Jump to content

Why do you log finds on caches that are MIA?


Recommended Posts

I think there are 2 caches that I logged a find on that were not there. I was still a newbie, and thought that was just what you were supposed to do. I have considered deleting the finds, but it has been so long ago it doesn't really matter, I was legitimately at the cache sites, however I have adjusted my standards since then.

 

Two very telling peces of information nobody has mantioned:

1) So in the end time heals all and this thread loses it's relevance.

2) Standards change so its impossible to develop a static position on the subject.

 

Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Cache on.

Link to comment

Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Cache on.

 

Cut and paste from my reply in the duplicate to this thread:

 

Some, especially many users of GSAK, load caches in their GPSr's to show the status of the last 4 or 5 logs. FFNF appended to the end of the number would indicate the last two seekers found it, while the third to last did not. FNNN, which could be created by the last seeker logging a DNF as found to mean it was there but the previous seekers just overlooked.

 

Yes, it can be called a lazy practice but to someone who simply loads up the GPSr and goes, which if you think about it is GC at it's purest, this becomes an issue.

 

Even with out that, you simply can not find something that is not there.

Link to comment

Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Cache on.

 

I care, and quite a bit.

 

Of course I don't suffer under a delusion that I can affect much beyond stating my opinion, but no one should assume this is simply someone playing a game of solitaire with their own deck of cards.

 

 

edit the/a

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment
Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Cache on.

Cut and paste from my reply in the duplicate to this thread:

 

Some, especially many users of GSAK, load caches in their GPSr's to show the status of the last 4 or 5 logs. FFNF appended to the end of the number would indicate the last two seekers found it, while the third to last did not. FNNN, which could be created by the last seeker logging a DNF as found to mean it was there but the previous seekers just overlooked.

 

Yes, it can be called a lazy practice but to someone who simply loads up the GPSr and goes, which if you think about it is GC at it's purest, this becomes an issue.

 

Even with out that, you simply can not find something that is not there.

Cut and paste addenda to B&BD's reply in the duplicate to this thread:

 

There is also the fact that many cachers use this GSAK feature, read the cache page, but do not read the logs (to avoid spoilers).

 

(The forums are easier when we don't have duplicate threads.)

Link to comment

I think there are 2 caches that I logged a find on that were not there. I was still a newbie, and thought that was just what you were supposed to do. I have considered deleting the finds, but it has been so long ago it doesn't really matter, I was legitimately at the cache sites, however I have adjusted my standards since then.

 

Two very telling peces of information nobody has mantioned:

1) So in the end time heals all and this thread loses it's relevance.

2) Standards change so its impossible to develop a static position on the subject.

 

Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Cache on.

It is people like you and slippery posts like yours which are leading geocaching, once a Godly and God-feraring sport, down the slippery slope of moral find log relativisim, and even further into the Hellfire of eternal Damnation!

 

 

:(

 

 

:unsure:

 

 

 

<_<

 

 

 

 

:P;):P

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

The other day on one I found a micro that was a metal film canister instead of the plastic ones you usually see. When I opened it I found the log was missing, not sure why. But due to the creative measure of hiding I could verify that I found it. Being new I learned a valuable lesson to bring log material with me next time and such.

Link to comment

Read his post again. Then read yours. If you can't see the many and vast differences in the two scenarios then you may not be capable of debating the issue.

Amen. <_<

 

In Ed's example, the logging of the find was an acceptable end result to both the cache owner and searcher.

A cacher who's goal is to experience the hunt and see the scenery might decide that signing the log is not vitaly important to him. This cacher might accept the offer to call it a find. In this case, the offer is acceptable to both the owner and searcher and could go forward.

