Logging an "Almost Found"

[+peajay84]

I was recently reveiwing logs from caches in my area (but not owned by me) that had been found. I like to see who is in the area caching.

 

One cache had a couple recent "finds" logged but upon reading the logs the cachers state that they didn't really find the cache just the place where it must have been. Here are the logs:

 

"Well we kinda found it. We found where the cache had been hidden until the Maintenance Supervisor at the location took hold of it due to damage to the Area. We know we were in the right place, cause there was a sign stating that the cache was now in possession of the Maintenance Supervisor and the owner of the cache may stop by and pick it up. Our attached picture shows that we found the place."

 

and

 

"Like the cacher's before, we did not find the cache because the property manager has confiscated it, but we found where it was. We'll post pictures of us there. This cache is becoming a 'virtual'."

 

Both of the above logs were posted by cachers with over 200 finds.

 

Why would you even consider logging it as a FIND when you clearly state you didn't find it? If you don't find the container that IS the cache, IT'S NOT A FIND!!!

 

Another log read as follows: "The place was closed, and the cache was not there. Would've loved to have found it, but there was a sign on the lamp post saying something about the geocache has been moved and that the "installer" can contact the facilities manager. I took a picture and have uploaded it along with some others." At least this cacher logged it as a DNF.

 

NOT ONE of these cachers logged a "Needs Archived" or even a "Needs Maintainence" to notify the owner that the cache was no longer there. The DNF was logged a month ago. The pictures uploaded show the sign posted at the site which really leaves a big black eye on geocaching as a sport. In big, bold, writing it blames geocachers for damage done to the site.

 

It has now been archived but it could have been brought to the attention of the cache owner much sooner if the first person (and the subsequent cachers) finding the sign posted would have logged the cache appropriately.

 

I get the "it's all about the numbers" for some people but at least a log of "Needs Archived" along with a Find or DNF to let the reviewer know there is an issue that needs to be addressed.

[+Bear and Ragged]

No sign the logbook/sheet, no find!

 

As you say, they should have said something to alert the cache owner...

Who may have allowed the first DNF or note to say it's missing, a find.

[+Kit Fox]

The correct term (and corresponding thread with thousands of examples) is "Found it = Didn't find it."

[+peajay84]

The correct term (and corresponding thread with thousands of examples) is "Found it = Didn't find it."

 

Maybe my thread title should read "Logging a Find When It Should Have Been a Needs Archived".

 

Do some seasoned cachers (and IMO anyone over 50 finds is a seasoned cacher) really not realize when the different situations should be used (Find, DNF, Note, Needs Maintainence, Needs Archived, etc)?

[Dinoprophet]

I imagine even some cachers with thousands of finds don't know the nuances of what's acceptable to log as a find to the community (i.e. the forums). And some people may also not be aware of the NA/NM logs or their purpose (less likely, but possible). Whether or not that's the case here, I know that I always make sure to read DNFs on my caches to see if there is any indication that the cache is missing (I read all logs, but DNFs get special attention for that reason).

[+briansnat]

Until they come up with a log type for "found where it should have been" I'll continue to log DNFs in such instances.

[+Allanon]

Do they realize the difference, I'd say yes...they do.

 

But obviously they just don't care.

 

Alternately, did you verify with the cache owner that s/he didn't give permission for the 'finders' to log it as Found?

Edited July 12, 2009 by Allanon

[+bittsen]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

I do have one cache that the owner asked me to log as found because I had found the spot, looked for the cache and the owner verified it wasn't there. The owner asked me to log as found and then corrected the problem.

That's a completely different story from the "I didn't find it so I will log it as found".

[namiboy]

The correct term (and corresponding thread with thousands of examples) is "Found it = Didn't find it."

 

Maybe my thread title should read "Logging a Find When It Should Have Been a Needs Archived".

 

Do some seasoned cachers (and IMO anyone over 50 finds is a seasoned cacher) really not realize when the different situations should be used (Find, DNF, Note, Needs Maintainence, Needs Archived, etc)?

