Preventing someone from logging without finding a cache

[+undertree]

A couple of problems with fake finds.

 

1. I may log a DNF and someone else logs a find that they didn't find. "Found the location but not the log. Great cache". That is not a find. In fact there is no cache.

 

2. They are cheating everyone who puts forth an effort to find legitimate caches.

[+sbell111]

A couple of problems with fake finds.

 

1. I may log a DNF and someone else logs a find that they didn't find. "Found the location but not the log. Great cache". That is not a find. In fact there is no cache.

 

2. They are cheating everyone who puts forth an effort to find legitimate caches.

It should come as no surprise that I disagree with this statement.

 

If another player logs a cache using a definition of find that I disagree with, it doesn't 'cheat' me out of any of my fun. In fact, I would argue (and am, I guess) that whether that cacher made a legit find is solely between the individual cache logger and the cache owner. If the cache owner agrees that it was a find, it was. If not, the cache owner has the power and authority to disallow the find.

[+Castle Mischief]

A couple of problems with fake finds.

 

1. I may log a DNF and someone else logs a find that they didn't find. "Found the location but not the log. Great cache". That is not a find. In fact there is no cache.

 

2. They are cheating everyone who puts forth an effort to find legitimate caches.

It should come as no surprise that I disagree with this statement.

 

If another player logs a cache using a definition of find that I disagree with, it doesn't 'cheat' me out of any of my fun. In fact, I would argue (and am, I guess) that whether that cacher made a legit find is solely between the individual cache logger and the cache owner. If the cache owner agrees that it was a find, it was. If not, the cache owner has the power and authority to disallow the find.

 

...and thus we have the basis of the "playing the game your own way" vs. "previous logs contribute to the quality of the cache" dichotomy.

 

Can we agree to disagree on page2 before this stretches out to page 10?

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

Maybe the finder should be required leave something behind, nothing big, just maybe sign a logbook or something. Then the cache owner could verify the find.

 

That's brilliant! Why haven't we been doing that...

Oh wait...

 

[+Renegade Knight]

A couple of problems with fake finds.

 

1. I may log a DNF and someone else logs a find that they didn't find. "Found the location but not the log. Great cache". That is not a find. In fact there is no cache.

 

2. They are cheating everyone who puts forth an effort to find legitimate caches.

 

True enough to an extent. If I have an ALR cache and most play, and a few don't if I as an owner don't delet the logs of the ones who didn't do the work I'm dishonoring the honest effort the others made. Doing that as an owner isn't fun though.

 

Also if someone logs a find on a cache that they didn't find I do rely on that information to tell me about the caches status. It does impact my hunt. A reverse example. I have a hard find. A string of DNF's build up (all honest) then folks started complaining it wasn't there, and posted NM logs on it. Now nobody is hunting the cache. I emailed one of the prior finders who confirmed it was MIA then went to replace it. It was there. People relied on the illinformed making a judgment that the cache wasn't there to decide not to look themselves. Yesterday someone found it. Hopefully that breaks the cycle. Revers it and if it was MIA and people logged foudn it logs others would waste their time looking. People rely on accurate logs.