Amen, again. I think the critical issue in this debate is, 'What is a find'. Who gets to answer that question? Since this game is being hosted, (is that the right word?), by Groundspeak, I think they would be the ones to decide what equals a find. In this, Groundspeak has remained silent. They appear to be unwilling to define what equals a find, and as such, those of us who need the world defined, must come up with our own definitions. In the relatively short time I've played this game, the best definition I've seen is, 'A find is whatever the cache owner and the cache seeker decide upon'. If BillyBobNosePicker logs a find on BillyJoeSkirtChaser's MIA cache, and he allows the find to stand, then it is a find. I realize that the Holier Than Thou crowd doesn't agree, and they are perfectly free to police the log books of their own caches to their heart's content, deleting anything that so much as hints at a discrepancy, and I'm OK with that too. After all, it fits my definition. Where I get my kilt in a knot is when I see folks berating others who have done nothing more than follow the aforementioned definition, calling them "liars" and "cheaters", and calling their finds "bogus". These are the folks who seem to treat geocaching as some sort of religion, persecuting any who don't follow the "true & righteous" path.

 

Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Ann, some folks ain't happy unless they are degrading others. Sad but true. :unsure:

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment

Amen, again. I think the critical issue in this debate is, 'What is a find'. Who gets to answer that question?

 

How about dictionary.com:

find:

1. to come upon by chance; meet with: He found a nickel in the street.

2. to locate, attain, or obtain by search or effort: to find an apartment; to find happiness.

3. to locate or recover (something lost or misplaced): I can't find my blue socks.

4. to discover or perceive after consideration: to find something to be true.

5. to gain or regain the use of: His anger finally helped him find his tongue.

6. to ascertain by study or calculation: to find the sum of several numbers.

7. to feel or perceive: He finds it so.

8. to become aware of, or discover (oneself), as being in a condition or location: After a long illness, he found himself well again. She woke to find herself at home.

9. to discover: Columbus found America in 1492.

 

You'll notice that nowhere does it say "to locate something that isn't there".

Whether you log a missing cache as "found" or not you did not find it. To do so would be impossible. That begs the OP's original question - why? What have you gained, except another increment in the meaningless number displayed on this web site after your name?

Link to comment
How about dictionary.com:

How about ClanRiffstersTheoriesAndBeliefsArentAlwaysInOnlineDictionaries.com? If you choose to box yourself in, limiting your reality to what can be found on the Internet, that is your prerogative. I choose not to join you.

 

find:

4. to discover or perceive after consideration: to find something to be true.

(was it not true prior to consideration?)

5. to gain or regain the use of: His anger finally helped him find his tongue.

(Was his tongue missing? How can he find something if he knew where it was?)

6. to ascertain by study or calculation: to find the sum of several numbers.

(Was the sum missing?)

7. to feel or perceive: He finds it so.

(Kinda like one would perceive that the cracked Gladware lid and pile of sodden McToys used to be a cache)

 

What have you gained, except another increment in the meaningless number displayed on this web site after your name?

Can you direct me to the increment in my meaningless number? I just checked my profile and couldn't find it.

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment
... What have you gained, except another increment in the meaningless number displayed on this web site after your name?
Well, you've also arrived at the location prescribed by the cache owner and experienced whatever there was to see there. Depending on whether the owner believes that the location or the log is the thing, you may have 'found' it.
Link to comment

Where I get my kilt in a knot is when I see folks berating others who have done nothing more than follow the aforementioned definition, calling them "liars" and "cheaters", and calling their finds "bogus". These are the folks who seem to treat geocaching as some sort of religion, persecuting any who don't follow the "true & righteous" path.

 

Who cares if people logs DNF's as finds and inflate their numbers. I really wonder what all the fuss is about?

Ann, some folks ain't happy unless they are degrading others. Sad but true. :laughing:

Same here...that's what bugs me the most, too. Yet, these are the same people who claim that the numbers mean nothing. How's that work, anyway?

Link to comment
... What have you gained, except another increment in the meaningless number displayed on this web site after your name?
Well, you've also arrived at the location prescribed by the cache owner and experienced whatever there was to see there. Depending on whether the owner believes that the location or the log is the thing, you may have 'found' it.

 

Do you feel the need to log a "find" on something that wasn't there in order to enjoy the location? Can't you enjoy the location just as much and log a DNF? I think you're confusing the geocaching experience with the physical geocache itself. And that bring us back to the OP's question - which, as best as I can tell, still hasn't been answered in this thread.

Edited by DocDiTTo
Link to comment

Somewhere we lost track of the thread's purpose. The debate as to whether it is right or not is being held elsewhere. This thread was to just gain insight into why you do log them, not debate the the morals of it.

 

How about we try to stay on topic with it? Thanks.

I agree. There's already another thread to discuss if it's OK to log MIA caches. What pghlooking is asking for here are for people to give examples of when they claim find and didn't sign the log and why they justify it. Let's leave the critique of the rationale to the other thread.

 

Re: TrailGator's experience. I've lost track of how many times I've dropped someone's cache in the storm drain or down inside a fence post. As it turns out, I'm a puritan when it come to logging these. If I signed the log before dropping the cache I claim a find. If I dropped the cache before I signed the log I log a DNF. Of course nobody knows if I am telling the truth :laughing:

Link to comment
Do you feel the need to log a "find" on something that wasn't there in order to enjoy the location?

Do you feel you need to berate those who don't see the world exactly as you do?

 

Can't you enjoy the location just as much and log a DNF?

Why would you want to regulate how someone else finds enjoyment?

 

I think you're confusing the geocaching experience with the physical geocache itself.

Some think the container is the critical element. Others think it's about the journey. Still others think the only important aspect is making sure everyone plays the same way they do. No confusion noted.

 

Here's your sign robe. :laughing:

Link to comment
... What have you gained, except another increment in the meaningless number displayed on this web site after your name?
Well, you've also arrived at the location prescribed by the cache owner and experienced whatever there was to see there. Depending on whether the owner believes that the location or the log is the thing, you may have 'found' it.
Do you feel the need to log a "find" on something that wasn't there in order to enjoy the location? Can't you enjoy the location just as much and log a DNF? I think you're confusing the geocaching experience with the physical geocache itself. And that bring us back to the OP's question - which, as best as I can tell, still hasn't been answered in this thread.
Me, personally? I log DNFs all the time. Check out my logs. I bet you don't find any caches logged that I didn't 'actually' find. Of course, the fact that I don't log in that manner doesn't mean that there aren't reasons that some cache owners and seekers would agree that logging a 'find' is perfectly fine.
Link to comment

It’s funny that every time this comes up, there are three distinct positions,

1. It’s wrong, I don’t do it, it shouldn’t be happening, it hurts the game

2. It’s wrong, I don’t do it, but it doesn’t affect anyone so who cares

3. Right and wrong are archaic terms that don’t apply, let everyone do whatever they want

 

Also, every time this comes up people in the second group ask “who does it hurt/affect? Several people point out who it affects and how it affects both players and the game, but the second group puts their hands over their ears and sing “La la la la la la I can’t hear you”, and later ask the very same question all over again.

 

There are gray areas, like when parts of the cache container are there, it’s going to be a judgment call on the part of the finder and cache owner as to whether it’s a legitimate find or not. BrianSnat mentions the dollar bill in the washing machine; I earlier mentioned a $5 in the dryer, same thing really. This thread and the other similar thread are about logging a find when there is nothing left of the cache container.

 

This thread in particular asks the people in group two what is the justification for claiming a find on something that isn’t there to find. So far, no one in the second group has come up with even one intelligently reasoned argument.

 

So come on, if you fall into group two or three, what is your argument? How do you justify selecting Found It from the drop down box when you know without a doubt that you didn’t find the cache? Can anyone in those two groups articulate an intelligent position in the debate, or are we just going to go around in circles?

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

At close to 500 finds, my standards are pretty simple. Log a DNF if I didn't find it, but if the owner offers to claim a find because I was in the right place and it wasn't there, I'll take it.

 

I offer to people who were in the right spot for mine when they have turned up missing that they can claim a find - some do, some don't.

 

Just my $0.02

Link to comment

At close to 500 finds, my standards are pretty simple. Log a DNF if I didn't find it, but if the owner offers to claim a find because I was in the right place and it wasn't there, I'll take it.

 

I offer to people who were in the right spot for mine when they have turned up missing that they can claim a find - some do, some don't.

