Jump to content

Claiming A Find For Not Finding A Cache


Keith Watson

Recommended Posts

A few years ago I noticed a log for a cache where the finder claimed a find for the cache even though they did not find it. They explained in the log that the cache was not there and the listing had been archived. Their excuse for claiming the find was that they biked a great distance to the cache and they deserved it.

 

Recently I received notification on one of my own caches that a similar thing had happened. The cache was not there, the listing archived, the cacher claimed a find, even though they clearly stated in the log that they did not find the cache. (Don’t bother trying to find the log, it has been turfed.) I deleted the log because I didn’t want to send the message that this was acceptable on my caches.

 

The thing that amazed me in both instances was the fact that they admitted in the log that they were claiming a find with out actually finding the cache.

 

My question is two part:

 

1) Has anyone else noticed this sort of behaviour?

2) Would you allow this on your own cache?

Edited by Keith Watson
Link to comment

 

My question is two part:

 

1) Has anyone else noticed this sort of behaviour?

2) Would you allow this on your own cache?

 

1) I've heard about it, and I've had a couple people log finds on caches that were entombed in ice. I'm actually thankful that no effort was made to extricate the cache at the time (saves me from having to repair the cache with the new hole in it).

 

2) I agree with another prominent Halton cacher's view on deleting logs. I don't like to do it these days unless your log entry is ruining the fun for others (read: you posted a puzzle solution or spoiler). My philosophy is that logging a find when you didn't find it only ruins YOUR fun and reputation, not mine.

Link to comment

I went on a trip last summer (travelled 2000 miles) and did some geocaching when I got there. One was a bit of a hike with alligators along the way, and when I actually DID find the cache, there was no pencil or pen in it, nor did I have one on me. It was attached to a string, which dangled underneath a pier, and was broken. I repaired it (thus proving that I indeed found it, thus said the owner), however I was not able to claim it. Though I was dissapointed, I can understand why we should not be allowed to do it.

Link to comment

It happens quite a bit...seems quite silly to me. Here's a whole thread on it:

 

Found It = Didn't Find It

 

edit: Sorry, should have added the rest of the topic. I have seen it happen and I wouldn't allow it on a cache that I knew was gone. I've had a couple of hiders who couldn't sign the log for different reasons....they emailed me the situation and I'm enough of a non-purist that I let them count the find.

 

Personally, if my name's not in the logbook, I don't claim the find....and yes, I've mashed up a blade of grass and used a stick to sign my name once! <_<

Edited by KoosKoos
Link to comment

When I do maintenance checks on my caches, I also note down entries in the logbook. I later compare them with the online logs. If I find a discrepancy, I would email the cacher politely asking for an explanation. Should none be forthcoming then I would delete the online log. Call me a purist but one of the aspects of this game I like is accurate record keeping. <_<

Link to comment

A few years ago I noticed a log for a cache where the finder claimed a find for the cache even though they did not find it. They explained in the log that the cache was not there and the listing had been archived. Their excuse for claiming the find was that they biked a great distance to the cache and they deserved it.

 

Recently I received notification on one of my own caches that a similar thing had happened. The cache was not there, the listing archived, the cacher claimed a find, even though they clearly stated in the log that they did not find the cache. (Don’t bother trying to find the log, it has been turfed.) I deleted the log because I didn’t want to send the message that this was acceptable on my caches.

 

The thing that amazed me in both instances was the fact that they admitted in the log that they were claiming a find with out actually finding the cache.

 

My question is two part:

 

1) Has anyone else noticed this sort of behaviour?

2) Would you allow this on your own cache?

 

Allow a find for not finding a cache to stand depends on a number of things really (unless you are an absolute purist).

 

1. Did the cacher have a reasonable expectation of making the find had the cache actually been there?

2. Did the cacher make the attempt without the knowledge the cache was archived?

3. Was a puzzle or multiple stages involved?

4. Did the cacher actually have any evidence of having made the attempt?

 

Since you may not have the appropriate information to make an informed deletion decision you can choose to investigate or simply arbitrarily delete the log.

 

In the end it is your cache and your decision alone to delete any log.

Link to comment

1. Did the cacher have a reasonable expectation of making the find had the cache actually been there?

2. Did the cacher make the attempt without the knowledge the cache was archived?

3. Was a puzzle or multiple stages involved?

4. Did the cacher actually have any evidence of having made the attempt?

 

By these rules, I can claim a find on every cache that becomes archived just by never checking the web site before I go caching. Just use the file I currently have. All I have to do is take a picture of every dnf I have, and if I discover that it has been archived, i get a free smiley out of it.

 

Since you may not have the appropriate information to make an informed deletion decision you can choose to investigate or simply arbitrarily delete the log.

 

The appropriate information is the fact they admintted not locating the cache.

Link to comment

I have only logged a find on two caches I did not actually find the container. In both cases, the containers were clearly missing.

 

In both cases, the owner (a very well known and respected local cacher) graciously offered (unprompted from me) to allow me to log a find as the trek was difficult (8 km via canoe in one case) and there was every expectation that I would find the container if it were there.

 

I don't agree with logging a find if you didn't find it and you don't have the owner's permission (permission, not forgiveness) to do so.

 

Logging a find on an archived cache or disabled cache is equally unacceptable to me. However, if the cache is archived, the owner has a responsibility to remove the container. Otherwise it is littering.

 

However, in the end, the finder has to live with his own set of values. And the owner can delete as he sees fit.

 

On a similar vein, owners have a responsibility to maintain their caches in a timely fashion. I have seen a fair number of caches reported as Needing Maintenance and the owner ignores it for months. Even though the owner is actively caching on a regular basis.

Link to comment

Question 1 - Yes.

 

Question 2 - No. I dealt with the issue as politely as I could. All was well with the result.

 

I have also run into situations where a caher has logged saying they were with so-and-so, but didn't sign at the time. To deal with that I asked that they please revisit and sign the log; problem solved.

Link to comment

The person logging the find that didn't really find it is wrong for even putting you in the position to have to make the decision on how to deal with it.

 

Ethics must not be their strong suit. ;)

 

But it is a double-edged sword that you are putting yourself on. My only advice is that if you are concerned about the accuracy of your cache pages then when it comes to bogus logs... kill em dead. But there are better ways to handle it than being heavy handed. Takes a bit longer, but usually has better results if you communicate your concerns.

 

Man I'm mellowing in my old age :D

 

:D BQ

Link to comment

I've had several people find my hides more than once.

 

I've e-mailed them and asked why they are logging a find when they've previously done so earlier (sometimes several months ago).

 

I've received varying responces from "Oh, I didn't know", to "Well, that must've been my wife that found it originally", to even "Oh well. What are you going to do?"

 

The fact is that people just simply don't care or give a crap.

 

Why can't people just be honest and have fun with this "game"??

Link to comment

My question is two part:

 

1) Has anyone else noticed this sort of behaviour?

2) Would you allow this on your own cache?

 

1) Yes...happens all the time...who cares what others do.

2) Yes...For them it was a find, who am I to tell them how to play their game. So what if they play the game a bit differently than I do.

 

Some people take the game a bit too seriously. I've got 3 caches that have specific logging rules, including taking a picture. If I enforced the rules, then 1/2 the logs would have to be deleted because people didn't follow the rules. I have no desire to be mean and take away someone's smiley.

 

Here are my personal rules on how I play the game and are subject to change as I see fit based on the game evolving:

1) Find = Found the cache or any part of it, or in the rare case the owner gives permission, then it counts as a find for me. Signing the log is irrelevant as to whether or not something counts as a find.

2) Deleting a log = Nope. Won't do it. I did it once 4 years ago and I will never do it again. Geocaching is supposed to be a fun activity and not <insert your own word of choice here>.

Edited by res2100
Link to comment

I have to agree with Ralph. Sometimes we take this WAY too seriously! If people want to cheat and log finds when they didn't or log a find when the cache wasn't there for whatever reason, that's their problem. There is no money involved, no annual trophy, no book or movie deals, so why do we care?

 

Personally, I have only done it twice. Once, when I was a new cacher, I hiked about 1.5km in to an old dam and found the exact hiding spot, then found the lid on the ground a few metres away with some of the cache guts strewn about (but no log or anything to salvage the container). I logged it as a find with no hesitation (not sure if I would do it now though). The second was a one of Hamgran's multi's down it Port Burwell, I think it was. I spent the couple of hours doing the stages and driving around the countryside, then DNFed, even though I was sure I had it right. I emailed Hamgran and she confirmed I had it right. She went out and found the container in the tall grasses a ways away. I didn't and was not going to log the find but she emailed me and suggested I log it since I had done the work and foundd the right spot.

 

Other than that, there have been a couple of times I have had no pen (and no mud/stick to sign with), the log was soaked and could not be signed, or it was just plain full, and I did not bother to sign. If anyone thinks this is wrong to log a find, maybe they should check with the top cachers in Canada for their opinion on this, as I know for a fact some rarely sign urban micros, for example. To them, seing and dholding the container is good enough.

 

My theory (as is that of one prominent cacher I was out with recently) is that if someone really hates that I didn't sign a log for whatever reason and they want to delete my entry, go for it. One smiley is not worth arguing about it.

 

That being said, if someone actually logged a find on a cache of mine that had been archived, I wouldn't delete it but would send them a note explaining that most would not find that very kosher.

 

I have seen cachers log their own caches as finds, caching partner's caches as finds (that I know they helped set up), log earthcaches and virtuals in places they have never been to because they can find the answers online, and all kinds of silly things. As much as I think its silly to do so, its not my problem. I know I've worked for every one of mine...that's all I care about.

Link to comment

I've given this quite a bit of thought.

 

Back in my early caching days, I did log one cache that was probably 'inappropriate'. I let the log stand now because its part of history, and I don't feel like denying history. I've since had others which most (including the cache owners) would probably acknowledge as a find, but I was unwilling to claim as a find, so statistics wise it all works out.

 

As far as motivations? Its just a game, they probably don't see it as 'cheating', its just a different way of looking at the different log types.

 

Here's another way of looking at them that might be more in line with the way they see it:

 

Picture a big list of all the caches. Some you've 'done', the rest are on your 'to-do' list. If you visit a cache, and feel that you're 'done' with it, then to check it off, you log it as a find, if you don't feel that you're done, you log a DNF. The list is for your own purposes, not to submit to some big grand cache judgement authority.

 

As far as the purity of the meaning of 'find' being diluted, I'd submit that even the purists (find the cache, and sign the log) have somewhat diluted the meaning of the word beyond the actual english language meaning. These people just choose to dilute it in the other direction. (rather than being tighter, they are somewhat looser).

Link to comment

\

 

I know for a fact some rarely sign urban micros, for example. To them, seing and dholding the container is good enough.

 

 

 

Never thought of doing this but I sure like the idea. I hate unraveling a nano's log and trying to get it back in. Especially when it is cold and raining.

Link to comment

I disagree with Res, All games need rules in order for it to be played otherwise what's the point of playing, might as well just go for a hike and forget about caching then. If I play a game of cards with somebody that they be sitting in front of me or not does not change the fact that I expect them to play by the rules of the game. Imagine a game of cards were there are no rules to follow everybody plays their own way and nobody cares, sorry if I don't think that would last very long before everybody got bored and moved on to do something else.

Link to comment

I disagree with Res, All games need rules in order for it to be played otherwise what's the point of playing, might as well just go for a hike and forget about caching then. If I play a game of cards with somebody that they be sitting in front of me or not does not change the fact that I expect them to play by the rules of the game. Imagine a game of cards were there are no rules to follow everybody plays their own way and nobody cares, sorry if I don't think that would last very long before everybody got bored and moved on to do something else.

 

Who's to say that there are *no* rules. To take your card analogy, there are many different games you can play with a deck of cards. Do you expect everyone to play the same card game? Even playing Solitaire, there are many different rule sets you can play by (single draw, three draw, times through the deck). What makes one way more 'valid' than others. As long as the players are honest about how they are playing, I don't see that any 'cheating' is going on.

