Logging your own cache

[+ePeterso2]

On the one hand, I don't think there's an issue of a gray area with regard to finding a cache you own. If you're willing to submit the cache hide report with your name on it, then you are knowingly giving up the right to find the cache.

 

On the other, what if you call the cache owner, ask where it is, then go "find" it? If the person tells you "It's an ammo can painted bright pink in the crotch of the tree with the four trunks right along the fence in the corner of the park, and it's got a big red flashing light on top of it", then how much "finding" have you really done?

 

I still think it makes no sense whatsoever to log a find of your own cache. But I don't think it really harms the community to do so either ... seems like the only person whose reputation you're injuring would be your own.

 

I've had to go find a few of my caches, when cachers have not replaced it in the right location. But even if I've had to search for it as much as any other not-in-the-know cacher would, I wouldn't consider it as a "find".

 

I think the best rule is: if you are listed as the owner of a cache, you shouldn't log a find for it. Period. Listing yourself as the (co-)owner means you give up your right to "find" it. Any other definition leads to too many special cases as to make any sense.

[+CYBret]

Do whatever you think is right.

 

[+Mudfrog]

Doesn't matter whether you place your own or help someone else place a cache. The black and white comes in when you want to log a find on it.

My daughter, Mogwai913, hid Mogwai's Mighty Multi with my assistance. I was there when she hid the stages, as well as when she hid the final. That was about a year ago, and I haven't been back since. (The March 17th TB swap was not done on site) I know what patch of woods it's in, but that's as close as I could get without firing up my 60CSx and finding all the stages. There is no way I could simply walk to it. If I ever do a maintenance run on this one for her, I'll probably log it as a find, since I'd have to jump through all the hoops as anybody else looking for it.

 

Oddly enough, if my name was listed on the page as co-owner, I wouldn't feel right about logging a find.

 

The case you listed is iffy for me but i can see this as being up to the individual to decide.

 

I can see circumstances where someone might log a find on a cache listed under their name too. For instance, my wife doesn't have her own account but she might decide to hide a cache one day while i'm not with her and then list it under my name. I would go find it of course but i wouldn't log it as a find. This is just me but i guess i can see why someone else might want to do it.

 

If i was co-owner (my name on the cache page) but for some reason, wasn't with the hider when they hid the cache. I would of course want to find it but i still wouldn't try to claim a find on it. Again though, i can see why some out there would.

 

I've gone back to look for my own caches and have had a heck of a time finding them. My memory isn't what it used to be, the terrrain had changed, or someone didn't rehide it in it's original spot so yes, i had to search and find my own cache. Even so, i would never consider trying to log this as a find.

 

These are some instances to think about but i believe that the OP was initially talking about hiding a cache then going home and logging it as a find. I just don't see how there can be any question on whether this is proper or not.

[Clan Riffster]

Two logging practices that get plenty of negative attention here in the forums, even when done innocently:

• Logging a find on your own cache
  
• Logging a find when you didn't actually 'find' the cache
  

Both of these practices (to me, anyway) seem to fall in the general category of not making sense, since you can't find something if you already know where it is, and since you can't find something you didn't actually find.

I have a slightly different belief regarding "Found It" logs. Many cachers subscribe to the notion that a "Find" equals going to a set of coords, locating a container, and signing a log. That pretty much sums up my belief as well, with one interesting caveat; I believe a "Find" is whatever the cache owner & cache hunter agree upon. Typically this mirrors the initial definition of "Find", and as such, leaves little room for contemplation. However, there are times when the agreement does not match the aforementioned definitions.

 

I.e: I go and look for BillyBobNosePicker's cache, and find a handful of broken Gladware container pieces scattered around. I post my DNF, and BillyBobNosePicker verifies that the cache is missing, sending me an E-mail inviting me to change my DNF to a "Find", since he's gonna archive that particular cache. Should I make the change? Early in my geocareer, I would've done exactly that, believing that I had earned a "Find" due to the effort I imparted. These days I choose not to. I still recognize the rights of others to participate in this practice, and I consider these types of "Finds" to be every bit as legitimate as any other. Not unlike an ALR hide where the owner requires you to rub blue mud in your navel and sing Purple Haze prior to logging a find. If someone were to log a find without the muddy singing, I would accept the owner's deletion of that Found log without batting an eye, even though by the original definition, it certainly qualifies as a Find. (On a related note, I would not delete a log on an ALR cache)

[+Lighteye]

I guess those people that never come into the forums are having fun playing the game the way they want to play it. They don't realize they're not supposed to do that.