 

Just my $0.02

A perfect example. This thread doesn't ask what you do, it asks why you do it. If you select Found It when you know you didn't, you are being untruthful. The OP is asking why.

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

So come on, if you fall into group two or three, what is your argument? How do you justify selecting Found It from the drop down box when you know without a doubt that you didn’t find the cache? Can anyone in those two groups articulate an intelligent position in the debate, or are we just going to go around in circles?

 

Exactly what the OP asked, and what I asked in two previous posts. Rather than answer in a straightforward matter, all I've seen is personal jabs at those of us asking the question. Maybe the best defense is a good offense? I've been told here that I've berated people, and that I'm trying to "regulate their enjoyment", simply because I asked the same questions the OP did.

 

You might want to provide the measurements for your robe in advance. Mine doesn't fit.

Link to comment

This thread in particular asks the people in group two what is the justification for claiming a find on something that isn’t there to find. So far, no one in the second group has come up with even one intelligently reasoned argument.

 

So come on, if you fall into group two or three, what is your argument? How do you justify selecting Found It from the drop down box when you know without a doubt that you didn’t find the cache? Can anyone in those two groups articulate an intelligent position in the debate, or are we just going to go around in circles?

Actually, this has been answered by myself in this thread and the others in this forum. For those of you who still don't know the details between the ONE time I have done this, here they are again...

 

I was hunting a cache several miles from home. We found the obvious spot, but no cache. We went home and logged a DNF. After contacting the owner, who checked it and verified it gone, he offered up to us the option of changing our DNF log to a "Found It". We accepted the offer. End of story.

 

Intelligently reasoned enough for you this time? It seems to me that the people who have reasoned their individual cases here, for quite long enough, actually, have to "defend" their reasoning later on. Why is that?

 

Circle back to you...

Link to comment

This thread in particular asks the people in group two what is the justification for claiming a find on something that isn’t there to find. So far, no one in the second group has come up with even one intelligently reasoned argument.

 

So come on, if you fall into group two or three, what is your argument? How do you justify selecting Found It from the drop down box when you know without a doubt that you didn’t find the cache? Can anyone in those two groups articulate an intelligent position in the debate, or are we just going to go around in circles?

Actually, this has been answered by myself in this thread and the others in this forum. For those of you who still don't know the details between the ONE time I have done this, here they are again...

 

I was hunting a cache several miles from home. We found the obvious spot, but no cache. We went home and logged a DNF. After contacting the owner, who checked it and verified it gone, he offered up to us the option of changing our DNF log to a "Found It". We accepted the offer. End of story.

 

Intelligently reasoned enough for you this time? It seems to me that the people who have reasoned their individual cases here, for quite long enough, actually, have to "defend" their reasoning later on. Why is that?

 

Circle back to you...

Uh...no. At no point do you answer the question, why. Why were you untruthful? You did not find the cache, but later claimed you did.

Link to comment

I am just asking...

 

1. What your reasons are/were for claiming a find on a cache that you did not physically sign your name into the logbook.

 

2. Is this something you normally practice?

 

3. Do you allow others to log your caches that were not signed but were rather "earned"?

Actually, here are the questions. I see nothing about "Why were you untruthful?"

 

Maybe you see a different set of questions?

Link to comment

A&F5, you'd have as much luck going to a (insert favorite religious group here) and arguing the merits of (insert favorite "sin" here). Once someone's mind is closed, it seldom opens just because somebody else offers them facts.

Yes, I know that feeling. No matter how many times I point out that selecting Found It from the drop down box on the cache page when you did not find the cache is a lie, I run into totally closed minds. Occasionally, someone fesses up and admits it’s a lie, and then attempts to justify the lie.

 

Cache owners wield some serious power, they can change the meaning of common English words and even alter reality. Maybe they can change the meaning of the phrase ‘honor system’ too.

Link to comment

I am just asking...

 

1. What your reasons are/were for claiming a find on a cache that you did not physically sign your name into the logbook.

 

Actually, here are the questions. I see nothing about "Why were you untruthful?"

 

Uh...how about right there in the first question. But i will commmend you on your attempt to weasle out of answering the question though.

