Signing Container Rather Than Logbook

[+JohnnyVegas]

What is your general thoughts on teams or individuals signing the outside of the container rather than taking the time to open the container and signing the logbook. Yes, the contain could be opened and did have a logbook enclosed. I have seen a lot of these containers signed this week in DFW area (for GW4) where teams have been running.

Some of my caches have air brushed camo on them. If I found one of my caches with names on the outside I would delete those log enteries

[+Corp Of Discovery]

It's weird. If these guys had just claimed finds for just getting near the cache, that would have been just fine with everybody. But sign the outside of the container, and now it's Federal offense.

 

Seriously, folks, with pocket caches and retirement caches and hundreds of finds for one event and bonus smileys and finds claimed for not finding the cache all considered just fine by many cachers, I can see how this group thought that what they were doing was just fine. In fact, they thought were being really tough on themselves for requiring that the container be signed and cachers be within 1/2 mile of each other!

 

Now do you understand why all those things are bad for the sport/hobby/whatever?

 

Ditto. I don't see this as isolated. They are/were just doing what has started to pass for 'normal'. I don't think this makes the cachers, event, Texas caching or the Texas Organization bad. It is just the result of a larger issue.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

<snip> ... at least from my long-distance perspective here on the East Coast ...

<snip> Even here on the West Coast, I am already starting to see and hear ...

Your assessment of the situation carries extra weight in my book because of your ability to be on both coasts at the same time.

That was indeed a bizarre typo! Wonder if I was translocating to the West Coast in one of my physical bodies as I wrote that!

(I have since gone back to the original post and corrected the error!)

[vagabond]

Seems to me if they had just had 400 or so temp caches at the event, then they could have logged them and everything would have been fine

[+Renegade Knight]

What is your general thoughts on teams or individuals signing the outside of the container rather than taking the time to open the container and signing the logbook. Yes, the contain could be opened and did have a logbook enclosed. I have seen a lot of these containers signed this week in DFW area (for GW4) where teams have been running.

Vandalizing the container really isn't in the spirit of the game. If the cache has a log you sign the log because that's how the cache owner wants you to go about claiming your find.

[+Glenn]

<snip>

 

The upset about signing cache containers after the run is over may be understandbale, but I would have wished for MORE input and feedback to our posts BEFORE the run so rules / guidelines could have been adjusted to the wishes of THE LOCAL CACHE OWNERS and / or the whole caching community.

 

The lack of interest in this run BEFORE we went for it - even the local cachers did not post in the threads in their local forum - was surprising for me, as I was used to sharing fun and caching with the locals before, around and after Geowoodstock events.

 

BTW, how many local cache owners (that have caches being hitten on the recrun) are posting here?

 

<snip>

 

If feeling of record-run CACHE OWNERS were hurt - I do deeply beg your understanding and ask you to read the posts we made and to check the available information before the run started.

 

It was not and will never be my intent or the intent of my team to make cache owners feel bad because of things we have done to their cache.

 

But as the owner of around 80 caches (that have more than 2000 logs on them) I want to state that I have no problems at all if my cache containers are signed as long as stealth is not harmed.

 

<snip>

 

In Dallas/FW we could find 312 caches, left physical proof of being there when the cache was in the hand of a team member.

 

Looking forward to meet some of you at GW4, I am open for your questions and criticism.

 

Am I understanding you correctly? It looks like to me that you are saying because you posted in a forum that you were going to sign the containers, any cache owners that didn't let you know that it wasn't okay with them, whether they read the forum or not, you just assumed that it was okay to sign the container? That seems very backwards to me.

 

For the record. I put log books in my cache not because the geocaching.com rules say I have to but because I want the log book be signed.

 

BTW: Did you find any virtuals? If so what did you sign then?

[+Glenn]

Seems to me if they had just had 400 or so temp caches at the event, then they could have logged them and everything would have been fine

 

You got a good point. Any found it logs that get deleted from upset cache owners can just be logged on the event page and the record count won't be in jeopardy. It's interesting how this has gone from it isn't about the numbers to who give a care about the caches either.

[+Renegade Knight]

Hello from Dallas!

 

My name is geoPirat (from Germany) and I have been a member of this years record run team in Dallas / FW.

 

I have read this thread and would like to comment on a few points . . .

 

The final rules for the record run have been posted on the TXA Forums, see here http://www.txga.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3370

 

In this thread, an older version of the rules has been posted some times, but we have posted the final layout in the Forums of the local Geocachers organization of the Dallas / FW area so the owners could read it (TXGA).

 

Many of the owners of caches planned for the recrun have been posted before the run, informing them of the run, the date, sometimes asking for maintainance or advice of how to drive / park best to a cache location. The list of caches of the run was available BEFORE THE RUN via a public link in the GW4 Forums http://www.geowoodstock4.com/ .

 

We had posted the rules asking for comments / help / criticism, given a time-line of a week (I remember) for this. We had NO feedback at all BEFORE the run.

 

On the preparation of the run, we made the cache list available to everyone and shared all information BEFORE the run so others could go for the run on their own, if not in a 24 hour record manner than in parts to have fun and find some caches - a thing new to record runs to my knowledge. Things have been posted in the Forums of GW4-site and TXGA, the recrun is even mentioned on the GC.COM GW4-cache page. What other ways of gathering interest and feedback could we have used?

 

The upset about signing cache containers after the run is over may be understandbale, but I would have wished for MORE input and feedback to our posts BEFORE the run so rules / guidelines could have been adjusted to the wishes of THE LOCAL CACHE OWNERS and / or the whole caching community.

 

The lack of interest in this run BEFORE we went for it - even the local cachers did not post in the threads in their local forum - was surprising for me, as I was used to sharing fun and caching with the locals before, around and after Geowoodstock events.

 

BTW, how many local cache owners (that have caches being hitten on the recrun) are posting here?

 

Finally the answer to the question - have cache containers been signed on the outside?

 

Yes, cache containers were signed by team members during the run if they were not camouflaged and if there was no harm to stealth factor if the cache.

 

Leaving a physical proof of 'we have been there' was very important to us to make our run revisable.

 

If feeling of record-run CACHE OWNERS were hurt - I do deeply beg your understanding and ask you to read the posts we made and to check the available information before the run started.

 

It was not and will never be my intent or the intent of my team to make cache owners feel bad because of things we have done to their cache.

 

But as the owner of around 80 caches (that have more than 2000 logs on them) I want to state that I have no problems at all if my cache containers are signed as long as stealth is not harmed.

 

Numbers of record runs are very difficult to compare because of Team size, local support, cache density in different areas, cache maintainance quality by the owners and so on. This record is menat to be a fun thing (maybe a bit crazy).

 

We took the record from ourselves (I was member of last years record holder Team of 263 caches in Jacksonville), there is no prize to win.

