Jump to content

A Smiley Indeed? Not!


Recommended Posts

And it gets even more fun....eyeball this thread while you can, I get the distinct impression it is soon to be locked and removed , as it has caught someone's eye further up the food chain, and they sent me an email about it.

 

The aforementioned "cacher1" went through the overtly childish step of deleting ALL of his logs on our hidden caches, which caught someone's attention, and that someone thinks that we personally deleted all of their logs on our caches in a hissy fit. IP addresses are logged,right?

 

This is a prime example of what can go wrong when someone cheats. My reputation has been a bit besmirched, and I guess I'll be looking for other folks to cache with in the area.

 

All because of a couple of blatant numbers ho's. Good gravy...what a can of worms.

 

Fizzymagic (a few posts up) is right on target. Its sad that its gotten to the point that cheating in some areas is so rampant and accepted that someone who does the right thing and deletes phony finds has to pay a price.

 

Apparently its gone from "Let the cheaters cheat, who are they hurting?" to "Its fine to cheat and everyone must play along".

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

And it gets even more fun....eyeball this thread while you can, I get the distinct impression it is soon to be locked and removed , as it has caught someone's eye further up the food chain, and they sent me an email about it.

 

The aforementioned "cacher1" went through the overtly childish step of deleting ALL of his logs on our hidden caches, which caught someone's attention, and that someone thinks that we personally deleted all of their logs on our caches in a hissy fit. IP addresses are logged,right?

 

This is a prime example of what can go wrong when someone cheats. My reputation has been a bit besmirched, and I guess I'll be looking for other folks to cache with in the area.

 

All because of a couple of blatant numbers ho's. Good gravy...what a can of worms.

 

Well, I hope that you don't let them get to you. Stand your ground and keep on playing this game the way you are, knowing you are doing the right thing.

Link to comment

And it gets even more fun....eyeball this thread while you can, I get the distinct impression it is soon to be locked and removed , as it has caught someone's eye further up the food chain, and they sent me an email about it.

 

The aforementioned "cacher1" went through the overtly childish step of deleting ALL of his logs on our hidden caches, which caught someone's attention, and that someone thinks that we personally deleted all of their logs on our caches in a hissy fit. IP addresses are logged,right?

 

This is a prime example of what can go wrong when someone cheats. My reputation has been a bit besmirched, and I guess I'll be looking for other folks to cache with in the area.

 

All because of a couple of blatant numbers ho's. Good gravy...what a can of worms.

 

FWIW, I just made a mental note to look you guys up next time I get to FL.

Link to comment

And it gets even more fun....eyeball this thread while you can, I get the distinct impression it is soon to be locked and removed , as it has caught someone's eye further up the food chain, and they sent me an email about it.

 

The aforementioned "cacher1" went through the overtly childish step of deleting ALL of his logs on our hidden caches, which caught someone's attention, and that someone thinks that we personally deleted all of their logs on our caches in a hissy fit. IP addresses are logged,right?

 

This is a prime example of what can go wrong when someone cheats. My reputation has been a bit besmirched, and I guess I'll be looking for other folks to cache with in the area.

 

All because of a couple of blatant numbers ho's. Good gravy...what a can of worms.

Can't TPTB determine who deleted the logs?

The information must be in there somewhere.

Link to comment

FWIW, I just made a mental note to look you guys up next time I get to FL.

 

Thx, Mopar :huh: Be careful hanging with Lighteye...he'll actually make you find the cache and sign the logbook!!!

 

And RichardMoore...the higher up mentioned earlier figured it out that I was innocent of the silliness and deletion of logs.

 

Man oh man...this bit of tomfoolery feels like a marriage gone south for some reason. Oh well, I was right, cache on. :)

Link to comment

:D Mr Lighteye I know you were right to say you didn't find my cache and I will delete your log. But how about the common decency to email the cacher and say I know my cache was there and you need to go find it or log a DNF? That's the way the game was played when I started it in 2003 not in these Forums where you are called a liar and cheater. Yes to log a find and not sign the log is not right if the owner doesn't say you can. But think the intent was I found the spot and yes you could drag this out the way it is and make many friends or you could be a Friend and say and do as I have said. Without hurting the ones you hurt and dragging them through the mud. But at least you have kept thier names out and for that I am Proud of you. ..Maybe the one that deleted all your caches was telling you I don't need your finds to be who I am or to Smile Be Happy as SLP says.Either way you got me to post in a place I don't want to be and have no need for except to say Hope you feel better and sleep well Sir with all these pats on the back you should be Smiling Being Happy :D Hope to see you get on the trails soon.