 

You're only allowed to have fun if you play the game the way WE (the forum regulars) say to play it.

 

OTOH, say the Mr. half of us (me) hides a doozy of a multi, then a few months later the Mrs. half goes out on a hike and struggles to find it after 3 hours of hiking and hunting without assistance from me. Do we log a find on it ? NO NO NO NO. I already have a bullseye on my back, and no need to enlarge it. She'll get something better than a GC.com smiley when she gets in. At least that's how we do it here in my house.

[Mushtang]

I guess those people that never come into the forums are having fun playing the game the way they want to play it. They don't realize they're not supposed to do that.

 

You're only allowed to have fun if you play the game the way WE (the forum regulars) say to play it.

 

OTOH, say the Mr. half of us (me) hides a doozy of a multi, then a few months later the Mrs. half goes out on a hike and struggles to find it after 3 hours of hiking and hunting without assistance from me. Do we log a find on it ? NO NO NO NO. I already have a bullseye on my back, and no need to enlarge it. She'll get something better than a GC.com smiley when she gets in. At least that's how we do it here in my house.

Uh oh, it sounds like another case of someone playing the game the way they want to. I think the forum regulars should okay this "something better" before you continue.

 

So what happens if someone finds your multi, but then they want to come drop off a travel bug a month later. They don't get to log another find, but do they get to come by your house for "something better" too?

 

[+Glenn]

I can see circumstances where someone might log a find on a cache listed under their name too. For instance, my wife doesn't have her own account but she might decide to hide a cache one day while i'm not with her and then list it under my name. I would go find it of course but i wouldn't log it as a find. This is just me but i guess i can see why someone else might want to do it.

 

Your acting as if owners logging their own caches was blocked that it would be a 100% ban of the practice. I think that reviewer and admins would take special cases like the one are taking about in to consideration and enable the ability on a case by case and cache by cache basis.

[+hydnsek]

On a different note, what's happened to sbell111's avatar?!? That's just not right.

A reference was made to kitties and bunnies in another thread and I had taken this pic of our cat just a few days ago. It is unlikely to stay that way for long as I am having trouble identifying my own posts.

Yeah, there's only room for one cool cat avatar in this forum.

 

Very neat pic, btw - amazing timing to capture that.

[+SG-MIN]

Do whatever you think is right.

 

 

Great post-modern responce.

 

I am reminded of the closing words of the book of Judges: "In those days there was no king in Israel; all the peopel did what was right in their own eyes."

 

Of course this seems to be a critique of that worldview considering the last thing that happened before this statement is an entire town tries to break down the door of a man's house so they can sodomize his house guests, to which the man reacts by throwing out his concubine and the men of the town gang-rape her to death.

 

And what is the man's responce? Of course, he cuts the deat concubine into 12 pieces and sends and sends the bloody mess to the tribal leaders. (oh, and the concubine mutilator is the good guy in the story).

 

Well there is your sunday school lesson for the day. Oh, and CYBret, I agree with you, it is a great idea to let everyone do what is right in their own eyes

 

 

(that is the story the usually skip over when editing the picture bible for little kids ;-)

[Trinity's Crew]

<snip>

Obviously, the other angst filled threads have shown that some people will dig through thousands of logs to find ones that are not legit

 

How true... it usually cracks me up.

Edited December 4, 2006 by Trinity's Crew

[Mushtang]

Do whatever you think is right.

 

 

Great post-modern responce.

 

I am reminded of the closing words of the book of Judges: "In those days there was no king in Israel; all the peopel did what was right in their own eyes."

 

Of course this seems to be a critique of that worldview considering the last thing that happened before this statement is an entire town tries to break down the door of a man's house so they can sodomize his house guests, to which the man reacts by throwing out his concubine and the men of the town gang-rape her to death.