 

oh cool. i'm a seasoned cacher! thanks, you made my day.

[+GRANPA ALEX]

Agreed, it was not a find & should not be claimed as such . . . but it did cover the bases of notifying the owner of care being needed, some value there.

 

I think what you describe should be called to the reviewer attention with a "Needs Archived". It will then get some action toward resolution or removal to protect future cachers from wasting their time or being confronted with an unhappy property manager.

[+Arrow42]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

I do have one cache that the owner asked me to log as found because I had found the spot, looked for the cache and the owner verified it wasn't there. The owner asked me to log as found and then corrected the problem.

That's a completely different story from the "I didn't find it so I will log it as found".

 

Not that different. You still logged a found on a cache you did not find.

[+bittsen]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

I do have one cache that the owner asked me to log as found because I had found the spot, looked for the cache and the owner verified it wasn't there. The owner asked me to log as found and then corrected the problem.

That's a completely different story from the "I didn't find it so I will log it as found".

 

Not that different. You still logged a found on a cache you did not find.

 

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

[aniyn]

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. For a lot of us the fun is in the finding, and I see a difference between not finding a cache and finding a cache to be absent. Should you log a "needs maintenance" as well? absolutely. But knowing exactly where a cache is makes "finding it" the next time nothing more than a formality.

[+briansnat]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

I do have one cache that the owner asked me to log as found because I had found the spot, looked for the cache and the owner verified it wasn't there. The owner asked me to log as found and then corrected the problem.

That's a completely different story from the "I didn't find it so I will log it as found".

 

Not that different. You still logged a found on a cache you did not find.

 

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

 

I agree. Yet he can ask you to log it, but there is nothing saying you have to.

[+bittsen]

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

I agree. Yet he can ask you to log it, but there is nothing saying you have to.

 

To this agree and there is nothing saying I shouldn't.

Keep in mind this was somewhere near my 15th GC. I have learned a lot since then and haven't logged another missing cache as a found, nor am I likely to, UNLESS I was a few hundred miles from my town and the owner asked me to log it.

[+flask]

 

 

I agree. Yet he can ask you to log it, but there is nothing saying you have to.

 

well, yes. typically i would not log a find nor would i ask others to do so.

 

there is a day in my fairly recent memory however, when i was out with two of my gentlemen friends. they looked and looked and looked and finally after a long while of watching them excavate a huge snowbank it was conclusively proved that my cache was not there.

 

THEY had a replacement container and offered to put it out for me. i asked them to go ahead and log the find. the alternative was for me to have to schlepp myself out there to put it in place while they politely looked the other way (or not, since they knew where it should have been) and THEN logged it.

[+CanUK_TeamFitz]

Well since you can log a DNF on a muggled cache, what if someone actually DID find it? I'd love to see someone log the following:

 

Well, found your cache but it was 500m+ from GZ. Also recommend a higher difficulty rating as Maintenance Supervisor has installed deadbolts on the door.

 

[namiboy]

i guess this is a good place to ask:

 

say i found exactly where a geocache was supposed to be, but it was partly missing. what was holding it in place was there but the rest wasn't. what if i posted a note as such and asked the cache owner to sign my name for me when he put it back? i've never done that, but on one that was far from home i thought about doing that.

[+Harry Dolphin]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

I do have one cache that the owner asked me to log as found because I had found the spot, looked for the cache and the owner verified it wasn't there. The owner asked me to log as found and then corrected the problem.

That's a completely different story from the "I didn't find it so I will log it as found".

 

Not that different. You still logged a found on a cache you did not find.

 

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

 

Umm... No. I didn't find it. I had that offer from a cache owner, when I logged my DNF. "You may log it as a found." "No, thanks. I didn't find it. I'll try again next time I'm out that way."

[+Harry Dolphin]

i guess this is a good place to ask:

 

say i found exactly where a geocache was supposed to be, but it was partly missing. what was holding it in place was there but the rest wasn't. what if i posted a note as such and asked the cache owner to sign my name for me when he put it back? i've never done that, but on one that was far from home i thought about doing that.