Link to comment

2) Deleting a log = Nope. Won't do it. I did it once 4 years ago and I will never do it again. Geocaching is supposed to be a fun activity and not nazism.

 

Whoa! Ralph, that's over the top!

 

I surely won't hold anything against you for playing the game your way, but please don't call me a nazi if I delete a log when someone admits they didn't find the cache.

Link to comment

2) Deleting a log = Nope. Won't do it. I did it once 4 years ago and I will never do it again. Geocaching is supposed to be a fun activity and not nazism.

 

Whoa! Ralph, that's over the top!

 

I surely won't hold anything against you for playing the game your way, but please don't call me a nazi if I delete a log when someone admits they didn't find the cache.

 

Pretty extreme term, eh? ;) Would it matter if I used a different term in my original post? I just used a meaningless term that sounded a bit extreme.

 

If you delete someone else's log, go right ahead, it won't bother me a bit. Like I said I am not concerned about how other people play the game, only the way I play it. What would bother me though is if someone deletes one of my legitimate logs...it's happened and I don't like it, especially when they just do that on a knee-jerk reaction without any courtesy of an email why. I do find that some people are too quick with the delete button. If you know me, which you do, you know I usually write long logs because I think cache owners deserve more than a simple one line found it type log. Sometimes I give away a bit too much and I have no problem changing my log to remove anything that the owner might be bothered with...it's happened and I respect the fact that they email me and ask me to change something instead of just taking that knee-jerk reaction of deleting, and I have always complied. I do think some people take things too far though and a bit too seriously.

 

I geocache because I enjoy it. Some people however seem to go out of their way to take enjoyment away from others, especially when something does no harm to them or anyone else.

Link to comment

The closest we've come to logging a cache we didn't completely find was when we found the container lid in what was clearly the hiding spot (based on the hint). We also confirmed with the owner that it was the lid as it had a code letter on it. We also found a ripped up ziplock bag, with a pencil still in it, about five feet away. We signed a piece of paper we had with us and left it all together with the lid. Although we logged the find (after seeking owner's permission) I've always felt that I should go back and re-find that cache.

 

I've logged 5 DNFs because I couldn't safely get the caches out of the ice, and have spent too much time freeing other caches from the ice just to log them.

 

I put strict rules on myself, but I really don't care what rules other cachers follow. I agree that a game needs rules, but I don't see it as me competing against other cachers (unless it's for FTF) so don't care what rules they follow.

 

To answer the questions:

 

1) I've noticed it happening but am not bothered by it, I just won't do it myself.

 

2) I would not delete such a log on any of my caches.

Link to comment

 

Pretty extreme term, eh? ;) Would it matter if I used a different term in my original post? I just used a meaningless term that sounded a bit extreme.

.....

 

I geocache because I enjoy it. Some people however seem to go out of their way to take enjoyment away from others, especially when something does no harm to them or anyone else.

 

Don't mean to attack Ralph but I have to add that I too found 'nazism' to be extreme and definitely not a meaningless term. Actually, its a very emotionally loaded term.

 

But what I really want to comment on is your second point there that claiming an unfound cache is not harming anyone else. It is! There are lots of people (I actually exclude myself on this by the way) who enjoy the game by comparing their number of finds to others. That's why there are web pages out there showing the ranking of people in their province, state, or country. People who play the game that way assume, for the most part, that others are legitimately claiming actual finds, and not claiming non-finds as finds.

 

So, if non-finds, and this is clearly so in OP's example, are allowed then you are hurting those people who get fun from the ranking comparisons. That's why there are rules in everything. The only way you don't hurt anyone is to follow the agreed rules. And, the paramount rule in this game is FIND THE CACHE. Not just a possible location of the cache but the physical cache container.

 

JD

Link to comment

Geocaching is not rocket science, only two rules need to be followed to play the game

 

1 - find the cache

2 - sign the log

 

I like that... two simple rules. Fun and easy (or very serious, if that's your cup of tea). From there it is a wide open game with so much variation and so much to choose from.

 

I want to add that personally I would never consider just deleting a log without communicating first.

