Nano Logs

January 5, 2009

I know that the rules state a cache must have a log, but have come across a couple of Nanos now where one has to e-mail the colour found painted inside to claim. I personally think this is a good idea as the piece of minute paper to log upon does not last long at all and getting it in and out adds to its demise eventually as well. So is putting a colour/letter/numeral to e-mail back to the owner actually permitted by the reviewers? :lol:

2.3k · January 5, 2009

Probably not...so I'm in favour!

PS...please don't make this the 1st 2009 anti (you know what) thread. :lol:

Edited January 5, 2009 by currykev

January 5, 2009

I know that the rules state a cache must have a log, but have come across a couple of Nanos now where one has to e-mail the colour found painted inside to claim. I personally think this is a good idea as the piece of minute paper to log upon does not last long at all and getting it in and out adds to its demise eventually as well. So is putting a colour/letter/numeral to e-mail back to the owner actually permitted by the reviewers?

IANAGR but... no.

Not saying that I agree though.

January 5, 2009

Put simply.......NO

(Unless you can have grandfather rights that I dont know about??)

A cache will not be reviewed without a log book!!

But it happens. :lol:

When you have sixty caches dotted about the place this is the obvious thing to do to save on cache maintainence!!

Its not big and its not clever!!! Dont do it!!

January 5, 2009

Put simply.......NO

(Unless you can have grandfather rights that I dont know about??)

A cache will not be reviewed without a log book!!

But it happens.

When you have sixty caches dotted about the place this is the obvious thing to do to save on cache maintainence!!

Its not big and its not clever!!! Dont do it!!

Well, I'll probably get shot down over this, but......

I like mili, micro, nano, pico caches.... Yeah, I know loads of people hate them, but each to their own. I'd love to be able to have a code that can be emailed back instead of a logbook...

Hmmm... Just had a thought...Earthcaches dont have log books, just logging requirements, so why not have a pebble as an earthcache?

Right, back to my nice warm padded room, with the spiders!!

PAUL.

January 6, 2009

I just did a quick scan thru the "guidelines", and found this :

"For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit."

Surely the act of logging the find on GC.COM is in fact meeting the published "guideline" regarding logging by using the "other type of log" option?

3k · January 6, 2009

I like mili, micro, nano, pico caches.... Yeah, I know loads of people hate them, but each to their own. I'd love to be able to have a code that can be emailed back instead of a logbook...

PAUL.

They all have their place - unfortunately too many people nowadays seem to think that nano/micro=clever hide.

It doesn't - sticking a decent sized box in place of a nano and still not having it muggled=clever hide.

Film pot under rock in the back of beyond will never be a clever hide.......just a waste of 2/10ths of a mile

(ducks and gets ready to brazen it out)

1k · January 6, 2009

I know that the rules state a cache must have a log, but have come across a couple of Nanos now where one has to e-mail the colour found painted inside to claim. I personally think this is a good idea as the piece of minute paper to log upon does not last long at all and getting it in and out adds to its demise eventually as well. So is putting a colour/letter/numeral to e-mail back to the owner actually permitted by the reviewers?

its against guidelines they state it should be a physical logbook

1.1k · January 6, 2009

I just did a quick scan thru the "guidelines", and found this :

"For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit."

Surely the act of logging the find on GC.COM is in fact meeting the published "guideline" regarding logging by using the "other type of log" option?

I think the idea is that signing a physical log demonstrates you actually found the cache, whereas simply logging a "found it" at GC.COM doesn't.

The "colour of the inside" gets round that to some degree, but even if it was permitted, it should really be an "unknown" cache because of the additional logging requirement imposed by having to email the owner.

The additional logging requirement is similar to a virtual, and it's just one of the reasons I don't like virtuals. If I've done a virtual along with other caches, I have to 1) log them out of sequence, or 2) wait until the owner replies before I log ANY I found after the virtual, or 3) log it without getting confirmation and risk having to delete it if the answer was wrong.

So while I do understand that nano logs can be a pain to remove and sign, and that they do fill up quickly, I still prefer a physical log.

Rgds, Andy

1.7k · January 6, 2009

I just did a quick scan thru the "guidelines", and found this :

"For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit."

Surely the act of logging the find on GC.COM is in fact meeting the published "guideline" regarding logging by using the "other type of log" option?

I think the idea is that signing a physical log demonstrates you actually found the cache, whereas simply logging a "found it" at GC.COM doesn't.

The "colour of the inside" gets round that to some degree, but even if it was permitted, it should really be an "unknown" cache because of the additional logging requirement imposed by having to email the owner.

The additional logging requirement is similar to a virtual, and it's just one of the reasons I don't like virtuals. If I've done a virtual along with other caches, I have to 1) log them out of sequence, or 2) wait until the owner replies before I log ANY I found after the virtual, or 3) log it without getting confirmation and risk having to delete it if the answer was wrong.

So while I do understand that nano logs can be a pain to remove and sign, and that they do fill up quickly, I still prefer a physical log.