 

In Dallas/FW we could find 312 caches, left physical proof of being there when the cache was in the hand of a team member.

 

Looking forward to meet some of you at GW4, I am open for your questions and criticism.

 

If I would have seen your thread in GC.com (and maybe I missed it) I certainly would have commented.

 

As it stands the discussion of signing the log book to claim the find is a longstanding disucssion and quite frankly one of the rules that virtually all geocachers agree on.

 

If you guys did sign the container and not the log, then while I'm sure you had a lot of fun, no record was set and you guys can probably look forward to your finds counts dropping as a lot of owners delete your find for failing to complete the logging requirements.

 

If it's any consolation, when there is formal rules for setting records none of the current records will stand either except as foot notes because they would have taken place before offical recordkeeping.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Hello from Dallas!

 

My name is geoPirat (from Germany) and I have been a member of this years record run team in Dallas / FW. . .

As you all may know by now, I am certainly not one of the more vehement critics of the behavior of Team DRR during their by-now hotly disputed "run", and rather I seem to stand more among the moderates, but... I do feel that it appears that Team DRR likely engaged in some rather inadvisable behaviors in their eagerness to break a record. However, I must observe, in light of the arrogance of some of Geopirat's assumptions regarding "implicit permission to sign containers" and in light of the claims of cache vandalism (i.e., signing exterior of camouflaged caches) which have been emerging, this all puts Carsten's chosen geocaching handle of "GeoPirat" in a new and somewhat ominous light!

[+BigHank]

Numbers are the bane of Geocaching and cause more resentment and arguments than anything except lame micros (had to work those in somehow). I wonder how many folks would still cache if there were no stats kept?

[+BiT]

The Texas locals who posted in this thread weren't very happy about the situation either. I don't think they accepted it, I think they simply didn't know about it until after it was done. Many probably still don't know.

 

I've posted on the GW4 web site and it has seen little action. While out at GW4 I talked with a lot of folks and nobody seemed to know about what happened. It was kind of sad to see everyone going up and shaking the DRR teams' hands and congratulating them for a job well done when they didn't know the story behind the event.

[just B0B]

Haven't seen anyone in these threads from Alabama that has appeared shocked OR surprised. That should tell you something...

[+TotemLake]

What is your general thoughts on teams or individuals signing the outside of the container rather than taking the time to open the container and signing the logbook. Yes, the contain could be opened and did have a logbook enclosed. I have seen a lot of these containers signed this week in DFW area (for GW4) where teams have been running.

Sounds like a note to me. Frankly, it's disturbing that a bunch of cachers would get together and think this was a good idea without even thinking it is a wrong thing to do to somebody else's cache.

[+DocDiTTo]

The Texas locals who posted in this thread weren't very happy about the situation either. I don't think they accepted it, I think they simply didn't know about it until after it was done. Many probably still don't know.

 

I've posted on the GW4 web site and it has seen little action. While out at GW4 I talked with a lot of folks and nobody seemed to know about what happened. It was kind of sad to see everyone going up and shaking the DRR teams' hands and congratulating them for a job well done when they didn't know the story behind the event.

 

I'm sure the information being spread around the offline folks at GW4 is different than what's being discussed here. If I were there, I'd not be hanging out on these forums either. When folks finally get home and log in, they might begin to realize the truth. The folks who really ought to know are the cache owners themselves, as they're the ones with the power to delete the found logs. That 312 number could drop pretty quickly if enough cache owners were informed of the situation.

 

I think perhaps the DRR team owning up to the fact that they used poor judgement and renouncing their "record" claim would go a long way to making this all disappear. Hey, you say you screwed up, you're sorry, you move on. That hasn't been the message we've heard yet, but then again we've only heard from one person.

[+CYBret]

I think we're all missing the bigger question here.

 

What is the proper way to sign a cache container?

 

I've considered a few options:

 

1. Sharpie Marker

Sharpie has long been a name you can trust in cache log signing. With the double tipped (fat/thin) Sharpie, you can be assured of being able to sign just about any sized cache container, from ammo can to breath strips, this one's a sure favorite. Also with the silver model you can be assured that the log will be visible on even those black 35mm containers.

 

Of course "permanent" is in the eye of the cache holder. After a few other finds much of the wording can wear off. On the other hand, that great "marker buzz" you get from sniffing them will really keep you going while traveling from cache to cache.

 

2. The Cordless Dremel

The Dremel provides a permanent record of your visit. With the proper set of attachments you can be assured of being able to leave your mark on just about any container surface. The lithium-ion battery insures long life but for those heavy-duty cache runs you might want to consider a car charger, two Dremels, or a solar backpack set up.

 

Also, the cordless Dremel is great for logging those benchmarks too!

 

Caution: may be harmful to some plastics.

 

3. "GeoTagging"

While considered to be vandalism under some city ordinances, tagging has become a routine sight in city life. The carry over into the world of the urban micro seems natural, though maybe a bit overkill.

 

4. The Joy of Caching

Sure, the painter's pallet might weigh you down a little bit, but there's no substitute for creativity, even in a race against the clock.

 

"Today we're gonna make a happy little log on the side of this ammo box. Remember, there is no right or wrong, this is your world, you're going to create it yourself."

 

Bret

[+Bushwhacking Queen]

I was one of the people that had their log deleted on the Sprinkler's Doom cache. We went to the cache, found the cache, opened it, and could not log the log. The log was damp, we described the container, the location, and where it was found. We took time and even spoke to residents in the area. Maintenance was not done on the cache and we did what we could with the situation when the cache was found. Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

 

I was not part of the DRR team. I came to Texas for GW4 and to cache a lot in the area. We (B.A.B.E Team -- there are four of us women) have had an incredible amount of no finds among our finds. We cache for 18 hours a day and have been able to see a vast mount of the Dallas/Ft Worth area.

 

I guess I don't udnerstand why my log would be deleted. I went to the area, attempted to sign the cache, described it to the owner, yet our log was still deleted. What is wrong with what we did? As a cache owner if someone told me that there was a problem with my container, described it and the area in which the cache is located, I would not deny them the find. Obviously, they were there and understood the reason why I brought them where I did.

 

B.Q.

[+BiT]

I was one of the people that had their log deleted on the Sprinkler's Doom cache. We went to the cache, found the cache, opened it, and could not log the log. The log was damp, we described the container, the location, and where it was found. We took time and even spoke to residents in the area. Maintenance was not done on the cache and we did what we could with the situation when the cache was found. Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

 

I was not part of the DRR team. I came to Texas for GW4 and to cache a lot in the area. We (B.A.B.E Team -- there are four of us women) have had an incredible amount of no finds among our finds. We cache for 18 hours a day and have been able to see a vast mount of the Dallas/Ft Worth area.

