I just deleted two logs

[+W7WT]

I have a virtual in the Olympic National Park at Hurricane Ridge. I had two German cachers who sent me the correct answers to claim a find. One on December 13th and the other on the 14th. I thought isn't it nice they are visiting the Olympic Pennisula. I was a little suspicious at the time but did allow them to log a find. Today, I checked their finds on their

profiles. The one on the 13th also claimed finds on virtuals in Mexico, Cameroon and three in Texas on that date. The other on the 14th claimed finds on virtuals in Alabama, Missouri and two in Texas on that date.

This is the first time I have ever deleted a log. I have asked people to delete some pictures that gave away the location. I did send each a e-mail explaining why I deleted their logs.

I love virtuals but now I can see why they were moved to Waymarking. Dick

Edited January 16, 2007 by W7WT

[+MREAGLEWO1]

I have a virtual in the Olympic National Park at Hurricane Ridge. I had two German cachers who sent me the correct answers to claim a find. One on December 13th and the other on the 14th. I thought isn't it nice they are visiting the Olympic Pennisula. I was a little suspicious at the time but did allow them to log a find. Today, I checked their finds on their

profiles. The one on the 13th also claimed finds on virtuals in Mexico, Cameroon and three in Texas on that date. The other on the 14th claimed finds on virtuals in Alabama, Missouri and two in Texas on that date.

This is the first time I have ever deleted a log. I have asked people to delete some pictures that gave away the location. I did send each a e-mail explaining why I deleted their logs.

I love virtuals but now I can see why they were moved to Waymarking. Dick

 

did they respond? also, some people might hold off their logging to do whne hte have time at a computer. I know i have read some threads on here about that. however it does sound suspicious

[+W7WT]

I just deleted the logs and sent the e-mails today. Looking at their finds on their profiles indicates that they have a pattern of similar finds. They did send me the answers and requested permission to log the caches which I did. My bad for not checking on this earlier. Dick

[Moun10Bike]

You're not the only one this has been happening to, Dick - check out this thread in the General section.

 

I had a real bout of false logging on my geocoins recently, and a large proportion of the false logs came from cachers in Germany. It looks like there is some circle over there that is promoting and publicizing this sort of "couch logging".

[+FunnyNose]

Recently there was someone (who by the way is in the top 10 geocachers for their state) log 40 caches in one day in the Seattle area but neglected to sign any of the logs.

[Moun10Bike]

Recently there was someone (who by the way is in the top 10 geocachers for their state) log 40 caches in one day in the Seattle area but neglected to sign any of the logs.

 

That person is also one of the first to sell one of my coins on eBay. Seems like he's a real quality guy.

[+wyohunter]

I thought the reason of geocaching was to go out and get the thrill of finding as well as the other scenery that is around the virtual/caches? btw, I would like to find one of your coins!

[+LindaLu]

Dick,

 

You were just being a responsible cache owner. I have had to delete logs only once or twice in my 5 1/2 years of caching as I can recall, but it does make you feel kind of sad that apparently not everyone is honest in their logging of caches!

 

(On the other end of the spectrum are cache owners that delete logs just because they don't like what the person said. That is a separate issue altogether.)

 

Anyway, you were absolutely right to do so.

 

73,

 

Linda

[+W7WT]

Thank you Linda, I have also done over the requirements for claiming the cache. All I am interested in is that people do visit Hurricane Ridge to log the cache. How is your "ham radio" coming along? Been just over four years ago when you were at my home on the very first Cache Machine.

 

88 Dick

Edited January 17, 2007 by W7WT

[+Half-Canadian]

I have a virtual in the Olympic National Park at Hurricane Ridge. I had two German cachers who sent me the correct answers to claim a find. One on December 13th and the other on the 14th. I thought isn't it nice they are visiting the Olympic Pennisula. I was a little suspicious at the time but did allow them to log a find. Today, I checked their finds on their

profiles. The one on the 13th also claimed finds on virtuals in Mexico, Cameroon and three in Texas on that date. The other on the 14th claimed finds on virtuals in Alabama, Missouri and two in Texas on that date.

