Finding one's own hides?

September 28, 2009

So, what do I do when reviewing my area for my non-finds, and my hides come up? While I am at it, why do events show as findable when they were just meet-n-greets. and the event is over without any physical caches left there, or at least none under the event name?

6.7k · September 28, 2009

Finding ones own hide is considered wrong by most cachers. I've never worried about seeing my caches in the results. I may even stop in and check on one if I am caching in the area.

The events are left open for a while to allow those who attended a chance to log as such.

5.6k · September 28, 2009

So, what do I do when reviewing my area for my non-finds, and my hides come up? While I am at it, why do events show as findable when they were just meet-n-greets. and the event is over without any physical caches left there, or at least none under the event name?

Ignore your own caches. Yes, it's considered bad form to "find" them. [[Edit: I checked back, and see that you are a premium member. You will find a filter checkbox for "Hide My Finds" on all of the map pages, and you can also deselect your own finds from any Pocket Query.]]

As for events, each one counts as a "find" when you attend. Not sure why it's set up that way - probably the folks at gc.com thought it would encourage people to get together if they were 'rewarded' for doing so. They do leave them up a while so people who were there can log them as "attended", post their comments, and upload their photos. After a bit, they are archived by the person who initiated the event.

Edited September 28, 2009 by ecanderson

4k · September 28, 2009

I have no idea why events are counted as a cache find. When I started I logged them as notes because to me they aren't geocaches. But then your event totals are incorrect. In the end I changed and started logging them just to keep my attended stats correct.

19k · September 28, 2009

Actually, it boggles my mind (<-- that's a "boggled mind") that the subject of "finding" one's own caches comes up as frequently as it does. Why would anyone even wonder about that? You hid it. You know where you hid it. You know HOW you hid it. No, you can't should not claim a find on it!! Not as a serious thing, at least.

Events are not a "find" per se. They are an "attended". Both do get a smiley, which most do consider "finds", but really, they are just that... smilies. I'm only guessing here, but I imagine that the the powers that be decided that they wanted to encourage events, and that a good way of doing that would be to let people have a smiley for attending.

Edited September 28, 2009 by knowschad

2.7k · September 28, 2009

Attending an event is it's own reward. I have attended my share of events, but you would never know it by looking at my profile. I just write notes. That keeps my FIND count accurate which is much more important to me than my EVENT count. Of course you won't find any Virtuals, Webcams, CITO,s or EC's there either.

There have been past discussions of a tracking option for events that don't pump your "find" count. It will never happen though because it doesn't bother enough cachers.

September 28, 2009

IMO, There is one exception when it comes to "finding" your own caches. I have about 25-30 caches that I adopted when another cacher moved to another part of the country. I have finds on all of them, some of them I had to actually FIND in order to do maintenance on them for the first time after I adopted them, because I hadn't found them previous to the adoption.

10.2k · September 28, 2009

Actually, it boggles my mind (<-- that's a "boggled mind") that the subject of "finding" one's own caches comes up as frequently as it does. Why would anyone even wonder about that? You hid it. You know where you hid it. You know HOW you hid it. No, you can't should not claim a find on it!! Not as a serious thing, at least.

Do Not find your own caches. (And I'm not talking about caches you later adopted). Sure, there are a few Geo hippies around here who will tell you you can do it, and the system allows it, and why should anyone care if you do it, it's none of their business, etc... . But in reality, if you do it, everyone in your area is just going to point at you and laugh. I know they certainly do in my area to the 2 local find your own cache guys. Don't be that guy :lol:

Edited September 28, 2009 by TheWhiteUrkel

September 28, 2009

Do Not find your own caches. ...if you do it, everyone in your area is just going to point at you and laugh.

Thank goodness I haven't found my two hides yet. I have a fairly good idea where they are.

38.2k · September 28, 2009

Gauche is a good word for logging finds on your own cache.