 

I guess I don't udnerstand why my log would be deleted. I went to the area, attempted to sign the cache, described it to the owner, yet our log was still deleted. What is wrong with what we did? As a cache owner if someone told me that there was a problem with my container, described it and the area in which the cache is located, I would not deny them the find. Obviously, they were there and understood the reason why I brought them where I did.

 

B.Q.

 

Yes the log was DAMP but it was still able to be signed. So the log was deleted.

[+The Leprechauns]

Damp logs are commonplace, unfortunately. I even encountered a wet ammo box in my cache hunts today, along with the more customary wet film canisters.

 

As an experienced geocacher, I'm prepared with a pen that writes well on damp paper (i.e., not ball point). In worst cases I add my own signed dry scrap of paper. Others solve the same challenge by using stickers.

 

I'm still curious about why logs couldn't be signed, under the published rules.

[+BiT]

If you notice on the pic of the log for Sprinkler's Doom cache there are non-damp spots that are able to be signed.

[+fizzymagic]

Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

Signing damp logs is part of geocaching.

 

For me, if I don't sign the log, I don't count the find. Figuring out how to do it can be part of the fun.

 

For example, a few weeks ago I did a pretty steep bushwhack through poison-oak-infested hills to reach a cache, only to find that I had forgotten a pen! I figured out how to sign the logbook using crushed fern leaves as ink, and then came back the next week to be sure it was signed properly!

 

Last weekend, I went to find a puzzle cache I had solved some time ago, only to find that it had come unglued from the fencepost top it was attached to and fallen down to the bottom of the post. Determined to log the find, we used a piece of double-sided tape and my hiking staff to fish it back out. If I hadn't succeeded, I wouldn't have claimed the find.

 

And yes, there have been several times I was not successful, and I've written a DNF. I've pushed microcaches down into holes so deep I couldn't get them, and I even once dropped a cache from a bridge. In both cases, I found the cache and tried to sign the logs, but in both cases they were DNFs. Because that's how geocaching works.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

I was one of the people that had their log deleted on the Sprinkler's Doom cache. We went to the cache, found the cache, opened it, and could not log the log. The log was damp, we described the container, the location, and where it was found. We took time and even spoke to residents in the area. Maintenance was not done on the cache and we did what we could with the situation when the cache was found. Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

 

I was not part of the DRR team. I came to Texas for GW4 and to cache a lot in the area. We (B.A.B.E Team -- there are four of us women) have had an incredible amount of no finds among our finds. We cache for 18 hours a day and have been able to see a vast mount of the Dallas/Ft Worth area.

 

I guess I don't udnerstand why my log would be deleted. I went to the area, attempted to sign the cache, described it to the owner, yet our log was still deleted. What is wrong with what we did? As a cache owner if someone told me that there was a problem with my container, described it and the area in which the cache is located, I would not deny them the find. Obviously, they were there and understood the reason why I brought them where I did.

 

B.Q.

 

Hm.

[+DocDiTTo]

And yes, there have been several times I was not successful, and I've written a DNF. I've pushed microcaches down into holes so deep I couldn't get them, and I even once dropped a cache from a bridge. In both cases, I found the cache and tried to sign the logs, but in both cases they were DNFs. Because that's how geocaching works.

 

I was looking for ablinker nano once and accidentally sent it flying into the 6" of snow and ivy. Gone. In my DNF I explained to the owner what happened, he replaced the cache, I went back to sign the log the next day.

It happens, it's part of the game.

 

Typically I carry a sharpie and a Uniball Powertank RT pen that doesn't freeze and writes upside down, even on damp paper. With the Sharpie I can sign anything (even cache containers!! )

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

Hm.

 

That is bad. Why even bother to log finds any more?

[+jaredl]

I say the record is garbage just like the caches they wrote on. whats the point in spending the time to plan something like this just to cheep out. I think its a bunch of poopie and the people involved should be very ashamed of there actions and lies.

 

If it were up tp me i'd cancle there memberships to gc.com and make sure to not involve them in any future events.

 

Whats the point in playing a game if your not going to follow the rules, or even the rules that you set out personaly. If i wanted to be a lameo i could have scribbled on the actual cache every time and savd the 2 min of looking threw the box, and found 1 more cache a week but whats the point? if you just want numbers and you going to be that cheep why even bother leaving your house, I'm sure you could have logged more then 312 caches in 24 hours from home no prob

 

as far as i'm concerned with this much questioning about the record and the lack of clarification form the people claiming to do this its NOT REAL. just a bunch of people high on them selves who think they accomplished something but really just cheapened the "sport" and made them selves look stupid, because they are forever going to be known as the guys who faked a record

 

GOOD WORK LOOSRES

[gridlox]

Jeeze DRR! Lay the blame on the local cache community because they didn't go to the different forums and get informed of the way you were gonna create your own rules for the run. Not to mention, if they didn't go there, they probably weren't even aware it was going to take place. NOT COOL!!

 

I guess since "all of your team members" from the DRR have promptly come to the forum here and defended yourselves, we'll let it stand.

 

Oh, right!

Only one of you have come and "tried" to defend your actions. I guess that means it's YOUR fault the community feels the need to reject your attempt. You should have been more dilligent to the forums you put so much stock in to keep informed of what was going on. Sorry for your loss!

 

In reply to the OT - Sign the cache log or don't bother logging a find! Deface my cache, then not only will you get your log deleted, but expect a very unfriendly email!

Our game is Geocaching! NOT Geo-trashing!

 

If I do a maintenance check and there isn't a signature on the cache log "in" the cache the find will be deleted!! It hasn't happened to me yet, thankfully. But...

 

If the log is unsignable, then note that the log is in need of maintenance and leave a scrap of paper with your signature if you want a find.

 

I've got one micro hide that has maintenance issues after getting a few days of soaking rains and the log has to be replaced.

But, the hide has be very well recieved (even with the damp logs) is the only reason it hasn't been removed or the container changed.

When the log has had issues, the finders have always found a way to sign the log. Whether it's leave a business card, sticker, sign a scrap of a fast food restaraunt reciept and stick in in the cache, to even had one cacher replace the log for me and bring me the wet log.

 

When there's a will there's a way!

 

D-man

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I was one of the people that had their log deleted on the Sprinkler's Doom cache. We went to the cache, found the cache, opened it, and could not log the log. The log was damp, we described the container, the location, and where it was found. We took time and even spoke to residents in the area. Maintenance was not done on the cache and we did what we could with the situation when the cache was found. Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

 

I was not part of the DRR team. I came to Texas for GW4 and to cache a lot in the area. We (B.A.B.E Team -- there are four of us women) have had an incredible amount of no finds among our finds. We cache for 18 hours a day and have been able to see a vast mount of the Dallas/Ft Worth area.

 

I guess I don't udnerstand why my log would be deleted. I went to the area, attempted to sign the cache, described it to the owner, yet our log was still deleted. What is wrong with what we did? As a cache owner if someone told me that there was a problem with my container, described it and the area in which the cache is located, I would not deny them the find. Obviously, they were there and understood the reason why I brought them where I did.