FWIW, I just made a mental note to look you guys up next time I get to FL.

 

Thx, Mopar :drama: Be careful hanging with Lighteye...he'll actually make you find the cache and sign the logbook!!!

 

And RichardMoore...the higher up mentioned earlier figured it out that I was innocent of the silliness and deletion of logs.

 

Man oh man...this bit of tomfoolery feels like a marriage gone south for some reason. Oh well, I was right, cache on. :lol:

Link to comment

I know I only started a year ago, but I don't think it matters if you started in 2005, 2003, or 2000.... I don't think the intent was ever to find the spot -- it was to find the cache, correct? I find general vicinities of things all the time, but that's not geocaching. As for common courtesy of emailing the cacher, shouldn't the cacher have demonstrated the same courtesy by emailing the owner before logging it as a find? If the owner had said it was okay, then no problem.

 

I honestly don't know why the person would be so upset -- If I were the one to not find the cache, I'd simply go back until I did find it. I thought that was the point of the game, finding the cache. (And I've had several caches where I've returned multiple times.) People who are so intent on upping their numbers should really investigate Waymarking -- that's all about finding the spot, and no need to waste time opening a cache and signing a log.

 

If it hurts you that some anonymous person's actions were talked about harshly (albeit truthfully), then maybe you need to toughen up a bit. This discussion centered around how an unidentified party posted a found it log when they did not find it. That's all. No big deal. Nobody was unjustly accused of anything they didn't do. I'm sorry that it's apparently become such a big tragedy that it forced you to come to these forums where you've stated you do not wish to be. (Sadly for you, if anything, I think you helped the OP look better and have shown how petty the subject of the thread has behaved.)

Link to comment

:drama:

 

:D Mr Lighteye I know you were right to say you didn't find my cache and I will delete your log. But how about the common decency to email the cacher and say I know my cache was there and you need to go find it or log a DNF? That's the way the game was played when I started it in 2003 not in these Forums where you are called a liar and cheater. Yes to log a find and not sign the log is not right if the owner doesn't say you can. But think the intent was I found the spot and yes you could drag this out the way it is and make many friends or you could be a Friend and say and do as I have said. Without hurting the ones you hurt and dragging them through the mud. But at least you have kept thier names out and for that I am Proud of you. ..Maybe the one that deleted all your caches was telling you I don't need your finds to be who I am or to Smile Be Happy as SLP says.Either way you got me to post in a place I don't want to be and have no need for except to say Hope you feel better and sleep well Sir with all these pats on the back you should be Smiling Being Happy :lol: Hope to see you get on the trails soon.

Uh . . . if the intent was to find the spot (my emphasis), we could still list Virtual caches on GC.com. If people want to find the spot, they will really enjoy Waymarking. :D

 

Gecocaching is all about finding a container . . . and signing the log. :D

Link to comment
But how about the common decency to email the cacher and say I know my cache was there and you need to go find it or log a DNF?

 

Common decency to tell a cheater that he's not allowed to cheat? The "finders" knew they were lying about the find. They should expect their phony log to be deleted. It's hubris on their part to log a phony find and expect it to stand, and incredible gall to complain when it was deleted. Why should the owner give them warning? If anybody should have e-mailed anyone first it should have been the "finders" asking the owner for permission to log the phony find. To intimate that the the owners did anything wrong and leave veild threats about their losing friends in the community over this is unconscionable.

 

Whatever happened to just not logging finds on caches you don't find.

 

That's the way the game was played when I started it in 2003 not in these Forums where you are called a liar and cheater.

 

When I started this game in 2001 the point was to find a container in the woods. Anyone who claimed they found the container but didn't was a liar. They still are. Back then though, the practice was rare. Unfortunately its become acceptable and even the norm in some areas and sadly, those who refuse to accept it are the now bad guys.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Even being new (40 finds as of this post). I think you did the right thing. I am doing my best to stick to the SPIRIT of the game, good trades, CITO, LNT, good log entries, etc. it amazes me how even in a hobby/sport/game like this, people still want to be tools.