Link to comment

Something has occured to me while following this thread. Please forgive me if this strays too far from the topic. Why does the system permit "Found it" logs on a cache that is Disabled or Archived? ;) Seems to me that option shouldn't be available otherwise there's little point to disabling or archiving a cache.

Link to comment

Something has occured to me while following this thread. Please forgive me if this strays too far from the topic. Why does the system permit "Found it" logs on a cache that is Disabled or Archived? ;) Seems to me that option shouldn't be available otherwise there's little point to disabling or archiving a cache.

 

Caches can be found, and then archived, then logged. Caches can be disabled that are still there.

 

If I find a cache, then the owner goes out and archives it before I get around to logging it, why shouldn't I log it as found.

 

If a cache owner archives a cache, but doesn't remove it, and I find it (without realizing that its archived) didn't I still find the cache?

Link to comment

First sorry for the poor use of words...I've edited my original post to remove the term. I didn't realize it was such an emotionally sensitive term and I appologize. Now my wife however is making me sleep outside with the fish in the pond tonight. ;) Hope a raccoon doesn't eat me.

 

Perhaps a part of what makes geocaching so great is that it has no rules. Also most play the game in a similar fashion, there are a lot of variations and each person does things just a bit differently, and as time goes on, we also change slightly how we play the game. We see what others do, we learn, we evolve. Some things matter more to some people, other things matter more to other people.

 

Like I said, for me it's all about having fun. if I am not having fun, something is wrong.

Edited by res2100
Link to comment

Geocaching is not rocket science, only two rules need to be followed to play the game

 

1 - find the cache

2 - sign the log

 

I like that... two simple rules. Fun and easy (or very serious, if that's your cup of tea). From there it is a wide open game with so much variation and so much to choose from.

 

I want to add that personally I would never consider just deleting a log without communicating first.

 

I think that those rules are neither necessary, nor sufficient (IMO) for logging a cache as found.

 

Consider a cache which is locked. If you break the lock off the cache in order to log it, is that a find? no

 

Consider a cache that the intention is for you to perform some specific task in order to find it? There was one that I recall that you were meant to walk through a culvert in order to retrieve the cache. This was part of the 'process'. You were meant to have to walk through an inch of water in order to find the cache. I wasn't in a position where I *could* do this, I had someone with me who could, and did, and offered to hand me the cache so I could sign the log. Did I 'find' it? I don't think so.

 

If you're at the cache, find it, open it, have the log in your hands, but the pencil is missing, why shouldn't you call it a find.

 

Anyways, just some random things to think about.

Link to comment

I disagree with Res, All games need rules in order for it to be played otherwise what's the point of playing, might as well just go for a hike and forget about caching then. If I play a game of cards with somebody that they be sitting in front of me or not does not change the fact that I expect them to play by the rules of the game. Imagine a game of cards were there are no rules to follow everybody plays their own way and nobody cares, sorry if I don't think that would last very long before everybody got bored and moved on to do something else.

 

Sorry to differ, but Geocaching and the "game" thereof is nothing like playing cards or any other game against someone. There is no winner to be cheated out of a win and no prize for being first.

 

When I go golfing with others, if they want to shave a stroke or two, fine (unless there's money on the table). At the end of the day, all I want to do is be better than the last game I played. I will always golf with people better than me or worse than me. All I care about and am responsible for is my game.

Link to comment

The person logging the find that didn't really find it is wrong for even putting you in the position to have to make the decision on how to deal with it.

 

Ethics must not be their strong suit. ;)

 

But it is a double-edged sword that you are putting yourself on. My only advice is that if you are concerned about the accuracy of your cache pages then when it comes to bogus logs... kill em dead. But there are better ways to handle it than being heavy handed. Takes a bit longer, but usually has better results if you communicate your concerns.

 

Man I'm mellowing in my old age :D

 

:D BQ

 

BQ - you must really be on the decaf now! :-)

Link to comment

The person logging the find that didn't really find it is wrong for even putting you in the position to have to make the decision on how to deal with it.