This is the first time I have ever deleted a log. I have asked people to delete some pictures that gave away the location. I did send each a e-mail explaining why I deleted their logs.

I love virtuals but now I can see why they were moved to Waymarking. Dick

 

Interesting discussions going, both here and at the other thread Moun10Bike points to in one of the general forums.

 

Shortly after the bookmarking feature became available, various "couch caching" or "armchair caching" bookmarks popped up. If I was eating lunch at my desk, I would sometimes work on one of these bookmarked caches during my lunch hour that didn't specifically require visiting the site in order to fulfill the requirements. I found I often learned some interesting facts through the internet searching, and have earmarked some of those locations for an actual physical visit someday.

 

During the extended snowy spell we have endured recently, I've been stuck at home for long periods without a whole lot to do in my free time, to say nothing of being able to get out to cache. And I did a few more of these "armchair" caches, picking virtuals that required emailing the cache owner with some requested bits of information that could be gleaned either through visiting the location or by using internet tools -- google, satellite mapping, reading through online cemetery records, etc. Even though I may never visit those spots in the Florida Keys, or Prague, or the South Pole, I learned some interesting things about those areas and fulfilled the requirements to log the cache.

 

I don't feel bad or guilty about logging these virtuals, though frankly it's gotten boring and I can't wait to get out and do "real" caches again

[Moun10Bike]

Huh. I guess I share Mopar's views on this subject:

 

As one of the "old timers", I'd just like to point at that whaaaay back when virtuals first came about, there were NO logging requirements needed. You just went to the spot the hider wanted you to go to, and you claimed your find. Back then the honor system worked. Obviously it no longer does, hence the logging requirements on newer virtuals.

Virtuals were ALWAYS about going to the location, and with maybe a few exceptions any the encourage you to log a find without leaving your chair were changed that way after they were listed.

Trust me, when virtual caches were created nobody considered people would sit at home and "find" them on the internet. Since the game is all about getting outside it never crossed anyone's mind someone would cheat like that.

That said, the cache owner not only has the right to delete those logs, he has the RESPONSIBILITY to delete them. It's part of the guidelines. If the cache owner allows bogus caches to remain, he stands the chance of having his cache archived. That chance is probably slim right now, but as the problem grows I expect there will be a crack down. Just look at pocket caches.

[+hydnsek]

Huh. I guess I share Mopar's views on this subject:

 

As one of the "old timers", I'd just like to point at that whaaaay back when virtuals first came about, there were NO logging requirements needed. You just went to the spot the hider wanted you to go to, and you claimed your find. Back then the honor system worked. Obviously it no longer does, hence the logging requirements on newer virtuals.

Virtuals were ALWAYS about going to the location, and with maybe a few exceptions any the encourage you to log a find without leaving your chair were changed that way after they were listed.

Trust me, when virtual caches were created nobody considered people would sit at home and "find" them on the internet. Since the game is all about getting outside it never crossed anyone's mind someone would cheat like that.

That said, the cache owner not only has the right to delete those logs, he has the RESPONSIBILITY to delete them. It's part of the guidelines. If the cache owner allows bogus caches to remain, he stands the chance of having his cache archived. That chance is probably slim right now, but as the problem grows I expect there will be a crack down. Just look at pocket caches.

In general, I agree with y'all, but I followed the link to a cited 'armchair' cache in one of the threads, and the owner just provides a riddle to solve with no location to visit:

 

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

 

from the Four Windows cache in Germany.

 

Now, I agree this isn't really caching.....but it's a posted cache, with nothing to physically visit (well.....come on).