 

The infamous "Found the Velcro" thread! Nope. The velcro isn't the cache. I will log a find when I find the cache, but no log in it. After I put in a piece of paper with my signature. But, if I do not find the container, then I have not foud the cache. I didn't even log a find on the cache that I dropped into the Passaic River. I didn't get a chance to sign the log before I dropped it.

[+bittsen]

The infamous "Found the Velcro" thread! Nope. The velcro isn't the cache. I will log a find when I find the cache, but no log in it. After I put in a piece of paper with my signature. But, if I do not find the container, then I have not foud the cache. I didn't even log a find on the cache that I dropped into the Passaic River. I didn't get a chance to sign the log before I dropped it.

 

So, you found the cache, dropped it in the river, but didn't find the cache?

 

That doesn't make sense.

 

I do hope you dove in after the cache and then logged the dnf. Adding, of course that the log is wet and might need maintenance.

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

The infamous "Found the Velcro" thread! Nope. The velcro isn't the cache. I will log a find when I find the cache, but no log in it. After I put in a piece of paper with my signature. But, if I do not find the container, then I have not foud the cache. I didn't even log a find on the cache that I dropped into the Passaic River. I didn't get a chance to sign the log before I dropped it.

 

So, you found the cache, dropped it in the river, but didn't find the cache?

 

That doesn't make sense.

 

I do hope you dove in after the cache and then logged the dnf. Adding, of course that the log is wet and might need maintenance.

 

 

Ah, but, you see... My signature was not in the cache before I dropped it! That's a DNF.

I may be a dolphin, but even I do not swim in the Passaic River! I apologized profusely, and the CO harassed me unmercifully! But we're still good friends.

[+bittsen]

The infamous "Found the Velcro" thread! Nope. The velcro isn't the cache. I will log a find when I find the cache, but no log in it. After I put in a piece of paper with my signature. But, if I do not find the container, then I have not foud the cache. I didn't even log a find on the cache that I dropped into the Passaic River. I didn't get a chance to sign the log before I dropped it.

 

So, you found the cache, dropped it in the river, but didn't find the cache?

 

That doesn't make sense.

 

I do hope you dove in after the cache and then logged the dnf. Adding, of course that the log is wet and might need maintenance.

 

 

Ah, but, you see... My signature was not in the cache before I dropped it! That's a DNF.

I may be a dolphin, but even I do not swim in the Passaic River! I apologized profusely, and the CO harassed me unmercifully! But we're still good friends.

Well, the log is only "proof" that you found the log. I think that admitting that you tossed it in the river is proof enough that you found it.

 

To be completely forthright, if I found a cache and forgot to sign the log, I would probably log it as found. I am honest enough with my caching that I would not be morally bothered by not actually signing. A find is a find. Logging is merely proof that you found it IMHO.

Having said that, I have yet to forget to sign a log. I would even sign one in blood because a pen wouldn't work if I were already bleeding.

[+power69]

i guess this is a good place to ask:

 

say i found exactly where a geocache was supposed to be, but it was partly missing. what was holding it in place was there but the rest wasn't. what if i posted a note as such and asked the cache owner to sign my name for me when he put it back? i've never done that, but on one that was far from home i thought about doing that.

that happened to me. magnets were there but container gone. logged a dnf.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The infamous "Found the Velcro" thread! Nope. The velcro isn't the cache. I will log a find when I find the cache, but no log in it. After I put in a piece of paper with my signature. But, if I do not find the container, then I have not foud the cache. I didn't even log a find on the cache that I dropped into the Passaic River. I didn't get a chance to sign the log before I dropped it.

 

So, you found the cache, dropped it in the river, but didn't find the cache?

 

That doesn't make sense.

 

I do hope you dove in after the cache and then logged the dnf. Adding, of course that the log is wet and might need maintenance.

 

 

Ah, but, you see... My signature was not in the cache before I dropped it! That's a DNF.

I may be a dolphin, but even I do not swim in the Passaic River! I apologized profusely, and the CO harassed me unmercifully! But we're still good friends.