 

And what is the man's responce? Of course, he cuts the deat concubine into 12 pieces and sends and sends the bloody mess to the tribal leaders. (oh, and the concubine mutilator is the good guy in the story).

 

Well there is your sunday school lesson for the day. Oh, and CYBret, I agree with you, it is a great idea to let everyone do what is right in their own eyes

 

 

(that is the story the usually skip over when editing the picture bible for little kids ;-)

Seriously, it sounds like you're suggesting that because some dude a LONG time ago did horrible things to a woman after other people did horrible things to him, that we shouldn't log our finds the way we think is right.

 

That's what you're saying, I'm almost sure of it.

 

At least it seems that way to me. If I'm wrong, can you clarify your reply some?

[+SG-MIN]

Do whatever you think is right.

 

 

Great post-modern responce.

 

I am reminded of the closing words of the book of Judges: "In those days there was no king in Israel; all the peopel did what was right in their own eyes."

 

Of course this seems to be a critique of that worldview considering the last thing that happened before this statement is an entire town tries to break down the door of a man's house so they can sodomize his house guests, to which the man reacts by throwing out his concubine and the men of the town gang-rape her to death.

 

And what is the man's responce? Of course, he cuts the deat concubine into 12 pieces and sends and sends the bloody mess to the tribal leaders. (oh, and the concubine mutilator is the good guy in the story).

 

Well there is your sunday school lesson for the day. Oh, and CYBret, I agree with you, it is a great idea to let everyone do what is right in their own eyes

 

 

(that is the story the usually skip over when editing the picture bible for little kids ;-)

Seriously, it sounds like you're suggesting that because some dude a LONG time ago did horrible things to a woman after other people did horrible things to him, that we shouldn't log our finds the way we think is right.

 

That's what you're saying, I'm almost sure of it.

 

At least it seems that way to me. If I'm wrong, can you clarify your reply some?

 

I thought my reference to an obscure Old Testament story would surely be understood as sarcasm. It just struck me that CYBret's words were very similar to those at the conclusion of Judges.

 

I actually agree with CYBret's comment about everyone needing to do what is right in their own eyes - especially in a situation involving logging your own caches.

 

My apologies if my sarcasm was not obvious enough. I am surely not advocating that since some people log their own caches that concubines, gang rape, and necro-mutliation are alright.

[Mushtang]

My apologies if my sarcasm was not obvious enough. I am surely not advocating that since some people log their own caches that concubines, gang rape, and necro-mutliation are alright.

It actually sounded the opposite, that since the stuff in the bible quote was wrong, then logging your own cache is therefore also wrong.

 

But since you said you were being sarcastic I guess it doesn't matter. I was just confused.

 

If for some reason I decide that it's okay with me to log my own caches, and the site still allows it, then I'll do it and not care what you or any harlot mangler has to say about it.

[+TrailGators]

To me finding your own caches like having an Easter Egg Hunt where you hide all the Easter Eggs. Then you invite all the kids outside to find them. You announce that whoever finds the most eggs gets a big chocolate Easter Bunny! Then you blow the start whistle and run around finding most of the eggs yourself winning the chocolate Easter Bunny. Later that day, you post a question in the Easter Egg Hunt thread asking why all the kids were crying after you did that......

Exactly. The ones who care about statistic are like crying kids and over-competitve grown-ups.

 

The rest just enjoys the outdoors and couldn't care less!

 

I think it's pretty funny that some people switch into "competition mode" as soon as there are some numbers present. GermanSailor

You are the first one to get what I actually meant!

I sometimes wonder if only children played this game if there would be less bickering....

[+Lighteye]

I guess those people that never come into the forums are having fun playing the game the way they want to play it. They don't realize they're not supposed to do that.

 

You're only allowed to have fun if you play the game the way WE (the forum regulars) say to play it.

 

OTOH, say the Mr. half of us (me) hides a doozy of a multi, then a few months later the Mrs. half goes out on a hike and struggles to find it after 3 hours of hiking and hunting without assistance from me. Do we log a find on it ? NO NO NO NO. I already have a bullseye on my back, and no need to enlarge it. She'll get something better than a GC.com smiley when she gets in. At least that's how we do it here in my house.