[+W7WT]

I received this e-mail from one of the German's

 

"Hello! Apologise me for the inconvenience I have done to you. It was not in my intention to bluff you or to be disgruntling. If I had known which is it no couchpotato, I would have requested no log release. I have read a lot about your Cache and have learnt and would like to thank once again for the image of this place. Greeting (name deleted)"

 

At least he admitted to doing it and apologised. Dick

 

--

Edited January 17, 2007 by W7WT

[+Allanon]

Huh. I guess I share Mopar's views on this subject:

 

As one of the "old timers", I'd just like to point at that whaaaay back when virtuals first came about, there were NO logging requirements needed. You just went to the spot the hider wanted you to go to, and you claimed your find. Back then the honor system worked. Obviously it no longer does, hence the logging requirements on newer virtuals.

Virtuals were ALWAYS about going to the location, and with maybe a few exceptions any the encourage you to log a find without leaving your chair were changed that way after they were listed.

Trust me, when virtual caches were created nobody considered people would sit at home and "find" them on the internet. Since the game is all about getting outside it never crossed anyone's mind someone would cheat like that.

That said, the cache owner not only has the right to delete those logs, he has the RESPONSIBILITY to delete them. It's part of the guidelines. If the cache owner allows bogus caches to remain, he stands the chance of having his cache archived. That chance is probably slim right now, but as the problem grows I expect there will be a crack down. Just look at pocket caches.

In general, I agree with y'all, but I followed the link to a cited 'armchair' cache in one of the threads, and the owner just provides a riddle to solve with no location to visit:

 

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

 

from the Four Windows cache in Germany.

 

Now, I agree this isn't really caching.....but it's a posted cache, with nothing to physically visit (well.....come on).

Actually, my brother will be visiting that cache in March (he goes up with the UW each spring)...I'm going to have him take a picture of the bear.

[Moun10Bike]

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

 

from the Four Windows cache in Germany.

 

Now, I agree this isn't really caching.....but it's a posted cache, with nothing to physically visit (well.....come on).

 

Anyone who has been around this game for a while knows about the handful of armchair caches like this - ones that were mistakenly approved and then grandfathered in. But how can you argue that such caches make it okay to log finds on the hundreds of other virtual caches that have been targeted by couch cachers? What makes it okay to log Dick's cache from thousands of miles away without ever visiting the location?

 

Those logging other caches in this manner are just trying to take advantage of inattentive or unaware cache owners in an effort to pump up their own numbers.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I love virtuals but now I can see why they were moved to Waymarking. Dick

 

Curious, did this move solve the problem?

 

John

[+hydnsek]

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

 

from the Four Windows cache in Germany.

 

Now, I agree this isn't really caching.....but it's a posted cache, with nothing to physically visit (well.....come on).

 

Anyone who has been around this game for a while knows about the handful of armchair caches like this - ones that were mistakenly approved and then grandfathered in. But how can you argue that such caches make it okay to log finds on the hundreds of other virtual caches that have been targeted by couch cachers? What makes it okay to log Dick's cache from thousands of miles away without ever visiting the location?

 

Those logging other caches in this manner are just trying to take advantage of inattentive or unaware cache owners in an effort to pump up their own numbers.

I hope your questions aren't directed at me personally, cos I'm on your side. I think it's wrong to armchair-log virtuals that are supposed to be visited.

 

And I guess I'm still a newbie - I'd never heard of these armchair caches until these two threads. My only point above was that there are a few caches that, erroneously approved or not, don't have a place for you to visit (Allanon's brother aside ). Should they be geocaches? No. Are they? Yes.

[+W7WT]

I love virtuals but now I can see why they were moved to Waymarking. Dick

 

Curious, did this move solve the problem?

 

John

 

No John is sure didn't. Being an older fart than you are, I really enjoyed the virtuals. I also enjoyed the chase of the yellow jeep in the locationless caches. I just hope the couch cachers don't get all the grandfathered virtuals archived. Dick

[+pdxmarathonman]

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

 

from the Four Windows cache in Germany.

