Jump to content

Double logging and geo-ethics


Scaber

Recommended Posts

When I find a new cache I log "found it". Subsequently when I go to that cache to drop off a travel bug I just leave a note. I have noticed that some people log "found it" again. Does this "double logging" add to your found numbers? Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics. As we mature in our caching ability I have found that most people develop their own geo-ethics of what is right and wrong. This recreation has no geo-cops (although I have met a few tough reviewers). If you wanted to you could sit home all day and log finds on GC.com that you have never been to. When caching with my brother we would take turns hopping out of the car to get park and grabs in parking lots. After, I felt guilty about logging caches that I did not actually actively participate in finding. I adjusted my geo-ethics accordingly. My questions are 1. Do you double log on the same cache and 2. How has your geo-ethics evolved or what are your own rules and limitations?

Link to comment

To answer your question...yes, each find log adds to your stats!

 

People play the game in completely different ways. I will not go into detail about the different senarios that may cause someone to want to double-log, but I have always logged 1 find log for each GC#

 

People have and still do sit at their computer screen and rack up the numbers, and those are called "armchair caches".....If that is the way that you like to play, then go for it and have fun doing it! Some people may look down on you for doing it, but if you are having fun then that is all that matters. You always run the risk of a cache owner deleting your find log if he/she feels you never visited their cache.

Link to comment

My Geo-ethics have evolved a bit over time but I have always been a (one GC# equals1 and only 1 find) logger.

 

 

I log all my DNF's.

 

I only log events as attended.

 

I don't make find logs on missing caches.

 

I don't replace "missing" containers. (only broken ones - stuff the original into the new)

 

No Fake finds.

 

No logging my own caches (except those I found and then adopted)

 

 

that sort of thing....

Link to comment

My ethics are as simple as I can make them: WWJD? AKA: What Would Jeremy Do?

(no, I'm not a psychic, nor have I ever met Jeremy, so in reality, I can only guess what Jeremy would do)

 

Each of my finds is for a single, unique cache. The one time I double logged a find was by mistake, when I was very new to the game, and I dropped a bug using the "Found It" log type. A polite E-mail from the owner corrected the error of my ways.

 

I personally won't log a find unless my name is in the log.

 

I will only attend a single event one time.

 

If a cache is not listed on this site, I won't claim a find on this site.

 

These mores are mine, and mine alone. I will not try to foist them off on someone else. As long as you're having fun, you're doing something right. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Lets say that numbers are important, that the more finds you have the better. What does it really mean if your number is big because of double and triple logs? Person A finds a cache once and logs it once. Person B finds a cache once and logs it three times. Is B three times as good as A?

Link to comment

When I find a new cache I log "found it". Subsequently when I go to that cache to drop off a travel bug I just leave a note. I have noticed that some people log "found it" again. Does this "double logging" add to your found numbers? Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics. As we mature in our caching ability I have found that most people develop their own geo-ethics of what is right and wrong. This recreation has no geo-cops (although I have met a few tough reviewers). If you wanted to you could sit home all day and log finds on GC.com that you have never been to. When caching with my brother we would take turns hopping out of the car to get park and grabs in parking lots. After, I felt guilty about logging caches that I did not actually actively participate in finding. I adjusted my geo-ethics accordingly. My questions are 1. Do you double log on the same cache and 2. How has your geo-ethics evolved or what are your own rules and limitations?

 

As a relitive new-be I knew only that I could drop a TB by logging the cache as a find. I didn't realize I could post a note and do it. After figuring that out I have never gone back to see if I missed something obvious in some explanation or instructions or if there were any related instruction at all.

 

I recall my first experience with a TB and I had a hard time figuring how to drop it at all.

 

Might be just me... I seldom read the instructions on "some assembly required items"!

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics.

 

 

Cheating? :unsure: Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

 

 

The top cachers with 20,000+ finds have been crucified for double logging and other such unwritten ethics violations..... When someone pointed out if you stripped them of their questionable finds that their actual total would be less by 1000 caches, or so, all you could hear were crickets. If someone with 19,000+ unquestionable finds wants to claim top dawg, I'll have the Snoogstress bake 'em some cookies and they can collect at GW6. (What? I gotta pay postage too? :rolleyes: )

 

 

I have a double log on exactly one cache. It is well documented why I did it. I have no regrets about it. I am my own harshest critic.

 

 

I won't presume to measure another person by the ruler I measure myself by. Anyone that tries to hold their own ruler up to me will likely get poked with the pointy ends after I break it over my knee. :unsure:

Link to comment

My ethics are as simple as I can make them: WWJD? AKA: What Would Jeremy Do?

 

My ethics are as simple as I can make them as well: WWID? AKA: What Would I Do?

 

Don't really care what anyone else... to include Jeremy would do. The rules aren't hard and fast and set in stone, there is no penalty for playing it your own way, double logging affects noone but the person doing it and the cache owner (so it's a negotiation between them).

