Another one container was missing but we found the attachment item and with owners approval claimed find. I feel no guilt about doing this and I also claim my share of dnf's. I also know people who sign the log book and do not take the time to log on line. That is not the important part of caching to them they get enough pleasure out of the hunt and need no further interaction. That is the great part of this sport.

 

I ended up with a similar situation which is why I went to stickers. If nothing else, I can leave a label to indicate I was there even when a writing utensil just won't do the job.

Edited by TotemLake
Link to comment

Another one container was missing but we found the attachment item and with owners approval claimed find.

 

This is not criticism, but I would never log that as a find, since I didn’t find the container. My total indicates the number of geocaches that I’ve found. My total does not include attachment points like eye hooks or velcro, depressions in the ground, or hollow stumps where the cache simply had to be.

 

I'm still confused about this idea of asking the owner for permission to log their cache. If I find it, I'll go online and log it, no permission required.

 

I think we can all agree that there is diversity of opinions, no?

Link to comment
I think we can all agree that there is diversity of opinions, no?

Certainly there is a diversity of opinion - but it helps sometimes to discuss them. I know, for my part, seeing some items discussed that are probably old hat to the 1k Club has helped me learn.

Link to comment
I think we can all agree that there is diversity of opinions, no?

Certainly there is a diversity of opinion - but it helps sometimes to discuss them. I know, for my part, seeing some items discussed that are probably old hat to the 1k Club has helped me learn.

 

Then you won't learn anything from me, my find count is well below that. :laughing:

Link to comment

I never log a find online unless I have opened the container and verified it's a geocache. A lot of times I don't find a pencil, well, I don't always carry one. I still call it a find. One thing I am guilty of it is getting the cache open and panicing. I always open it and verify it's the cache I'm looking for, but it's an urban hide near something like a bike path and it's crawling with muggles, I say forget the paper logging and rehide it as soon as possible to avoid someone see me putting it back. I think the owner would rather me protect it's secretly, verses me looking like a mugger waiting for the joggers to pass me.

Link to comment

You're only cheating yourself if you accept anything less, so who really cares. The active cache machine folks have their fun and the purists do too. I crossed checked a couple of my geocaches against the logs and found some discrepencies.

 

I thought about e-mailing and asking for the whys, but figured if they want to claim a cache find more power too them. I have my own rules and try to live by them. I don't claim a cache unless I sign the log....well expect for that cache machine I did.....oh and the time I cached with a friend...oh and that other time I forgot my pen.......and when I was caching with my daughters!..... :laughing:

Link to comment

You're only cheating yourself if you accept anything less, so who really cares.

 

I suppose if people want to cheat the game, they have only their own conscience to live with. I kinda wonder what is the meaning of a milestone cache to the cheater? Some of us recognize the achievement of a fellow geocacher reaching a milestone and we offer congratulations. To those who cheat, do we congratulate them for achieving the milestone number, which includes caches they never even saw or were in the vicinity of? Kind of lessens the significance of the milestone.

Link to comment

I'm 1/2 guilty ;) after 3 logged DNF's from other people, I went out, found it, but with too many people in the area I didn't want it to get muggled, I posted my results for the find backwards, at GCK855 Friend of the river, but I did go back to sign the log a day or so later :)

 

I think I've logged a Found it because of this situation. I wasn't planning on returning to the area and I'd found the cache. But there was a cop sitting in his car very close. Decided it wasn't worth bringing the cache out to simply sign the logbook. I don't get much of a thrill out of signing so for me the trip was complete. I don't really get the fascination with actually signing a logbook.

 

I may have done it another time when after walking all over downtown playing "urban bingo" I came right to where the cache was hidden. Under a park bench. In a deserted park with a dozen or so benches. And one homeless guy. Sitting on the one bench. Ugh. I don't recall if I actually logged that one or not. But Mrs. Stump counted it as a find.

Link to comment

I think you have to gauge this one with your own rules... are you in it for the hunt or to run your numbers up? If the latter, people will be on to you after a while and it will be obvious in some cases.

 

Now, personally, the 4 of us in Team Jac'd voted as such: (okay DangerBoy being 3 yrs old followed the voting of the other 3)

 

- in cache machines, as long as you are within 50 feet, preferrably physically touch the cache

- in a group or as a team, one of us must physically tocuh, preferrably sign the log

- the only 2 excuses we accept for ourselves for not signing the log are:

1) bringing the log out and signing it would draw too much attention to the cache, and we have tried all other manners of grabbing the cache to sign it.