 

Now, I agree this isn't really caching.....but it's a posted cache, with nothing to physically visit (well.....come on).

Actually, my brother will be visiting that cache in March (he goes up with the UW each spring)...I'm going to have him take a picture of the bear.

I really hope he brings back a picture of the house

Edited January 17, 2007 by pdxmarathonman

[+The Jester]

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

 

from the Four Windows cache in Germany.

 

Now, I agree this isn't really caching.....but it's a posted cache, with nothing to physically visit (well.....come on).

Actually, my brother will be visiting that cache in March (he goes up with the UW each spring)...I'm going to have him take a picture of the bear.

I really hope he brings back a picture of the house

I don't know ... With four years of ice drift the house may no longer be within accuracy range.

[Team Misguided]

Then he should post a picture of his gps at the coordinates and then one showing that the house is gone and attach both to his SBA note on that cache.

[+jcar]

 

... I just hope the couch cachers don't get all the grandfathered virtuals archived. Dick

 

Already started. This cache was mentioned in the other thread, and was just archived.

[+FunnyNose]

 

... I just hope the couch cachers don't get all the grandfathered virtuals archived. Dick

 

Already started. This cache was mentioned in the other thread, and was just archived.

 

I hope they don't go to far with this.. Some people actually visit the couch caches.

 

Pyramids outside Mexico City

[Team Misguided]

If all cache owners are pro-active like W7WT and take care of deleting false logs then the existing virtual caches are safe from archival. IMHO

[John E Cache]

In general, I agree with y'all, but I followed the link to a cited 'armchair' cache in one of the threads, and the owner just provides a riddle to solve with no location to visit:

 

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

What are the WGS84 coordinates for the North Pole? Edited January 19, 2007 by John E Cache

[+pdxmarathonman]

In general, I agree with y'all, but I followed the link to a cited 'armchair' cache in one of the threads, and the owner just provides a riddle to solve with no location to visit:

 

You won't find the cache at these given coordinates.

The cache is a house with a window in each of its four sides. Each window looks to the south. Inside the cache is a bear.

 

Please send

1. the colour of the bear and

2. the coordinates (WGS84) of the cache and

3. your geocaching name

What are the WGS84 coordinates for the North Pole?

Oh man, you gave it away. Now anyone can log it

[Team Misguided]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

 

 

So not only is it a couch cache, it's a MOVING couch cache!!!

Edited January 19, 2007 by Team Misguided

[+Ladybug Kids]

What are the WGS84 coordinates for the North Pole?

Depending on the number of decimal places one uses, there are an infinite number of answers to that question

[+Renegade Knight]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

 

 

So not only is it a couch cache, it's a MOVING couch cache!!!

When I was 16 I worked on the North Slope and got to watch the polar ice cap drift in and out. Being only 16 they would not let me use a power boat to go touch the dang thing just to say I did. It was still cool to see.

[+FunnyNose]

A) The Earth rotates or spins at 1000 miles per hour, taking 24 hours or one day to make one rotation.

 

The Earth revolves around our star “The Sun,” at 30 kilometers a second or 67,000 miles per hour, taking one year to make one revolution.

 

C) Our solar system revolves around the galaxy at 220 kilometers per second or 490,000 miles per hour, taking 225 million years to make one rotation around the galaxy.

 

So every single cache is a moving cache and needs to be archived.

[+Prying Pandora]

OK, I'm strapped into my couch-mobile with my GPSr and ready to log some caches!

 

[+-Hawk-]

I myself being a newbie, got into this game shortly before the unfortunate demise of the virtuals. They were some of the caches that helped me appreciate a portion of the purpose of cachin'....seeing places you otherwise wouldnt. Some locations have the ability to place a container there, some dont hence the virtual cache. Some cachers may not have the imagination to place a creative container there that would blend in unseen to the normal person that doesnt have the highly trained and focused eye belonging to a cacher. In that case a Virtual is the perfect option for them, and even though there is not a container there, I still appreciate the opportunity to visit that particular location. I personally would love to see the virtual cache option returned. I also agree with what Dick did, those caches need to be made (or modified ) by means of there listings to reflect actually visiting that spot to claim a find by means of a photo or something.