 

I have to agree to Snoogans wholeheartedly here:

 

 

Cheating? Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Link to comment

1 find per GC. That's the general rule for me. I was the last to find for one cache, followed by a string of DNF's, and even the CO couldn't find it when he visited. It was archived before I could make it back. Anyway, I went back, found it buried under soil, and re-hid, emailing the CO exactly how to find, leaving him the option to try and reinstate the cache if the local reviewer wanted, or simply remove the cache. In this case I would think that logging it as a find would be acceptable (giving previous DNF'ers a chance to go back if they were watching it), but I chose still not to. I wanted to leave any notice of the status of the cache to the owner and the local reviewer.

 

One cache I went out to get in the morning in order to be FTF. I couldn't find it and gave up. At work, usig googlemaps and a trail map of the park, I realised my mistake. I went on the wrong trail that would have forced me to go through private property for about 1/4 mile to get to the cache. Never saw the other trail. Went back after work the same day and was indeed FTF. I chose not to mark this one as a DNF. My personal rule is if I find it the same day, it's not a DNF. (I do log my DNF's, I have 3 DNF's for 21 finds).

 

All subsequent visits to a cache will be marked by notes for me. Mostly to drop off or pick up bugs and coins.

Link to comment

When I find a new cache I log "found it". Subsequently when I go to that cache to drop off a travel bug I just leave a note. I have noticed that some people log "found it" again. Does this "double logging" add to your found numbers?

Yes, the "find count" is total number of "found it" logs and "attended" logs that you have logged online.
Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics. As we mature in our caching ability I have found that most people develop their own geo-ethics of what is right and wrong. This recreation has no geo-cops (although I have met a few tough reviewers).
This is partially correct. The website doesn't enforce a no double logging rule. This is because there are a few rare cases where double logs on caches are reasonable. However, the cache owner is responsible for maintaining the quality of post to their cache page. Per the guidelines owners may "delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements."
If you wanted to you could sit home all day and log finds on GC.com that you have never been to.
Except that some owners will delete your log. Also if you start doing this enough to annoy TPTB, they have in the past disabled accounts for doing this. However it is theoretically possible.
When caching with my brother we would take turns hopping out of the car to get park and grabs in parking lots. After, I felt guilty about logging caches that I did not actually actively participate in finding. I adjusted my geo-ethics accordingly.
This is a reasonable personal decision. Others may feel comfortable working as a team in this way to claim a find.
My questions are 1. Do you double log on the same cache and 2. How has your geo-ethics evolved or what are your own rules and limitations?

1. I have one double logged cache. I'm comfortable with two finds on it. I don't see the find count as a competition. 2. Yes my geo-ethics have evolved. I'm probably tougher on myself than when I started. I am also more tolerant of others who may have looser standards. Early on I realized that you can't compare two cachers numbers so there isn't really anything to get to upset about if someone is using a 'found it' log for every visit to a cache. I wouldn't go as far as Snoogans in saying there is no reason to "cheat". There are several unofficial leader boards and some people have been know to boast about where they are in the "standings". Many local groups award trophies or certificates to cachers for achieving milestones. So there is some advantage in padding your numbers. However, I think there are very few cases of cachers actually cheating. The main issue is that different cachers have different opinions about when it is proper to use a found it log. Some, whom I have refered to as "puritans", take a very conservative approach and look down on those that use the found it log more freely as lacking integrity and moral character.
Link to comment

Wow, I never realized that people were double logging. I always just post a note if I drop off a TB. (Then again, I'm not a numbers person anyway)

A note is the right way to go. I've seen some people log a find for a bug on a cache they already had found. They had made a mistake, when I emailed them to ask them to change it to a note they said "whoops, sorry, fixed". No harm, no foul.

Link to comment

When I find a new cache I log "found it". Subsequently when I go to that cache to drop off a travel bug I just leave a note. I have noticed that some people log "found it" again. Does this "double logging" add to your found numbers? Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics. As we mature in our caching ability I have found that most people develop their own geo-ethics of what is right and wrong. This recreation has no geo-cops (although I have met a few tough reviewers). If you wanted to you could sit home all day and log finds on GC.com that you have never been to. When caching with my brother we would take turns hopping out of the car to get park and grabs in parking lots. After, I felt guilty about logging caches that I did not actually actively participate in finding. I adjusted my geo-ethics accordingly. My questions are 1. Do you double log on the same cache and 2. How has your geo-ethics evolved or what are your own rules and limitations?

 

In my opinion you are not even close to correct.

 

If you adopt a rule which prevents you from logging a cache as the owner intends then you have no sense.