Well, the log is only "proof" that you found the log. I think that admitting that you tossed it in the river is proof enough that you found it.

 

To be completely forthright, if I found a cache and forgot to sign the log, I would probably log it as found. I am honest enough with my caching that I would not be morally bothered by not actually signing. A find is a find. Logging is merely proof that you found it IMHO.

Having said that, I have yet to forget to sign a log. I would even sign one in blood because a pen wouldn't work if I were already bleeding.

 

Now that makes a lot of sense. At the end of the day, we all know if we actually found the cache or not. I have on two occasions logged a cache when I hadn't (yet) signed the log. The first was on the first cache I ever looked for. The CO confirmed that it was missing and told me to log a find. I did, but went back a week or so later and found the cache (actually, in a spot I had never searched) and found it and signed the log. The other time was on a cache about 35 miles from home. I had DNFd on it once before after actually touching the container but there were too many muggles around for me to grab the cache. It was in January went I "found it" the second time, hidden in a crotch of a tree. After brushing away some leaves I could see the cache...embedded in a pool of ice several inches thick. I sent email to the CO and explained what I had found and he told me to go ahead and log the find. I haven't been back in that area since so I haven't officially since the log and it haunts me still. I have also signed a log with a twig and some mud after discovering that I had forgotten a pen after a 1/2 mile hike into the woods. A subsequent finder was kind enough to trace over my initials in the log book.

[Dj Storm]

I imagine even some cachers with thousands of finds don't know the nuances of what's acceptable to log as a find to the community (i.e. the forums). And some people may also not be aware of the NA/NM logs or their purpose (less likely, but possible). Whether or not that's the case here, I know that I always make sure to read DNFs on my caches to see if there is any indication that the cache is missing (I read all logs, but DNFs get special attention for that reason).

 

Sometimes even cache owners don't know the difference between log types. Two recent stories from my holiday:

 

I logged a DNF on a micro, where I didn't really felt like searching thoroughly. My log stated that I searched for about 5 minutes. Some of the previous found it logs told a story of 3-4 caches searching for 15-30 minutes all over the place until finally finding it. After my log, the owner (with several hundred finds and dozens of hides) disabled the cache (without any message). I sent him an email, saying my DNF doesn't mean the cache is not there, and he shouldn't disable a cache just because of a DNF from a newbie. No answer, the cache is still disabled.

 

Another cache was behind a gated property; I walked around, then bushwhacked about 350m, found the cache near a road (the road was used by joggers and bicycle riders), went back on the road and found the gate again. Posted a needs maintenance saying now the area is off limits, but some uses might be allowed. The owner posted a note, saying that that is a public road across a private property, and the land owner must allow public transit according to state laws.

I felt somewhat guilty of posting a NM, and told the owner to put that information on the cache page, and to post a "performed maintenance" log to clear the "needs maintenance" attribute. The owner (hundreds of finds, dozens hides) thanked me, but did not follow my recommendations.

 

I guess there are areas where only "found it" logs are posted, any other log type disorients the cache owner. I looked through my DNF's, and on an urban cache (in the same area as the two examples above), my DNF is the only one against 65 found it logs.

[+rob3k]

i guess this is a good place to ask:

 

say i found exactly where a geocache was supposed to be, but it was partly missing. what was holding it in place was there but the rest wasn't. what if i posted a note as such and asked the cache owner to sign my name for me when he put it back? i've never done that, but on one that was far from home i thought about doing that.

that happened to me. magnets were there but container gone. logged a dnf.

 

This happened to me just a few days ago. Then 2 days later somebody found it! It's a multi so my guess is either the person had previously found the 1st stage or there just happened to be a loose magnet right at GZ. I threw in the towel as soon as I found the stray magnet thinking it must be gone.

[+on4bam]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

What about this then: I recently found a nano. The log was full and there is no place for another piece of paper. So, Found cache, don't sign log, log found online... or not?

 

OK, I'll admit it, I did put a nano sized piece of paper with my name in there so the log was signed However, the next person will not be able to do the same.

