Jump to content

Is this a "find" or not a find?


Recommended Posts

I fear I may not like your collective answer to this question, but here is what I faced this past weekend. I visited a cache in a hole in a tree which required climbing. I climbed the tree, found the intended container. Unfortunately the container was put together similar to a travel bug with a little container chained to a ceramic dog, and somebody earlier that day had broken and dropped the smaller container and the log sheet down into a deep hole in the tree. I had the cache in hand, there just wasn't a log available to sign.

 

I left both a "Needs Maintenance" and a "Found" log. The person who broke it logged their find after I did. It occurs to me now that I might have taped a new log to the cache and that would have allowed me to physically leave a log. I logged the find with the consideration that the only thing preventing me from signing the log was that it was no longer attached to the cache.

 

Ithink that is a dnf. But it doesn't have to be. Whenever I find a cache where the log is wet and unsignable or something, I just write my name on a piece of paper and leave it in the cache. If I were you, I would have let a paper with my name and date and then logged a find and NM log.

Link to comment

I have a cache in a tree and got this "find" log today:

 

I could see this cache, but it was too high for me to get to it safely, as I was alone and didn't want to fall and break a bone. So, I could not sign the log. Nice hide, though.

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks.

It doesn't matter what we think, it's up to you. However, if it were my Cache, that would depend on my reason for placing it in that spot. If the placement was to add to the challenge of finding the Cache, then I'd likely expect them to come back and try with the support they needed, but if it was hidden that way just to make it more fun/interesting, or to keep it from Muggles, then I might not worry about it.

Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

Edited by slukster
Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

 

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

Link to comment

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

Maybe sending a link to the cache guidelines that state that you must sign the log would have been more appropriate? They have only been caching since Feb. and obviously don't fully understand the guidelines. If I wanted my cache to be able to be logged without having to climb the tree I wouldn't have hidden it there. And the caches are rated 4 for terrain and are called "Climb tree, find cache...".

Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

 

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

 

How completely bizarre! These aren't virtual caches. These are caches with log books! Find cache. Sign log. Get smiley! I've DNFed a few of slukster's caches. Nope! I'm not about to try to climb that tree. Especially with the fair right next to it. Sure, I could see the container. I did not sign the log, so it is not a find. If you don't want to climb the tree, don't bother looking for the cache. But don't claim a find on it! Go looking for an easy cache instead. Or don't you bother to sign the logs there either?

Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

 

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

 

How completely bizarre! These aren't virtual caches. These are caches with log books! Find cache. Sign log. Get smiley! I've DNFed a few of slukster's caches. Nope! I'm not about to try to climb that tree. Especially with the fair right next to it. Sure, I could see the container. I did not sign the log, so it is not a find. If you don't want to climb the tree, don't bother looking for the cache. But don't claim a find on it! Go looking for an easy cache instead. Or don't you bother to sign the logs there either?

 

Harry you must have missed the "earlier pronouncements"!! No longer is it required to sign the log (if it ever was B) ) but now... you don't seem to even have to touch it!! The log or the cache!! Now a "visual" is reasonably acceptable to log as a find!! Keep up would ya? :D

Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

 

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

 

How completely bizarre! These aren't virtual caches. These are caches with log books! Find cache. Sign log. Get smiley! I've DNFed a few of slukster's caches. Nope! I'm not about to try to climb that tree. Especially with the fair right next to it. Sure, I could see the container. I did not sign the log, so it is not a find. If you don't want to climb the tree, don't bother looking for the cache. But don't claim a find on it! Go looking for an easy cache instead. Or don't you bother to sign the logs there either?

How is it bizarre?

The reply was snarky and that would get the cache owner on my ignore list. How is that bizarre?

There are a couple of cachers in the area that get to be on my ignore list. I don't like their cache style. How is it bizarre to ignore them because i don't like their caches?

 

Did I miss the part where it says I HAVE to find them all?

Link to comment

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

Maybe sending a link to the cache guidelines that state that you must sign the log would have been more appropriate? They have only been caching since Feb. and obviously don't fully understand the guidelines. If I wanted my cache to be able to be logged without having to climb the tree I wouldn't have hidden it there. And the caches are rated 4 for terrain and are called "Climb tree, find cache...".

Can you provide that link for me? I don't remember seeing that rule.

Link to comment

Maybe sending a link to the cache guidelines that state that you must sign the log would have been more appropriate? They have only been caching since Feb. and obviously don't fully understand the guidelines. If I wanted my cache to be able to be logged without having to climb the tree I wouldn't have hidden it there. And the caches are rated 4 for terrain and are called "Climb tree, find cache...".

Can you provide that link for me? I don't remember seeing that rule.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

Under logging of all physical caches.

"Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

I hope this helps.

Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

 

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.

 

How completely bizarre! These aren't virtual caches. These are caches with log books! Find cache. Sign log. Get smiley! I've DNFed a few of slukster's caches. Nope! I'm not about to try to climb that tree. Especially with the fair right next to it. Sure, I could see the container. I did not sign the log, so it is not a find. If you don't want to climb the tree, don't bother looking for the cache. But don't claim a find on it! Go looking for an easy cache instead. Or don't you bother to sign the logs there either?

 

Harry you must have missed the "earlier pronouncements"!! No longer is it required to sign the log (if it ever was B) ) but now... you don't seem to even have to touch it!! The log or the cache!! Now a "visual" is reasonably acceptable to log as a find!! Keep up would ya? :D

 

You don't even need to leave home, I guess. To ask someone to leave the safetly and comfort of their computer to log a cache would apparently be exclusionary, and therefore, evil. Might even fall under the ALR prohibitions.

</sarcasm>

Link to comment

I have a cache in a tree and got this "find" log today:

 

I could see this cache, but it was too high for me to get to it safely, as I was alone and didn't want to fall and break a bone. So, I could not sign the log. Nice hide, though.

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks.

 

I don't know, what do you think? It's your hide.

Are you so adamant that a cacher HAS to sign the log to consider it a find? Is it so important that the cacher has to jum through a hoop to get a smiley? Is it important that a cacher who has limited ability to retrieve a cache placed high can't log a smiley?

 

Or is it cool with you that they visited your cache and was honest enough to tell you that they didn't actually "sign the log" but did, in fact, find the cache?

 

It's your cache. Follow your instincts.

Ditto. If it was my cache then it would be a find.

Link to comment
I don't know, what do you think? It's your hide.

Are you so adamant that a cacher HAS to sign the log to consider it a find? Is it so important that the cacher has to jum through a hoop to get a smiley? Is it important that a cacher who has limited ability to retrieve a cache placed high can't log a smiley?

 

I don't like their cache style. How is it bizarre to ignore them because i don't like their caches?

 

Did I miss the part where it says I HAVE to find them all?

 

This reminds me of a movie i saw once!

 

"Dig me a hole, Luke"

 

"Luke whats this hole doin in my yard?"

Link to comment
Not.
Yup.

 

Any argument to the contrary is simply being contrary, as far as I'm concerned. I have a cache that is a bison tube about 30 feet up. Anybody that tries to log it without singing it is out of luck. Not that it has happened. The cachers in my area seem to understand the most basic rules of this game. I hide some easy ones, and I hide some tough ones. If you can't sign the log in the tough ones... well, that's just tough.

Link to comment
Not.
Yup.

 

Any argument to the contrary is simply being contrary, as far as I'm concerned. I have a cache that is a bison tube about 30 feet up. Anybody that tries to log it without singing it is out of luck. Not that it has happened. The cachers in my area seem to understand the most basic rules of this game. I hide some easy ones, and I hide some tough ones. If you can't sign the log in the tough ones... well, that's just tough.

 

I see no problem with that as long as they are rated correctly.