Link to comment
But how about the common decency to email the cacher and say I know my cache was there and you need to go find it or log a DNF?

 

Common decency to tell a cheater that he's not allowed to cheat? The "finders" knew they were lying about the find. They should expect their phony log to be deleted. It's hubris on their part to log a phony find and expect it to stand. Why should the owner give them warning? If anybody sould have e-mailed anyone first it should have been the "finders" asking the owner for permission to log the phony find. To intimate that the the owners did anything wrong and leave vield threats about thier losing friends in the community over this is unconscionable.

 

Whatever happened to just not logging finds on caches you don't find.

 

That's the way the game was played when I started it in 2003 not in these Forums where you are called a liar and cheater.

 

When I started this game in 2001 the point was to find a container in the woods. Anyone who claimed they found the container but didn't was a liar. They still are. Back then though, the practice was rare. Unfortunately its become acceptable and even the norm in some areas and sadly, those who refuse to accept it are the now bad guys.

I could not possibly have said that any better.

Link to comment

I was at the spot of a micro cache on Monday. I couldn't find it. I know I was at the exact spot of the cache because my next stop was to go hiking with the owner of the cache. He asked me where I looked, and I told him... his response was, "yea, that's the right spot." I didn't ask for a freebie, and he didn't offer one. I logged a "dnf". I also logged another "dnf" on another cache that day.

 

If I had found the micro, and signed the log, I would have logged a "found it." That's how I've played from March of 2002 until now. Only once have I logged a "found it" after being offered by the owner-- and I signed the remains of the somewhat out-of-the-way rural micro cache, which the owner verified on his subsequent maintenance visit. He offered me the opportunity of changing my "dnf" to "found it". I still feel a bit guilty that I didn't actually sign the log, only the remaining physical evidence of the cache.

 

Monday, I also submitted four waymarks for the Maryland Historical Markers category I help to sponsor. For three of them, I didn't have to leave my car. I pulled up, stuck my GPS out the window to mark the spot, backed up, took the requisite pictures, and submitted them when I got home. I could have approved them myself, but offered them up to the other category reviewers. If I had not submitted the information correctly, I know they would have not been accepted by the group.

 

The intent of the action has nothing to do with the outcome. I intended to find two more caches than I did, but I didn't. They were there somewhere, but I didn't find them. That means that I will probably go look for them again sometime.

 

I am pleased to see that the forums (here, and elsewhere) are addressing these issues, and I'm getting the very strong impression that way more geocachers are against slack logging practices than are in favor of them. If you are going to go caching, make it your intent to be on the up-and-up in the way you play your -- and all of our -- game. After all, you are the only one who has to look yourself in the mirror... but your actions are seen by a lot of others.

Edited by Metaphor
Link to comment

 

I let them know that they could repost logs when they legitimately found it, and not until then, and deleted those logs pronto. Too extreme?! Am I being too anal retentive? :D

 

You did the right thing. Caching may not be the biggest item in the universe's scheme of things, but even here, integrity should be the baseline.

Link to comment

Here is a new twist on this same subject.

 

Some high number 'finders' (I'm probably using that term somewhat loosely as of now)I've followed while caching don't even go out to the physical location of caches--they sit at home, look for caches whose owners are inactive (a specific one has not logged onto gc.com for a year) and simply log all the caches which belong to a likely inactive owner. They even admit to practicing caching this way! These cachers are smart enough to read the other logs, make it appear they were at the actual cache site by echoing some of the same sentiments/decriptions of others who have logged these caches and bump their numbers by spending no time/money/gas/effort in doing so.

 

However, when you reach the cache location in your pursuit of a smilie, their signatures are not to be found.

The ah-ha moment came when these cachers logged ~180 caches in one day over a straight line distance of almost 200 miles in two different states.

 

Sometimes they use a 'team theme name' (not a gc.com team name--but a team name created for five different cachers who oftentimes cache separately rather than together) and slap a sticker on a paper log (without individual cacher names) and simply have everyone (whether present at the cache or not) log a find for a cache.

 

Sometimes they go in multiple cars and wipe out an entire area with team stickers.

 

They have recently started logging caches in larger routes sometimes through multiple states which ultimately make a circle between where they live and where they 'say' they've been--all to increase numbers?

 

Some of their 'falsified' logs were deleted locally and then caches started disappearing. When some of the offenders were warned their logs would be deleted if their signature wasn't on the cache or they hadn't followed cache rules for logging their caches, ugly acronyms with profanities were edited into cache logs. (You do realize cache owners do not receive any notification of any edited logs.) Another warning at least got the acronyms edited, but the opportunity for a potential friendship or caching relationship was damaged in the process.

 

The only positive to all of this behavior is that local cachers who now followed them on enough logs and are seeing the lack of signatures and even stickers. Their 'find' record means little unless the lies and false numbers mean something to them alone. These cachers have been spoken to kindly and personally about their caching ethics, suggestions have been made as to how best to remedy the falsified logs to redeem their reputations and the cachers have laughed it off as a joke. Anal or not--I find it hard to attend or contribute to a milestone celebration of any sort when the cause for celebration was a lie and continues to be a lie!

 

It seems a shame that people who are interested in numbers think this behavior is okay--but the reality is that they do.

 

The other reality is that many of these cachers seek the high numbers to gain attention and sadly that is what they are gaining when their logs are deleted and they consequently find one person at a time to tell their sad tale of woe and (as in your case) attempt to destroy the protesting cache owners and their reputations who play this game by the gc.com rules. The cachers also pointed a finger at cache owners and claimed their stickers had been removed from caches on purpose to make them look bad!

 

I actually smiled when I read a log on a cache several states away (part of a falsified loop route one day) which had been found recently by someone who had planned for it during the past 4 years!!! She found the same cache as the number ho's for her 1K milestone and 'called out' these cachers who had simple copy and paste logs on an obvious rapelling cache hide rated a difficulty of 5. She didn't see their names on the actual log in the cache...

 

Maybe that is another solution as well-- :D

 

Good luck in the future with your number ho's...sadly we've all got them. We all control our cache pages and maybe people will grow more and more tired of the false number ho's...I personally respect the number ho's who have gotten their numbers the 'honest' way--finding a cache, signing a paper log! How much more simple could it be? :D

Link to comment

Here is a new twist on this same subject.

 

Some high number 'finders' (I'm probably using that term somewhat loosely as of now)I've followed while caching don't even go out to the physical location of caches--they sit at home, look for caches whose owners are inactive (a specific one has not logged onto gc.com for a year) and simply log all the caches which belong to a likely inactive owner. They even admit to practicing caching this way!

 

Pass this on to your local reviewer. Don't email every questionable find, but when it seems obvious like there is a 'sweep' of logs, then please do so.

Link to comment

I am glad that there are people like you (the op) that try to protect the integrety of geocaching. I have only been at this a few weeks, but I have learned a lot about the intended method of caching through reading these forum pages. And I am trying to properly teach everyone I have introduced to geocaching.

 

In my few short weeks, I have logged 4 DNFs and even have them bookmarked for others to read. One of my DNFs I was 99% positive of it's location but couldn't retreive because of muggles. Today I checked with a friend that found it this weekend. I told her specifically the spot I think it is in and she confirmed it. I am still not going to log it as found until I go back and sign the log. Too me, it just wouldn't be right.

 

The numbers mean nothing to me. I just enjoy the places the caching has taken me, the pictures I have taken while caching, the fun and laughs my friends & I have shared while caching, and the actual searching!

 

Keep up the good work, and thanks for helping me be a better cacher.

Link to comment

Here is a new twist on this same subject.

 

Some high number 'finders' (I'm probably using that term somewhat loosely as of now)I've followed while caching don't even go out to the physical location of caches--they sit at home, look for caches whose owners are inactive (a specific one has not logged onto gc.com for a year) and simply log all the caches which belong to a likely inactive owner. They even admit to practicing caching this way!

 

Pass this on to your local reviewer. Don't email every questionable find, but when it seems obvious like there is a 'sweep' of logs, then please do so.