Another last minute thought as typing, does the rules of a particular virtual, boil down to the individual owners rules? If that owner is willing to accept a net find is that a bad thing and undermine the whole purpose of virtuals, or is it merely allowing individuality between them? There is a regular cache and a puzzle cache. Would this be the equivilent of that...a regular virtual and a "puzzle" type virtual?

Just curious, or am I way off here? If I am...I can take it

[John E Cache]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

Land masses drift and change shape too. I was thinking the end of the axis of rotation, where the pole sticks out.

[+The Jester]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

Land masses drift and change shape too. I was thinking the end of the axis of rotation, where the pole sticks out.

That's the reason I use for not finding caches - they've drifted too far from the original co-ords. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

[Hiram]

Dick,

 

You were just being a responsible cache owner. I have had to delete logs only once or twice in my 5 1/2 years of caching as I can recall, but it does make you feel kind of sad that apparently not everyone is honest in their logging of caches!

 

(On the other end of the spectrum are cache owners that delete logs just because they don't like what the person said. That is a separate issue altogether.)

 

Anyway, you were absolutely right to do so.

 

73,

 

Linda

Sometime it is necessary to delete logs to protect someone from their ownselves. I had to delete one that was very negative on their parenting skills and judgement.

[+Half-Canadian]

I have a virtual in the Olympic National Park at Hurricane Ridge. I had two German cachers who sent me the correct answers to claim a find. One on December 13th and the other on the 14th. I thought isn't it nice they are visiting the Olympic Pennisula. I was a little suspicious at the time but did allow them to log a find. Today, I checked their finds on their

profiles. The one on the 13th also claimed finds on virtuals in Mexico, Cameroon and three in Texas on that date. The other on the 14th claimed finds on virtuals in Alabama, Missouri and two in Texas on that date.

This is the first time I have ever deleted a log. I have asked people to delete some pictures that gave away the location. I did send each a e-mail explaining why I deleted their logs.

I love virtuals but now I can see why they were moved to Waymarking. Dick

 

Interesting discussions going, both here and at the other thread Moun10Bike points to in one of the general forums.

 

Shortly after the bookmarking feature became available, various "couch caching" or "armchair caching" bookmarks popped up. If I was eating lunch at my desk, I would sometimes work on one of these bookmarked caches during my lunch hour that didn't specifically require visiting the site in order to fulfill the requirements. I found I often learned some interesting facts through the internet searching, and have earmarked some of those locations for an actual physical visit someday.

 

During the extended snowy spell we have endured recently, I've been stuck at home for long periods without a whole lot to do in my free time, to say nothing of being able to get out to cache. And I did a few more of these "armchair" caches, picking virtuals that required emailing the cache owner with some requested bits of information that could be gleaned either through visiting the location or by using internet tools -- google, satellite mapping, reading through online cemetery records, etc. Even though I may never visit those spots in the Florida Keys, or Prague, or the South Pole, I learned some interesting things about those areas and fulfilled the requirements to log the cache.

 

I don't feel bad or guilty about logging these virtuals, though frankly it's gotten boring and I can't wait to get out and do "real" caches again

 

I've been following this thread with interest, and I've also appreciated the way that the subject was handled by the posters in this forum, who expressed their points of view without personal attacks. The parallel thread that was referenced here earlier by Moun10Bike includes postings accusing individuals who have logged virtuals without actually visiting the location as being "cheaters", or having "unethical behaviour" or "lying" among other things.