 

This is like arguing with five year olds. Does anyone have an intelligent argument?

Link to comment

A&F5, you'd have as much luck going to a (insert favorite religious group here) and arguing the merits of (insert favorite "sin" here). Once someone's mind is closed, it seldom opens just because somebody else offers them facts.

Yes, I know that feeling. No matter how many times I point out that selecting Found It from the drop down box on the cache page when you did not find the cache is a lie, I run into totally closed minds. Occasionally, someone fesses up and admits it’s a lie, and then attempts to justify the lie.

 

Cache owners wield some serious power, they can change the meaning of common English words and even alter reality. Maybe they can change the meaning of the phrase ‘honor system’ too.

Yeah, I get that feeling, too. No matter how many times I point out that my first log was a DNF and then a "Found", people still see that as a 'lie'. Huh. Go figure. Somebody, though, points out that this is EXTREMELY dishonest, and the offending party is without morals, a cheater, and an altogether big bad guy.

 

All this in a non-competitive game of few rules and a lot of discretion.

Link to comment

Uh...how about right there in the first question. But i will commmend you on your attempt to weasle out of answering the question though.

Ok, I typed this really slow because it's becoming readily apparent you are having a hard time with the big words:

 

I was hunting a cache several miles from home. We found the obvious spot, but no cache. We went home and logged a DNF. After contacting the owner, who checked it and verified it gone, he offered up to us the option of changing our DNF log to a "Found It". We accepted the offer. End of story.

 

This is the 'why' part. Get it now?

 

Does anyone have an intelligent argument?

We're wondering the very same thing about you.

Link to comment

A&F5, you'd have as much luck going to a (insert favorite religious group here) and arguing the merits of (insert favorite "sin" here). Once someone's mind is closed, it seldom opens just because somebody else offers them facts.

Yes, I know that feeling. No matter how many times I point out that selecting Found It from the drop down box on the cache page when you did not find the cache is a lie, I run into totally closed minds. Occasionally, someone fesses up and admits it’s a lie, and then attempts to justify the lie.

 

Cache owners wield some serious power, they can change the meaning of common English words and even alter reality. Maybe they can change the meaning of the phrase ‘honor system’ too.

Yeah, I get that feeling, too. No matter how many times I point out that my first log was a DNF and then a "Found", people still see that as a 'lie'. Huh. Go figure. Somebody, though, points out that this is EXTREMELY dishonest, and the offending party is without morals, a cheater, and an altogether big bad guy.

 

All this in a non-competitive game of few rules and a lot of discretion.

So if I claim to have never climbed Mount Everest, but later claim that I did, I’m not telling a lie?

 

You know, if the intellectual base that you are building your argument on is faulty, then your whole argument becomes moot. Your (collective you) only hope is to petition Seattle to add another selection to the drop down, one for Smiley Awarded, then you can be truthful.

Link to comment

I've logged a couple of caches that some might consider questionable. One was reported MIA and archived, but I didn't have that status on my PDA, so I went out and found it. It was exactly at the listed coordinates, and I signed the log, but had trouble logging it because it had been archived. I did get it logged, and have no problems with my conscience about doing it. It was there and I signed the log.

 

The other was another story. I found the cache, could see it and almost touch it, but a 4-foot long rattlesnake had a den under it, and was being very aggressive about guarding it. I did not sign that log. Some logs just aren't worth signing; this was one. I found it, but didn't sign the log, and my conscience doesn't hurt me about that one, either.

Link to comment
I was hunting a cache several miles from home.

Superfluous information.

We found the obvious spot, but no cache.

Happens all the time

We went home and logged a DNF.

Good, you logged a did not find. Perfect since you did not find the cache.

After contacting the owner, who checked it and verified it gone, he offered up to us the option of changing our DNF log to a "Found It".

He verified the cache was gone thus making your original DNF post correct. His offer, however well meaning, doesn’t change the fact that you did not find the cache.

We accepted the offer.

When you reopened the cache page and selected Found It, you were untruthful. You even admit you did not find the cache.

 

And the question remains, why do you feel it’s acceptable to lie in a game that’s based on the honor system?