2) the cache is physically not accessible, but we have touched it.

Both excuses must be okayed by the cache owner.

 

For #1, it has happened once, and for #2 it has happened once. In #2, it was a cache inside of a tree and I physically touched it but was not able to retrieve it after significant effort.

 

We think these are fair rules to play by, but don't expect everyone to follow them, just us.

Link to comment

 

This is not criticism, but I would never log that as a find, since I didn’t find the container. My total indicates the number of geocaches that I’ve found. My total does not include attachment points like eye hooks or velcro, depressions in the ground, or hollow stumps where the cache simply had to be.

 

I'm still confused about this idea of asking the owner for permission to log their cache. If I find it, I'll go online and log it, no permission required.

 

I think we can all agree that there is diversity of opinions, no?

 

This is food for thought. I have not logged any other caches that I found the location of but the cache was missing. This was a first time for me to do that. I have not counted many caches that were missing when I found the location. One of our party called the owner and verified we had the right thing and I DID feel a tad bit guilty in logging it. I think I will change that find to a note. I like to have integrity in my how I play the game. However if the cache is in my hand and I can't open it I will still claim it as a find. Afterall that is my why I am caching to find the container.

 

Now on the other hand if I know of some caches in our area that you can find the container that holds the cache container and it is a puzzle on how to open the outside container. If you cannot figure out how to attain the log book (which is the cache) then you should not claim it as a find because the outer container is in plain sight. Some have claimed finds on these caches although they did not find the way to access the log.

 

Thanks Criminal for setting back on the straight and narrow.

Link to comment

 

I like to have integrity in my how I play the game.

 

So help me understand. By letting someone else go to a cache and sign your name on the log, then claiming it as a find online, even though you were no where near the cache, is playing the game with integrity? Come on now.

 

I am sorry you fieel you need to libel me. I know of no such cache that I have done that on. I know of several caches in which I have been with friends on when caching and chose not to go to or complete due to tiredness or difficulty or some other reason and they signed my name to the log but I never logged the find on line. I think I play this game fairly and do not pad my finds. If you think I do so otherwise I am sorry.

Edited by Patudles
Link to comment

This argument seems to be between you and I, so I vote we discuss this further outside of the forums.

 

Excuse me, you are the one accusing me. I would suggest you go to the caches you think this happened at and see if I logged my name to them. I assume you are referring to the Bellingham cache machine and if you are I think you will find that though my name was on the log at the cache, I never logged it on line because you are right I did not go to the cache. Another team member may havie sign my name but I did not claim it as a find. Am I to be accused of cheating because of that? Now I understand why some people do not log on line and keep score of their caches. It is incidents like this that tarnish the fun of caching.

Link to comment

This argument seems to be between you and I, so I vote we discuss this further outside of the forums.

 

Excuse me, you are the one accusing me. I would suggest you go to the caches you think this happened at and see if I logged my name to them. I assume you are referring to the Bellingham cache machine and if you are I think you will find that though my name was on the log at the cache, I never logged it on line because you are right I did not go to the cache. Another team member may havie sign my name but I did not claim it as a find. Am I to be accused of cheating because of that? Now I understand why some people do not log on line and keep score of their caches. It is incidents like this that tarnish the fun of caching.

 

I would never consider cache machine style caching to be cheating. It’s no different than caching with a friend who finds it before you do. What I don’t like to see is people logging finds when they clearly admit they did not find the cache.

 

Example one:

 

Example two:

 

Example Three: I was shocked to see people claiming this one as found, since I was the last one to actually see the cache but since I didn't get my name in the log I claimed it as a DNF.

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

What I don’t like to see is people logging finds when they clearly admit they did not find the cache.

 

Example one:

 

Example two:

 

Example Three: I was shocked to see people claiming this one as found, since I was the last one to actually see the cache but since I didn't get my name in the log I claimed it as a DNF.

 

Wow, I was surprised by examples 2 and 3. Some of the 'false finds' are from folks I've cached with. I'm with you (and others) - if a cache is missing, then I post a note, DNF, or archive (depending on situation), I do NOT post a find, since the cache was not there or not accessible. Velcro, bolt holes, and fishing lines don't count. :(

Link to comment

I would never consider cache machine style caching to be cheating. It’s no different than caching with a friend who finds it before you do. What I don’t like to see is people logging finds when they clearly admit they did not find the cache.

 

Example one:

 

Example two:

 

Example Three: I was shocked to see people claiming this one as found, since I was the last one to actually see the cache but since I didn't get my name in the log I claimed it as a DNF.

 

Must be cabin fever setting in over there in E.WA! :P ......I would bet there are very few cachers that can claim finding 100% of the caches they've logged. What is the criteria for a find then? If you make it all black and white with a strict set of rules then you take the fun out of it for many people. I have no problem with people claiming a find on a partial cache. If they put out the effort to go to a cache site and the owner has been negligent in cache maintenance then the cache seeker shouldn't be penalized.

 

You lost the cache in example 3! :( If the cache owner is MIA then it should have been disabled ASAP. I see others put in quite an effort to find it. The ones that looked for it down below should get an honary cache find just for the effort!..... ;)

Edited by GeoRoo
Link to comment

 

Wow, I was surprised by examples 2 and 3. Some of the 'false finds' are from folks I've cached with. I'm with you (and others) - if a cache is missing, then I post a note, DNF, or archive (depending on situation), I do NOT post a find, since the cache was not there or not accessible. Velcro, bolt holes, and fishing lines don't count. :(

 

If you are positive that the cache is missing then I belive the correct log type would be "Needs Maintenance". Followed by "Needs Archived" if the situation is not resolved in a timely fashion.

 

If you are not absolutly positive that the cache is missing then you "Didn't find it".

 

I use "Write Note" when I went to the area but could not search due to muggles or such. Or I just don't log at all.

 

When I first started caching I logged the top of an ammo can on a line (the bottom had sunk) and was gently corrected buy the owner. What others choose to do doesn't bother me at all.

Link to comment

There’s a parallel thread going over here, about multiple logging on event caches, and several posters have said the same thing, “it doesn’t affect me so why should I care?” So I have to stop and think about it, it doesn’t affect me, so why should I care? And I do care.

 

There are geocachers in whom I have a great deal of respect, guys and girls I’ve cached with, hiked with, and/or cracked a beer with afterwards. Some of them are notable in the local area (Western Washington) for their high stats, finds as well as hides. Take M10B or EGH for example. Both have thousands of finds and neither would ever log a strip of Velcro or a dangling piece of fishing line as a ‘found it’. (Both hunt all types of caches without discrimination, something I cannot do. If the words ‘bison tube’ appear on a cache page I almost exclusively ignore it.) So what does their accomplishment amount to? Well, not a damnn thing since it doesn’t affect anyone else, right? Logging something as found that you clearly didn’t is a disrespect to those who actually went to all the trouble of finding the container, opening it, and signing the logbook. With few exceptions, like a wet disintegrating logbook or absolutely impossible to open container, that is the definition of ‘found it’, whether you (collective yous) think so or not.

 

It’s not about the effort we put in to get to the cache site, looking for something does not equal finding something, regardless of the effort expended. You can play the game any way you like, but you cannot just alter the English language to suit your own narrow sighted desire. When I went after the FTF on Mt Jupiter, I was determined to find the cache, and probably a bit too determined. Was 20+ miles enough effort? Was 11+ hours enough time spent? My hiking partner that day was seriously convinced she wasn’t getting off the mountain alive (yes, it was that bad), was that enough to claim the cache as found when we did not? How would you have felt if you had hiked the same distance the next day and dug the cache out of the hip deep snow, only to find out when you got home that we had claimed the FTF without ever even touching the cache? Doesn’t affect anyone else? BS.

 

At the end of the day, maybe Joe Schmoe cacher logging a depression in the ground as a ‘found it’ isn’t a big deal. Nobody is going to die from it, right? However, I, for one, will not join everyone in patting him on the back in the Milestones thread.

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

What I don’t like to see is people logging finds when they clearly admit they did not find the cache.

 

Example one:

 

Example two:

 

Example Three:

 

I just took a quick look through the logs mentioned above, and was rather surprised to see my name as one of those cited for logging a "missing" cache. I was a relatively inexperienced cacher at that time and preferred then, as I do now, to cache by myself. Up to that point, I had had very little opportunity to cache with and observe those with more experience, to see how they would handle situations such as this one, when they came up.

 

I also didn't realize that there were "rules" regarding logging of missing caches, nor was I aware that someone was keeping track of my caching practices. In retrospect, I should not have logged that cache as a find, as I did not set pen to paper. However, this was the first time I had encountered this situation, and I was simply following the example set by the several previous cachers' logs registering a find for locating the attachment velcro for the missing cache. Now that I am a more experienced geocacher and have had a chance to become better aware of proper caching protocol by occasionally caching with others with more experience and by reading these forums, I would not make the same choice today under the same circumstances.