 

The few of these virtuals that I logged over the past month or so did not require a visit to the location, merely a request to furnish the cache owner with some bit of information. I did not indicate in my logs that I had actually visited the site -- in fact in most of my logs indicated that I had used a google search -- so being indirectly accused of lying, cheating, or being unethical I find reprehensible.

 

What changed my mind about this practice? Reflecting on Dick's original post in this thread. When I thought back to what lengths I went to in order to log his Windy Ridge cache last summer on a Delorme run -- a long drive and a lengthy detour out of my way, and a $20.00 entry fee -- and what I would have missed by not visiting that virtual cache location -- some breathtaking scenery, driving down a road that made my hair stand on end in places, and visiting a very cool historical building -- I would have felt that my efforts were cheapened had I discovered that hundreds of people had logged that cache in the past few months by an easy internet search. And conversely, those cachers that had gone to the effort of finding the virtuals that I logged via an internet search have had their experiences diminished by my actions.

 

Going back over those virtuals I logged over the past month, I was astonished to see that in some cases hundreds of new logs had been posted for some of these virtual caches, and that many had been disabled or archived to stop the flood of this new trend. That troubled me too, as many of these virtuals I had bookmarked for a visit to someday, and now they are gone.

 

In the parallel thread referenced earlier, I found the post quoted below to be insightful. My motivation in virtual logging was the enjoyment of ferreting out the information and learning things about places I might never have a chance to visit, not to increase my find count, but in doing so I may have in some small way caused the demise of some of these fine old virtual caches.

I think that when you boil an issue like this down to individuals trying to bump up their find counts, you do the issue a disservice. Certainly, someone might google-log a virt because they enjoy doing so, rather than because they are numbers obsessed.

 

The problem is with the action that these loggers are taking, not with their individual motivations.

I went through my cache logs last night and deleted those virtual finds that I logged over the past few weeks, as I can see now that that practice is to the detriment of all virtual caches. I will continue to crack those interesting virtual caches during my lunch hour by surfing the net, but from now on will either post a note to the cache page or just enjoy having learned something new and sharpened my detective skills

[+shunra]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

Land masses drift and change shape too. I was thinking the end of the axis of rotation, where the pole sticks out.

That's the reason I use for not finding caches - they've drifted too far from the original co-ords. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

 

Yep, continental drift, that's it!

[+shunra]

I went through my cache logs last night and deleted those virtual finds that I logged over the past few weeks, as I can see now that that practice is to the detriment of all virtual caches. I will continue to crack those interesting virtual caches during my lunch hour by surfing the net, but from now on will either post a note to the cache page or just enjoy having learned something new and sharpened my detective skills

 

HC, I think you're taking this too far. There is a big difference between caches like W7WT's, that are supposed to be visited and of which logging a Find without visiting is indeed cheating on the one hand, and couch potato caches, which were never MEANT to be visited, but to be logged the way you did. IMO, you really don't have to delete those finds of yours. Nobody visits those locations, and you're not diminishing anyone's experience.

 

I would agree that such caches should not be approved, but I think that of some other grandfathered-in caches as well. Now that they're there, there's nothing wrong about logging them.

 

Again, pretending to have visited a real virtual without actually having done it is a different thing, but I think nobody disagrees about that.

[+WeightMan]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

Land masses drift and change shape too. I was thinking the end of the axis of rotation, where the pole sticks out.

I don't have a fancy map, but that moves around a bit too. The Earth actually wobbles while spinning just like a top does.

[John E Cache]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

Land masses drift and change shape too. I was thinking the end of the axis of rotation, where the pole sticks out.

I don't have a fancy map, but that moves around a bit too. The Earth actually wobbles while spinning just like a top does.

I was trying to show that the answer to that cache puzzle may not be easy because WSG84 might be different than NAD27 or some other datum and it was kind of a cool[so to speak] question. I got responses with other reasons I never thought of. Wobble. drift. precision, which meridian etc. Maybe the couch potato caches are kind of fun after all. Fun being my most important rule of caching.