It's not always possible to sign the log especially when nano's are involved.

[+Frank Broughton]

Now this subject is a legitimate dead horse topic - no Sbell?

[+EvanMinn]

What part of "find cache, sign log, log online" do these people fail to understand.

 

I do have one cache that the owner asked me to log as found because I had found the spot, looked for the cache and the owner verified it wasn't there. The owner asked me to log as found and then corrected the problem.

That's a completely different story from the "I didn't find it so I will log it as found".

 

Not that different. You still logged a found on a cache you did not find.

 

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

 

The CO can give you permission but after that, YOU have the final say.

 

I found a cache where the cache itself was gone but I found the magnet that attached it to its spot. I took a pic of it and sent it to the owner and logged a needs maintenance.

 

The CO told me I could log a find but I didn't. To me, I didn't find it but just found a little piece of attaching material and not the cache itself.

 

I wouldn't say other people in the same circumstances shouldn't log a find (it was a close to finding it as was possible), but I don't care about the numbers and to me, I didn't find the cache so I didn't log a found the cache log.

 

The point is that it is only PARTLY up to the CO. It is also up to you to decide what your standards are for what constitutes a find in questionable circumstances.

Edited July 13, 2009 by EvanMinn

[+Arrow42]

 

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

 

If you have no compunctions about logging a find on a cache that you didn't find then yes, that's between you and the CO. However, claiming to have found the cache is untruthful any way you look at it.

[+bittsen]

 

Ah, but there IS a difference. The Cache Owner told me to log it that way.

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

 

If you have no compunctions about logging a find on a cache that you didn't find then yes, that's between you and the CO. However, claiming to have found the cache is untruthful any way you look at it.

 

So the CO determining that it was a virtual cache, and allowing the find, means nothing?

[aniyn]

If you have no compunctions about logging a find on a cache that you didn't find then yes, that's between you and the CO. However, claiming to have found the cache is untruthful any way you look at it.

 

Only by your interpretation of the rules. However, Groundspeak does not have any set guidelines to deal with these kinds of situations (and I'll bet dollars to pesos that they won't). We all have to deal with them as best we can.

Besides, it's a game we play in the woods with tupperware, not our income taxes.

[Clan Riffster]

The cache owner is the final say if you log it found or not.

 

Wouldn't you agree?

I wouldn't. Logging a find on a missing cache is a two part process.

1 ) The cache owner allowing a found log.

2 ) The cache seeker deciding their smiley is more important than their accuracy.

 

Back on topic:

The only time so called "fake" logs bother me is when there is an intent to deceive.

If a cacher logs a find on a missing cache, clearly stating it is missing, then there is no intent to deceive.

My personal rule is, if my name is not on the log, I will not log a find. No exceptions.

I recognise that this is a pretty lofty standard, and I am not willing to push this standard on others.

[+Arrow42]

Only by your interpretation of the rules. However, Groundspeak does not have any set guidelines to deal with these kinds of situations (and I'll bet dollars to pesos that they won't). We all have to deal with them as best we can.

Besides, it's a game we play in the woods with tupperware, not our income taxes.

 

What I'm saying has nothing to do with the rules. I'm not saying anything should happen. I'm just stating the facts and how I see them. Found = , Did not Find = , "Did not find cache but found location where it was" is fairly straight forward.

 

No, your right. It's just a silly game. On my care-level bittsen's find is a little bit lower then whether or not I wear matching socks when wearing long pants. Then again, this is a discussion and I'm stating my point of view. I'm not making a call for action or anything.

[+Unkle Fester]

i guess this is a good place to ask:

 

say i found exactly where a geocache was supposed to be, but it was partly missing. what was holding it in place was there but the rest wasn't. what if i posted a note as such and asked the cache owner to sign my name for me when he put it back? i've never done that, but on one that was far from home i thought about doing that.

that happened to me. magnets were there but container gone. logged a dnf.

Same here, found magnets, velcro, string... you name it. no cache, no find. Now, I have found some where the contents were sooo waterlogged that I signed a scrap of paper and put in the cache, marked a find and a needs maintenence.