Regarding events, they come up as findable on your searches so you can find them. They are usually archived within a few weeks after the event

8k · September 28, 2009

If you would stop looking at the online found log as some kind of score this so called "problem" would seem a lot less of a problem. Anyone can create a "found it" log online for any cache or an "attended" log for any event. In order to that things don't get too crazy however, the cache owner is asked to do quality control of the logs on their cache pages and delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. The main use of the Found It and DNF logs are to indicated to others the cache has been found or the the cache was searched for but not found. Some cachers will decided to seek only caches which have a record of being found recently. A bogus log may cause someone, perhaps one of briansnat's friends, to drive 200 miles out of their way to seek a cache that is likely to be missing. One would hope that when a cache owner intentionally logs a find on their own cache it is because they looked for the cache and found it. Now, the puritans - and perhaps even a majority of all cachers - believe that an owner knows where he hid his cache so they would not post a 'Found It' log if they found one of their own caches. However there is no rule that says one can't log "Found It" on their own cache.

Historically, TPTB added events as a cache type since it was an easy to add this feature when geocachers asked for some way to organize geocaching events. Initially you could post the same logs for events as any other cache and people began to post "Found It" logs when they attended an event. Because of the this events were counted in the find count, which was just a count of the number of "Found It" logs you had. Later the site was change so that you "Attended" events instead of finding them. (You also could no longer DNF an event, but there was a new "Will Attend" log type where previously if you wanted to RSVP for an event you posted a Note.) TPTB probably should have said that with the advent of the attended log, events would no longer count in the find count total, but geocachers being what they are, it was decided to count "Attended" logs in the find count. Otherwise you would have people complain that events before a certain date counted but they didn't count after that date.

The find count is not a score. It is simply the total number of "Found It", "Attended", and "Photo Taken" logs that a person has entered. Most people will only enter one of these logs when they believe they have truly done something that deserves one on these log types. A tiny number of people may enter these logs simply to increment their find count as if it was a score. It's sad that someone might be so mistaken to believe that the find count is not only a score but that you can cheat (i.e. get a higher score by dishonest means). If you understand that it is not a score, you can either laugh at these people or you could decide that perhaps they have a good reason for using a "Found It" log on their own cache.

4k · September 28, 2009

The find count is not a score.

I'm sure a whole bunch of cachers will disagree with that. [to some] It's absolutely a score.

8k · September 28, 2009

The find count is not a score.

I'm sure a whole bunch of cachers will disagree with that. [to some] It's absolutely a score.

So what do we have to do to correct this misconception?

4.5k · September 28, 2009

The find count is not a score.

I'm sure a whole bunch of cachers will disagree with that. [to some] It's absolutely a score.

So what do we have to do to correct this misconception?

There is no misconception, at least for many cachers. There's no doubt that there are cachers out there who keep scores with these numbers. Smilies are what makes caching fun for them and they like seeing where they stand and even have little contests going with other friends and cachers. There is nothing wrong with this and to be honest, i'm not really sure why you think that there is anything here that needs correcting. There are lots of people who have fun with these numbers and if that's what floats their boat, then good for them!

8k · September 28, 2009

Setting personal goals and having friendly competitions with cachers you know based on "numbers" is fine. The problem I have is that if this is a score people will want to enforce some arbitrary standard for when you can use the "found it" log. Its pretty obvious to me that the puritans can't even agree what a find is, so what if there are some practices that all puritans condemn. What does it matter if is logging finds on their own cache or someone logged a find without signing a log or someone attended an event multiple time because they found some temporary caches? The system allows these logs (so long as the cache owner doesn't delete them) You can take an approach that all these people are cheating because these logs just inflate their "score" or you can say that the find count isn't a score and either these people are just being silly or they honestly believe that they did something that deserves a "Found It" log. The point is that if people are using the "Found It" log someway that you or I wouldn't use it, it doesn't make them a cheater and it doesn't prevent you from using the number how ever you like - other than to claim cacher A is ahead of cacher B because their find count is bigger. If A and B are friends that know each other, they can have what ever agreements they want between them and compare their finds. Comparing your finds with someone you don't know and you have to realize that the only thing you've compared is how many online logs you have written with the number of online logs they have written.

8.6k · September 28, 2009

One must, occasionally, return to their own cache for some reason. Use the postings for "note" or "maintenance" (if that is what you are doing).

For one thing, it lets the other cachers know that you care about your caches and are keeping an eye on them, i.e. clean, dry, etc.

September 28, 2009

Do Not find your own caches. ...if you do it, everyone in your area is just going to point at you and laugh.