Uh oh, it sounds like another case of someone playing the game the way they want to. I think the forum regulars should okay this "something better" before you continue.

 

So what happens if someone finds your multi, but then they want to come drop off a travel bug a month later. They don't get to log another find, but do they get to come by your house for "something better" too?

 

 

Hmmmm SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Harrumph! I am disappointed... This thread has reached a length of two full pages, and I must say I am more than a little disappointed by the tone and direction that this thread has taken. When I first noticed this thread at its inception, I was sure that it would quickly degenerate into a near-psychotic free-for-all, with people fighting wildly, and with people on both sides of the argument throwing vicious barbed hostile invocations and imprecations at each other, with oout-of-contorl combatants hurling insane insults at each other, and with each side claiming the moral high ground and asserting that he other side was in league with Satan... Unfortunately, this has not happened, and the tone of this thread has stayed very clear and sane and reasonable for the most part. How sad. Very sad. If this kind of thing keeps up, I will need to get a real life, as I will be unable to find my vicarious thrills in the forums here. How sad. :laughing:

 

 

 

 

 

[+briansnat]

I was sure that it would quickly degenerate into a near-psychotic free-for-all, with people fighting wildly, and with people on both sides of the argument throwing vicious barbed hostile invocations and imprecations at each other, with oout-of-contorl combatants hurling insane insults at each other, and with each side claiming the moral high ground and asserting that he other side was in league with Satan... Unfortunately, this has not happened, and the tone of this thread has stayed very clear and sane and reasonable for the most part.

 

I don't think there are enough people who are stridently on the "Logging your own caches is dandy" side to make a for a good forum fight..

[+cimawr]

I think the best rule is: if you are listed as the owner of a cache, you shouldn't log a find for it. Period.

 

Out of sheer curiosity, would you exempt caches adopted after the fact from that?

 

I have a find on the one cache I'm listed as owning.

Why? Because when I found it, it was "owned" by somebody else, and I went out and searched for it like any other cache. However, when I went on the website to log it, I found that it was "up for adoption" and the owner planned to archive it shortly if there were no takers.

The cache is in a patch of woods near my S.O.'s house, I walk my dogs there at least twice a month, it's a nice little cache, so after logging my find, I sent a note to the owner offering to "adopt", and Bob's your uncle.

I see no reason not to keep the "find" on it, as it's not only a legitimate find, but part of the cache's history.

 

Never occurred to me that anybody would see that as "cheating"; which I couldn't care less if they do, but I'm curious as to whether it would annoy "purists" that I didn't delete my own found log once the cache was in my "owned" list. .

[+brodiebunch]

Logging your own cache..........................What fun is that?

[+sbell111]

Logging your own cache..........................What fun is that?

Some time ago, a fellow cacher decided to delete all my finds on his caches. I logged the finds on one of my archived caches to maintain the history of them.

[+ibycus]

To be honest when I was a newbie, it never even occured to me to log a find on my own cache. Why would I? I mean I know where it is right?

 

Then later when I had some caches behind me, I started to look around a bit, and noticed a few caches that were logged as 'found' by their owner. Most of them actually seemed to be very low numbers cachers, living in areas with very few people. For them, it was just a different interpretation of found. Yep I went back, the cache is still there. I 'found' it where I left it.

 

Contrary to what one might expect then, most of these kinds of logs seem to be by people for whom it really isn't about the numbers, its about the game.

[+KBI]

Logging your own cache..........................What fun is that?

Some time ago, a fellow cacher decided to delete all my finds on his caches. I logged the finds on one of my archived caches to maintain the history of them.

Excellent solution.

 

If anyone else ever runs into this problem, but you just can't bring yourself to log your own cache, you're welcome to use one of mine for that purpose. Just send me a courtesy email first so I'll know what's goin on, then ... log away!!!

[+KBI]

To be honest when I was a newbie, it never even occurred to me to log a find on my own cache. Why would I? I mean I know where it is right?

 

Then later when I had some caches behind me, I started to look around a bit, and noticed a few caches that were logged as 'found' by their owner. Most of them actually seemed to be very low numbers cachers, living in areas with very few people. For them, it was just a different interpretation of found. Yep I went back, the cache is still there. I 'found' it where I left it.