 

There is/was a cache at the south end of Hells Canyon near a town called Homestead named MOM. Several people mentioned a new barbed wire fence and no tresspassing signs but crossed to make the finds anyways. When I went through, I posted a needs archived to keep others out of private property.

 

Some of the many damaging things to this game include crossing no tresspassing signs without permission, destroying an area around a cache and cachers not using the tools available to keep caches active and healthy. As a cache owner, If I don't know it's broke, I can't fix it.

[+Chrysalides]

What about this then: I recently found a nano. The log was full and there is no place for another piece of paper. So, Found cache, don't sign log, log found online... or not?

Found a couple of nanos with log full. I looked for any empty space and wrote "c" on it and logged a found. Figured it's the CO's problem, not mine, especially when the previous 4 logs complained about log being full. I don't remove old logs from the cache, unless it is wet, disintegrating and useless.

 

I've "found" caches which I was not able to sign due to muggle activity a couple of times. Staring right at it, so near yet so far. In those cases, if I log the cache, I log a note instead of a DNF (but definitely not a "found").

[+Chrysalides]

I wouldn't. Logging a find on a missing cache is a two part process.

1 ) The cache owner allowing a found log.

2 ) The cache seeker deciding their smiley is more important than their accuracy.

I agree. I've only logged a find once without actually finding the cache and signing a log. It was a puzzle, I made two trips back, discussed with the CO over a few e-mails, provided photos of the area, and when the CO said he may not replace the cache and asked me to go ahead and log the find, I did. Still bothers me to this day even though I stated very clearly in my log.

 

Hmm, noticed that the CO did replace the cache. Time for a return visit just to ease my conscience. Or is that my OCD?

[+ArcherDragoon]

I have logged a couple "Almost Founds"...of course they are logged as "Did Not Finds"...but it certainly sounds better by referring to them as "Almost" instead of "Did Not"...

 

[+Jeep_Dog]

My personal rule is, if my name is not on the log, I will not log a find. No exceptions.

I recognise that this is a pretty lofty standard, and I am not willing to push this standard on others.

 

Well said, Riffster. Within the "Logging of Physical Caches" guidelines that state "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed", that's my interpretation and how I log my found caches, and how I manage online log entries of the caches which I have placed. I prize my integrity, and do not feel it worth compromising (perceived or actual) over a "smilie." That's just me, and lofty as well, and do not feel worth my time to push onto others.

 

The way in which a person logs can say a lot about their character, whether that "found it" be based upon a "I was in the general area, and here's a photo" or a 'thorough' log that states "TFTC" only, it is an glimpse of character. If someone doesn't care about the perception of their character, then I do not care about it either.

[+bittsen]

My personal rule is, if my name is not on the log, I will not log a find. No exceptions.

I recognise that this is a pretty lofty standard, and I am not willing to push this standard on others.

 

Well said, Riffster. Within the "Logging of Physical Caches" guidelines that state "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed", that's my interpretation and how I log my found caches, and how I manage online log entries of the caches which I have placed. I prize my integrity, and do not feel it worth compromising (perceived or actual) over a "smilie." That's just me, and lofty as well, and do not feel worth my time to push onto others.

 

The way in which a person logs can say a lot about their character, whether that "found it" be based upon a "I was in the general area, and here's a photo" or a 'thorough' log that states "TFTC" only, it is an glimpse of character. If someone doesn't care about the perception of their character, then I do not care about it either.

 

Ah, so someone who honors the wishes of the CO has less, or tarnished, character?

 

Makes me wonder, how is the view from that high horse?

Edited July 13, 2009 by bittsen

[+Arrow42]

Makes me wonder, how is the view from that high horse?

 

The view is dismal... that's why we are up here.

 

Ah, so someone who honors the wishes of the CO has less, or tarnished, character?

