Log etiquitte

[+oisact]

I know with geocache logs it's inappropriate to post spoilers unencrypted. Is that true for benchmarks too? I'm putting in basic pieces of info, like where to park, or where the marker is located near more modern landmarks, and I'm curious if those types of things should be encrypted. My impression is that with markers it's a bit more down to business to try to make recoveries that haven't been done in decades, but I don't want to ruin it for others.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

oisact -

 

For benchmark hunting the spoiler concept is the exact opposite of geocaching. The idea is to make the mark you find 100% easy for the next person to find it. Note any changes in the published description, like changes in pole numbers, street names, building names, etc. Be sure to include a picture of the benchmark taken from several feet away, so that someone can use that picture to find it. Extra credit for stating the general compass direction you faced when taking the picture! If it's a location-SCALED mark, note the averaged lat-lon from your GPSr in your log too.

[+frex3wv]

OIS:

 

I think telling or giving the coor. of where to park isn't a spoiler at all - not around my parts anyway where the marks are pretty rural. I try to tell of my adventure while leaving out details that would "spoil" the hunt for others. As it regards photos - I have on some said something along the lines of "if you NEVER plan on going for this mark - look at the pics - if you DO planning on going for it - don't"

 

Hope that helps.

[Bill93]

I agree with BDT, and I think a lot of other regulars on this forum, that the goal is to record up-to-date and helpful information. I never withhold anything I think would help.

 

We're competing with time, Mother Nature, and urban sprawl, not the other searchers.

 

There are a couple marks that I didn't find and someone else did, that I really really wish they had included more in their log than "found it" because I want to know what I missed. In these cases I don't doubt they found the mark, but other times a picture helps verify they got the right one.

[+frex3wv]

I have a great deal of respect for BDT - so I'd go with his answer on this one (though I don't really feel like my posting style is in disagreement with his).

[+PFF]

Bill93 wrote:

 

There are a couple marks that I didn't find and someone else did, that I really really wish they had included more in their log than "found it" because I want to know what I missed. In these cases I don't doubt they found the mark, but other times a picture helps verify they got the right one.

 

AMEN! Call it proof. Call it "peer review". Either way, we've all seen cases where someone spotted a disk and logged it under the wrong PID. A photo of the disk removes all doubt. And photos of the area help the next searcher.

 

Some marks are recovered 10, 15, or more years apart. Even if it only has been two years since the last log entry, it certainly helps to have pictures showing what the area looked like in the past.

 

-Paul-

[andylphoto]

Paul, I couldn't agree more on peer review. I will rarely even post a log if I don't have a picture of some type to go with it. I have a few with only a distant shot, because I recovered a few steel rods before realizing that the designation was stamped on the access cover.

 

However, I also know of at least one mark near me that has a found log, though I am quite sure that the mark is no longer there. No photos in the log though. I think the cacher was logging, and got the PIDs mixed up. She probably found the one about a mile away that IS still there, one digit off. The one in question was in an outcropping of bedrock that the highway department blasted away about 5 years ago.

[ArtMan]

I like Paul's description of the process as "peer review."

 

With caching, there's normally a logbook in the cache that confirms that you were there. For benchmarking, it's more of a modified honor system — Доверя́й, но проверя́й (trust, but verify).*

 

There are genuinely puzzling PIDs, for example where everything fits except for the stamping information on the disk. In some cases, it seems like it's the right disk, but it's not. And in others, it's clearly the wrong disk. But often it's just not clear. Posting your observations and good photos can help gin up a discussion in these forums and maybe resolve the issue, or alert the next person that there are issues.

 

Sometimes inexperienced benchmarkers (often cachers who happen to find a disk near a cache), feel compelled to grab a photo and log the PID. The photo sometimes is proof that they found, say, a reference mark rather than the station disk.

 

One clan (apparently an extended family all operating under the same ID) logged an incredibly large number of benchmarks in a very short time. This was a couple of years ago, and I think they were banned from the site, or maybe they just gave up. Anyway, they never posted any details about their find, and certainly never posted any photos, leading many of us to conclude that their "logs" were totally bogus. That would not have been the case had they posted photographic proof of their logs.

 

And by posting photos, particularly photos that show the mark in its surroundings, we can facilitate land surveyors and others who use these marks professionally in finding and documenting the condition and environment around the marks.

 

-ArtMan-

_____

* I wish I knew Russian, but I do know Wikipedia!

[+Harry Dolphin]

Yes. My photo is my proof that I found the benchmark I was looking for. Or, contrariwise, someone will look at it and say: "No, Harry. That beacon is not the original. It was destroyed."

And, one of the ideas of benchmarking is to help the next person find it easily. "Here are the coords where I found it" (1000 feet off!), and photos of the area with the benchmark in the picture, so the next hunter can find it more easily. (Yes. I brought a photo I took, along, when benchmarking with someone else. Made it much easier to find again!)

And!! We like to look at photos!!!!