 

B.Q.

Yes the log was DAMP but it was still able to be signed. So the log was deleted.

I really do not see the problem here, unless the logbook was soaking wet and had turned into a mass of wet pulp. Particularly because I prefer to seek extreme caches -- caches which may receive little maintenance and are often located in rather harsh conditions -- I often find very damp or even wet and soggy logbooks. For those logbooks which are in such bad shape that I cannot sign them with a good ballpoint pen, I either add a new logbook, complete with my log entry (and I usually seal the new book in a heavy duty freezer-type ziplock bag), or I write my log entry on a clean and dry sheet of paper (one with enough room for a few more log entries as well, to better serve the next few finders. . .) and insert that in the cache container.

[Peanut Butters]

DDR = Mark McGuire/Barry Bonds of Geocaching

[+Klatch]

DDR = Mark McGuire/Barry Bonds of Geocaching

DDR = German Democratic Republic = East Germany

[+Tsmola]

I think we're all missing the bigger question here.

 

What is the proper way to sign a cache container?

 

I've considered a few options:

 

1. Sharpie Marker

Sharpie has long been a name you can trust in cache log signing. With the double tipped (fat/thin) Sharpie, you can be assured of being able to sign just about any sized cache container, from ammo can to breath strips, this one's a sure favorite. Also with the silver model you can be assured that the log will be visible on even those black 35mm containers.

 

Of course "permanent" is in the eye of the cache holder. After a few other finds much of the wording can wear off. On the other hand, that great "marker buzz" you get from sniffing them will really keep you going while traveling from cache to cache.

 

2. The Cordless Dremel

The Dremel provides a permanent record of your visit. With the proper set of attachments you can be assured of being able to leave your mark on just about any container surface. The lithium-ion battery insures long life but for those heavy-duty cache runs you might want to consider a car charger, two Dremels, or a solar backpack set up.

 

Also, the cordless Dremel is great for logging those benchmarks too!

 

Caution: may be harmful to some plastics.

 

3. "GeoTagging"

While considered to be vandalism under some city ordinances, tagging has become a routine sight in city life. The carry over into the world of the urban micro seems natural, though maybe a bit overkill.

 

4. The Joy of Caching

Sure, the painter's pallet might weigh you down a little bit, but there's no substitute for creativity, even in a race against the clock.

 

"Today we're gonna make a happy little log on the side of this ammo box. Remember, there is no right or wrong, this is your world, you're going to create it yourself."

 

Bret

 

[+Team Cotati]

Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

Signing damp logs is part of geocaching.

 

For me, if I don't sign the log, I don't count the find. Figuring out how to do it can be part of the fun.

 

For example, a few weeks ago I did a pretty steep bushwhack through poison-oak-infested hills to reach a cache, only to find that I had forgotten a pen! I figured out how to sign the logbook using crushed fern leaves as ink, and then came back the next week to be sure it was signed properly!

 

Last weekend, I went to find a puzzle cache I had solved some time ago, only to find that it had come unglued from the fencepost top it was attached to and fallen down to the bottom of the post. Determined to log the find, we used a piece of double-sided tape and my hiking staff to fish it back out. If I hadn't succeeded, I wouldn't have claimed the find.

 

And yes, there have been several times I was not successful, and I've written a DNF. I've pushed microcaches down into holes so deep I couldn't get them, and I even once dropped a cache from a bridge. In both cases, I found the cache and tried to sign the logs, but in both cases they were DNFs. Because that's how geocaching works.

 

When I find a cache, I'm going to log it. If there is a physical log that is in good enough shape to be signed, I'm going to sign it. If I forgot to bring my own writing instrument, I won't hunt for caches. I will not spend one micro-second scrounging around for Leif Erikson's instrument of choice.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Bottom line was that we found the cache yet were not able to sign the log. I didn't have a writing utensil that would adhear to the damp paper.

Signing damp logs is part of geocaching.

 

For me, if I don't sign the log, I don't count the find. Figuring out how to do it can be part of the fun.

 

For example, a few weeks ago I did a pretty steep bushwhack through poison-oak-infested hills to reach a cache, only to find that I had forgotten a pen! I figured out how to sign the logbook using crushed fern leaves as ink, and then came back the next week to be sure it was signed properly!

 

Last weekend, I went to find a puzzle cache I had solved some time ago, only to find that it had come unglued from the fencepost top it was attached to and fallen down to the bottom of the post. Determined to log the find, we used a piece of double-sided tape and my hiking staff to fish it back out. If I hadn't succeeded, I wouldn't have claimed the find.

 

And yes, there have been several times I was not successful, and I've written a DNF. I've pushed microcaches down into holes so deep I couldn't get them, and I even once dropped a cache from a bridge. In both cases, I found the cache and tried to sign the logs, but in both cases they were DNFs. Because that's how geocaching works.

One of the first caches which we ever placed was Sitting and Waiting (GCNQE7), a backcountry cache. The 2TF finder (who happened to be Vyper4, who frequents these forums) arrived and found that there was no pen in the cache container. Although he did not have a pen with him, this did not faze him, and he simply used a green leaf and a sharp stick to sign his name and log entry in "chlorophyll green" ink. Worked fine for him and it worked find for us and it made everyone smile!

[+CJOttawa]

Its great for them wanting to break a record and all, but will the 90 seconds or so to open the cache, grab the logbook, find the last signed page, add "DRR", close logbook, then close the container really going to put a damper on their attempted feat? Come on, gimme a break!

Actually, the 1-day record has gotten so high that I imagine that 90 seconds at a cache would cause an attempt to fail.

 

I'm only half-way through this thread but I had to comment on that.

 

If the rules governing geocaching dictate a LOG - a paper log, contained within the cache - must be signed in order for a visit to count, it re-indexes the standard for what a "record" is.

 

Simply deny any record set by "tagging" a cache and you invalidate attempts like DDR's. Either they'll stop their tactic and play by the rules or we'll end up with a sub-culture of geo-cachers.

 

What's next?

 

"Number of caches destroyed in a single day." Well gee... of course you guys hold the record - NOBODY CAN TRY TO BEAT YOU BECAUSE YOU BURNED ALL THE GAME PIECES.

 

How about this: if you're a 'cacher and want to "speed cache"... go to Staples, get a self-inking stamp made with your userID and another adjustable date stamp. You'll save a few seconds over writing your name on the log. (but please still USE the log...)

 

If someone wants to keep a *personal* record, don't "tag" anything - just make notes of your own and don't log anything.

I fully support suspending a user if they've been warned and don't follow the rules.

Edited May 28, 2006 by af895

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Certainly a lot of interesting points of view expressed here!

 

I thank everyone for their opinion, however expressed.