Thank goodness I haven't found my two hides yet. I have a fairly good idea where they are.

Don't be so sure, cache migration could make it a little more difficult.

1.3k · September 28, 2009

For the past six years I have been doing this, posting a find on your own cache has pretty well been taboo amongst most of the caching community. Grounsspeak has provided great tools for filtering out caches you have found and caches that are yours so there is no need for anyone to find their own cache. Some people cache for the numbers, some for the bragging, and I think most for the enjoyment.

I have had people try to log multiple finds on some of my caches using their finds as a tracking tool for where they have been. That I personally do not accept as I want an accurate record of when people “Found” my caches, not when they came back with friends. For that they can post a note.

Using pocket queries and a tool like GSAK (gps swiss army knife) could help with sorting out what is yours and what you have found vs. what you have not found. As well this can be filtered out in the map and the creation of a pocket query.

September 28, 2009

For the past six years I have been doing this, posting a find on your own cache has pretty well been taboo amongst most of the caching community. Grounsspeak has provided great tools for filtering out caches you have found and caches that are yours so there is no need for anyone to find their own cache. Some people cache for the numbers, some for the bragging, and I think most for the enjoyment.

I have had people try to log multiple finds on some of my caches using their finds as a tracking tool for where they have been. That I personally do not accept as I want an accurate record of when people “Found” my caches, not when they came back with friends. For that they can post a note.

Using pocket queries and a tool like GSAK (gps swiss army knife) could help with sorting out what is yours and what you have found vs. what you have not found. As well this can be filtered out in the map and the creation of a pocket query.

September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

6.7k · September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

Nope, none. No rash, no swelling, no hives or boils. I'm good I think. Thanks for asking though.

Most cachers I know would not log that as a find. Around here that would, as TWU says, get you talked about and laughed at behind your back. Heck, maybe to your face.

September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache.

I guess my feelings on the matter are that I don't want anyone telling me how to 'cache so I don't really have any business telling someone else how they should go about it. That being said, I think most people would agree that logging your own cache as a find is pretty childish. Are you really so desperate for a 'find' that you need to do that? Rhetorical question, of course, but that just strikes me as sad, really. But hey, if you're comfortable with it, go ahead. I won't stop you. I'll think it's pathetic, but I won't stop you from doing it.

Same goes for being with the CO as the cache is being placed so you can then turn around and log the "find". I'm not going to tell you you can't do it, but it strikes me as childish and smacks of a certain sad desperation. I couldn't log such a "find" personally, but that's me and I understand not everyone feels the same way. In the end we're accountable only to ourselves in this hobby.

10.2k · September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

Nope, none. No rash, no swelling, no hives or boils. I'm good I think. Thanks for asking though.

Most cachers I know would not log that as a find. Around here that would, as TWU says, get you talked about and laughed at behind your back. Heck, maybe to your face.

C'mon now, I was kidding there in that other post. Next thing you know I'll be accused of saying that we all talk about people behind their back. :lol:

Reaction? Quite a few people do this. I personally think this one's pretty cheesy too, although I wouldn't report them to the Geocaching Police or anything. I think a lot of it has to do with ignorance of the ignore list, or how it works. Statistics show that only about 200 people use the ignore list feature.

6.7k · September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

Nope, none. No rash, no swelling, no hives or boils. I'm good I think. Thanks for asking though.

Most cachers I know would not log that as a find. Around here that would, as TWU says, get you talked about and laughed at behind your back. Heck, maybe to your face.

C'mon now, I was kidding there in that other post. Next thing you know I'll be accused of saying that we all talk about people behind their back.

Reaction? Quite a few people do this. I personally think this one's pretty cheesy too, although I wouldn't report them to the Geocaching Police or anything. I think a lot of it has to do with ignorance of the ignore list, or how it works. Statistics show that only about 200 people use the ignore list feature.

Now where have I seen that number before? I know it sounds familiar.

5.6k · September 28, 2009

So what do we have to do to correct this misconception?

Have gc.com cease publishing the subtotal and total numbers at all. If someone other than the account owner REALLY wants to know ... let 'em count.

Of course, THAT doesn't help with their business model, either. For those for whom this is a "serious" contest of sorts, THAT suggestion (along with the participation of some percentage of paying members) might go over like a lead balloon.