 

Ethics must not be their strong suit. :P

 

But it is a double-edged sword that you are putting yourself on. My only advice is that if you are concerned about the accuracy of your cache pages then when it comes to bogus logs... kill em dead. But there are better ways to handle it than being heavy handed. Takes a bit longer, but usually has better results if you communicate your concerns.

 

Man I'm mellowing in my old age :anibad:

 

:P BQ

 

BQ - you must really be on the decaf now! :-)

 

Yeah, I could do with some adrenilin (sp)... if only a knew someone with a fast car to go racing down the street with :ph34r:

Link to comment

Some really good comments here especially from Res2100, ibycus and M3J.

 

What strikes me most in reading some of the other posters however is how "rigid" some are applying the "rule" - you don't sign, you don't log. And one that calls into question the "ethics" of someone that may log a find when they think they shouldn't. Clearly the question of ethics needs to be aligned with "intent" - did the cacher make a reasonable effort to seek out the cache and was unable to sign the logbook for reasons outside his control?

 

Now I know the last comment will "load the gun" for those that will choose to twist this and come up with all sorts of bizarre scenarios for logging a cache without signing the book. If it makes you feel better jerking the knee then go for it.

 

For the rest of us - it is only a game.

Link to comment

Some really good comments here especially from Res2100, ibycus and M3J.

 

What strikes me most in reading some of the other posters however is how "rigid" some are applying the "rule" - you don't sign, you don't log. And one that calls into question the "ethics" of someone that may log a find when they think they shouldn't. Clearly the question of ethics needs to be aligned with "intent" - did the cacher make a reasonable effort to seek out the cache and was unable to sign the logbook for reasons outside his control?

 

I usually use the "Did not find" status for such situations, no matter what the effort I may have put into the cache. I have a DNF that is over 3,000km from home - and it involved a four hour flight and a three hour bus trip to get to. When I found the bag of cocaine instead of the cache I logged a DNF against it. Surely, I had put enough effort into the cache.

 

My one exception to this is winter caching. When I started caching I had a no-name in the log booky means no smiley policy. Then I put a hole in the GHMCMC final while trying to chip it out of the ice (fortunately I had a suitable replacement cache in the car). Now my philosophy is that once I confirm it's the cache container and know where it is exactly, then I'll log it. Most cache owners are fine with this method, and I encourage it - especially with tupperware hides.

 

The biggest reason I prefer to use DNF over Found it, gimme the smiley is that a DNF notifies the cache owner about problems. It ALSO notifies other cachers there may be a problem, even if the listing is still active. I don't tend to hunt caches with more than 3 DNFs in a row, or at least you'd better believe I'm going to read those logs and weigh it against the cacher's experience level.

 

I know I've been stumped a few times, and been absolutely convinced I had the correct spot ... only to have the darn thing confirmed as in good condition by the cache owner or found the next day. If I had logged a "Found it" in those situations I would have cheated myself out of the find in the future.

 

In the end, it is the cache owner that decides whether or not you have found their cache by their rules. Geocaching.com is simply a listing service, as mentioned by BQ on another thread. If one is planning to boast about their numbers, then they better be accurate about their finds/no finds, or they risk upsetting other cachers. Other than that, one is simply cheating themselves.

 

Please, just do whatever makes the game the most fun for everyone. That's the most important thing we can do for the hobby. Too often we concentrate on specific rules/agendas to the point that we're out there to have fun.

Link to comment

The old me would delete a log that didn't meet the exacting rules that I once followed for myself. I don't play that way anymore.

 

However, there is a big difference between "I couldn't see the container, but I think I was in the right spot" and "I could see the container but couldn't retrieve it safely".

 

But when a cache also says Stealth Required... that implies that signing the log is required, otherwise just being at the spot and seeing what's around... well, that's a Virtual... and they died. Go play Waymarking if that's how you want to use your GPS.

 

Stealth Required = Micro in a publicly visible place (usually), and part of the find is getting the cache without getting caught or seen. Again, if you aren't going to go all the way to the end then all you've done is Virtualized it.