The best example is moving caches, the hider intends that Finders should log the cache each time they find it, if you adopt a rule that prevents you from doing that then you have no sense, this is my opinion. A few people admit that the rule they have adopted is simply an expression of the fact that they are anal, they have the good sense to recognize that they are anal. Some people continue to to come into the forums and flog the rule they have adopted as an example of sound geocaching practice, these people have no sense.

 

The cache owner is always the final arbiter of all claims, there is no exception to this rule. If a cache owner allows your log to stand then you have a Find, if the cache owner deletes your log then you have not found the cache, there is an exact relationship between your log, the cache owner and your Found count.

 

I have a cache placed underwater, it takes two people to find the cache, one must be on the shore of the lake, the other person must dive down approximately 14' to retrieve the cache. People who have developed ethical warts would insist on doing the dive down before they signed the cache, people with sense would arrive as a group and select the strongest swimmer to dive down and retrieve the cache so everyone could sign it, I designed this cache with that in mind. If a group of three people arrived and they were infected with your ethical wart one of them would have to forego signing the log because they "did not actually actively participate in finding." The group could stand on the beach and argue all they wanted, they still wouldn't have any sense, that is my opinion.

 

People who have rules about "their numbers" are demonstrating that they have no sense, this is my opinion. If you log finds on my caches you will do it as I intend, if you don't then I will delete your log, this makes sense because it is my cache and when you leave a log on my cache it has to pass my muster, not yours.

 

Geo-ethics are warts, this is my opinion, most warts develop when people start to think that a Found count matters or that finding a geocache is something other than a simple bit of fun.

Link to comment

Not about double logs, but a different logging question:

Just for the sake of the conversation, let's say that numbers do mean something. Most people probably think that if a cache is up a tree , just standing at the base and looking up at the cache is not enough.

What about people who cache in groups? One climbs the tree and all in the group log a find. Not too many people would think this is wrong. What about people who have their own accounts but cache in groups? They might never have found a cache on their own but still get the smiley all the same. I suggest that if you are in a group of ten people you each get 1/10 of a smiley.

Link to comment

I suggest that if you are in a group of ten people you each get 1/10 of a smiley.

I'm pretty sure that's how the GS computer program documents finds. However, since 1/10 of a smiley would be really, really hard to distinguish between, say, 1/8 of a smiley, or 1/7 of a smiley on the computer monitor, they just round up to the nearest whole smiley...

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment

Last I checked this wasn't a competition. So, you can't cheat. Kinda like cheating at solitaire, isn't it?

 

I always hear this analogy and it doesn't make sense. Of course you can cheat at solitaire. You can peak under a pile and see what cards are there. You can grab one of those cards and play it if it helps move the game forward. You can decide to play red on red or black on black. You can certainly cheat in several ways.

 

Now is it silly to cheat in a solo game? Of course. But whether you're cheating another party or just yourself doesn't make it any less an act of cheating.

Edited by Googling Hrpty Hrrs
Link to comment

When I find a new cache I log "found it". Subsequently when I go to that cache to drop off a travel bug I just leave a note. I have noticed that some people log "found it" again. Does this "double logging" add to your found numbers? Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics. As we mature in our caching ability I have found that most people develop their own geo-ethics of what is right and wrong. This recreation has no geo-cops (although I have met a few tough reviewers). If you wanted to you could sit home all day and log finds on GC.com that you have never been to. When caching with my brother we would take turns hopping out of the car to get park and grabs in parking lots. After, I felt guilty about logging caches that I did not actually actively participate in finding. I adjusted my geo-ethics accordingly. My questions are 1. Do you double log on the same cache and 2. How has your geo-ethics evolved or what are your own rules and limitations?

 

Recently I was downloading GPX files for some caches I was thinking about going after and I noticed a "Found It" log with text that indicated it should have been a DNF. I'd seen this cacher's logs before and I figured that this one was a "typo" and that he'd just picked the wrong thing from the pulldown.

 

I sent him a PM and asked, and he went and corrected it.

 

It's possible that the double-loggers don't realize that they can use a note to drop a TB. If they don't have a lot of finds yet....

Link to comment

Last I checked this wasn't a competition. So, you can't cheat. Kinda like cheating at solitaire, isn't it?

 

I always hear this analogy and it doesn't make sense. Of course you can cheat at solitaire. You can peak under a pile and see what cards are there. You can grab one of those cards and play it if it helps move the game forward. You can decide to play red on red or black on black. You can certainly cheat in several ways.

 

Now is it silly to cheat in a solo game? Of course. But whether you're cheating another party or just yourself doesn't make it any less an act of cheating.

No. When you "cheat" at a solo game you are just playing under your own rules. This is not a moral deficit. You have decided that peaking under a pile to see what card is there is allowed in the rules you use to play solitaire. "Cheating" as a moral flaw can only occur when it is done to gain an unfair advatange over someone else. If you are comparing you the number of solitaire games you play out to the number some else plays out and one of you peaks while the other one doesn't then one person has a unfair advantage over the other.