5.6k · September 28, 2009

One must, occasionally, return to their own cache for some reason. Use the postings for "note" or "maintenance" (if that is what you are doing).

For one thing, it lets the other cachers know that you care about your caches and are keeping an eye on them, i.e. clean, dry, etc.

It's funny how rarely you see these in some areas. If I've had a couple of DNFs where I didn't expect them, and pay a visit to make sure all is in order, I'll post a "Note" to that effect just to be sure future finders aren't put off by the DNFs. Also, if someone notes that a log in one of my caches is damp (as one example), but doesn't flag the cache with a Needs Maintenance, I'll post a note after I go out and take care of the issue in lieu of a maintenance entry.

5.6k · September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

That's a real Catch22 situation. Now the "helper" will forever be unable to remove that annoying little icon from their map with either a "Hide My Finds" or "Hide My Caches". I know I'd find that annoying. That's why I don't attend when others place caches. A clean map is a happy map. Edited September 28, 2009 by ecanderson

September 28, 2009

I wasn't really bothered my people who logged their own caches until I noticed someone in my area did it, and it does bother me, even though I said I wouldn't let it. However it did work to my advantage because they logged their find before anyone else and must have confused people, so I was able to get a FTF even several days after it had been published. They only have 3 caches hidden, but they are newbies with only 40 finds. So in the grand scheme of things its not bad...but yet it still gnaws on me.

Edited September 28, 2009 by Col. Flagg

8k · September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache.
I guess my feelings on the matter are that I don't want anyone telling me how to 'cache so I don't really have any business telling someone else how they should go about it. That being said, I think most people would agree that logging your own cache as a find is pretty childish. Are you really so desperate for a 'find' that you need to do that? Rhetorical question, of course, but that just strikes me as sad, really. But hey, if you're comfortable with it, go ahead. I won't stop you. I'll think it's pathetic, but I won't stop you from doing it.

Same goes for being with the CO as the cache is being placed so you can then turn around and log the "find". I'm not going to tell you you can't do it, but it strikes me as childish and smacks of a certain sad desperation. I couldn't log such a "find" personally, but that's me and I understand not everyone feels the same way. In the end we're accountable only to ourselves in this hobby.

Why do assume people are "desperate" for a smiley? There are many reasons someone might want to use a "Found It" log other than to increment their find count. It marks the cache in the Geocaching.com data base so it can be filtered out. Sure, premium members can use the ignore feature, but basic members don't have the option and many premium members don't know of it or how it works. You can be marking an accomplishment, which as far as you are concerned is the equivalent of finding a caches. It has been mention that caches migrate and that sometimes a cache owner will find their cache in a different location than where they hid it. And that being there with the cache owner when they hid the cache is no different than claiming a find with group that caches via the all-for-one method where if anyone finds the cache they all sign the log. You may have personal guidelines you follow for logging caches but if you are serious about not telling someone else how to cache, why must you assume that if they have more liberal guidelines for when they log a "Found It" that they are desperate for a smiley?

I oppose the notion that the reason for a "Found It" log is to increment some number as if there is a competition over that number. There may be foolish people who believe that the number is a score and that geocaching is about competing for who has the highest score. If you are in that group, I urge you to stop thinking in those terms. At the very least, I urge you to stop assuming that everyone else caches for this purpose, especially those who have high find counts or who occasionally log a "Found It" that you personally would not log.

1.3k · September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it.

I have done this a few times. Mostly just so it stops showing up in the list of not found caches. Long before the ignore feature was introduced. We do however make it very clear in the log and on the cache page that we were there with the owner and our logs do not count as an FTF. Even with this warning, one cacher got bent out of shape because we stole the FTF from them.

Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

This is a very interesting question. Almost right after I started caching with e friend, jiminy crickets, and awesome cacher and fantastic blood hound for caches, I came up with the idea of once you find the cache, pretend to keep looking until you move away from the cache and then let the other people find the cache for themselves. That way everyone gets to enjoy the fun. I don’t do that anymore as it has become yet another way for others to brag about how they found the cache before someone else and make fun of them while they are still looking. Very childish if you ask me.

The interesting part is when it comes to a challenge cache. If one has to say find 1,000 traditional caches, does it count if you found them with someone else? Did you really earn it if some of them were found by the other person and they pointed it out to you?