I move that a special exemption be made for cache owners with Alzheimer’s.

[+baloo&bd]

Out of sheer curiosity, would you exempt caches adopted after the fact from that?

 

Put another way " If you hid it, how do you find it?". Adopting a cache you have not yet found, while frankly is sort of silly, would be exempt as would a log that you previously posted prior to the adoption. You found them.

[+nekom]

I'll echo `I don't care how other people play their game', but I personally didn't log either of my 2 hides. Because I didn't find them. I hid them. If a heavy rain swept one away, and I searched and found it, THEN I'd log a find.

[+sbell111]

I'll echo `I don't care how other people play their game', but I personally didn't log either of my 2 hides. Because I didn't find them. I hid them. If a heavy rain swept one away, and I searched and found it, THEN I'd log a find.

Are you advocating for it being OK to log it as a find if it is not in the original hide location?

[+budd-rdc]

Out of sheer curiosity, would you exempt caches adopted after the fact from that?

 

Put another way " If you hid it, how do you find it?". Adopting a cache you have not yet found, while frankly is sort of silly, would be exempt as would a log that you previously posted prior to the adoption. You found them.

Lots of exceptions and "corner cases" here. Let's hope they are based on true stories and not "what if's" just for the sake of proving a point... or we might as well be playing a Virtual Geocaching video game.

 

The controversy seems to be from people being afraid that logging your own cache is numbers-padding. The corner cases don't occur enough to really matter, IMHO. The ones I've seen are newbie mistakes, or from people who don't participate in the social aspect of the game. The important thing is that even the people who proclaim "to each his own" don't seem to log finds for their own caches.

[+cimawr]

 

Lots of exceptions and "corner cases" here. Let's hope they are based on true stories and not "what if's" just for the sake of proving a point...

 

Heh, well... if you're seriously worried about whether people are telling "true stories", I bet most of them can be verified by checking the posters' profile pages. Mine certainly can.

 

Not, mind you, that I care - I only posted because I was curious as to whether anybody would be silly enough to tell me that yes, I should have deleted my found log once I'd adopted the cache and it appeared on my "owned" list.

 

Which I have to agree with those who've stated that It Doesn't Matter, except in that people who blatantly and repeatedly hide caches and then log them as "finds" may suffer some damage to their credibility with

their local geocaching community.... which doesn't hurt anybody but themselves, so why should anybody care?

Not to mention that damaging one's credibility with local cachers isn't going to have any effect except socially within the online community... which, unless your community small enough that it could have any effect OUTSIDE geocaching, is not likely to cause must of an impact on the person's "real life".

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

We're going through and listing all the extraneous reasons why you might EVER log your own cache (adopting a cache you found, helped hide the cache, cache moved, etc) BTW- I still wouldn't log the cache under even the special circumstances- don't ask me why, I just wouldn't. I have a hard enough time remembering the regular caches I've found.

 

However, I don't think that was what the OP was getting at. I read it as "why shouldn't we log all of our hidden caches as finds, and do we feel we shouldn't due to the unwritten rules set forth by the forums?" This may not be right, but maybe the OP can clarify.

 

I understand, even if I wouldn't do myself, the reasons why someone might log their own cache once in a very blue moon. I'm trying to find out for what reason would you make a regular practice of it.

[+SG-MIN]

So far the biggest reason to not log your own cache is because it could hurt your reputation. I would guess that most people don't interact with the larger geocaching community beyond their friends who cache, and a hurt reputation is not much of a deterant.

[Clan Riffster]

I'm curious as to whether it would annoy "purists" that I didn't delete my own found log once the cache was in my "owned" list. .

Don't sweat the small stuff. The Purists will get annoyed about most anything.

[+nekom]

I'll echo `I don't care how other people play their game', but I personally didn't log either of my 2 hides. Because I didn't find them. I hid them. If a heavy rain swept one away, and I searched and found it, THEN I'd log a find.

Are you advocating for it being OK to log it as a find if it is not in the original hide location?

 

Well, based solely on the definition of the word `find' I'd say yes, but maybe it's not exactly in the right spirit of things. Thankfully for me it's never come up.