 

Geocaching is much more complicated than solitaire. Some people don't compete, their numbers are their personal stats that they never compare to anyone else. They can't cheat because they have no advantage in doing so. They may have personal rules that justifies using a 'found it' log for a return visit to a cache. Other people use the number for some kind of competition. Who has more finds? Who gets to a round number milestone first? These people can cheat, then can have a personal rule that allows them to log a 'found it' that someone else wouldn't log. Their rule gives them an advantage in playing the game. The problem we have is when some people (who often say they are not competing) assume that others who use a looser definition of when to log 'found it' must be competing and therefore are cheating.

Link to comment

Not about double logs, but a different logging question:

Just for the sake of the conversation, let's say that numbers do mean something. Most people probably think that if a cache is up a tree , just standing at the base and looking up at the cache is not enough.

What about people who cache in groups? One climbs the tree and all in the group log a find. Not too many people would think this is wrong. What about people who have their own accounts but cache in groups? They might never have found a cache on their own but still get the smiley all the same. I suggest that if you are in a group of ten people you each get 1/10 of a smiley.

 

This really brings another question to mind. How close are we to running out of smiley's. We should really have someone check the Groundspeak inventory for this, that way we can know for sure how to ration the smiley's in the future.

 

Dividing up the smiley's is one way of doing it... 1/10th of smiley here, 1/12th there... but unless we can start cloning the smiley's... eventually, we're gonna run out.

 

Ration your smiley's everyone... we need to stretch this out as long as possible. <_<

Link to comment

Not about double logs, but a different logging question:

Just for the sake of the conversation, let's say that numbers do mean something. Most people probably think that if a cache is up a tree , just standing at the base and looking up at the cache is not enough.

What about people who cache in groups? One climbs the tree and all in the group log a find. Not too many people would think this is wrong. What about people who have their own accounts but cache in groups? They might never have found a cache on their own but still get the smiley all the same. I suggest that if you are in a group of ten people you each get 1/10 of a smiley.

 

This really brings another question to mind. How close are we to running out of smiley's. We should really have someone check the Groundspeak inventory for this, that way we can know for sure how to ration the smiley's in the future.

 

Dividing up the smiley's is one way of doing it... 1/10th of smiley here, 1/12th there... but unless we can start cloning the smiley's... eventually, we're gonna run out.

 

Ration your smiley's everyone... we need to stretch this out as long as possible. :(

 

IF you use multiple types of smiley's they could last longer plus we get the added bonus of rating the cache. as example.

 

What were they thinking when they hid this one. <_<

I really hate these micros in the woods :(

Stealth requires :o

Wow this is really cool :)

I shouldn't be here I shouldn't be here :D

 

Team Sand Dollar

Link to comment

Last I checked this wasn't a competition. So, you can't cheat. Kinda like cheating at solitaire, isn't it?

 

I always hear this analogy and it doesn't make sense. Of course you can cheat at solitaire. You can peak under a pile and see what cards are there. You can grab one of those cards and play it if it helps move the game forward. You can decide to play red on red or black on black. You can certainly cheat in several ways.

 

Now is it silly to cheat in a solo game? Of course. But whether you're cheating another party or just yourself doesn't make it any less an act of cheating.

No. When you "cheat" at a solo game you are just playing under your own rules. This is not a moral deficit. You have decided that peaking under a pile to see what card is there is allowed in the rules you use to play solitaire. "Cheating" as a moral flaw can only occur when it is done to gain an unfair advatange over someone else. If you are comparing you the number of solitaire games you play out to the number some else plays out and one of you peaks while the other one doesn't then one person has a unfair advantage over the other.

 

Geocaching is much more complicated than solitaire. Some people don't compete, their numbers are their personal stats that they never compare to anyone else. They can't cheat because they have no advantage in doing so. They may have personal rules that justifies using a 'found it' log for a return visit to a cache. Other people use the number for some kind of competition. Who has more finds? Who gets to a round number milestone first? These people can cheat, then can have a personal rule that allows them to log a 'found it' that someone else wouldn't log. Their rule gives them an advantage in playing the game. The problem we have is when some people (who often say they are not competing) assume that others who use a looser definition of when to log 'found it' must be competing and therefore are cheating.

 

To keep going with this analogy...by your definition, you are changing the generally accepted rules of solitaire. Therefore, while you may not be "cheating" against someone else, you are no longer playing solitaire..you're playing your own game. Which frankly, is what many people argue they are doing with geocaching.

 

On the flip side, while you can find millions of listings of "solitaire rules", I'm not aware of any such list that demands that you log one smiley "find" for each approved GC.com listing.

 

Personally, I take that approach and while it may be a general consensus (and seems to be changing from that), it's not a "rule" in our hobby. I don't like double (or other multiple logging), and I think it's really silly, and it makes congratulating someone for a milestone meaningless.....I just don't think it fits into the definition of "cheating".

Edited by KoosKoos
Link to comment

This really brings another question to mind. How close are we to running out of smiley's. We should really have someone check the Groundspeak inventory for this, that way we can know for sure how to ration the smiley's in the future.

 

Dividing up the smiley's is one way of doing it... 1/10th of smiley here, 1/12th there... but unless we can start cloning the smiley's... eventually, we're gonna run out.

 

Ration your smiley's everyone... we need to stretch this out as long as possible. <_<

 

Actually, no worries there...Signal gets a fresh shipment every day from the factory in Smiley Town.

 

31106z.jpg

Link to comment

This really brings another question to mind. How close are we to running out of smiley's. We should really have someone check the Groundspeak inventory for this, that way we can know for sure how to ration the smiley's in the future.

 

Dividing up the smiley's is one way of doing it... 1/10th of smiley here, 1/12th there... but unless we can start cloning the smiley's... eventually, we're gonna run out.

 

Ration your smiley's everyone... we need to stretch this out as long as possible. :(

 

Actually, no worries there...Signal gets a fresh shipment every day from the factory in Smiley Town.

 

31106z.jpg

 

:D<_<:o:)

Link to comment

Wow, I never realized that people were double logging. I always just post a note if I drop off a TB. (Then again, I'm not a numbers person anyway)

A note is the right way to go. I've seen some people log a find for a bug on a cache they already had found. They had made a mistake, when I emailed them to ask them to change it to a note they said "whoops, sorry, fixed". No harm, no foul.

 

Ok, I'll admit to never even thinking about this..... Not that I'm a numbers person, but more just wanted to play correctly and in the "spirit" of the game. I have only found logged a half dozen TB in some 200 finds,,, but after reading this thread, I don't know if I'm doing it correctly. I find a cache,,,, log the cache as a find,,, if I took a TB, then I click on it and choose found it as well,,,, is this wrong? What is the correct process for finding cache,,,taking TB,,, finding another cache,,,, and dropping off TB...... Again, just want to make sure I'm doing it correctly.

Thanks

Link to comment

Wow, I never realized that people were double logging. I always just post a note if I drop off a TB. (Then again, I'm not a numbers person anyway)

A note is the right way to go. I've seen some people log a find for a bug on a cache they already had found. They had made a mistake, when I emailed them to ask them to change it to a note they said "whoops, sorry, fixed". No harm, no foul.

 

Ok, I'll admit to never even thinking about this..... Not that I'm a numbers person, but more just wanted to play correctly and in the "spirit" of the game. I have only found logged a half dozen TB in some 200 finds,,, but after reading this thread, I don't know if I'm doing it correctly. I find a cache,,,, log the cache as a find,,, if I took a TB, then I click on it and choose found it as well,,,, is this wrong? What is the correct process for finding cache,,,taking TB,,, finding another cache,,,, and dropping off TB...... Again, just want to make sure I'm doing it correctly.

Thanks

 

Find Cache: Log "Found it"

Select TB: Log "Retrieved from Cache XXXXXX"

Find New Cache: Log "Found it", select TB from Inventory and submit log

Visited previously found cache in order to drop off TB: Log "Write Note", select TB from Inventory and submit log.

Edited by BRTango
Link to comment
Cheating? <_< Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Yes.

 

And yes.

 

In fact, there are quite a few off-site prizes for achieving various levels of finds.

 

I find it pretty funny when people in these threads claim that there are no prizes for getting more smileys. The statement is just plain false.

Link to comment

Last I checked this wasn't a competition. So, you can't cheat. Kinda like cheating at solitaire, isn't it?

I've always equated cheating with rules violations, more than the existence of competition. Solitaire has a specific set of rules, so, by my thinking, a person can cheat while playing it. Geocaching, on the other hand, has no rules, therefore, the term "cheating" doesn't quite fit. Typically, before I get judgmental on someone, I'll look at what I perceive their intent to be. If they post a log with the intent to deceive others, then I'll happily declare Shenanigans on them. <_<

Link to comment
Cheating? <_< Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Yes.

 

And yes.

 

In fact, there are quite a few off-site prizes for achieving various levels of finds.

 

I find it pretty funny when people in these threads claim that there are no prizes for getting more smileys. The statement is just plain false.

 

Care to back this statement up? I really want to know where these prizes can be had, so I can inflate my numbers, and go pick up my prize

Link to comment

Someone who "double logs" has deeper issues. If they need to inflate their numbers to make themselves feel better then they have some sort of self esteem problem and need to seek help. :( When I first got into this game I never even thought about "double logging". If you cheat in a solitaire game then you are cheating someone, yourself!!! Then again it's just a game. Have fun!! <_<

Link to comment
Cheating? <_< Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Yes.