 

Il don't believe that its the job of reviewers to police logs. I doubt the reviewers would even want to get involved in that. But if there is rampant abuse of this site's features, people have been known to have been banned.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

:D Mr Lighteye I know you were right to say you didn't find my cache and I will delete your log. But how about the common decency to email the cacher and say I know my cache was there and you need to go find it or log a DNF? That's the way the game was played when I started it in 2003 not in these Forums where you are called a liar and cheater.

 

Peer pressure and open discussion is what will put an end to logging DNFs as a find. Emailing the cacher will only send the message to the cheat that they can't cheat on this persons caches. Discussing it here sends the message that it is wrong to log any cache they did not find. It has the added bonus of letting new cachers know how the game is intended to be played and helps all of us stay honest.

 

Yes to log a find and not sign the log is not right if the owner doesn't say you can.

 

Obviously you don't get it. It is not right to log a find if you DNFed. It doesn't matter what the owner says or thinks. You found it and signed the log or you didn't. That is not a glib remark. It really is that simple.

 

But think the intent was I found the spot and yes you could drag this out the way it is and make many friends or you could be a Friend and say and do as I have said. Without hurting the ones you hurt and dragging them through the mud.

 

Or these great 4000 find popular cachers could have logged a DNF and avoided this embarrassment too. You are blaming the wrong person for this one.

Link to comment

Here is a new twist on this same subject.

 

Some high number 'finders' (I'm probably using that term somewhat loosely as of now)I've followed while caching don't even go out to the physical location of caches--they sit at home, look for caches whose owners are inactive (a specific one has not logged onto gc.com for a year) and simply log all the caches which belong to a likely inactive owner. They even admit to practicing caching this way!

 

Pass this on to your local reviewer. Don't email every questionable find, but when it seems obvious like there is a 'sweep' of logs, then please do so.

 

Il don't believe that its the job of reviewers to police logs. I doubt the reviewers would even want to get involved in that. But if there is rampant abuse of this site's features, people have been known to have been banned.

 

I don't believe it is the job of the reviewers to be 'log police' either. Therefore I am not going to say anything about this to a reviewer, but I wonder how it would appear if everyone who logged these caches behind 'the offenders' made note of the 'invisible ink' they used. I think it would be a far worse punishment to 'out' the offenders publicly through all the area logs and perhaps that would discourage this practice more efficiently. Dunno...

 

The falsified 'sweep of logs' would be apparent to all and if the reviewer(s) wanted more information they could contact cache owners--however these cachers are counting on not being 'called' on their practices or at the very least not being 'outed'.

Edited by VAtechnoteacher
Link to comment

There are several posters in this thread who need to check their PMs if they haven't.

 

I am not giving up this sport that has brought us so many hours of fun because of a couple of wormy apples in the barrel. I will not be run off because some folks think they are above the rules if their find count is so high, and seek to hold a onetime friendship hostage. :D

 

It is geoCACHING not geoIFOUNDTHESPOTting. The object is to find the cache, not the spot you think it is in, and sign the log, and move on to the other quarter million or so caches. Alternatively, log a DNF, lather, rinse, and repeat. :D

 

The good news is, I am not alone locally, I just happen to be the most vocal one in the group. :D Enjoy the walk or drive, and have fun hunting, but don't sic all of our onetime mutual friends on me, it won't work. I refuse to take the blame for someone else's pursuit of something to replace a bruised ego. :D

Link to comment

Outspoken he is!

 

Mr. Lighteye has stirred the pot and turned up the heat in our locale. I like it! <_<

 

I too was under the impression you had to find it and sign it. You done good!

 

Day before yesterday a cacher found one of mine and had lost his pen. He emailed to ask if he could log it and sent pictures of himself with the log in hand at the hide. I accepted the pictures as his signature and on my next maintenance run I will sign it for him.

 

The number of find's someone else has does not hold sway anymore. I started earlier this year and was amazed at the numbers of finds some had logged. I got caught up in the chase, picking trails with multiple caches as the main criteria. The enjoyment experienced hiking was lost, worried about getting that next smiley. Luckily, I did not let this get to far. Now we cache where we hike instead of hiking where we cache.

 

Don't forget Lighteye, I got your six!

Link to comment
I think it would be a far worse punishment to 'out' the offenders publicly through all the area logs and perhaps that would discourage this practice more efficiently.