20.7k · September 28, 2009

I tried to care about this issue, but I couldn't pull it off.

3.2k · September 28, 2009

The find count is not a score.

I'm sure a whole bunch of cachers will disagree with that. [to some] It's absolutely a score.

Ranking cachers by who has the most finds makes exactly as much sense as ranking cachers by who has the most hair. My brother, for example, is a far better cacher than me, yet I have him beat on both of those meaningless measures. Neither of those metrics is a useable indicator of our relative merit as cachers as he always kicks my butt when it comes to caching skills. I find lots and lots of easy urban micros and I have more free time to cache than he does – and his dome reflects more light than mine – yet those things don’t mean squat.

One’s find count will only be meaningful as a competitive score when every cache has been officially standardized and made to be exactly identical to every other cache, AND when every cacher’s score is reset to zero so that everyone can get a fair start on the same official start date, AND when there are official rules and scoreboards, etc, etc, etc.

On the other hand, there is nothing to stop cachers like you and your buddies from having a little unofficial and unsanctioned fun comparing find stats among yourselves. The find count was never intended to be used as a score, but it doesn’t hurt anyone for you to use it in that nonsensical way, does it? So I say if it is fun for you, then go for it. Your choice. I don’t care.

Of course, there is also nothing to stop a cache owner from having a little unofficial and unsanctioned fun using one of his own caches to log a smiley. The find log was never intended to be used on one’s own cache, but it doesn’t hurt anyone for you to use it in that nonsensical way, does it? So I say if that is fun for you, then go for it as well. Your choice. I don’t care.

I however, choose not to participate in either of those pointless wastes of time.

September 28, 2009

Why do assume people are "desperate" for a smiley? ... You may have personal guidelines you follow for logging caches but if you are serious about not telling someone else how to cache, why must you assume that if they have more liberal guidelines for when they log a "Found It" that they are desperate for a smiley? ... At the very least, I urge you to stop assuming that everyone else caches for this purpose, especially those who have high find counts or who occasionally log a "Found It" that you personally would not log.

Relax, Francis.

I make that assumption because it's a logical conclusion to come to, that's all. If I'm wrong about some people doing it for the count, well gee whiz, hang me from the nearest tree by the neck until dead; it sure wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about something. Besides if they are (logging the find for the reason/s you mention) I'm sure there would be a note in the log explaining those very circumstances. That's what I would do anyway, just to avoid any confusion. But that's just me.

3.2k · September 28, 2009

I tried to care about this issue, but I couldn't pull it off.

I think it’s logical to assume that the folks who maintain Geocaching.com feel the same way.

If logging one’s own cache were viewed as a serious enough problem by TPTB they could easily prevent it from happening in the future by adding a few simple lines of code, even allowing an exception for special cases like adopted caches. They have always had the ability to do this. They can do it whenever they wish. They have never done so, therefore presumably they don’t care.

Honestly, I can’t understand why anyone would care.

3.2k · September 28, 2009

Do Not find your own caches. (And I'm not talking about caches you later adopted). Sure, there are a few Geo hippies around here who will tell you you can do it, and the system allows it, and why should anyone care if you do it, it's none of their business, etc...

Maybe that’s because the Geo Hippies understand intuitively that there is truly no harm in logging one’s own cache, other than the "harm" one does to one’s reputation in the eyes of the local self-appointed cache police.

For example:

.... But in reality, if you do it, everyone in your area is just going to point at you and laugh. I know they certainly do in my area to the 2 local find your own cache guys. Don't be that guy

As for me, I really don’t care what the self-appointed cache police, with their arbitrary made-up standards and rules, think of me. I don't cache to please them; I cache for my own fun while observing the golden rule. If I ever wanted to log a smiley on one of my own caches it wouldn’t harm a thing, nor would it bother me at all what anyone else thought about it.

The main reasons for why I don’t do it is because it would be pointless for me to do so, and because it would skew my own record of caching activity. What you preach is irrelevant to those reasons.