 

And yes.

 

In fact, there are quite a few off-site prizes for achieving various levels of finds.

 

I find it pretty funny when people in these threads claim that there are no prizes for getting more smileys. The statement is just plain false.

 

 

Can you clarify?

 

 

Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

 

 

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

 

 

You call my statement false, but you backed it up with exactly nuthin'. :(

Link to comment

When you "cheat" at a solo game you are just playing under your own rules. This is not a moral deficit. You have decided that peaking under a pile to see what card is there is allowed in the rules you use to play solitaire.

Moral Relativism at it's finest! Just make it up as you go along.

 

"Cheating" as a moral flaw can only occur when it is done to gain an unfair advatange over someone else. If you are comparing you the number of solitaire games you play out to the number some else plays out and one of you peaks while the other one doesn't then one person has a unfair advantage over the other.

 

Geocaching is much more complicated than solitaire. Some people don't compete, their numbers are their personal stats that they never compare to anyone else. They can't cheat because they have no advantage in doing so. They may have personal rules that justifies using a 'found it' log for a return visit to a cache. Other people use the number for some kind of competition. Who has more finds? Who gets to a round number milestone first? These people can cheat, then can have a personal rule that allows them to log a 'found it' that someone else wouldn't log. Their rule gives them an advantage in playing the game. The problem we have is when some people (who often say they are not competing) assume that others who use a looser definition of when to log 'found it' must be competing and therefore are cheating.

According to Merriam-Webster

 

transitive verb

1 : to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud

2 : to influence or lead by deceit, trick, or artifice

3 : to elude or thwart by or as if by outwitting <cheat death>

intransitive verb

1 a : to practice fraud or trickery b : to violate rules dishonestly <cheat at cards> <cheating on a test>

2 : to be sexually unfaithful -- usually used with on <was cheating on his wife>

3 : to position oneself defensively near a particular area in anticipation of a play in that area <the shortstop was cheating toward second base>

 

Competition or not, personal gain or not, cheating is in fact cheating.

 

DDC

Link to comment

A couple of months back (in March 2007, I think) a German cacher with almost 400 finds up till then, logged 25 caches in France, all on the same day, which was about 7 months earlier (August 2006) . These caches were all over France, mostly old, several of them disabled or even archived on the day in question. It would have been physically impossible for him to have visited more than 6 of them in the 24-hour period. In 3/4 of the cases he had clearly started at the end of the "Caches in France" list and chosen caches where he thought that the owner, even if still active in the game, wouldn't pose too many questions about a "catching up from last summer" log.

 

None of the caches were mine, but a couple belonged to friends of mine. So I posted a heads-up to the French forum and some people checked their caches, found nothing from this cacher in the log, and deleted his finds. I also posted an "ironic" note on the German forum congratulating the cacher on his purchase of a teleportation device, which was the only way he could have achieved the feat. (On reflection, this probably wasn't my business. But it felt like the right thing at the time.)

 

I didn't think any more about it, until a few weeks later a German friend contacted me with a link to the guy's profile. He had deleted every single one of his 400+ finds. But AFAIK he's still organising events, placing caches, etc.

 

Now, I'm not a psychologist and I can't give an informed opinion of what was going through the guy's head, either when he decided to put his 400-cache reputation on the line for the sake of 25 extra smileys, or when he decided to semi-geocide. But it does suggest that there are even more ways of playing this game than some of us could ever imagine. <_<

Link to comment
Someone who "double logs" has deeper issues. If they need to inflate their numbers to make themselves feel better then they have some sort of self esteem problem and need to seek help. :( When I first got into this game I never even thought about "double logging". If you cheat in a solitaire game then you are cheating someone, yourself!!! Then again it's just a game. Have fun!! :D

 

 

I would stop short of telling them to seek help (that's a bit presumptuous don'tcha think?), but I mostly agree.

 

 

I look at it this way:

 

 

Who am I to judge how someone else finds enjoyment in their geocaching practices if it doesn't impact my own enjoyment in a negative way? <_<

 

 

Let me be presumptuous now and say that if knowing someone else has thousands more finds than you (the royal you) and that some percentage of their finds are questional by your own or some perceived majority ethical code and it causes you angst, perhaps you (again, the royal you) should seek help for your issues. :)

 

 

In short, the minute someone else's questionable find erases one of my legit finds I'll gather up all the angst I can muster to throw at them. Until then, live and let live. :o

Link to comment
Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

That's not what you asked. There is a leaderboard.

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

Do a simple thread search for milestones congratulations threads here in the forums. There are probably at least a thousand threads that fit the description. I am surprised you have never seen any.

 

In my area, there is a geocaching organization, NUTS, that awards medals to members for reaching milestone numbers.

 

You probably already know about the "geocaching achievement" geocoins that are ony available to those who have achieved certain numbers of finds.