Why do you think that the people involved in the OP's case are so upset that he made it public in the forums? Because they have been embarrassed. Public discussion, and public outing of cheaters, is the only way this kind of behavior will ever be deterred.

 

That's why discussion of these issues in the forums is so valuable, and why the people who participate in various cheesy practices hate it so much.

Link to comment

Hmmm,

It would appear that one of my caches is being used as some kind of example. A frequent poster to the forums has logged a fake find on a cache of mine (why in the world is he perusing my caches - I have 60+ hides!) to show the folly of finding a cache lid and claiming a find. It's one thing to debate such things in the forums but to go forward and log a find on my cache, leave it there at least overnight, and in doing so draw me in trying to figure out what is going on? And then friends email me about the situation? I tracked down what was going through the forums but ... I don't want to be part of these debates. I saw the log he referred to - I disabled the cache after that post and then I get this forum poster's Found It log. Debate all you want, but please leave those of us not part of the debate out of it!

 

The log I am referring to.

Link to comment

Hmmm,

It would appear that one of my caches is being used as some kind of example. A frequent poster to the forums has logged a fake find on a cache of mine (why in the world is he perusing my caches - I have 60+ hides!) to show the folly of finding a cache lid and claiming a find. It's one thing to debate such things in the forums but to go forward and log a find on my cache, leave it there at least overnight, and in doing so draw me in trying to figure out what is going on? And then friends email me about the situation? I tracked down what was going through the forums but ... I don't want to be part of these debates. I saw the log he referred to - I disabled the cache after that post and then I get this forum poster's Found It log. Debate all you want, but please leave those of us not part of the debate out of it!

 

The log I am referring to.

 

Looks like a "Sting" operation - delete the logs or he might add your cache it to his bookmark! <_<:unsure::huh:

 

Edit to add: Hmmmm... another post on the above

Edited by DcCow
Link to comment
I think it would be a far worse punishment to 'out' the offenders publicly through all the area logs and perhaps that would discourage this practice more efficiently.

Why do you think that the people involved in the OP's case are so upset that he made it public in the forums?

 

Because they have been embarrassed. Public discussion, and public outing of cheaters, is the only way this kind of behavior will ever be deterred.

 

That's why discussion of these issues in the forums is so valuable, and why the people who participate in various cheesy practices hate it so much.

 

Do you honestly think these people are capable of shame? Even if they were, all the people jumping to their defense certainly reinforces their belief that they did nothing wrong and it was the OP who was out of line. Just go the to FGA discussion that addresses this. Those of us who decry cheating and lying are the bad guys and are likened to the KKK <_< . Hey, at least they didn't call us Nazis - yet.

 

This is usually about the time in these threads where someone comes along and asks why anyone would care about others cheating. It will probably say something like "Its like cheating at solitaire, who does it hurt?". As one who has wasted gas and my time looking for a long missing cache because I assumed the "found it" logs on the page were honest, I can assure you that logging phony finds is not harmless. By logging a "found it" you are essentially telling the community that the cache is there. If it really isn't, you can waste the time and money of others. Screwing with other people is not harmless.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

 

This is usually about the time in these threads where someone comes along and asks why anyone would care about others cheating. It will probably say something like "Its like cheating at solitaire, who does it hurt?".

 

Cheating is cheating. It goes against a moral code of ETHICS. If you cheat at something simple, it gets easier to put your hands over your ears and holler, "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!" when your little concience cricket tells you that cheating is wrong. AND it leads to more and more. Not EVERYONE progresses to something worse, and not EVERYONE is able to withstand cheating. BUT, if more people would be held accountable for their actions at an earlier age, there would be a lot less crime of any kind.

 

Hell, I remember taking one piece of candy out of a bulk bin and eating it as we went out a store. My mom caught me ( I was 6 or 7 I think) with it and made me walk back in to the store, apologize and pay for it. I was absolutely mortified! It also taught me something good. Today it is cruel and mean to embarass children, so we let them get away with everything and be accountable for nothing! And our society reflects all of it!

 

I am certainly not a "well-established" cacher, but I agree. Falsified logs merely bungle up the next guy AND any potential maintenance issues with a cache!

 

I say roast 'em for cheating and then whining about it. (Since actual flogging is frowned upon any more...)