 

I have mobility issues... I am not lazy so i try to filter out my caches by the terrain rating. If I go searching for a terrain 1.5 or even 2.5 I do not expect to be required to bring a ladder or climb a tree.

 

And as have been pointed out by more experience cachers than I... there are no rules... only guidelines.

 

I myself prefer to follow the guidelines.

Edited by brslk
Link to comment

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

 

That sounds like a very friendly and polite way to handle it. :D

Link to comment

Ah, you silly Jester.

Please! I'm not silly, I'm weird - it pays much better!

 

(rhetorical question for all)

Don't you want people to be happy?

(rhetorical answer)

Sure, but just giving someone something they haven't earned is no way to make them happy.

 

Congratulations! I declare you the winner of the Olympic 50 yard dash. Here's your gold medal. (Feel happy?)

Link to comment

(rhetorical answer)

Sure, but just giving someone something they haven't earned is no way to make them happy.

 

Congratulations! I declare you the winner of the Olympic 50 yard dash. Here's your gold medal. (Feel happy?)

 

Ah, hyperbole.

When all else fails.... use hyperbole.

Link to comment
Not.
Yup.

 

Any argument to the contrary is simply being contrary, as far as I'm concerned. I have a cache that is a bison tube about 30 feet up. Anybody that tries to log it without singing it is out of luck. Not that it has happened. The cachers in my area seem to understand the most basic rules of this game. I hide some easy ones, and I hide some tough ones. If you can't sign the log in the tough ones... well, that's just tough.

 

I see no problem with that as long as they are rated correctly.

 

I have mobility issues... I am not lazy so i try to filter out my caches by the terrain rating. If I go searching for a terrain 1.5 or even 2.5 I do not expect to be required to bring a ladder or climb a tree.

 

And as have been pointed out by more experience cachers than I... there are no rules... only guidelines.

 

I myself prefer to follow the guidelines.

There are rules. Find the cache, sign the log. The guidelines refer more to hiding the cache than to finding it. Can you imagine baseball without rules?
Link to comment

(rhetorical answer)

Sure, but just giving someone something they haven't earned is no way to make them happy.

 

Congratulations! I declare you the winner of the Olympic 50 yard dash. Here's your gold medal. (Feel happy?)

 

Ah, hyperbole.

When all else fails.... use hyperbole.

Hyperbole is a great tool for making a point. It has a very ancient and noble history. You've used it yourself many times.
Link to comment

I forgot that some caches were designed to exclude people from "finding" it.

 

My bad.

 

Tell those cachers that their physical inability to reach the cache is no excuse. Deny them the find. Make no excuses. Let them know, in no uncertain terms that people who are unable to climb are not welcome at this cache.

 

~note substantial dose of sarcasm~

 

Exactly what I did:

 

Disclaimer:

 

The following persons should not attempt this cache:

 

Children * Elderly People * Out of Shape People

but most importantly,

NO Whiners, Crybabies, and Wusses.

PLEASE NOTE:

Armchair logging of this cache is specifically NOT allowed.

If you cannot retrieve the cache yourself, please do not log a find.

 

Why rate a cache as a 5 if anyone can get within eyesight and log it as a find?

Link to comment

Thanks for all the input. As some have found, the 3 rated cache is about 12 feet up in a tree...easy climb.

 

I have emailed the cacher and asked that they change their "find" to a "note".

 

My intention was/is for each cacher to physically access the cache so the log can be signed.

 

Will see what happens......

Link to comment

Maybe sending a link to the cache guidelines that state that you must sign the log would have been more appropriate? They have only been caching since Feb. and obviously don't fully understand the guidelines. If I wanted my cache to be able to be logged without having to climb the tree I wouldn't have hidden it there. And the caches are rated 4 for terrain and are called "Climb tree, find cache...".

Can you provide that link for me? I don't remember seeing that rule.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

Under logging of all physical caches.

"Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

I hope this helps.