I almost intentionall logged a find on my own caches once. Had I done it, it was going to be for the purpose of maintaining an accurate find count. You see, at the time there was a cache owner who kept deleting my legitimate find from his cache page because he was cranky over the way I had worded something in my log. I kept re-logging it, re-wording it each time in an attempt to appease his demands, but he kept deleting them anyway. He finally relented once I sanitized it down to an empty "Found it," but had he not, I was prepared to log the smiley on one of my own.

A local reviewer who heard about the disagreement even offered to let me do so on one of his caches. A reviewer who frequents these forums, in fact. So unless they’ve changed their mind since then, I really don’t think TPTB care about this harmless little non-issue.

And most of us don’t care in the slightest what you or any other unofficial self-appointed referee thinks of our own personal logging standards, no matter what insulting names you might choose to call us.

20.7k · September 28, 2009

Why do assume people are "desperate" for a smiley? ... You may have personal guidelines you follow for logging caches but if you are serious about not telling someone else how to cache, why must you assume that if they have more liberal guidelines for when they log a "Found It" that they are desperate for a smiley? ... At the very least, I urge you to stop assuming that everyone else caches for this purpose, especially those who have high find counts or who occasionally log a "Found It" that you personally would not log.
Relax, Francis.

I make that assumption because it's a logical conclusion to come to, that's all. If I'm wrong about some people doing it for the count, well gee whiz, hang me from the nearest tree by the neck until dead; it sure wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about something. Besides if they are (logging the find for the reason/s you mention) I'm sure there would be a note in the log explaining those very circumstances. That's what I would do anyway, just to avoid any confusion. But that's just me.

The nearest tree to you, or to us?

Edited September 28, 2009 by sbell111

4.2k · September 28, 2009

I don't care if you log your own hide. I will whisper about you at events behind your back, because I think it's kind of silly, however.

Edited September 28, 2009 by Castle Mischief

September 28, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

Nope, none. No rash, no swelling, no hives or boils. I'm good I think. Thanks for asking though.

Most cachers I know would not log that as a find. Around here that would, as TWU says, get you talked about and laughed at behind your back. Heck, maybe to your face.

Nope, none. No rash, no swelling, no hives or boils. I'm good I think. Thanks for asking though.

Bwahahaha that's funny!

September 28, 2009

Thanks all for your replies; now that my first hides have been published, I see the available filtering. I run my PQs thru GSAK anywho, so it really was a non-issue; I just wanted to see what the conventional ettiquette was, and I will not be 'finding' my hides...kinda like hiding one's own Easter eggs, what?

'An untempted woman cannot boast of her chastity.' --

Michel de Montaigne

September 29, 2009

Wow! Logging one's own hides. Never thought of that. Let me see, I have only 512 finds. If I find my hides and add them that would kick me up to 870. And I have 60 cache hides ready to submit. That would get me to 930. I might just reach 1000 sooner than I thought.

Nah, not going to get there that way. Doesn't seem like that would be the way to play the game.

4.7k · September 29, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

my general rule?

if i'm with the hider and i know where he put it, we call it a joint hide.

if i'm with him and i don't know where it is, i go ahead and look for it and then call it a find.

not knowing where it is comes from a number of causes, the most prominent being that i stayed in the car and played minesweeper while he hid it, and then i check his coordinates and let him watch me hunt the thing so he can judge how difficult it is, and how likely it is to get found by accident, or how well the container or its surroundings will stand up to a search.

we call this "beta testing". for me, the only thing that makes it different than a regular find is that i get the coordinates from him instead of my PQ.

3.2k · September 29, 2009

How about reporting a find when you were with the owner when they hid the cache. We have had this come up in our area. It seems to me if you were in on the hide, even though you don't own it, you did not find it. Someone else contends that this is no different than having a group searching when one finds it and they all claim hides. Reactions.

My reaction: Do whatever makes you feel comfortable. Other than the cache owner there are no logging police. Groundspeak only steps in when there is distractingly extreme abuse. Beyond that, a valid log is whatever the hider and finder say it is. As long as you and the cache owner are happy with it, don’t waste your time worrying what others think.