 

There's a term for people that go almost all the way but don't quite get there... I'm not going to say what it is... but if you walk around afterwards bragging about how you 'scored' .... well :anibad:

 

Fizbot... let's go for coffee! Make mine an Espresso! :ph34r:

Link to comment

The old me would delete a log that didn't meet the exacting rules that I once followed for myself. I don't play that way anymore.

 

However, there is a big difference between "I couldn't see the container, but I think I was in the right spot" and "I could see the container but couldn't retrieve it safely".

 

But when a cache also says Stealth Required... that implies that signing the log is required, otherwise just being at the spot and seeing what's around... well, that's a Virtual... and they died. Go play Waymarking if that's how you want to use your GPS.

 

 

Yup, well put. I forgot to mention that signing the log is important if at all possible. I'll only skip out on the log entry if doing so would physically damage the cache (i.e. ice). Damaging the cache ruins the fun for the next cacher.

 

Personally, I like the fun things that we do to avoid muggle detection while we're signing our logs. I'm sure we've all used cool little tricks like the GPS is a "digital camera" or "cell phone" ... to the "I'm only over here to pick up after my dog" to acting crazy or causing a diversion (I remember one cacher that took a flying somersault on his mountain bike.... all eyes were on him, not the cache).

 

Now that I walk around with an SLR, I tend to get away with a lot more at ground zero. Want the muggles to leave? Just pop the lens cap off and point it in their general direction. They usually depart at that point.... otherwise I stage a photo shoot and wait. Another solution is night caching. Most muggles run like heck when they encounter 6 people on a trail in the woods at 2 AM. :laughing:

 

I remember one cacher putting in their log many moons ago that you could almost get away with being anywhere without suspicion if you had a kid, a dog, a camera or a combination of the above. Muggles ignore people with those..... unless you're holding an ammo can labelled GRENADES or some other ballistic marking.

Link to comment

Hey KW (and others) how do you handle group caching? When it is evident that only one member of the group actually found it do you delete the log entries of all the others in the group?

 

Further to the above, have you personally found each and every cache that you hunted as part of a team - or only posted a find on those that you did find? How about asking for help in solving a cache puzzle or location. Without this help you would not have solved the puzzle or made the find - are you entitled to log a find? Careful how you answer this you may have to delete your April Fool's 2007 edition logs.

 

It might be black and white to you but I see many shades of gray here.

Link to comment

Hey KW (and others) how do you handle group caching? When it is evident that only one member of the group actually found it do you delete the log entries of all the others in the group?

 

Normally when I'm out caching with KW, we have a game. When one person finds the cache, that person continues searching as if they had not. Eventually they make their way off to the side and quietly turn off their light, or say "click" to indicate they have already found the cache. Each person does this in turn until everyone has found the cache. This way everyone gets the thrill of the find.

 

Naturally, if another person sees someone retrieving the cache, the gig is up. I'm pretty sure it's acceptable behaviour to have each person sign the log book once it is found. The difference here is that sharing a find is not the same as having a group go to an area and not find the cache but log it anyway.

 

Deleting logs because one finds a cache with friends is a really good way to kill geocaching. What about event caches? Surely, only the driver of the car gets to log a find on that one.

 

The thread topic seems to summarize as follows:

 

- If you found the cache - actually found it - you can log a smiley

- If you didn't see the cache, you don't get a smiley

- Some people tolerate bending of these "rules" and offer others latitude to make the game more enjoyable

- Some people are strict.

- Cache owner's rules, if within the Geocaching.com guidelines, are the final authority

 

Now, we're digressing into territory that, at best means we need flame retartdant web browsers, at worst means that event caches are going to really suck after the mass log deletions occur.

 

Can we just accept that people have different interpretations on the game and that you should address any concerns about these interpretations with the owner or finder of the cache so the rest of us can go back to having fun?

Link to comment

Hey KW (and others) how do you handle group caching? When it is evident that only one member of the group actually found it do you delete the log entries of all the others in the group?

 

Further to the above, have you personally found each and every cache that you hunted as part of a team - or only posted a find on those that you did find? How about asking for help in solving a cache puzzle or location. Without this help you would not have solved the puzzle or made the find - are you entitled to log a find? Careful how you answer this you may have to delete your April Fool's 2007 edition logs.

 

It might be black and white to you but I see many shades of gray here.

 

Northern Penguin answered how we handle group caching. And it is quite enjoyable.

 

As for shades of gray, the topic of this thread is about not finding the cache, posting in the log it was not found, yet still claiming a smiley.

 

If people want to play the game their own way, and justify how and or why they play it that way, I would challenge them to have themselves removed from any list that ranks cachers by number of finds as this would clearly be inaccurate. Only far to the people that do car about the numbers.

 

As far as asking for help on puzzles, I try to indicate in the log how I arrived at the solution if I did not do it my self, or I got help. If someone else finds the cache and pulls it out before I see it in the hiding spot, I give the credit. I have even stated in caches that I do not approve of the logging requirements, but comply anyway.

 

I am very proud of my numbers, and keep very detailed records. That is the way I play the game.

Link to comment

 

If people want to play the game their own way, and justify how and or why they play it that way, I would challenge them to have themselves removed from any list that ranks cachers by number of finds as this would clearly be inaccurate. Only far to the people that do car about the numbers.

 

 

I have never asked to be put ON a ranking list.

 

Please provide details as to how you can be REMOVED from these lists.

Link to comment

Say what you wish, as it's your right, but I simply don't care about the ethics - or lack of ethics - on how others chose to play this game.

 

Let's face it - if someone choses to fool themselves by logging a find when they didn't find the cache, or even logging an archived cache, then feel free to do so. If this is how some cachers chose to play the game, then what right do i have to tell them not to do it. They're not fooling anyone except themselves. And as many have previously mentioned, there's no "prize" or special award, so what's the big deal? Why even do it?

 

But that's like telling people that they shouldn't drink and drive, or speed, or throw garbage on the ground when there's a garbage can 3-feet away - there will always be someone who wishes to try to bend the rules.

 

Yes, it can be VERY annoying to others who play the game honestly, but it all comes down to the fact that people have their own right to chose what to do. Play the game and have fun as a group, or be an individual.

 

To me, I personally don't care what others chose to do, although I draw the line at insults and/or personal/physical attacks. I play the game honestly, and to me, that's a step in the right direction.

Link to comment

 

If people want to play the game their own way, and justify how and or why they play it that way, I would challenge them to have themselves removed from any list that ranks cachers by number of finds as this would clearly be inaccurate. Only far to the people that do car about the numbers.

 

 

I have never asked to be put ON a ranking list.

 

Please provide details as to how you can be REMOVED from these lists.

 

That's simple... go back and delete all of your activity and track everything you do in an offline method. No one needs to log their finds here.

 

I'm not saying that to be a smart-a**, there are many people that choose to not log. If you don't want people to have a method to evaluate your data then do not provide it publicly.

Link to comment

That's simple... go back and delete all of your activity and track everything you do in an offline method. No one needs to log their finds here.

 

I'm not saying that to be a smart-a**, there are many people that choose to not log. If you don't want people to have a method to evaluate your data then do not provide it publicly.

 

Or, realize that you're the one controlling your count and any public use of that data for ranking is outside of your control and it's up to the ranking sites to figure out what a smiley means and how much it's worth. There are lots of variations of what people count as finds such as people who log temporary event caches vs. those who don't, people logging caches as finds when it's gone, people logging bonus smileys for performing some stunt at a cache.

 

How can you really compare your find count to other people unless you both agree on how a smiley should be counted?

Link to comment

 

If people want to play the game their own way, and justify how and or why they play it that way, I would challenge them to have themselves removed from any list that ranks cachers by number of finds as this would clearly be inaccurate. Only far to the people that do car about the numbers.

 

 

I have never asked to be put ON a ranking list.

 

Please provide details as to how you can be REMOVED from these lists.

 

That's simple... go back and delete all of your activity and track everything you do in an offline method. No one needs to log their finds here.

 

I'm not saying that to be a smart-a**, there are many people that choose to not log. If you don't want people to have a method to evaluate your data then do not provide it publicly.

 

That doesn't remove you from the list. It simply puts you at the bottom of the list. Nothing gained.

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