Rgds, Andy

Andy, there's a way round the issue of log orders and virtuals. Although I tend to run the risk and log it before confirmation, the best option is to log a NOTE in sequence with your other logs, and then change this to a found type when you've had confirmation.

Back On T though, I like the idea of a painted inside, but it isn't permitted. If you've seen one like it, keep schtum and let it live wiould be my opinion!

Finally, keehotee makes a good point. A micro doesn't automatically = clever hide, and the opposite is true as well! the only thing that can make a clever hide is a clever cacher (or one who 'borrows' ideas from clever cachers, as I may have done before... )

January 6, 2009

On the practical side for a moment - Is it possible to tell what colour it is in the dark ?

I assume primary colours are used

just a thought

1.7k · January 6, 2009

On the practical side for a moment - Is it possible to tell what colour it is in the dark ?

I assume primary colours are used

just a thought

If you can find a nano-cache in the dark,

when all about you are using a torch,

you're a better man than I, Gunga Din!

January 6, 2009

'Other type of log' that's it..........a letter/numeral/colour that has to be e-mailed to the owner to confirm find and enable a 'Found it' log. Just as previously mentioned is done all the time with a Virtual Cache. It would comply within the rules generally surely, what are the reviewers saying? or are they sitting on the fence? :laughing:

January 6, 2009

I set a nano a year or so ago and put a paper roll in with random three letter codes. The idea was that the finder would cross out the next code and email the code to me as part of the logging process. My thinking for this was that the roll would last longer than it would with some cachers trying to write their life history on the roll.

Eckington was a reviewer at the time and he replied with the following to my submission:

"Sorry to take so long to get back to you.

I have looked at the cache, as have my colleagues, and I am afraid we can not let it go live at the moment.

The requirement is for cachers to SIGN the logbook.

The code word idea you have used is against the guidelines.

If you replace the code word roll with a similar roll and ask the finders to simply initial the log and date it this should suffice."

My reply to Eckington was:

"Regarding "<Cache name removed>". Your comments are noted. If I ask for the finder to initial OVER the next code and then send the code as part of the logging requirement then I assume that is OK as the signing requirement has been complied with."

To which he replied:

"That is an excellent idea ......., mail me when the cache page is updated and I will continue with the review."

I emailed him and the cache went through.

So, with the "old" reviewers, and I think Graculus was one then, you had to have a physical log to be signed.

9.2k · January 6, 2009

Did read of a nano (it's an active cache!) which had the co-ords to the box with the log book in...

Find the nano, to be able to find and sign the log book.

3k · January 6, 2009

Did read of a nano (it's an active cache!) which had the co-ords to the box with the log book in...

Find the nano, to be able to find and sign the log book.

Isn't that just a normal offset cache with a nano container as the first stage??

January 6, 2009

I have read through the posts and for some reason I twigged that last weekend I contacted a CO after finding a "mark" on a logless cache and asking if I could still log!!

I got the reply that it was the done thing!!

So what im saying is do as I say not as I do!

sorry!

January 7, 2009

On the practical side for a moment - Is it possible to tell what colour it is in the dark ?

I assume primary colours are used

just a thought

If you can find a nano-cache in the dark,

when all about you are using a torch,

you're a better man than I, Gunga Din!

I have found a nano in the dark (for a FTF) but it was not difficult as it was the only obvious 'magnetic' place it coule be at the co-ords.

January 7, 2009

The Devil in me says it's worth a try so I will in the near future and let the forum know what happens! :unsure: :blink:

January 7, 2009

Put simply.......NO

(Unless you can have grandfather rights that I dont know about??)

A cache will not be reviewed without a log book!!

But it happens.

When you have sixty caches dotted about the place this is the obvious thing to do to save on cache maintainence!!

Its not big and its not clever!!! Dont do it!!

Well, I'll probably get shot down over this, but......

I like mili, micro, nano, pico caches.... Yeah, I know loads of people hate them, but each to their own. I'd love to be able to have a code that can be emailed back instead of a logbook...

Hmmm... Just had a thought...Earthcaches dont have log books, just logging requirements, so why not have a pebble as an earthcache?

Right, back to my nice warm padded room, with the spiders!!

PAUL.

What are mili and pico caches?

1.1k · January 7, 2009

What are mili and pico caches?

Presumably a millicache is a pill box and a picocache is a microdot :blink:

.

Rgds, Andy

January 7, 2009

Put simply.......NO

(Unless you can have grandfather rights that I dont know about??)

A cache will not be reviewed without a log book!!

But it happens.

When you have sixty caches dotted about the place this is the obvious thing to do to save on cache maintainence!!

Its not big and its not clever!!! Dont do it!!

Well, I'll probably get shot down over this, but......

I like mili, micro, nano, pico caches.... Yeah, I know loads of people hate them, but each to their own. I'd love to be able to have a code that can be emailed back instead of a logbook...