 

There are probably many more that I am not aware of.

Link to comment
Cheating? <_< Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Yes.

 

And yes.

 

In fact, there are quite a few off-site prizes for achieving various levels of finds.

 

I find it pretty funny when people in these threads claim that there are no prizes for getting more smileys. The statement is just plain false.

 

 

Can you clarify?

 

 

Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

 

 

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

 

 

You call my statement false, but you backed it up with exactly nuthin'. :(

I mentioned above:

There are several unofficial leader boards and some people have been know to boast about where they are in the "standings". Many local groups award trophies or certificates to cachers for achieving milestones. So there is some advantage in padding your numbers.

 

But my take on the cheating issue is

I think there are very few cases of cachers actually cheating. The main issue is that different cachers have different opinions about when it is proper to use a found it log. Some, whom I have refered to as "puritans", take a very conservative approach and look down on those that use the found it log more freely as lacking integrity and moral character.

 

When you "cheat" at a solo game you are just playing under your own rules. This is not a moral deficit. You have decided that peaking under a pile to see what card is there is allowed in the rules you use to play solitaire.

Moral Relativism at it's finest! Just make it up as you go along.

 

"Cheating" as a moral flaw can only occur when it is done to gain an unfair advatange over someone else. If you are comparing you the number of solitaire games you play out to the number some else plays out and one of you peaks while the other one doesn't then one person has a unfair advantage over the other.

 

Geocaching is much more complicated than solitaire. Some people don't compete, their numbers are their personal stats that they never compare to anyone else. They can't cheat because they have no advantage in doing so. They may have personal rules that justifies using a 'found it' log for a return visit to a cache. Other people use the number for some kind of competition. Who has more finds? Who gets to a round number milestone first? These people can cheat, then can have a personal rule that allows them to log a 'found it' that someone else wouldn't log. Their rule gives them an advantage in playing the game. The problem we have is when some people (who often say they are not competing) assume that others who use a looser definition of when to log 'found it' must be competing and therefore are cheating.

According to Merriam-Webster

 

transitive verb

1 : to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud

2 : to influence or lead by deceit, trick, or artifice

3 : to elude or thwart by or as if by outwitting <cheat death>

intransitive verb

1 a : to practice fraud or trickery b : to violate rules dishonestly <cheat at cards> <cheating on a test>

2 : to be sexually unfaithful -- usually used with on <was cheating on his wife>

3 : to position oneself defensively near a particular area in anticipation of a play in that area <the shortstop was cheating toward second base>

 

Competition or not, personal gain or not, cheating is in fact cheating.

 

DDC

Of course the puritans can define cheating however they want, but I think when people double log, or log a found it log but didn't sign, or break any of the puritans' rules (they're not Geocaching.com's rules), and state in the logs that's what they did - there is no fraud or trickery.

Link to comment
Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

That's not what you asked. There is a leaderboard.

 

 

They are ALL opt-in leaderboards. Sorry, that don't cut it.

 

 

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

Do a simple thread search for milestones congratulations threads here in the forums. There are probably at least a thousand threads that fit the description. I am surprised you have never seen any.

 

 

Seen 'em. How does a kind word equate to a prize? Do you feel cheated that you were happy for someone else? Do you scour their logs to see if they're worthy by your standards before you award them your congratulations?

 

 

In my area, there is a geocaching organization, NUTS, that awards medals to members for reaching milestone numbers.

 

 

Organization specific. Where's MY award and everyone else's?

 

 

You probably already know about the "geocaching achievement" geocoins that are ony available to those who have achieved certain numbers of finds.

 

 

I was actually AWARDED one of those at GW5, by a friend, Corp of Discovery. I had planned to buy it myself but he beat me to the punch.

 

 

How does that equate? I suspect most people buy their own or they are given by friends as mine was. There is no governing body that created those coins, nor do they award them to the general geocaching community.

 

 

Sorry, I can't see your point. Please point out some losers. Since obviously people are cheating to win something. There'd hafta be some losers..... Right? <_<

 

 

Geocaching is like the Special Olympics. If you participate, there are NO losers. (Well, except the one's you yourself perceive to be losers.) :(

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment

 

That's not what you asked. There is a leaderboard.

 

Actually, there used to be several. But they all got their IP addresses blocked for slowing down gc.com. But I'm sure everybody knows the one you're talking about, where they found a different way to do it, that obviously doesn't anger TPTB.

 

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

Do a simple thread search for milestones congratulations threads here in the forums. There are probably at least a thousand threads that fit the description. I am surprised you have never seen any.

 

In my area, there is a geocaching organization, NUTS, that awards medals to members for reaching milestone numbers.

 

You probably already know about the "geocaching achievement" geocoins that are ony available to those who have achieved certain numbers of finds.

 

There are probably many more that I am not aware of.