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

Yeah, I get that feeling, too. No matter how many times I point out that my first log was a DNF

The correct log, since you Did Not Find the cache.

 

and then a "Found"
So you went back and changed your claim that you actually did find it.

 

, people still see that as a 'lie'.
Well, it's not the truth... so what other word would you prefer other people use?

 

Huh. Go figure.
I did. I figure that you were given permission to pretend that you actually found the cache, and that's what you're doing, pretending. I figure there's nothing wrong with that in this particular case as long as you're fine with it. A lot of people claim a Find on caches that were missing. Since the owner replaced the cache before you changed your version of history your bogus find didn't really mislead anyone into thinking it was there when it really wasn't. So no harm done. Your numbers are really only meaningful to you anyway, same with everyone else here. None of the numbers can be compared to show anything of value.

 

Somebody, though, points out that this is EXTREMELY dishonest, and the offending party is without morals, a cheater, and an altogether big bad guy.
That was a little rude and over the top of them to say all that. I'm curious which post you saw this in. Do you have a link?

 

All this in a non-competitive game of few rules and a lot of discretion.
It's a great game eh? It's similar to putt-putt in that regard. If every once in a while you want to claim a hole-in-one on a hole you never actually played on, I'll still have the same amount of fun playing when I go.
Link to comment

And the question remains, why do you feel it’s acceptable to lie in a game that’s based on the honor system?

Ya know, it was kinda fun bantering back and forth, but now I'm bored with it. I don't feel the need to explain anything I do in this game to anyone. If you have a problem with the way anyone else plays the game, that's too bad. I've said it before, life is too short. It seems like you aren't interested in the "why", only berating the reasons you do get.

 

Have a nice day!

Link to comment

And the question remains, why do you feel it’s acceptable to lie in a game that’s based on the honor system?

Ya know, it was kinda fun bantering back and forth, but now I'm bored with it. I don't feel the need to explain anything I do in this game to anyone. If you have a problem with the way anyone else plays the game, that's too bad. I've said it before, life is too short. It seems like you aren't interested in the "why", only berating the reasons you do get.

 

Have a nice day!

I was waiting for that. You did it in the last thread too. You got backed into an intellectual corner and bailed.

 

You’re really no fun to debate with. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

I was waiting for that. You did it in the last thread too. You got backed into an intellectual corner and bailed.

 

You’re really no fun to debate with. :unsure:

Ditto. It's sorta like trying to explain nuclear physics to my 4 year old. He just doesn't get it, either. You tell him the same thing, over and over, and he's just got this look: :rolleyes:

 

Pretty much like me explaining to you the "why" behind my story.

Link to comment

This thread in particular asks the people in group two what is the justification for claiming a find on something that isn’t there to find. So far, no one in the second group has come up with even one intelligently reasoned argument.

 

So come on, if you fall into group two or three, what is your argument? How do you justify selecting Found It from the drop down box when you know without a doubt that you didn’t find the cache? Can anyone in those two groups articulate an intelligent position in the debate, or are we just going to go around in circles?

Actually, this has been answered by myself in this thread and the others in this forum. For those of you who still don't know the details between the ONE time I have done this, here they are again...

 

I was hunting a cache several miles from home. We found the obvious spot, but no cache. We went home and logged a DNF. After contacting the owner, who checked it and verified it gone, he offered up to us the option of changing our DNF log to a "Found It". We accepted the offer. End of story.

 

Intelligently reasoned enough for you this time? It seems to me that the people who have reasoned their individual cases here, for quite long enough, actually, have to "defend" their reasoning later on. Why is that?

 

Circle back to you...

 

I think the original question was why you did it, not what you did. Circle back to you.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

This case seems very cut and dry to me. It was a wasted experience because the cache was muggled. This happens all the time to all of us. If it were me I would have logged a DNF and been done with it. I would not make a special trip to go back just sign the log just (to get a smiley) unless I happened to be near it at some point in the future. For me the fun is in finding the cache and not in signing the log. It is a bummer when the cache is not there, but don't make it more of a bummer by lieing. Your integrity is worth a lot more than some tupperware container or whatever. :rolleyes:

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

Well, if I have bush-whacked across 3 acres of cockleburrs and did not find that cache..........