Once, a long time ago, I saw a really cool graphic in a forum thread which some creative cacher had produced to illustrate the entire 'logging standard' continuum. It showed the whole range from insanely strict to ridiculously liberal. I think it had Yoda’s face to represent the Light Side at one extreme (only logs smileys for caches that one found all by oneself, without any help or hints, and physically signed the log oneself) and Emperor Palpatine, Mr. Dark Side, at the other end (logs pretty much any cache online, even if one never visited the site nor signed the log). In between was pretty much every other conceivable standard: logs a cache found by someone else in a group, never logs online, logs missing caches when one is pretty sure they know where it used to be, logs caches brought to events, logs one’s own caches, etc.

I tried to find the image using the search function, but I failed. Maybe someone who remembers what I’m talking about could post a link, or maybe someone who is better at using the search could find it?

I really, really wish I could have found that image for this post. The point is that there is a wide range of logging standards, and it’s not always easy to assign a black-and-white word like 'good' or 'bad' to every situation. Everyone draws their ethical line in a slightly different place. The closer you get to either extreme the farther you get from consensus, of course, but in the middle there is a very wide and very gray area where some respectable people will be at ease with themselves deep down in their gut, while other respectable people will not.

Ultimately when you post your smiley log to a cache page there is only one Logging Policeman who really matters ... and that policeman is you.

6.1k · September 29, 2009

....Do Not find your own caches... Sure, there are a few Geo hippies around here who will tell you you can do it...

There are reports that it may cause blindness, and hair to grow on your palms, but if it feels good and you are not hurting anyone, then go for it.

1.3k · September 29, 2009

....Do Not find your own caches... Sure, there are a few Geo hippies around here who will tell you you can do it...

There are reports that it may cause blindness, and hair to grow on your palms, but if it feels good and you are not hurting anyone, then go for it.

I always like a good laugh in the morning, thanks.

10.2k · September 29, 2009

Do Not find your own caches. (And I'm not talking about caches you later adopted). Sure, there are a few Geo hippies around here who will tell you you can do it, and the system allows it, and why should anyone care if you do it, it's none of their business, etc...

Maybe that’s because the Geo Hippies understand intuitively that there is truly no harm in logging one’s own cache, other than the "harm" one does to one’s reputation in the eyes of the local self-appointed cache police.

For example:

.... But in reality, if you do it, everyone in your area is just going to point at you and laugh. I know they certainly do in my area to the 2 local find your own cache guys. Don't be that guy

As for me, I really don’t care what the self-appointed cache police, with their arbitrary made-up standards and rules, think of me. I don't cache to please them; I cache for my own fun while observing the golden rule. If I ever wanted to log a smiley on one of my own caches it wouldn’t harm a thing, nor would it bother me at all what anyone else thought about it.

The main reasons for why I don’t do it is because it would be pointless for me to do so, and because it would skew my own record of caching activity. What you preach is irrelevant to those reasons.

I almost intentionall logged a find on my own caches once. Had I done it, it was going to be for the purpose of maintaining an accurate find count. You see, at the time there was a cache owner who kept deleting my legitimate find from his cache page because he was cranky over the way I had worded something in my log. I kept re-logging it, re-wording it each time in an attempt to appease his demands, but he kept deleting them anyway. He finally relented once I sanitized it down to an empty "Found it," but had he not, I was prepared to log the smiley on one of my own.

A local reviewer who heard about the disagreement even offered to let me do so on one of his caches. A reviewer who frequents these forums, in fact. So unless they’ve changed their mind since then, I really don’t think TPTB care about this harmless little non-issue.

And most of us don’t care in the slightest what you or any other unofficial self-appointed referee thinks of our own personal logging standards, no matter what insulting names you might choose to call us.

Whoa! I was just messing around, KBI. And I said so in post #23. But if I could log a smiley for every time my humor didn't go over, Team Alamo would have serious competition.

But I will adress this. I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) you might be lumping all the logging standards that can be controversial with the "self-appointed GeoPolice" types together. Attending events multiple times for temporary caches? Tens of thousands of people have done this. Also things like logging a smiley for a cache you can see but can't reach, or logging a find for finding where you think the cache is supposed to be are very common.

But logging your own caches as finds? Almost no one does this, and almost everyone thinks it's wrong to do so. From a Sociological standpoint, I would consider this one of the Mores of Geocaching. By the way, I would have called it a More, but that sounds stupid. The singular of Mores is apparently Mos????? Who knew that? Also, I'm not talking about caches you later adopted, of make-up logs on your own caches for when your log is deleted. I've heard of a guy in Virginia who had to log over 1,000 finds on his archived caches due to deletions. I'm talking about knowingly logging finds on your own caches simply to "get credit" for it.