 

I have changed my log entry from a "Found It" to a "Did Not Find". I hope you can sleep better tonight, Criminal....

Link to comment
I have changed my log entry from a "Found It" to a "Did Not Find". I hope you can sleep better tonight, Criminal....

 

I haven’t lost any up till now, so I think I’ll be fine. :cute:

 

It ain’t the gospel folks, it’s just my humble opinion. It would seem pretty obvious to me that if you didn’t find it, you wouldn’t log it as found. (The collective yous again) When I joined, there was nobody around to spell all that out for us, but we figured it out all the same.

Link to comment

The problem comes in when people spend too much time watching what others are doing. When you do that, nobody is going to have fun. And also, you can make mistakes and not understand motivation, or not even notice when you are plain wrong about what someone has done.

 

The best course of action is to just enjoy yourself, and not keep checking into what everyone else is doing.

Link to comment

 

The best course of action is to just enjoy yourself, and not keep checking into what everyone else is doing.

 

But won't that kill the Milestone Congratulations thread? :cute::D

 

I would never log a string or piece of velcro, but it's not something to get all upset about. I've done 1 cache machine and had a great time, but I had real issues with "claiming" finds when I never came close to finding the cache in a group evironment. I think a cache machine is far closer to "cheating" when you can rack up 50 or more caches and never even get out of the car if you don't want to!......

 

I cache with my 2 daughters on occaision and just the other day my youngest had the cache before I was even out of the car. Should I delete this find? I didn't find it. Same as caching with friends. I haven't found every single cache I've done. Yes, I probably would have found it, but I know after doing the Wenatchee CM I wouldn't have found some of those evil hides on my own.

 

I'd say about 90% of my caches I've found solo, so I'm ok with that. We all live by our own rules. We don't need a ridgid set of rules. That will only kill the fun part of geocaching and make it too strict. I don't make my numbers a priority when I cache. Some do and that's their prerogitive. We all ultimately account to ourselves with our actions, so leave it at that and don't stress about it..... :D

 

Half Canadian, now you're gonna have to go back and change all your milestone caches!....... :cute:

Link to comment

What if you find the logbook laying on the ground but don't find the cache because it's missing? Does that count as a find? Are we looking for a cache container or a logbook?

 

I did that once. I found the top of the tupperware and underneath it was the log book and one piece of swag. I signed the log, put it back underneat the top and logged it some time later when I had access to a computer. I did call Runhills and ask him to post a note on the cache page advising the owner that the cache needed maintenance badly. I was not able to log the cache for at least a week and so I logged the find and then posted an SBA. The owner replaced the box later.

 

I have no problem with that. I found where the box was. I signed the official logbook.

 

Another time I found the top of the cache and nothing else. That only got the SBA since there was no log to sign. I had no problem with that either. I might add that that cache had no finders at all. It was muggled before FTF.

Link to comment

What if you find the logbook laying on the ground but don't find the cache because it's missing? Does that count as a find? Are we looking for a cache container or a logbook?

 

I did that once. I found the top of the tupperware and underneath it was the log book and one piece of swag. I signed the log, put it back underneat the top and logged it some time later when I had access to a computer. I did call Runhills and ask him to post a note on the cache page advising the owner that the cache needed maintenance badly. I was not able to log the cache for at least a week and so I logged the find and then posted an SBA. The owner replaced the box later.

 

I have no problem with that. I found where the box was. I signed the official logbook.

 

Another time I found the top of the cache and nothing else. That only got the SBA since there was no log to sign. I had no problem with that either. I might add that that cache had no finders at all. It was muggled before FTF.

 

I guess it all comes down to signing the log then. Maybe the ones that did the hanging string cache signed the string!..........I've done caches where the log was a gooey mess. There was no way in $%^ I could have signed a log. Criminal does enough hike to caches that I bet he's run across that plenty of times. Do you log a cache find?........If he does then that's cheating in my book. If the log can't be deciphered then those caches should be deleted. Yes, everyone of them!.....:cute:

 

I retrieved a cache log from one of my caches on the Sky River near Index the other day. It got wet and many logs are unreadable. Should I go back and delete the ones I can't verify?.......The log is not God. It's just one part of the whole caching experience. I enjoy reading cache logs and most of the time I make an effort to say something with every one of my caches. I don't just scribble my name. We all do it our own way. Don't make it a black and white world. When you put demands on people to "do it your way" then it's not fun anymore.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...