 

That brings up an old moral dilemma. If your beloved mother(or father, etc) asks you to do something morally questionable, what do you do? Honor your parents and violate your own morals or do you dishonor your parents and keep your integrity? What one is the lesser "sin"? Each person will need to make their own choice and live with it.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know... "It's just geocaching!" - you know what I have to say about that? *PTTTHHHHHH*

[+bittsen]

Makes me wonder, how is the view from that high horse?

 

The view is dismal... that's why we are up here.

 

Ah, so someone who honors the wishes of the CO has less, or tarnished, character?

 

That brings up an old moral dilemma. If your beloved mother(or father, etc) asks you to do something morally questionable, what do you do? Honor your parents and violate your own morals or do you dishonor your parents and keep your integrity? What one is the lesser "sin"? Each person will need to make their own choice and live with it.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know... "It's just geocaching!" - you know what I have to say about that? *PTTTHHHHHH*

 

What if you don't have morals?

 

The funny thing I saw at least 2 identities claim they didn't care what people thought of their opinion and then managed to question the GCers character. It just seemed so......hypocritical.

[aniyn]

"Logging of Physical Caches" guidelines that state "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed"

Well if you're going go by exactly what the guideline says, with a black or white attitude, then you shouldn't be able to sign a scrap of paper and leave it behind, since your scrap of paper is not the actual log book. Water-logged log book? That's a DNF as well.

[+Arrow42]

What if you don't have morals?

 

Makes a moral dilemma so much easier.

[+bittsen]

"Logging of Physical Caches" guidelines that state "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed"

Well if you're going go by exactly what the guideline says, with a black or white attitude, then you shouldn't be able to sign a scrap of paper and leave it behind, since your scrap of paper is not the actual log book. Water-logged log book? That's a DNF as well.

 

If I took any hobby as serious, it would end up being work.

 

Black and white attitudes are what gets people, organizations, companies and countries in trouble.

 

BTW, "guidelines" are NEVER black and white.

[aniyn]

 

If I took any hobby as serious, it would end up being work.

 

Black and white attitudes are what gets people, organizations, companies and countries in trouble.

 

BTW, "guidelines" are NEVER black and white.

 

Hey, I'm on your side here......

[+bittsen]

 

If I took any hobby as serious, it would end up being work.

 

Black and white attitudes are what gets people, organizations, companies and countries in trouble.

 

BTW, "guidelines" are NEVER black and white.

 

Hey, I'm on your side here......

 

My bad, I read your reply as contrary to my opinion. Even though, my comments weren't contrary to yours but complimentary.

 

~LOL~

[+niraD]

Well if you're going go by exactly what the guideline says, with a black or white attitude, then you shouldn't be able to sign a scrap of paper and leave it behind, since your scrap of paper is not the actual log book. Water-logged log book? That's a DNF as well.

Well, first you perform a bit of non-owner maintenance by placing a replacement log sheet in a cache that doesn't have a usable log. Then you can sign the replacement log sheet with a clear conscience.

 

Just signing a scrap of paper and leaving that scrap of paper in the cache would be completely different.

[Dinoprophet]

My personal rule is, if my name is not on the log, I will not log a find. No exceptions.

I recognise that this is a pretty lofty standard, and I am not willing to push this standard on others.

 

Well said, Riffster. Within the "Logging of Physical Caches" guidelines that state "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed", that's my interpretation and how I log my found caches, and how I manage online log entries of the caches which I have placed. I prize my integrity, and do not feel it worth compromising (perceived or actual) over a "smilie." That's just me, and lofty as well, and do not feel worth my time to push onto others.

That's all fine, but that sentence is taken from the guidelines for listing, not finding. There's no reason to believe a finder would ever read that page. Further, the section it is found in is all about ALRs, so I read it as meaning that signing the physical log is the MAXIMUM one must do to log online. You may read it as saying it's the MINIMUM you must do, but to me that doesn't make sense given the context.

 

That said, today I charred a twig so I could sign a logbook in a cache with no pen. Recently, I carved my name on a stick and left it in a cache with a soaked log. I need to start carrying pen and paper more reliably.

Edited July 14, 2009 by Dinoprophet