FTF Before Publication

[aniyn]

I don't really understand the whole FTF obsession. The only reason I can think of is to try to snag an FTF prize, but few ever have them. It doesn't really matter to me.

 

I guess it just comes down to what you view gc'ing as - to me it's a hobby, like fishing. Sure there's a goal, but it's the getting there that's the fun part. If you see it as a game, then you're only going to be frustrated because someone else is always going to have more free time, more resources to throw at it, a fanatic mentality, and a huge head start. You'll never "win", and it can only lead to dissapointment.

 

In the end i guess it's like anything - there's always someone out there willing to get all bent out of shape and throw a punch over some conceived injustice, no matter the size or setting. The trick is not being there when it happens

[+Headhardhat]

Besides the more obvious situations like the owner slipping out the coords to someone I have had a situation come up twice that may explain it.

 

I have a pocket query that I check just before I leave home from work called New Caches. It simply looks for geocaches from a particular area that has not been found yet. I usually go directly to the watch in google maps to see if any are on the "radar". On two seperate occasions I saw new geocaches pop up on the map, I get the coords from geocaching.com as usual and go find them for a FTF. They show up as published caches and can be found through Geocache Navigator as well.. On those two occasions I get my email notification that the cache has published an hour AFTER I already found it.

 

So there can be a time lag of when the cache is actually published on geocaching.com and when the email notice goes out.

 

Just food for thought.

 

-HHH

[Keystone]

Yes, there can be delays with notifications arriving (either due to throttling by the recipient's mail provider, or the occasional e-mail logjam on Groundspeak's mail server). But, when the system is functioning as designed on both ends, the notification is sent immediately upon entry of the "Published" log.

 

When publishing caches, it is fun to hear the alarm go off on my cellphone for the new e-mail. (I subscribe to insta-notify under my player account, because there are three other reviewers who publish caches within my normal caching range.) Sometimes, the notification arrives while the website page is still refreshing after I press the "publish" button.

[+chadli]

I have noticed that too... only usually the FTF is published by a reviewer. Is that legal? Can a reviewer get the ftf THEN publish it for everyone else? Just doesn't seem fair...

 

After going back over the listings where I thought this had occured, it turns out I couldn't find it. I must've made a mistake in this original posting. My apologies for my erroneous facts...

[+anakerose]

Perhaps the hider gave the doords to a friend to "test find" the cache. I've also seen where folks watch for drops of coins/tbs into new caches and are able to get teh coords but no other info.

 

I do that for some people, but usually I'll write it in my log that I was a test finder.

[+KJcachers]

I just had this happen this morning. Got alerted to a new cache near my house. Stopped on the way to work, less than an hour after being published and it had a FTF signature in it. Turns out the FTFer saw the owner placing the cache and signed it right after they left and then came back and logged the find as soon as it was published. I am not sure how I feel about that but I claimed the first "official" FTF in my log.

Edited May 21, 2009 by KJcachers

[Skippermark]

Perhaps the hider gave the doords to a friend to "test find" the cache. I've also seen where folks watch for drops of coins/tbs into new caches and are able to get teh coords but no other info.

 

I do that for some people, but usually I'll write it in my log that I was a test finder.

And log it on the second page so no one flips out and gets confused when they see another signature in there.

[+obxnomad]

I can see both sides of the geocoin on this question. I guess it all depends on how bad you want that FTF.

[+chadli]

I have been seeing more and more first to finds on caches before the admin publishes it. How is that happening? I am a Premium member and by the time I get notification of the cache someone has already found it and the log is in before the admins published post.

I don't think GC.com should allow caches to be found before they are published except in the case of special commemorative caches like for other cachers birthdays or find # whatever, then only the person it is for should be able to log it before it is published.

 

OK, I will get off my soapbox now!

 

Well I got my first cache published this week...

I recieved the notification on my cell phone when it was published.

I went online and saw the publication.

The next morning I looked at saw the FTF, and it WAS listed before the publication.

SO... It LOOKED like the FTF came in before the publication, but it didn't.

 

I don't know why, and I know there are many theories out there as to why this happens, but all I can say is that I didn't share the coords with anyone, the publication WAS the first log in the description, but the FTF superceded the publication when it was logged.

[+gof1]

Look at a cache with several days with finds on it. Now divide out each day. The first log to come in on any given day is at the top of the list for that day. The next log posted online is just below that. The third log posted online is below that. The next day is above all this, but the logs for that day start with the earliest on top and subsequent logs under it. As you have seen with your cache the FTF did not happen before the cache was published.

 

Day 3

log 1

log 2

log 3

 

Day 2

log 1

log 2

log 3

 

Day 1

published

log 1

log 2

log 3

[+The Blorenges]

I understand the way that this new-style of log listing is working but I prefer the "old way". I like to see the reviewer's Published log at the very bottom and all subsequent logs working upwards from that one...