Link to comment

Hey, at least they didn't call us Nazis - yet.

Heh, I’ve been called that and worse.

 

This is really such a simple game, find a container of some size, open it, write, scratch, or stamp something in the logbook. Any simpleton can do it. So if you have to cheat at a game that any simpleton can play, what does that say about you?

 

There are new cachers joining the site everyday, what does it teach them? They go out and expend at least some effort to find a cache and feel a sense of accomplishment for having done so. They go back a week later to review the caches they’ve found only to see that someone who believes they deserve the smiley has claimed the same find even though they admit that they never found it. Suddenly the game doesn’t seem so much fun, and either they join in the cheating to keep up, or they lose interest. I’m still surprised Seattle has done nothing to address this issue, even a simple statement; it is only going to pull money out of their pockets in the long run.

Link to comment
Here is a new twist on this same subject. ...

Please clarify something for me.

 

Your post started out with the theory that some people are logging false finds on caches that they never even tried to visit. The assumption being that the cache owner is inactive and will not catch the deception. We all agree that these logs are bogus.

 

You go on to explain the some cachers are teaming up and signing the logs as a team, but logging online individually. There is a thread related to this issue. Several people do not believe that this alone constitutes cheating. Obviously, if individual players claimed the find, but were not, in fact, on site at the time of the find. The logs of those individuals would be bogus.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

By logging a "found it" you are essentially telling the community that the cache is there. If it really isn't, you can waste the time and money of others. Screwing with other people is not harmless.

 

I could not agree with you more. When I cache while on a business a trip, I generally filter for caches found within the last 7 days. Most of the time this ensure that the cache is there. However, if folks are lying about whether or not they found a cache, it could easily cause someone else to waste their time and gas looking for a non-existant cache. It may also delay the owner in doing maintenance.

Link to comment

In the case that started all of this, there had been a DNF posted, and since it is only a few minutes from house to cache, I stopped by, verified it was in place, and replaced the log while I was there.I posted a maintenance note that all was well, and that the cache was there.

 

In less than 48 hours is when it all kicked off, with the "geologgers" posted that yep, they thought the cache was missing, but due to their lifeline call, they KNEW where it was supposed to be, so they were logging a "find".

 

I am fastidious about maintenance on my owned caches, and if there are multiple DNF's, usually 3, I will disable until I can check it personally.

 

Fake finds can screw things up royally, and can have bad effects on others who waste time, gas, and energy to hunt something that may not be there, and is something that the owner needs to be aware of. Fake finds can also cause someone to be cast out of a circle of "friends", if they could be called that.

 

BTW, how's my white robe looking to you guys? Disregard the bit of barbequeue sauce on the cuff there. I was thinking about adding some gold trim to it, to make it a bit flashier to wear when I feel a geo-rant coming on. :rolleyes:

 

Cache on!

Link to comment
... BTW, how's my white robe looking to you guys? Disregard the bit of barbequeue sauce on the cuff there. I was thinking about adding some gold trim to it, to make it a bit flashier to wear when I feel a geo-rant coming on. :rolleyes:
Most people (in the forums) will agree that you did the right thing.
Link to comment

You did the right thing, stick to your guns--

 

jimear1e wrote:

 

"I got caught up in the chase, picking trails with multiple caches as the main criteria. The enjoyment experienced hiking was lost, worried about getting that next smiley. Luckily, I did not let this get to far. Now we cache where we hike instead of hiking where we cache."

 

Amen brother! Words to live by--

Link to comment

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a stat called a "frowney". You would be issued one every time you had a log deleted by the cache owner. This stat would show up next to your finds and hides, and is your signature box. So these cache machines that have huge smiley counts could potentially have a large "frowny" cont as well.

 

It would be a sort of self-policing kind of like ebay. There potentially is room for abuse of this system as well, which is probably a reason it might not ever be considered, but it is nice to dream.

Link to comment
Here is a new twist on this same subject. ...

Please clarify something for me.

 

Your post started out with the theory that some people are logging false finds on caches that they never even tried to visit. The assumption being that the cache owner is inactive and will not catch the deception. We all agree that these logs are bogus.