September 29, 2009

The nearest tree to you, or to us?

Coords to follow in PM... New rope only, please and thank you.

Edited September 29, 2009 by Jupiter_Jack

3.2k · September 29, 2009

Whoa! I was just messing around, KBI. And I said so in post #23. But if I could log a smiley for every time my humor didn't go over, Team Alamo would have serious competition.

Your first post may have been completely tongue in cheek, but as you and I both know the attitude you described is one that is shared by a significant number of busybodies who believe it is their job to instruct everyone else in what they believe to be the only "proper" way to cache.

But I will adress this. I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) you might be lumping all the logging standards that can be controversial with the "self-appointed GeoPolice" types together. Attending events multiple times for temporary caches? Tens of thousands of people have done this. Also things like logging a smiley for a cache you can see but can't reach, or logging a find for finding where you think the cache is supposed to be are very common.

But logging your own caches as finds? Almost no one does this, and almost everyone thinks it's wrong to do so.

Like I said, there is a wide continuum of personal acceptability when it comes to logging standards. Some folks are exceedingly strict when it comes to what they will allow themselves to log, while others are exceptionally broadminded. And then there is everything else in between. I think you and I already agree on that detail.

My point was that it is up to each individual cacher to decide for himself what is right when logging finds, and that it is nobody else’s business.

From a Sociological standpoint, I would consider this one of the Mores of Geocaching.

Wikipedia:

Mores

(singular mos) is the Latin term for societal norms, customs, virtues or values. Mores derive from the established practices of a society rather than its written laws. They consist of shared understandings about the kinds of behavior likely to evoke approval, disapproval, toleration or sanction, within particular contexts.

You’re saying that the approval of others matters to you, and that you allow general consensus to determine your personal logging standard. That’s fine; that’s your choice. I’m only saying that it isn’t necessary. It’s just like the old crossword analogy: If I get a wild hair and decide to peek at the solution before I even start the puzzle, then why should I care who knows about it or what they think? It’s just a puzzle. Ask me what I think about cheating on a contract or otherwise harming someone and I’ll answer differently of course. But this is just geocaching.

So the issue boils down to this rhetorical question: Do you cache for your own entertainment, or do you cache for the approval of others?

You seem to prefer the latter. As for me: Not only is it impossible to please everyone, but I really don’t care what any of the busybodies think of my own logging standards, and neither should anyone else in my opinion. Each of us must decide for ourselves what is right. I need only seek my own approval.

If we were using these smilies to keep score in some sort of sanctioned competition I would feel differently, of course, but we’re not. It’s just geocaching.

3.6k · September 30, 2009

The only time I would log my own finds are if I found it before adopting it. Or the other way, after adopting it out and then find it, sign it, log it. Those being you didn't own it when found. I have cachers thinking I logged my own finds but technically I didn't own them at the time I logged them.

Events showing up as finds might be a result of programs such as ones on iPhones. We notice at an event everyone logged Attended except one cacher who logged as a find. He owns a iPhone and logged it through it.

September 30, 2009

I thought it was humorous that when checking on one of my caches last night that it took me 20 minutes to find it! Someone had hid it very well in a close but different location.

I would not log that as a find but I certainly worked harder finding my own cache than probably 80% of my actual finds. I almost walked away thinking it got muggled but thought, no, there is no way someone found this one by accident. Then, I found it in a different spot.

I didn't mind. It was fun!

September 30, 2009

In response to the statement:

"Ultimately when you post your smiley log to a cache page there is only one Logging Policeman who really matters ... and that policeman is you."

I agree. I once got all flustered because I noticed a few log entries on the web site and was sure that person's name was not on the log sheets when I visited a few caches in the area that they had smiley's for. I was thinking, "I should report this guy to the CO." Then thought better of it. What do I care if they were there or not? I cache for me, no one else. Maybe they used invisible ink or something or they are a double amputee and have no arms to open the cache with.. Who knows. All I know is that I found the cache and went home happy.

peace,

( yes, I'm a caching hippy. ) :drama:

Finding one's own hides?

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

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