 

Posting a response here is probably a losing proposition no matter how I approach it, but I will give it a shot.

 

First and foremost, I am the administrative lead for this record run and all responsibility for it eventually falls to me.

 

While anyone may attempt a record run anywhere at anytime without anyone's blessing or permission, it has been done now several times around the GeoWoodstock event.

 

This does not mean that the GeoWoodstock event and the World Record Run are in any way related - they are not. None of the team is from Texas, we are not active members of this caching community, and acted completely without support from them... in fact, other than 9Key asking me to put this together, we had no communications of any substance with the organizers and hosts.

 

The hardworking hosts who put together this year's great GeoWoodstock4 had no part in planning, conducting or sanctioning our run, and most of the TexasGeocaching folks wouldn't have even known it was going on unless they wandered into my thread regarding the run.

 

Whether you attended GW4 or not a note of thanks is due these fine people for the work they did (are doing) to make this a great event for hundreds of geocachers. I hope to see everyone with such strong beliefs and ethics as are represented here at the CITO event to help them clean up the mess left behind.

 

TexasGeocaching, Groundspeak, GeoWoodstock nor anyone else hosted, administered, blessed or sanctioned our activities and none of your anger at our behavior or appreciation of our efforts can be fairly aimed at them.

 

The eight of us on the DRR team, and most notably myself, are the sole administrators and participants of this run.

 

Having said that, I want to personally and on behalf of the DRR team apologize to any cache owner of any cache we visited if our writing on their cache offended them. As cache owners you have the right to delete any find that you feel is in bad faith or taste, and there will certainly be no hard feelings if you choose to delete ours.

 

I assure you that no ill intent was intended, and when I decided on that logging method no thought of vandalism ever crossed my mind. My logic was that we found the cache, had it in hand, signed it and moved on as quickly as possible.

 

Further, if you believe that your cache is damaged or compromised by our writing on it I will personally pay any costs related to refinishing or replacing your cotainer.

 

We set out to do a good, fun thing... find as many caches as we could in 24 hours and have fun while doing it.

 

If we exceeded the previous record of finds in 24 hours, great, if not, no biggie, we had a wonderful time trying and will always remember those 24 hours!

 

Our teammates from Germany had never cached together, or if some had, not often. GeoPirat had been on a previous record run, the others had not. All, however, are experienced geocachers, well-known and respected in their community.

 

Of the American team members, Cache&Keri is a previous record-holder, and the rest of us well-known and experienced active members of large geocaching communities.

 

We are all quite aware of the guidelines as written and as widely interpreted.

 

The 'rules' everyone so quickly quote are in fact guidelines, with a certain degree of flexibility built in.

 

That said, certain guidelines are widely accepted by the community as hard-and-fast rules, and we certainly bent if not broke the 'sign the log' part.

 

Carsten (GeoPirat) and I wrote the rules for our run. We were honest and fair in our approach, and published them widely in advance. We shared the run rules with other teams contemplating a run at the record, even going so far as to share our cache target list and planned route on the internet for all to use if they so desired.

 

The rest of the team members followed the team rules as Carsten and I laid them out.

 

Yes, Carsten and I discussed the ethics of signing the container. We knew that we would be flamed by some who did not care for that tactic. As the administrator of ths run I alone ultimately decided that we were within the bounds of ethics and guidelines.

 

If you have problems with that, address them to me.

 

I want to extend an aplogy to Tammo, Darth_Maul_3, MZeilinski, Nonnipoppy, GolfNutz and GeoPirat for my poor decision. Team members follow the rules as established by the captain, and you did no more than that. I certainly never expected to expose you to personal or ethical attack. You worked hard for this record, and despite flaws in the planing, there were none in your execution.

 

Carsten and I both hold a certain position as experienced geocachers that led this team to trust and follow our lead, and it was over several team members vocal objection that I decided signing the cache container was an acceptable variation from normal procedures for this run.

 

The community has no reason to be upset with these team members nor to try to deny ther accomplishment.

 

I hope that geocaches world-wide will recognize the tremendous effort put into this record run. Remember that we did it for fun, not glory - except as we define it to ourselves there exists no such thing as a world record in geocaching - it is not a competitive sport. it's a game and we play it for fun. Still, it can be an expensive game. International flights, lodging, days off work planning this (yes, Nonipopy and GolfNutz put extensive time into planning the run route, perhaps cumulatively two full working weeks) and time on-site cost everyone a bundle, most of us being here 5 days just for the run (Wednesday-Sunday) and that kind of excitement about and investment in this record run should not be invalidated even if we made some mistakes.

 

By and large I think we did good. I am proud of my team. I am proud to have been a part of this effort. I am sorry that a my misjudgement cast a pall on our effort, but the overwhelming support and appreciation I have recieved so far tells me that most folks honor our effort even if we didn't do everything by the book.

 

I ask that the posters to this thread please consider how these events came about and place the blame for any negatives where it belongs, with me, and see if you can't find it in your hearts to honor this team that worked so hard, was so excited, invested so much energy to this accomplishment but had no control over the things that have caused such community concern.

 

Ed

TheAlabamaRambler

[+LaPaglia]

Certainly a lot of interesting points of view expressed here!

 

I thank everyone for their opinion, however expressed.

 

Posting a response here is probably a losing proposition no matter how I approach it, but I will give it a shot.

 

First and foremost, I am the administrative lead for this record run and all responsibility for it eventually falls to me.

 

While anyone may attempt a record run anywhere at anytime without anyone's blessing or permission, it has been done now several times around the GeoWoodstock event.

 

This does not mean that the GeoWoodstock event and the World Record Run are in any way related - they are not. None of the team is from Texas, we are not active members of this caching community, and acted completely without support from them... in fact, other than 9Key asking me to put this together, we had no communications of any substance with the organizers and hosts.

 

The hardworking hosts who put together this year's great GeoWoodstock4 had no part in planning, conducting or sanctioning our run, and most of the TexasGeocaching folks wouldn't have even known it was going on unless they wandered into my thread regarding the run.

 

Whether you attended GW4 or not a note of thanks is due these fine people for the work they did (are doing) to make this a great event for hundreds of geocachers. I hope to see everyone with such strong beliefs and ethics as are represented here at the CITO event to help them clean up the mess left behind.

 

TexasGeocaching, Groundspeak, GeoWoodstock nor anyone else hosted, administered, blessed or sanctioned our activities and none of your anger at our behavior or appreciation of our efforts can be fairly aimed at them.

 

The eight of us on the DRR team, and most notably myself, are the sole administrators and participants of this run.

 

Having said that, I want to personally and on behalf of the DRR team apologize to any cache owner of any cache we visited if our writing on their cache offended them. As cache owners you have the right to delete any find that you feel is in bad faith or taste, and there will certainly be no hard feelings if you choose to delete ours.