 

I hope it'll get changed back one day.

 

MrsB

[+gof1]

I agree 100 percent.

[+geodarts]

I never use the three initials that begin with "F" in a log (although I do not mind finding a cache that has never been visited on occasion). But without getting into a rant about that, I have seen caches that have been found before publication.

 

One cacher had placed a series of caches in the area that were being released periodically. A friend was in the neighborhood where many of them were appearing, looked at a likely looking spot and found it.

 

Another cacher was hiking in the woods and happened across one that was hidden under a rock along side a trail.

 

After the latter find, I was inspired to simply leave a cache and have people find it using their intuition. After all, if you can find a cache before it has been published, you can find any cache. I relented a bit and narrowed down the search area. Then I gave a few clues: GC17RPG

 

There are of course, some people who may sign a log because they were with the owner when it was placed. Locally, we seem to have adopted a "do not log online until three people have found it" guideline for these kinds of situations.

[+gof1]

I've found a couple that way myself. Out looking for a place to hide a cache and low and behold there is already a cache there. Hey, a good hiding spot is a good hiding spot.

 

Thing is that I think this thread was more about how the published log by the reviewer is not the first log appearing at the bottom of the page online.

[jholly]

I understand the way that this new-style of log listing is working but I prefer the "old way". I like to see the reviewer's Published log at the very bottom and all subsequent logs working upwards from that one...

 

I hope it'll get changed back one day.

 

MrsB

 

The way gof1 showed the logs is EXACTLY the way the logs were shown on the personal profile page - the one you can see and not the one that is public. There was loud wailing and gnashing of teeth because everyone was upset that the caches were not shown in chronological order. The lackeys fixed that problem. Now the caches on your personal profile page are shown in correct order. The world is good and everyone is happy.

 

Unfortunately that fix now broke the log listing on the cache pages and if you take the time to look, the public list of your caches found are now upside down, just like the order gof1 has shown.

 

But we are now happy because our personal profile page is ordered correctly. The world is warm and fuzzy and smiles around. God forbid they change it back because then the world will be dark, cold and forbidding with our finds in some crazy order and to get them right we have to log the first last and the last first.

 

So what do you want? cache logs in the right order or your personal profile page in the right order? Seems we can't have both.

 

Jim

[+gof1]

I don't know about MrsB but I want it all and I want it now!

 

Um, please, if it isn't to much trouble,'k?

[jholly]

I don't know about MrsB but I want it all and I want it now!

 

Um, please, if it isn't to much trouble,'k?

 

Your sounding like a spoiled user

 

Jim

[+gof1]

I don't think I'm spoiled yet, but I'm willing to give it a try.

[jholly]

I don't think I'm spoiled yet, but I'm willing to give it a try.

 

touche!

 

Jim

[+gof1]

I think it took the two of us working together to get to that punchline.

[+CCWelch]

OK I had this happen to me....I know that my cache was placed well before the administrator published it, I looked at it the night it was published and the administrators published log was the only one there,the next morning the first to find logs were right there under the administrators log like they had been logged first. What is up with that? if someone new comes to the site they will think the same as I originally did. I know now from experience that things may not be what they seem.

[+gof1]

See my previous post, post #60. Then see JHolly's post #65. They explain what is happening and why.

[+Echo 5 Hotel]

I have received my notifications a day late before, could be a glitch in your email carrier once in a while

[+Parabola]

I understand the way that this new-style of log listing is working but I prefer the "old way". I like to see the reviewer's Published log at the very bottom and all subsequent logs working upwards from that one...

 

I hope it'll get changed back one day.

 

MrsB

 

I agree with this as well. I don't know if I was so used to seeing it that way or what. It can kind of throw off getting the last 5 log's in paperless caching as well.

 

I hope they consider it a bug and it's on the to be fixed list.

[+Parabola]

I understand the way that this new-style of log listing is working but I prefer the "old way". I like to see the reviewer's Published log at the very bottom and all subsequent logs working upwards from that one...

 

I hope it'll get changed back one day.

 

MrsB

 

The way gof1 showed the logs is EXACTLY the way the logs were shown on the personal profile page - the one you can see and not the one that is public. There was loud wailing and gnashing of teeth because everyone was upset that the caches were not shown in chronological order. The lackeys fixed that problem. Now the caches on your personal profile page are shown in correct order. The world is good and everyone is happy.

 

Unfortunately that fix now broke the log listing on the cache pages and if you take the time to look, the public list of your caches found are now upside down, just like the order gof1 has shown.

 

But we are now happy because our personal profile page is ordered correctly. The world is warm and fuzzy and smiles around. God forbid they change it back because then the world will be dark, cold and forbidding with our finds in some crazy order and to get them right we have to log the first last and the last first.

 

So what do you want? cache logs in the right order or your personal profile page in the right order? Seems we can't have both.

 

Jim

 

I'd prefer if they made the world dark, and cold again. I didn't relieze that's what made the log's look funny on the cache page. Sorry but I pay more attention to the cache page and what folk's have to say about their hunt then the other list on my personal profile.

[+rockymtn8iv]

If a TB or Geocoin is dropped in a cache before it is published it is possible to check the "map" feature on the TBs page and locate a cache.

 

Someone found one of mine like that once.

 

Now I wait to drop the "Bugs" 'till after it is published.

[+The Blorenges]

I understand the way that this new-style of log listing is working but I prefer the "old way". I like to see the reviewer's Published log at the very bottom and all subsequent logs working upwards from that one...

 

I hope it'll get changed back one day.

 

MrsB

 

... So what do you want? cache logs in the right order or your personal profile page in the right order? Seems we can't have both.

 

Jim

 

I'm sure those clever bods over on the geocaching.com website could fix it for us to have it both ways... What's it worth in bribery? A month's supply of donuts or something?

 

Personally, of the two options, I'd prefer to see the logs in "ascending order" on the cache pages.

 

But I'm not one to complain... I can cope with the stress and pain of seeing the reviewer's Published log steadily moving up the cache page as the first batch of found it logs appear on the same day...

 

Doesn't mean I like it though

 

MrsB

[+Harry Dolphin]

I just had this happen this morning. Got alerted to a new cache near my house. Stopped on the way to work, less than an hour after being published and it had a FTF signature in it. Turns out the FTFer saw the owner placing the cache and signed it right after they left and then came back and logged the find as soon as it was published. I am not sure how I feel about that but I claimed the first "official" FTF in my log.

 

No. That makes you FTFAP. Whoever signed the log first is still FTF. Unless, of course, you have been ordained to make the rules?

Come to think of it, I did that to someone once. Told him that that should be easy to find. He not only moved the final of the mystery cache, but went back and tore my signature out of the log book. Oh, well. If it means that much to you... But you're still not FTF!

[M15a4spr]

 

I don't think GC.com should allow .......

 

Oh that's definitely what geocaching needs, more rules. *rolls eyes*

[+KJcachers]

M15, you must be a new member of the board just scrolling through old topics which is cool but please refrain from posting and dragging these old topics back to the top unless you have something really valuable and new to add to the discussion. ( yep, I just got my message board police badge out of my cereal box this morning!)

[+Unkle Fester]

US Department of Pre-caching...

 

I see a coin in there or something...

[+Happy Humphrey]

I did go out and deliberately find a cache about 24 hours before publication recently in order to guarantee the FTF.

 

There's a well-known loophole which allows this (you don't need to rely on some sort of collusion) and Groundspeak are well aware of it. But it's only a game, so I don't think a fix is top of the priority list. Nobody dies. It's a bit of fun, and I did e-mail the cache owner afterwards, who took it in good spirit.

 

I'm not going to explain the loophole, however, so please don't ask!

[+Chrysalides]

Nobody dies. It's a bit of fun, and I did e-mail the cache owner afterwards, who took it in good spirit.

Well, it can be argued that a group of cachers would rage and rant about this, creating stress in their system that reduce their life expectancy by X number of days or months. Totaled up, this might amount to a few decades, or the life of one person

 

Anyway, the loophole is fairly straightforward. You replace your Ethernet cable to your router with something that transmits faster than light, and you'll be able to receive the notification e-mail BEFORE it was sent. Please be careful - you wouldn't want to create a paradox loop in the space-time continuum and destroy the universe as we know it.

Edited June 24, 2009 by Chrysalides

[+tomfuller & Quill]

... I am a Premium member and by the time I get notification of the cache someone has already found it and the log is in before the admins published post. ...

Just because the found log resides lower on the page than the reviewer log does not mean that the found log was entered first.

 

Got an FTF on Monday at 7:10PM on Monday. The cache was published about 3PM Monday and I got the email on my phone and called my wife at home for the coords about 5PM. I logged my find about 7PM on Tuesday but my FTF log still showed up under the reviewers published log.

That's just the way it is if you log your find on the day it is first published.

I noted the time on both the paper log and my online log.

[+Ladybug Kids]

I've only found a cache once before it was published, but it was pretty fun: Mini Society

[+Kalkendotters]

I've only found a cache once before it was published, but it was pretty fun: Mini Society

Sometimes you just get lucky :-)

[+DIGGER_52]

I don't think GC.com should allow caches to be found before they are published except in the case of special commemorative caches like for other cachers birthdays or find # whatever, then only the person it is for should be able to log it before it is published.

 

This is just a listing service. It isn't geocaching.com's, or anybody else's business how, when, where and to whom the cache owner releases his coordinates

 

I have noticed this as well and sometimes when a new cache comes out and the FTF junkies swarm it all their logs appear before the publishing administrators log. It looks like just a glitch in the system

[+Go catch]

I have been seeing more and more first to finds on caches before the admin publishes it. How is that happening? I am a Premium member and by the time I get notification of the cache someone has already found it and the log is in before the admins published post.

I don't think GC.com should allow caches to be found before they are published except in the case of special commemorative caches like for other cachers birthdays or find # whatever, then only the person it is for should be able to log it before it is published.

 

OK, I will get off my soapbox now!

 

I have just had a very unusual experience with a 'possible' FTF this morning, here's the story:

A new cache appears by email at 22:52 last night (09/07/09) after being published by the reviewer. It wasn't until this morning before heading off to work that I checked to see where it was and whether I could go for it in time. At 05:30 this morning (10/07/09) I arrived at the site and found it no problem. Then I opened the container to see that there was already a log present, but dated 28/06/09 which coincidentaly was the date that the cache was set. There is no mention that it is a 'special' cache and as I was the first to find the cache after the published date I feel I should claim the FTF. Am I justified in what I've done?

[GOF and Bacall]

Perhaps the CO released the coords in some other manner prior to listing the cache on GC.com. Could have used one of the other listing services, the news paper, a billboard on the expressway. The CO may even have handed the coords on a piece of paper to some friend. Keep in mind that geocaching is not a competition.

[+sbell111]

I have just had a very unusual experience with a 'possible' FTF this morning, here's the story:

A new cache appears by email at 22:52 last night (09/07/09) after being published by the reviewer. It wasn't until this morning before heading off to work that I checked to see where it was and whether I could go for it in time. At 05:30 this morning (10/07/09) I arrived at the site and found it no problem. Then I opened the container to see that there was already a log present, but dated 28/06/09 which coincidentaly was the date that the cache was set.

Perhaps the cache was listed on two listing sites. Perhaps the other site listed it immediately, but it was slightly delayed in getting listed to GC.com.

There is no mention that it is a 'special' cache and as I was the first to find the cache after the published date I feel I should claim the FTF. Am I justified in what I've done?

Since 'FTF' is not an official thing, you are welcome to say that you found every cache first.

 

Basically, if your find met your personal definition of 'FTF', it was an FTF.

[+Markle2k]

I saw this in the Dead Horse Thread and was wondering if anybody had seen this but nobody mentioned it.

 

I've gone out and grabbed a FTF after getting the email, logged the find online, noticing that the publish is the same date as my log(because this has happened a few times). I'll then look at the page a couple days later to see what others thought and the date on the publish has changed to the day after my find. No evidence that the reviewer edited the publish. It's always happened when it was published a few hours before midnight and I found it the same night. Sometimes I got back before midnight to log it, sometimes not.

 

GC20KAG, GC20J8K, GC20J8G, GC1Z0J5, GC1W203 of the last 13

 

I'm generally pretty good spirited about 2TF by the way but when I opened a cache and found it was signed three days before it was listed or published and there was no note on the cache page I was a bit cheesed off and I invented a new acronym:

 

FTFWTBOBWTHAHA3DHS!*

....

I was somewhat nonplussed when I pulled out the cache and it was signed FTF. Three days before it was published.

 

*Thus, I have logged this First to Find without the benefit of being with the hider and having a 3 day head start.

 

They didn't even have the decency to log it for another two weeks, but backdated.

[+sbell111]

It's really difficult to get worked up over FTF squabbles.

[+supertbone]

They key to finding lots of unpublished caches is to catch a series of caches being published on a power caching trail and be ahead of the reviewer. I have two examples of this.

 

Yesterday, I was able to find 18 unpublished caches in a rural area that are part of a series. The other day a few caches in this series were published. Due to their placement, container used, and cache info I had a feeling more would be on their way. While out finding the published part of the series, a couple more were published, I got the notifications on my blackberry and had the logs signed moments after publishing. It looked like the reviewer was staggering their release. From that point I started connecting the dots and looked every .10 mile on a series of roads in the area. Since the area is flat farm land there was not a lot of hiding spots for the type of container being used and that made searching easy. Some of the containers were visible from your car if you knew what you were looking for.

 

Recently a cache team from the local area went and found approx 80 unpublished caches (out of a series of 120) that were hidden the same way along on a mega power caching trail in Utah County, UT. They did the same thing I did on a larger scale and connected the dots with what had been released.