[+TrailGators]

I'm curious as to whether it would annoy "purists" that I didn't delete my own found log once the cache was in my "owned" list. .

Don't sweat the small stuff. The Purists will get annoyed about most anything.

I don't see any problem at all with keeping a find log for a cache you have later adopted. In most cases, being a past finder is a prerequisite to adopt the cache. Your find log still captures the fun you had finding a new hidden treasure!

[+SG-MIN]

oooh... here is new one to throw in there. What about a virtual? You had to find that one in order to list it, and you really don't own anything.

[+tozainamboku]

I was sure that it would quickly degenerate into a near-psychotic free-for-all, with people fighting wildly, and with people on both sides of the argument throwing vicious barbed hostile invocations and imprecations at each other, with oout-of-contorl combatants hurling insane insults at each other, and with each side claiming the moral high ground and asserting that he other side was in league with Satan... Unfortunately, this has not happened, and the tone of this thread has stayed very clear and sane and reasonable for the most part.

 

I don't think there are enough people who are stridently on the "Logging your own caches is dandy" side to make a for a good forum fight..

If the question were "Should geocaching.com remove the ability to log your own cache?" you might get a better fight out of it. Most people realize that you can't find something that you hid. Aside from selecting the wrong log type by mistake, there are several reasons why someone might log their own cache.

1. Grandfathered moving cache
   
2. Adopted cache that you haven't found yet
   
3. Attended log on your own event
   
4. Part of a team account, where one person on the team hid the cache and another person finds it
   
5. Claim a find to keep your find count correct (and a history of your log) if some deletes a disputed find on another cache.
   
6. Feeling that your cache had been move or rehidden in such a way as to require you to "find" it again
   
7. Wanting to clear the cache for your closest unfound list and not understanding how this can be done using the ignore list
   

The puritans may deny that some of these are finds. I put them here to show that people who claim a smiley on there own log are probably not doing it to inflate their find count, but because they feel they have a legitimate reason to use the found it log. Use of the find count to keep score makes no sense. Use of the find count to congratulate people on reaching milestones or as a rough estimate of a geocacher's experience is not really hurt by the fact that different people have different opinions as to when it is appropriate to use a found it log.

Edited December 4, 2006 by tozainamboku

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

So far the biggest reason to not log your own cache is because it could hurt your reputation.

 

I understand that. What is the reason TO log your own caches? (regular logging, not counting the extreme cases)

Edited December 4, 2006 by Googling Hrpty Hrrs

[+Kealia]

Why are those of us in the forums so adamently against this?

 

I'm not against it. Log away if it pleases you. I simply don't understand why anbody would want to.

 

Ditto.

 

And, from an earlier point:

There's no rule/law against farting in a public place but the general community frowns upon it so it becomes common practice.

 

Same thing as logging your own cache to me.

[+Mudfrog]

So far the biggest reason to not log your own cache is because it could hurt your reputation.

 

I understand that. What is the reason TO log your own caches? (regular logging, not counting the extreme cases)

 

I'm curious as well. No special circumstances, a person hid the cache and knows where it is,,,, What reason would that person have for logging a find on it?

[+SG-MIN]

If the question were "Should geocaching.com remove the ability to log your own cache?" you might get a better fight out of it. Most people realize that you can't find something that you hid. Aside from selecting the wrong log type by mistake, there are several reasons why someone might log their own cache.

1. Grandfathered moving cache
   
2. Adopted cache that you haven't found yet
   
3. Attended log on your own event
   
4. Part of a team account, where one person on the team hid the cache and another person finds it
   
5. Claim a find to keep your find count correct (and a history of your log) if some deletes a disputed find on another cache.
   
6. Feeling that your cache had been move or rehidden in such a way as to require you to "find" it again
   
7. Wanting to clear the cache for your closest unfound list and not understanding how this can be done using the ignore list
   

The puritans may deny that some of these are finds. I put them here to show that people who claim a smiley on there own log are probably not doing it to inflate their find count, but because they feel they have a legitimate reason to use the found it log. Use of the find count to keep score makes no sense. Use of the find count to congratulate people on reaching milestones or as a rough estimate of a geocacher's experience is not really hurt by the fact that different people have different opinions as to when it is appropriate to use a found it log.

 

Great post tozainamboku. I was only going to reply to the last paragraph, but the couple posts above me were looking for an answer as to when it might be apporpriate to log a cache you own. I think you have put forth several good examples.

 

I think the point you made in your last paragraph is the strongest point made yet: most people who log their own caches as finds are not trying to artificially inflate their find count. Now if we can all agree on this (even with the disclaimer that yes there are a few people out there that do self-log for number inflation) I would think this thread has served its purpose.

[+TrailGators]

And, from an earlier point:

There's no rule/law against farting in a public place but the general community frowns upon it so it becomes common practice. Same thing as logging your own cache to me.

The fart analogy sums it up nicely! The only difference is that we all know who farted!

[+Northstar and Gemini]

It really is more fun finding easter eggs other people have hidden. Sometimes when you get older, it is hard to find your own easter eggs because you don't give them a set of coordinates.

 

Can you tell how seriously this thread should be taken?

[+CYBret]

I actually agree with CYBret's comment about everyone needing to do what is right in their own eyes - especially in a situation involving logging your own caches.

 

Actually, I wrote that because those are the six words that constantly frustrate me. In my younger days when every detail was up for debate a friend of mine would occasionally end our discussions with the words, "Do whatever you think is right." ARRGHHH...but I don't want to do what I think is right! I want to do what I want to do!!!!

 

Back on topic, I've seen several examples over the years of people logging finds on their own caches. My opinion is the majority of these are done by new players who simply don't know that they can just log a note on their cache page. You can drag the so-called "abusers" through the streets, but more often than not I think it's done purely by accident.

 

In my opinion, that alone is reason enough to remove the ability to log your own caches as finds. Save the newbies the hassle and just take away the option.

 

But that's just my opinion....you do whatever you think is right.

 

Bret

 

P.S. By the way, now that I'm a parent, those 6 words work wonderfully on my daughter....heck...don't tell, but they work really well on my wife too!

Edited December 5, 2006 by CYBret

[+ePeterso2]

Before reading further, I don't really care who logs what or how, except for folks incorrectly logging entries on caches I've placed and reported. It makes no difference to me when I'm out in the sun with my GPS in hand, nor when I'm online looking for new ones to find.

 

I'm sure that the reasons below are why people feel that logging a find in your own cache is acceptable. But here's how I feel about 'em:

 

1. Grandfathered moving cache
   
2. Adopted cache that you haven't found yet
   
3. Attended log on your own event
   
4. Part of a team account, where one person on the team hid the cache and another person finds it
   
5. Claim a find to keep your find count correct (and a history of your log) if some deletes a disputed find on another cache.
   
6. Feeling that your cache had been move or rehidden in such a way as to require you to "find" it again
   
7. Wanting to clear the cache for your closest unfound list and not understanding how this can be done using the ignore list
   

Cases 1 and 2 aren't really a case of logging your own hide. To adopt something later pretty much requires that you found it at such a time when it wasn't yours to begin with. I can't see how this is a problem.

 

Cases 3, 4, and 6 are instances where I don't really see how logging a find makes any logical sense. If you placed the cache (either as an individual or as a team) or hosted the event, then I can't see how you've "found" it in any sense of the word.

 

I think logging a find for Case 5 is an even worse reason than logging a find for cases 3, 4, and 6. You're logging a record of something you know never actually happened. The only reasons I could see for someone deleting a find record would be accidentally, for not meeting the logging requirements, or out of malice. The first two issues are easily addressed and corrected. But if someone deleted one of my finds out of some negative emotional response, then that's not a find I would have wanted in the first place.

 

Case 7 is the same as case 5 ... this is a problem of not understanding how to use the logging system.

 

Use of the find count to congratulate people on reaching milestones or as a rough estimate of a geocacher's experience is not really hurt by the fact that different people have different opinions as to when it is appropriate to use a found it log.

Agreed completely.

[+sbell111]

[+MetroGT]

Before reading further, I don't really care who logs what or how, except for folks incorrectly logging entries on caches I've placed and reported. It makes no difference to me when I'm out in the sun with my GPS in hand, nor when I'm online looking for new ones to find.

 

I'm sure that the reasons below are why people feel that logging a find in your own cache is acceptable. But here's how I feel about 'em:

 

1. Grandfathered moving cache
   
2. Adopted cache that you haven't found yet
   
3. Attended log on your own event
   
4. Part of a team account, where one person on the team hid the cache and another person finds it
   
5. Claim a find to keep your find count correct (and a history of your log) if some deletes a disputed find on another cache.
   
6. Feeling that your cache had been move or rehidden in such a way as to require you to "find" it again
   
7. Wanting to clear the cache for your closest unfound list and not understanding how this can be done using the ignore list
   

Cases 1 and 2 aren't really a case of logging your own hide. To adopt something later pretty much requires that you found it at such a time when it wasn't yours to begin with. I can't see how this is a problem.

 

Cases 3, 4, and 6 are instances where I don't really see how logging a find makes any logical sense. If you placed the cache (either as an individual or as a team) or hosted the event, then I can't see how you've "found" it in any sense of the word.

 

I think logging a find for Case 5 is an even worse reason than logging a find for cases 3, 4, and 6. You're logging a record of something you know never actually happened. The only reasons I could see for someone deleting a find record would be accidentally, for not meeting the logging requirements, or out of malice. The first two issues are easily addressed and corrected. But if someone deleted one of my finds out of some negative emotional response, then that's not a find I would have wanted in the first place.

 

Case 7 is the same as case 5 ... this is a problem of not understanding how to use the logging system.

 

Use of the find count to congratulate people on reaching milestones or as a rough estimate of a geocacher's experience is not really hurt by the fact that different people have different opinions as to when it is appropriate to use a found it log.

Agreed completely.

 

I have to disagree with point #3... it's not a found, it's an attended. I have logged an attended at my own event, cause guess what... I attended it. I setup the time and place, arranged all the games/activities, setup the prizes, and... actually showed up to meet and greet like events are designed to do. Hence... I attended the event.

 

Do I feel guilty for logging my event? No... if I did, I wouldn't tell you people about it. Play the game by your own rules if you feel necessary, cause only you or a reviewer can delete the logs. When I place the next event I hold... I'll log it as an attended too, as long as I show up that is.

 

As for point #6... I actually have a cache that I have to "find" every time I do maintenance on the cache. I don't count it as a found because I placed the cache and I know where it could be. Even if it is in a place it shouldn't be, it's my cache hide.

[+BlueDeuce]

I place it, I don't log it.

 

And no justification using "New Math" will make any difference.

[+cimawr]

Ok, here's a new variation on the theme that I encountered a couple of days ago, which I'm curious as to others' take on it:

 

A cache was placed on the ground in a wooded area that periodically floods. In Feb., found it notes say things in the cache are wet, and find logs after that report deterioration. In June, a finder posts a "Needs Maintenace" note stating the cache is soaked and the log is a bag of pulp. No apparent action is taken by the owner. In October, a second "needs maintenace" log is posted, in which it was reported as apparently missing; it wasn't in the place that matched the online clue, nor in any similar places in the area. (It's a cache with an easy rating, and the clue is explict.)

 

Last week, a "big numbers" cacher from the next state over was in the area, went and looked, didn't see the cache either. So they put out another container in a different place - above the ground rather than on it, and about 40 feet from the spot the original clue indicates .. and logged it as a find, saying "We found the location".

[Grawp]

I used to play in another team (2 of us) which unfortunately broke up. I was out of the game for quite a while as I don't like caching alone. I now have a new caching partner, and a new team name. I have adopted the caches that I had placed under the old team name, but before doing so, used my caches to teach my new partner all about the game. I ofered no assistance as to the location of the caches - she found them entirely by herself, and signed the logs under the new team name. Once she was happy playing the game (totally hooked, in fact) we adopted the caches.

 

I don't see anything wrong with this, as long as it's done ethically. Which I did.

[+KBI]

I move that a special exemption be made for cache owners with Alzheimer’s.

[+KBI]

Hey, I have an idea! I move that a special exemption be made for cache owners with Alzheimer’s.