 

I don't know of a geocaching organization that awards medals, pins, and the like to it's members for milestones, but I'm sure there are several, in addition to the one example given. And yes there are several "geocaching acheivement" awards available for puchase out there on the internet, although generally given out more or less as gifts on a personal basis, and not by organizations.

 

EDIT: OK, I thought of another one. In an area to the South of me (with a little spillover into my area), people have taken to the practice of naming caches for people's milestones. Example: "Joe Guardrail's 1,000 finds", "Parking lot Suzie's 1,500 finds", etc...

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment

I wouldn't cheat, logging 2 finds on a single cache would end up throwing all my milestones off. Once you start, it just snowballs and one day when you realize it, you'll regret it. Everybody can play the way they want, but I'm sure not gonna cheat because your only cheating yourself. As for prizes, praise and pride is good enough for me.

Link to comment

I think a lot of times this logging thing is a newbie error/confusion. But I have seen more experienced cachers double log like this when I'm sure they should know better, so I don't know what's up with that.

 

Regarding the apparent disbelief that there is some 'reward' for people racking up numbers, I know I can't be the only one who has seen listed such things as "Franky-Joe-Billy-Bob's 1k Congrats Event", wherein the local group of uber-cachers will be honor and present FJBB with a golden ammo can to congratulate him for his amazing acheivement.

Is that type of thing not a "reward"?

Link to comment

Before the angst set in, scabr asked:

When I find a new cache I log "found it". Subsequently when I go to that cache to drop off a travel bug I just leave a note. I have noticed that some people log "found it" again. Does this "double logging" add to your found numbers? Of course this brings up the larger issue of cheating and geo-ethics. As we mature in our caching ability I have found that most people develop their own geo-ethics of what is right and wrong. This recreation has no geo-cops (although I have met a few tough reviewers). If you wanted to you could sit home all day and log finds on GC.com that you have never been to. When caching with my brother we would take turns hopping out of the car to get park and grabs in parking lots. After, I felt guilty about logging caches that I did not actually actively participate in finding. I adjusted my geo-ethics accordingly. My questions are 1. Do you double log on the same cache and 2. How has your geo-ethics evolved or what are your own rules and limitations?

 

As IsonoKarst noted: Many of the double loggers for TB pick up/drop do not realize that there is a diffrent way that does not require double logging. I admonished a cache owner for logging his own cache for maintenance. He corrected that to a note. Many instances are due to newbie ignorance.

There are vocal, angst-ful adherents to two or more sides of the 'cheating argument'.

One side argues that there are no rules, and they can log anything that they want to.

The other side argues "Sign log, get smiley."

See any of a dozen threads on these subjects.

Personally, I think that it's about time that geocaching establishes some rules, if for nothing else than to quell these arguments. GC seems to be staying with the theory that it's a listing service, and it's up to the cache owner to determine what constitutes a find.

I will admit to several multiple finds. One set on a moving cache that I found twice. Once thirty-five miles east of here, and once seventy miles south (after it had been moved six or eight times). The other multiple finds were or Locationless Caches/Photo caches with changing or multiple objectives. Objective 18: Photograph a statue of a bird, with your GPS in the shot. Objective 41: Photograph your state capitol building. Multiple logging of these was generally approved, and part of the concept of locationless caches with changing objectives. But, they are all archived. Oh, well.

Ethos, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. My moral values are not the same as those of everyone else. I would never log a temporary cache at an event as having attended an event more than once. That makes no sense to me. 'Attend event'. What am I missing here? Temporary caches are not listed by this service, and cannot be looged for that reason! Should I log all the attendees as well?

There are instances (that I've been following) of a cachers visiting an area and logging just about every cache nearby. One such cacher (who is best known for logging a cache where the cache owner erred in the coordinates. The cache was actually forty miles north. Didn't stop that cacher from logging it anyway.) logged forty caches in a distant city during a visit. Some cache owners noticed that the ones that they checked had no signatures from said cacher, and questioned said cacher. All forty finds were deleted by the 'finder'.

Ethics is what YOU feel is right. Some will agree with you, and some will not. This cacher had not qualms about logging forty caches that s/he never actually found.

Link to comment

Lets say that numbers are important, that the more finds you have the better. What does it really mean if your number is big because of double and triple logs? Person A finds a cache once and logs it once. Person B finds a cache once and logs it three times. Is B three times as good as A?

 

Yes. Person B is better than person A. Right!

Link to comment

i'm sorry, snoogans. it's "who", not "whom". i really, really tried to restrain myself. apparently there is not enough medication in the world to help with this.

 

anyway, yes, it's cheating. if we are both playing a game and only one of us is competing, your cheating does nothing to me other than erode my respect for you. because you and i are unlikely to spend any time together, it really doesn't matter. i'll be over there with those guys; they're solid and they don't cheat.

 

you're not invited.

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