 

I assure you that no ill intent was intended, and when I decided on that logging method no thought of vandalism ever crossed my mind. My logic was that we found the cache, had it in hand, signed it and moved on as quickly as possible.

 

Further, if you believe that your cache is damaged or compromised by our writing on it I will personally pay any costs related to refinishing or replacing your cotainer.

 

We set out to do a good, fun thing... find as many caches as we could in 24 hours and have fun while doing it.

 

If we exceeded the previous record of finds in 24 hours, great, if not, no biggie, we had a wonderful time trying and will always remember those 24 hours!

 

Our teammates from Germany had never cached together, or if some had, not often. GeoPirat had been on a previous record run, the others had not. All, however, are experienced geocachers, well-known and respected in their community.

 

Of the American team members, Cache&Keri is a previous record-holder, and the rest of us well-known and experienced active members of large geocaching communities.

 

We are all quite aware of the guidelines as written and as widely interpreted.

 

The 'rules' everyone so quickly quote are in fact guidelines, with a certain degree of flexibility built in.

 

That said, certain guidelines are widely accepted by the community as hard-and-fast rules, and we certainly bent if not broke the 'sign the log' part.

 

Carsten (GeoPirat) and I wrote the rules for our run. We were honest and fair in our approach, and published them widely in advance. We shared the run rules with other teams contemplating a run at the record, even going so far as to share our cache target list and planned route on the internet for all to use if they so desired.

 

The rest of the team members followed the team rules as Carsten and I laid them out.

 

Yes, Carsten and I discussed the ethics of signing the container. We knew that we would be flamed by some who did not care for that tactic. As the administrator of ths run I alone ultimately decided that we were within the bounds of ethics and guidelines.

 

If you have problems with that, address them to me.

 

I want to extend an aplogy to Tammo, Darth_Maul_3, MZeilinski, Nonnipoppy, GolfNutz and GeoPirat for my poor decision. Team members follow the rules as established by the captain, and you did no more than that. I certainly never expected to expose you to personal or ethical attack. You worked hard for this record, and despite flaws in the planing, there were none in your execution.

 

Carsten and I both hold a certain position as experienced geocachers that led this team to trust and follow our lead, and it was over several team members vocal objection that I decided signing the cache container was an acceptable variation from normal procedures for this run.

 

The community has no reason to be upset with these team members nor to try to deny ther accomplishment.

 

I hope that geocaches world-wide will recognize the tremendous effort put into this record run. Remember that we did it for fun, not glory - except as we define it to ourselves there exists no such thing as a world record in geocaching - it is not a competitive sport. it's a game and we play it for fun. Still, it can be an expensive game. International flights, lodging, days off work planning this (yes, Nonipopy and GolfNutz put extensive time into planning the run route, perhaps cumulatively two full working weeks) and time on-site cost everyone a bundle, most of us being here 5 days just for the run (Wednesday-Sunday) and that kind of excitement about and investment in this record run should not be invalidated even if we made some mistakes.

 

By and large I think we did good. I am proud of my team. I am proud to have been a part of this effort. I am sorry that a my misjudgement cast a pall on our effort, but the overwhelming support and appreciation I have recieved so far tells me that most folks honor our effort even if we didn't do everything by the book.

 

I ask that the posters to this thread please consider how these events came about and place the blame for any negatives where it belongs, with me, and see if you can't find it in your hearts to honor this team that worked so hard, was so excited, invested so much energy to this accomplishment but had no control over the things that have caused such community concern.

 

Ed

TheAlabamaRambler

 

A couple of points..

 

I assure you that no ill intent was intended, and when I decided on that logging method no thought of vandalism ever crossed my mind. My logic was that we found the cache, had it in hand, signed it and moved on as quickly as possible.

 

Yes, Carsten and I discussed the ethics of signing the container. We knew that we would be flamed by some who did not care for that tactic. As the administrator of ths run I alone ultimately decided that we were within the bounds of ethics and guidelines.

These two parts contradict each other.

 

Remember that we did it for fun, not glory

If its not for Glory why was there so much effort put into announcing the record!!! That sounds like Glory hounds to me.

 

From what you wrote at the end are you saying "oops, My bad" "Let's let the record stand anyway"?

Is that a correct reading?

 

Now the only one that can answer that question is TAR so please everyone don't respond with "Well what I think he meant was...." Lets hear it from the person that wrote it.

Edited May 28, 2006 by LaPaglia

[+AuntieWeasel]

That must've been a difficult apology and one instinctively wants to react graciously to such a thing.

 

But the whole business still feels so wrong and it's hard to see past that. I could be persuaded to forget the whole thing, but I really don't have congratulations in me.

[+ventura_kids]

I'm extremely dissappointed in the whole thing.

 

I myself would love to be the record holder (even though you say there isn't one).

 

It pisses me off to see a fake record, created by cheating.

 

Now, I believe a true honest record will be dismissed as second best!

That sucks!

 

If the record was attempted correctly and within the NORMAL, customary rules/guidelines, then everyone would have a fair chance at attaining it.

 

Now, this whole situation has ruined that.

No one who plays fairly, myself included, can even hope to be near the fake record.

[+DocDiTTo]

That must've been a difficult apology and one instinctively wants to react graciously to such a thing.

 

But the whole business still feels so wrong and it's hard to see past that. I could be persuaded to forget the whole thing, but I really don't have congratulations in me.

 

Saying "I'm sorry, BUT..." is not saying "I'm Sorry, PERIOD." I don't see much of an apology here, other than "we're sorry we didn't get away clean with our end-run around signing the logs".

[+Celticwulf]

I do respect TheAlabamaRambler for coming in and trying to explain things. I also respect the amount of work to attempt a record run such as they did...the best I've ever been able to do was myself and a friend got 30 in one day, so the amount of work to just get to the areas for 312 caches is something I won't accomplish anytime soon.

 

However, I do have to state that I for one don't entirely think this is a "record" for most caches found, mostly for the two "rules" that people have pointed out issues with: 1) .5 mile distance of team members and 2) signing caches instead of logs. In reality, the second is the bigger problem in my mind, but the first is also a valid concern. I know hindsight is 20/20, but in reality, to try to be setting a "record" the very first thing I would try to do is AVOID anything that MIGHT cause contraversy. I can see that this was attempted by avoiding virtuals, but realize that ANYTHING that could be questioned on a "record" attempt WILL be questioned. It's just the nature of bragging rights...if you eliminate anything that can be reasonably questioned, then you are much happier at the end because most of the people that are having issues with this current run would (most likely) be ON your side instead of on the side of questioning the results.

 

Personaly, with hindsight being what it is, if I were on the team I would be stating that this was NOT a record due to the issues that have come up, but that the team will try to get together another time, with rules that are pre-posted and disucussed in the MAIN gc.com forums. With that planned in advance, I would have no issue with anyone who wants to state they have made a "record".