Hmmm... Just had a thought...Earthcaches dont have log books, just logging requirements, so why not have a pebble as an earthcache?

Right, back to my nice warm padded room, with the spiders!!

PAUL.

What are mili and pico caches?

Milicache = preform, micro = film pot, nano = lil magnetic ex flashy led thingy painted black, pico cache = anything smaller than a nano!!!

January 7, 2009

Thanks I can rest easy now. :unsure:

January 8, 2009

Surely a nano log is a twig :yikes:

(grabs coat and runs)

1.5k · January 9, 2009

'Other type of log' that's it..........a letter/numeral/colour that has to be e-mailed to the owner to confirm find and enable a 'Found it' log. Just as previously mentioned is done all the time with a Virtual Cache. It would comply within the rules generally surely, what are the reviewers saying? or are they sitting on the fence?

All physical caches (ie doesn't include Earthcaches, Virtuals, Webcams or Events*) must have a logbook to sign. On occasions a reviewer may miss the fact during the review process or a cache owner may edit the page post-publication. If you see a cache that doesn't have a logbook if you report it to the reviewer via email or a "Needs Archived" log** then they will follow it up with the CO.

* Although Events don't have to have a logbook (with the exception of Mega Events) it's becoming very common for most Event holders to require everyone present to sign some form of log.

** A Needs Archived log doesn't automatically result in a cache being archived but (apart from a Change Coordinates log) it is the only log type that consistently gets forwarded to a reviewer.

Edited January 9, 2009 by dino-irl

January 9, 2009

I know that the rules state a cache must have a log, but have come across a couple of Nanos now where one has to e-mail the colour found painted inside to claim. I personally think this is a good idea as the piece of minute paper to log upon does not last long at all and getting it in and out adds to its demise eventually as well. So is putting a colour/letter/numeral to e-mail back to the owner actually permitted by the reviewers?

Can someone please let me know where I can get hold of one those magnetic nanos please as need one to replace a cache that was 'lost'

Many thanks

Will send 'nano' sized bank notes to any one who can help !!!

1.4k · January 9, 2009

Nano Cache? Have a look HERE. :blink:

January 9, 2009

No-one could ever tell whether I'd signed any nano logs or not as they're so small.

So what's the point?

Yes, I know the rules says you must sign a log at every cache, blah,blah,blah

We're talking practicalities here.

I lose the will to live when I see its a nano, with the ritual 5 minutes of unrolling then re rolling

And there's a nano fiend round Holmfirth who loves putting them out :blink:

3k · January 9, 2009

No-one could ever tell whether I'd signed any nano logs or not as they're so small.

So what's the point?

Yes, I know the rules says you must sign a log at every cache, blah,blah,blah

We're talking practicalities here.

I lose the will to live when I see its a nano, with the ritual 5 minutes of unrolling then re rolling

And there's a nano fiend round Holmfirth who loves putting them out

No - the rules don't say you should sign a log at every cache - they say that every cache must have a log. Whether you sign it or not is between you and the CO.....

January 9, 2009

I know that the rules state a cache must have a log, but have come across a couple of Nanos now where one has to e-mail the colour found painted inside to claim. I personally think this is a good idea as the piece of minute paper to log upon does not last long at all and getting it in and out adds to its demise eventually as well. So is putting a colour/letter/numeral to e-mail back to the owner actually permitted by the reviewers?

Can someone please let me know where I can get hold of one those magnetic nanos please as need one to replace a cache that was 'lost'

Many thanks

Will send 'nano' sized bank notes to any one who can help !!!

try geotees.co.uk

8.6k · January 9, 2009

...I lose the will to live when I see its a nano, with the ritual 5 minutes of unrolling then re rolling...

Yes, they can be really fiddly - maybe an idea for a competition at the next Mega? "Fastest nano log roller"? :blink:

They can be good fun, though... if they're really cleverly hidden... and the search takes more than 2 minutes.

MrsB

January 9, 2009

...I lose the will to live when I see its a nano, with the ritual 5 minutes of unrolling then re rolling...

Yes, they can be really fiddly - maybe an idea for a competition at the next Mega? "Fastest nano log roller"?

They can be good fun, though... if they're really cleverly hidden... and the search takes more than 2 minutes.

MrsB

how about a nano designed like a loo roll holder - put the roller on the lid & roll the cache round it then slot it onto the main part.

maybe i'll regain the will to live :blink:

3.3k · January 9, 2009

Yes, they can be really fiddly - maybe an idea for a competition at the next Mega? "Fastest nano log roller"?

That idea has been in the pot for quite a while

8.6k · January 9, 2009

Yes, they can be really fiddly - maybe an idea for a competition at the next Mega? "Fastest nano log roller"?

That idea has been in the pot for quite a while

Really?

I must be picking up psychic vibes on the southerly winds then.... :blink:

MrsB

January 10, 2009

I feel sorry for the Hamsters having to fit in these micros and nanos.

Nano Logs

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation