DNF's

[+trainlove]

I once 'found the location where the cache was supposed to be', but I was using an old PQ and in the year between when that PQ was run and when I was out in the field at that location the cache had been moved half a mile away.

 

I also know a cacher who actively plants fake suspicious piles of sticks and stones near caches he finds. Sometimes as close as 5 feet, and sometimes as far as the 30 or so feet of normal accuracy of GPS in the woods. Needless to say, finding a spot is not the same as finding the cache, it might be right there in front of you and you still do not ses it.

 

And of course sometimes cache coordinates are actually off by up to 200 feet, yes I've found caches, not letterboxes..., that far from where they are supposed to be.

 

It's only legal to log the cache if you signed the book, thems are the rules.

Edited June 30, 2008 by trainlove

[Clan Riffster]

To call someone unethical is a insult. Especially when you don't know them (I call this being a keyboard warrior)

Ethics are always a preconceived notion of what behavior is currently acceptable, versus what behavior is currently not acceptable. This changes from society to society, and even changes over time within a particular society. History is fraught with examples of behavior which we find barbaric, yet those who committed the acts would find them entirely justified and ethical, within their standards. You don't even need a history book to see this. All you need to do is watch the news for current events outside your country to see folks visiting atrocities upon their neighbors which we might label as unethical, yet they would describe as both ethical and ordained.

 

In this instance, I have to agree with you that applying the term "unethical" to the described behavior would be intentionally inaccurate and therefor, deliberately insulting. If I post a "Found It" log, (with the owner's permission), describing the fact that I did not locate the container, there has been no intent to deceive either the owner or the community. Ergo, the action cannot be labeled as unethical.

 

I think it's difficult to apply a negative label to someone based solely upon what log type they utilized, when we, as a group, can't agree on when each log type should be selected. Many, (myself included), have opined that the OP shouldn't log it as a find because they failed to locate the container. Is that all it takes? Heck, by those standards, I should log a "Found It" on Vinny & Sue's Psycho Urban Cache #13 since I have located the container. So, some of us, (myself included) elevate those standards even higher, to opine that a "Found It" log should only be applied when a seeker physically has the cache in their hot little hands. Even others, (myself included), offer the belief that simply having the cache in hand doesn't qualify one for a find, expressing the opinion that the log must be signed before a find is valid.

 

With so many diverse theories regarding what is, and what is not a find, how can we apply an ethics label, so long as the logger didn't intend to deceive?

[+wimseyguy]

So what you are saying is:

if the label does not fit,

we must acquit?

[+Renegade Knight]

I have a quick question and was hoping some of the more experienced cachers could help.

 

You go to a cache and lok and look for it but cannot find it. You realize the cache is gone yet you found where it should be. Can you/should you be able to log as a find even though you didn't technically find the cache?...

 

It's the owners call.

 

Yes the owner should maintain their cache when they know there is a problem. No you can't expect them to check on the cache 5 min before you get there so that it's there for you. Things happen and you will be the one to discover the problem often enough. While not as much fun as finding the cache stumbling into probems created through no fault of the owner is also part of the activity.

[+Renegade Knight]

...If I had one of my caches that was muggled and someone from Texas came through, emailed and said this was the location? Is it missing? I would allow that, if I could say 100% they found the location....

 

That's your call as the owner. It's also their call if they will log it. In days past I would have logged it. Now I wouldn't. The gas is a sunk cost either way.

[Clan Riffster]

So what you are saying is:

if the label does not fit,

we must acquit?

[+paleolith]

Knowing that I risk being flamed for posting on-topic ...

 

The situation came up for one of my caches a week ago. Seeker asked if he could log a find anyway since he was only around for a couple of days. My response was

I think the majority would say it's a DNF, but a fairly large minority would call it a find. If you want to call it a find, I won't stop you. Your call.

So far, he hasn't logged it ... I figure that allowing but discouraging is probably more effective than disallowing. And IJAG ... (It's Just A Game).

 

Of course, the fact that he sent me a nice note with a very detailed photograph which showed me that the cache was gone (I disabled it within seconds of seeing the email), and asked, made a difference. It wasn't just someone logging a find to avoid the trouble -- he spent 45 minutes documenting it for me, on a cache that seldom takes five minutes to find.

 

But still IJAG.

 

Edward