 

You don't think I want to look like a blind BOOB and say something like......."I looked and looked and just

couldn't find it."

 

Of COURSE not! Man, I'm here to tell ya, I FOUND that sucker..just look for that big SMILIE I have

plastered in the record!! I DID find it, dontcha believe me????????

 

What log book? The dog musta ate it!

 

Yeah, let all those LOSERS record that DNF....but as for me..........HERE IT IS!! :rolleyes:

 

(the preceding was a spoof and not intended to be taken in a serious manner :unsure:

Link to comment
What I want to know is why would you want to?

I think the most resounding answer, (at least in this thread), is that the smiley represents a reward. It can be a reward for locating a container, a reward for opening said container or a reward for effort expended upon the hunt for the container, depending on the beliefs of the cache owner and finder. As a cache owner, I am appreciative of anyone who discovers a problem with one of my caches, (MIA/Etc), and often offer to allow the person notifying me to change their DNF to a find as a reward. I have also had this offer given to me on several occasions, but as yet, I haven't taken anybody up on it.

 

Just because I apply a set of values on myself, doesn't mean I'm willing to impose those same values on others, in a game without rules. If the game did have rules, I might feel differently. I might even be willing to don my own Inquisitor's robes, take up my pitchfork & torch, and join the small minded zealots in their little witch hunt.

Link to comment
What I want to know is why would you want to?

I think the most resounding answer, (at least in this thread), is that the smiley represents a reward. It can be a reward for locating a container, a reward for opening said container or a reward for effort expended upon the hunt for the container, depending on the beliefs of the cache owner and finder. As a cache owner, I am appreciative of anyone who discovers a problem with one of my caches, (MIA/Etc), and often offer to allow the person notifying me to change their DNF to a find as a reward. I have also had this offer given to me on several occasions, but as yet, I haven't taken anybody up on it.

 

Just because I apply a set of values on myself, doesn't mean I'm willing to impose those same values on others, in a game without rules. If the game did have rules, I might feel differently. I might even be willing to don my own Inquisitor's robes, take up my pitchfork & torch, and join the small minded zealots in their little witch hunt.

I think I agree with everything in that post.

Link to comment

I might even be willing to don my own Inquisitor's robes, take up my pitchfork & torch, and join the small minded zealots in their little witch hunt.

 

Do statements such as this make you feel better about yourself? What I've seen so far in this thread are a few curious people asking why people make false statements in their online logs, nothing more, nothing less.

 

Although you might be onto something in that you perceive the smiley as some sort of "reward". That's an interesting perspective, although one which I don't share. If everyone who disagrees with you is automatically labeled a robed pitchfork and torch carrying zealot, I guess I'm in that group. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

I might even be willing to don my own Inquisitor's robes, take up my pitchfork & torch, and join the small minded zealots in their little witch hunt.

 

Do statements such as this make you feel better about yourself? What I've seen so far in this thread are a few curious people asking why people make false statements in their online logs, nothing more, nothing less.

 

Although you might be onto something in that you perceive the smiley as some sort of "reward". That's an interesting perspective, although one which I don't share. If everyone who disagrees with you is automatically labeled a robed pitchfork and torch carrying zealot, I guess I'm in that group. :rolleyes:

We all get a little hyperbolic, sometimes.

Link to comment
What I've seen so far in this thread are a few curious people asking why people make false statements in their online logs, nothing more, nothing less.

Perhaps you should reread the thread. Like you, I've also seen several folks inquiring about the practice of logging a find on a missing cache. No problems there. I've also seen posts in this thread where folks who practice this particular form of logging are called "liars". The ones slinging the "liar Liar, Pants On Fire" comments are the folks deserving white robe status, in my opinion. If you wish to join such a group, that is your choice. There are many organizations across the globe where intolerance is actively encouraged. You might feel welcome there, but I do not. Unless you can show me a set of rules by which this game must be played, please refrain from imposing your values upon me.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...