 

Make sense?

Celticwulf

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

 

From what you wrote at the end are you saying "oops, My bad" "Let's let the record stand anyway"?

Is that a correct reading?

 

Now the only one that can answer that question is TAR so please everyone don't respond with "Well what I think he meant was...." Lets hear it from the person that wrote it.

 

Yes, I applaud and appreciate what this team did and firmly believe that they deserve the respect and support of this community. I certainly uphold the record number of caches they found in 24 hours - I don't see how anyone can legitimately argue with that.

 

Cache runs and cache teams have long held that splitting up was acceptable if done in moderation. We did one long bridge where there were 22 caches along a walking path that could not safely be done from the vehicle. We had three men walk that section to find them while the van moved on to others. There was a walking path through a park that had 8 caches, which two men walked while the van went after others.

 

Even if you subtract these thirty caches found while apart, we still exceeeded the record.

 

They signed the containers as I told them to. Had they opened the containers and signed the logs it would certainly have taken more time, but we so far surpassed the 263 record that it is my belief that had we takenn the time and done so they would still have broken the record.

 

That being said, they are legitmate winners.

 

I personally will not log any of these caches as an attempt to accept responsibility for this unfortunate mistake.

 

I was with the team and of the team and, except for igniting this firestorm, feel that we did a good thing.

 

Anyone that wants to deny the legitimacy of my claim to the title is welcome to do so, but to deny it to them is grossly unfair.

 

Ed

Edited May 28, 2006 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+jaredl]

What a cop out. You just admited that what you knew was wrong before you did it. if there was any question on weather signing the actuall caches would be ok, you should have contacted the cache owners in advance. they could have even put like a peice of tape on the out side for you to sign, then romoved it later.

 

by admiting that you knew it was potentially not cool to do you are adminting that your record is garbage

 

If its al one persons fault then i fell bad for everyone who spent money, or waisted a vacation to be part of this because it will never go over as official now.

 

I still think its pathetic, and instead of offering to make it up tp cache owners i thin you guys should be planning 24 hour cache repair run to fix all the damage you guys did in the first place

 

very weak and you should still be ashamed of your actions and lies

[+ventura_kids]

 

From what you wrote at the end are you saying "oops, My bad" "Let's let the record stand anyway"?

Is that a correct reading?

 

Now the only one that can answer that question is TAR so please everyone don't respond with "Well what I think he meant was...." Lets hear it from the person that wrote it.

 

Yes, I applaud and appreciate what this team did and firmly believe that they deserve the respect and support of this community. I certainly uphold the record number of caches they found in 24 hours - I don't see how anyone can legitimately argue with that.

 

Cache runs and cache teams have long held that splitting up was acceptable if done in moderation. We did one long bridge where there were 22 caches along a walking path that could not safely be done from the vehicle. We had three men walk that section to find them while the van moved on to others. There was a walking path through a park that had 8 caches, which two men walked while the van went after others.

 

Even if you subtract these thirty caches found while apart, we still exceeeded the record.

 

They signed the containers as I told them to. Had they opened the containers and signed the logs it would certainly have taken more time, but we so far surpassed the 263 record that it is my belief that had we takenn the time and done so they would still have broken the record.

 

That being said, they are legitmate winners.

 

I personally will not log any of these caches as an attempt to accept responsibility for this unfortunate mistake.

 

I was with the team and of the team and, except for igniting this firestorm, feel that we did a good thing.

 

Anyone that wants to deny the legitimacy of my claim to the title is welcome to do so, but to deny it to them is grossly unfair.

 

Ed

 

Oh my gosh! The cachers weren't even together? This is laughable!

[+Mopar]

 

They signed the containers as I told them to. Had they opened the containers and signed the logs it would certainly have taken more time, but we so far surpassed the 263 record that it is my belief that had we done so they would still have broken the record.

 

Thats the thing. Without opening up the containers you often dont KNOW you have the cache, especially when dealing with micros and/or an urban environment.

I recently did a cache where my wife spotted the cache in seconds. A few seconds later, I did too. We were both feeling pretty good about nailing the cache in record time. That is until we went to sign the log. Yup, a decoy cache. We've spent another 30 minutes or so looking for the real cache and as yet have not found it. I'll make a third visit this week.

Another time my wife and Planet "found" the cache about the same time I found it 25ft away. That time it turned out they had a letterbox. Didn't know that until opening it, I would say the letterbox container looked more like a cache then the actual cache did.

My 3rd example out of dozens I've personally experienced is with one of our hides. An experienced and well known cacher was visiting our state. He was positive he found the first stage of the cache muggled. There was an altoids container sitting on the ground in the woods with a soggy, illegible piece of paper in it. The real cache was right where it belonged, just a few feet away.

So really, how many decoys did you scribble on? How many letterboxs? How many pieces of garbage that should have been cito'ed instead of logged as finds?

Edited May 28, 2006 by Mopar

[+ArcticNomad]

Since there are no rules governing a cache record attempt anywhere that I know of, here is my NEW world record attempt. I've already posted it on another thread, but this one is getting all the action! Who's with me???!!!

 

I am planning on hosting an event in October, 2006, final date to be determined. The event will be a "Team Earth Anti-cache Meet" (T.E.A.M.) A select few (no more than 5) cachers from every country in the world that has caches will leave their homes at precisely 12:00 noon local time and head out to find as many caches as they can in 6 hours. I realize that countries like Burkina Faso only have 1 or 2 caches to find, but they can still participate. We should easily surpass the old insignificant record of 312 or so, since 221 countries times 5 cachers times even 2 caches each would be 2210 caches logged as a team, and this would be in only 6 hours! A few rules will apply...

 

I. You MUST actually sign a log book that is INSIDE the cache by taking the time to actually open the cache and physically write a note. This may slow us down a little, but even at 10% less caches, we STILL have a great chance to annihilate the old record!

 

II. Your driver may wait in the vehicle you are using, if you have a driver (and a vehicle!)

 

III. If there is no cache at your location when you arrive, simply place a container there and log in to that with a picture of your GPS showing that you REALLY were at those coordinates. People using PaintShopPro or Photo-Shop editing of a generic GPS shot will have their T.E.A.M. logs removed, SO DON'T DO IT.

 

IV. This will meet with all the specs of the governing body of finding/hiding geocaches, unlike some other questionable practices that happened recently. Nowhere does it say anything about the entire T.E.A.M.'s physical proximity to the actual cache. You have to simply log the cache as a T.E.A.M. member for all of the rest of us, and in one day, we have a world record and a smiley for every one of those 221 countries involved.

 

V. As an added incentive, I could plan a special commemorative coin for this event, available to all who participate at a cost that would leave me with a substantial payoff for all my hard work organizing this event. The coin could then be brought to another meet where everyone there could log your coin and get the icon, even though they did nothing to actually earn the coin, but heck, it's not about the icons, RIGHT??