[+pdxmarathonman]

It's not that easy. Keep in mind that the 'North Pole' is not on a land mass. It's always moving. Below is a map of the drift of the North Pole Station buoys over the last nine months.

Land masses drift and change shape too. I was thinking the end of the axis of rotation, where the pole sticks out.

The Earth actually wobbles while spinning just like a top does.

Can't somebody take a straighter pole the next time they go up there? Wouldn't that help?

[+Logscaler and Red]

Here a couple years ago, I sat down one week and "logged" a few dozen "Virtual" Caches by just searching the internet.

 

Then I sent the "how" I did it to the cache owners and then deleted my logs.

 

Several of those caches have new requirements now to varify the person was really there.

 

All about the numbers for some people.

 

Logscaler.

[+Too Tall John]

 

... I just hope the couch cachers don't get all the grandfathered virtuals archived. Dick

 

Already started. This cache was mentioned in the other thread, and was just archived.

 

I hope they don't go to far with this.. Some people actually visit the couch caches.

 

 

Hmm... while I agree this could become a problem, if you read the logs for GC319E (the above-mentioned cache that was archived) you'll see these logs:

May 27, 2006 by (insert your favorite cacher's name here) (1107 found)

Owner is gone, email sent back undeliverable. All caches should be archived.

June 4, 2006 by (insert your favorite reviewer's name here) (3 found)

Archiving.

So, it was actually originally archived in June '06. While archiving a virtual cache because of Couch Cachers may be extreme, archiving a virtual with an unreachable owner seems reasonable to me.

 

Just my 2 cents. Now I'm broke, hope you're happy.

Edited February 1, 2007 by Too Tall John

[GermanSailor]

At least he admitted to doing it and apologised. Dick

 

Hi W7WT,

 

there are a couple of caches (not just virtuals) in Germany that are dedicated "armchair caches" some of them just can be found online with quite a lot of research. The owner allow it to log their caches after you did the "homework" and found out what it is about.

To me the idea of geocaching is to find new interessting places. Most of those armchair caches just do this, even if it is just virtual. I always learned something interessting about a historic place or person. So I personally don't see a problem with this type of geocaching, as long as the owner is okay with it.

 

The problem is that some people assume that it is okay to treat every virtual like one of the armchair caches.

 

So I guess it was just a misunderstanding and you were absolutely right to delete the logs!

 

GermanSailor

[+W7WT]

Thank you. I have no problem with people logging caches in armchair virtuals that are permitted by the owners. I would never log them and don't believe Virtuals were set up for that reason. I have played golf with people that shaved their strokes on a regular basis. Someone might say

what wrong with that it not hurting anyone. I never did because I always thought maybe some day I would be able to get that low score because my skill improved not my shaving of strokes. But maybe the reason I am old fashioned is because I am in my 80s. Dick

[+Lightning Jeff]

I have no problem with people logging caches in armchair virtuals that are permitted by the owners. I would never log them and don't believe Virtuals were set up for that reason.

You're right, they weren't set up for that purpose, and there is in my opinion no instance where it is legitimate to log a virtual without having visited the location. From the listing guidelines:

 

A virtual cache is an existing, permanent landmark of a unique nature. The seeker must answer a question from the landmark and verify to the cache owner that he was really there.

 

Cache owners are supposed to delete logs of those who have not actually visited the location. Also from the listing guidelines, specific to virtuals:

 

The poster will assume the responsibility of quality control of logged “finds” for the cache, and will agree to delete any “find” logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.

 

In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive the listing.

Given the above guideline on virtual caches, armchair logs are by definition "bogus" and should be deleted. Those who allow such logs are violating the listing guidelines and should have their caches archived.

[+W7WT]

I have had no armchair logs since I deleted the two German logs. However Blue Power Ranger and his family actually visited Hurricane Ridge yesterday and provided proof that they we there and enjoyed playing in the snow.

Edited February 4, 2007 by W7WT