 

You go on to explain the some cachers are teaming up and signing the logs as a team, but logging online individually. There is a thread related to this issue. Several people do not believe that this alone constitutes cheating. Obviously, if individual players claimed the find, but were not, in fact, on site at the time of the find. The logs of those individuals would be bogus.

 

My post was NOT a theory. My post was from my own experience as I personally knew some of the players who were participating in the falsified logs. Since the activity began, one former player/cacher (who left the team) has verified the bogus activities. He/she has promised he/she will go back and 'make the logs' accurate. I don't know if that has happened or not. But at this time, he/she has stopped caching altogether.

 

I hope this clarifies what I 'meant' to say. The team name in no way reflects all of the individual cachers present--the group created a whole list of team names with unkind acronyms used with some regularity--but the team name in no way reflected gc.com names.

 

The team would split into different cars and hunt some caches assigned to them to do by routes (not all of the cachers were present at all of the caches as they were in different cars)--then the 'leader of the team' would log the finds first (both ones actually found and the other estimated 30% - 40% they drove past while in the area) which were assigned to the individual groups for the day's outing. Everyone would log behind that first initial log as though they were all present for all of the finds. The team name in no way reflected a team name on gc.com--it changed several times, but the players were always the same. Each of the players had individual names registered on gc.com--but the team name or the team sticker on the cache log didn't list the individual gc.com cachers.

 

I cache with folks who log as a team on gc.com--but they have a team name on gc.com and nobody questions their finds or their hunting for caches separately.

Link to comment

In the case that started all of this, there had been a DNF posted, and since it is only a few minutes from house to cache, I stopped by, verified it was in place, and replaced the log while I was there.I posted a maintenance note that all was well, and that the cache was there.

 

In less than 48 hours is when it all kicked off, with the "geologgers" posted that yep, they thought the cache was missing, but due to their lifeline call, they KNEW where it was supposed to be, so they were logging a "find".

 

I am fastidious about maintenance on my owned caches, and if there are multiple DNF's, usually 3, I will disable until I can check it personally.

 

Fake finds can screw things up royally, and can have bad effects on others who waste time, gas, and energy to hunt something that may not be there, and is something that the owner needs to be aware of. Fake finds can also cause someone to be cast out of a circle of "friends", if they could be called that.

 

BTW, how's my white robe looking to you guys? Disregard the bit of barbequeue sauce on the cuff there. I was thinking about adding some gold trim to it, to make it a bit flashier to wear when I feel a geo-rant coming on. :unsure:

 

Cache on!

[ :unsure: ]Mr Lighteye I would like to say "Cast out of a circle of Friends if you call it that". Why Sir I thought you thought like me Once a Friend always a Friend. Guess I was wrong ?? Being a Friend is Never having to say I am sorry. I respect you and your caches and No one wants you to stop caching In fact we all can't wait till you get back to your old self and hit the woods and Smile Be Happy[:unsure:]

About the deleted logs No One Cares.. But you and those who think they are Liars and Cheaters.

The post show you are Right and Your White Robe is shinning bright. Feel Better now? Funny thing is all who was envoled knew that from the begining.. As I said all it would have took is a note, email whatever to say you logged my cache wrong and please remove your find or I will. But you had the right to do as you did by all the GeoCaching rules of a cache owner. I will say publicly I didn't log your cache and it wasn't my partner OBC. But we were the lifeline to your cache as we found it where it still looked like it was. And I will admit you do keep up your hides and are what ALL Geocachers should be a responable cache owner.

Now with all that said My Friend could we get back to caching and put this behind us???

Till we meet again keep Smiling Being Happy [:rolleyes:]

Link to comment

I am one of those "numbers people" lighteye speaks of, poor grammar and everything. I was definitely wrong to log his find. I notice no mention of the two DNF's of his caches I also logged that day.

I also notice no mention of the fact that he has logged more caches at a faster pace than I eve did.

 

When I went looking for this cache, there was a perfectly round depression where my ground zero was. I called someone who had found it and they said that's where it was. It was hot, I was tired, and made a very poor choice. As I felt bad about this, I went back through my logs and deleted all lighteye logs. Five or six, I believe, and asked him to delete any that I may have forgotten.

 

I apologize to the Geo-community as a whole and assure you this is not a practice of mine.

Thanks,

Bruce

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...