 

VI. The T.E.A.M. members cannot log caches they have already logged themselves, or caches they own. That might seem like cheating! These must be bonafide valid finds on caches you have not previously visited.

 

FAQ...

 

1? Why is the name 'Team Earth ANTI-caching Meet' used?

A. It's a contrived name... any better suggestions can be used without compensation to the originator if I like it better.

 

2? Will this be a valid meet?

A. It doesn't invalidate any rules I know of as blatantly as some other events have.

 

3? How much is the coin going to be?

A. Depends on demand... I am hoping to be able to retire and REALLY cache all over the world from the royalties. However, if FAQ 4 meets expectations, participants will get a FREE coin!!!!!!!!!!

 

4? Why is it so long before we can 'meet'?

A. I hope to get TV/Cable Hollywood movie/book rights in place first. Since it is a worldwide event, similar to the Olympics, I expect great things and lots of money to pour in... to me!

 

5? Are you serious???

A. Depends on FAQ 4!

[+BiT]

I think the honorable thing to do would be renounce the claim to the record and let the prior record stand. It would be in the best interest of the geocaching community as a whole for now and into the future. Doing this will set precedence and start laying the groundwork for a firm set of rules for future cache runs.

Edited May 28, 2006 by Buckeyes_in_Texas (BiT)

[+Mopar]

 

Cache runs and cache teams have long held that splitting up was acceptable if done in moderation. We did one long bridge where there were 22 caches along a walking path that could not safely be done from the vehicle. We had three men walk that section to find them while the van moved on to others. There was a walking path through a park that had 8 caches, which two men walked while the van went after others.

 

Even if you subtract these thirty caches found while apart, we still exceeeded the record.

Since WHEN was it acceptable, especially on a "world record" run?

I Know when Lep and Carleen did it they made sure they each signed the log. So it wasnt acceptable for the 242 caches in 24hr record. If you deduct your 30, and who knows how many decoys and pieces of trash you logged as finds, and the time that SHOULD have been spent signing the logs, and all the logs that will be deleted over the coming weeks, is it really even a record?

Edited May 28, 2006 by Mopar

[+Kealia]

Cache runs and cache teams have long held that splitting up was acceptable if done in moderation. We did one long bridge where there were 22 caches along a walking path that could not safely be done from the vehicle. We had three men walk that section to find them while the van moved on to others. There was a walking path through a park that had 8 caches, which two men walked while the van went after others.

 

Even if you subtract these thirty caches found while apart, we still exceeeded the record.

 

They signed the containers as I told them to. Had they opened the containers and signed the logs it would certainly have taken more time, but we so far surpassed the 263 record that it is my belief that had we takenn the time and done so they would still have broken the record.

 

That being said, they are legitmate winners.

 

I disagree with many points here, but mainly the first one. Maybe that's why I don't do cache runs, though. If I don't find the cache (or are not present when the cache is found) I don't claim a find. IF others do that differently, well........thier choice - but not on my cache.

 

Had they opened the caches and signed the logs, I don't think the record would have been broken. Figure 1 minute per container X 300 + caches and that's 5 hours you would have "lost" from the 24 hour period.

 

In any case, nobody doubts the time, effort and cost that went into this effort - just the means in which it was executed.

 

I applaud you for stepping up and taking the heat/blame for this - but I too don't see any "record" being set here.

[+DocDiTTo]

I think the honorable thing to do would be renounce the claim to the record and let the prior record stand. It would be in the best interest of the geocaching community as a whole for now and into the future. Doing this will set precedence and start laying the groundwork for a firm set of rules for future cache runs.

 

The record stands. It's just a little different than originally announced:

 

[+jaredl]

I think the honorable thing to do would be renounce the claim to the record and let the prior record stand. It would be in the best interest of the geocaching community as a whole for now and into the future. Doing this will set precedence and start laying the groundwork for a firm set of rules for future cache runs.

 

WELL SAID,, NOW LETS SEE WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE THESE ARE, WE ALREADY KNOW THERE VANDALS AND CHEATS, NOW YOU EXPEXT THEM TO BE HONEST AD FAIR?

 

IF I SAW ONE OF THESE GUYS OUT I"D HIT THEM WITH MY BEAR MACE AND KICK THEM IN THE JONNIES FOR CAUSEING ALL THIS STRESS AND MAKING ME ADDICTED TO COMEING HERE TO READ ABOUT THIS CRAP

[+jaredl]

 

From what you wrote at the end are you saying "oops, My bad" "Let's let the record stand anyway"?

Is that a correct reading?

 

Now the only one that can answer that question is TAR so please everyone don't respond with "Well what I think he meant was...." Lets hear it from the person that wrote it.

 

Yes, I applaud and appreciate what this team did and firmly believe that they deserve the respect and support of this community. I certainly uphold the record number of caches they found in 24 hours - I don't see how anyone can legitimately argue with that.

 

Cache runs and cache teams have long held that splitting up was acceptable if done in moderation. We did one long bridge where there were 22 caches along a walking path that could not safely be done from the vehicle. We had three men walk that section to find them while the van moved on to others. There was a walking path through a park that had 8 caches, which two men walked while the van went after others.

 

Even if you subtract these thirty caches found while apart, we still exceeeded the record.

 

They signed the containers as I told them to. Had they opened the containers and signed the logs it would certainly have taken more time, but we so far surpassed the 263 record that it is my belief that had we takenn the time and done so they would still have broken the record.

 

That being said, they are legitmate winners.

 

I personally will not log any of these caches as an attempt to accept responsibility for this unfortunate mistake.

 

I was with the team and of the team and, except for igniting this firestorm, feel that we did a good thing.

 

Anyone that wants to deny the legitimacy of my claim to the title is welcome to do so, but to deny it to them is grossly unfair.

 

Ed

What garbage. how is it unfair to deny a clam that is false? you guys should all know better. and you admited already that you guys broke your own rules. i think its time for a retraction

[+hikergps]

I think the honorable thing to do would be renounce the claim to the record and let the prior record stand. It would be in the best interest of the geocaching community as a whole for now and into the future. Doing this will set precedence and start laying the groundwork for a firm set of rules for future cache runs.

 

WELL SAID,, NOW LETS SEE WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE THESE ARE, WE ALREADY KNOW THERE VANDALS AND CHEATS, NOW YOU EXPEXT THEM TO BE HONEST AD FAIR?

 

IF I SAW ONE OF THESE GUYS OUT I"D HIT THEM WITH MY BEAR MACE AND KICK THEM IN THE JONNIES FOR CAUSEING ALL THIS STRESS AND MAKING ME ADDICTED TO COMEING HERE TO READ ABOUT THIS CRAP

 

Try to contain yourself, this is a family environment.