When the ALR guideline were changed, simply to indicate that a cache owner could no longer delete a find log solely base on the failure to do an additional task, I figured that some people would read this as meaning that you had to sign the log the physical log in order to log a find online. This guideline does not say this; reading this way is a well known logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.

 

The guideline made signing the physical log a sufficient condition for being allow to log a find online. A cache owner can no longer impose additional conditions for logging a find (except in a few instances like challenge caches). It has never been a necessary condition of logging a find online. That is, and always has been, up to the cache owner.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment
Thanks for all the input. As some have found, the 3 rated cache is about 12 feet up in a tree...easy climb.

 

I have emailed the cacher and asked that they change their "find" to a "note".

 

My intention was/is for each cacher to physically access the cache so the log can be signed.

 

Will see what happens......

 

 

 

Easy climb for who? I'd expect a cache that I had to climb 12 feet in a tree to be at least a 4 and to warn me that climbing a tree is required, not a generic "you may have to climb." And even worse for some of these meaning that I would likely assume that it wasn't this one because of the rating. And climb what? I have no problem with not logging a find and I think some of the other examples given where it was clearly stated exactly what was required to retrieve the cache have every right to ask someone to remove a find if they don't sign the log. But now that I have more info (looked at the cache page) it seems like you could have been more clear about what someone was getting themselves into before they made the drive. The fact that you had to ask what you should do tells me that you know in your heart that you weren't being quite fair in luring the cacher out there. Besides do you really want someone who is out there alone and unprepared attempting to climb 12 feet up a tree to sign a log? How would you feel if an unprepared cacher breaks their neck trying to get to it? I have no problem with caches that are hard and require something that not everyone can do, as long as they are not underrated and the task is at least somewhat clear. Your cache just isn't. IMO Maybe we need a bit more than guidelines when it comes to rating these. Still I would have asked for permission to log the find in this case. Who am I kidding I would climbed the dang tree and signed the log and then mention that it should have been rated higher while claiming my find. But I know a lot of people who would not have been able to do it and would have a right to be upset that they weren't warned they would need to. I also think if you ask this person to remove their log you need to go back and ask every group if each person in the group climbed the tree and ask anyone who didn't to remove their find.

 

 

Oh well I'm in a bit of a mood tonight after a rough day. so if I was too blunt cut me some slack. Oh wait it doesn't look like you do that. Thankfully I'm the type of person who will shrug and move on.

Link to comment

I have a cache in a tree and got this "find" log today:

 

I could see this cache, but it was too high for me to get to it safely, as I was alone and didn't want to fall and break a bone. So, I could not sign the log. Nice hide, though.

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks.

 

Part of the fun of the game is getting to the cache to sign the log. The last time I came upon one of those I went home, got a ladder and a spotter, went back and signed the log.

 

Logging a find without signing the logsheet is like discovering a travel bug.

Link to comment

When the ALR guideline were changed, simply to indicate that a cache owner could no longer delete a find log solely base on the failure to do an additional task, I figured that some people would read this as meaning that you had to sign the log the physical log in order to log a find online. This guideline does not say this; reading this way is a well known logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.

 

 

Ok, Harry Dolphin described all of this best. "Bizarre."

 

From the Getting Started section of geocaching.com site:

 

Easy Steps to Geocaching

 

- Register for a free Basic Membership.

- Click "Hide & Seek a Cache."

- Enter your postal code and click "search."

- Choose any geocache from the list and click on its name.

- Enter the coordinates of the geocache into your GPS Device.

- Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache.

- Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

- Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

 

So, what logical fallacy would it be to interpret the above as online "find" = "sign physical cache log"??? So, what logical fallacy would it be to interpret the above as online "find" = "sign physical cache log"??? Logical fallacy of "applying the simple and obvious" perhaps?

Edited by Jeep_Dog
Link to comment
....snip....

 

Oh well I'm in a bit of a mood tonight after a rough day. so if I was too blunt cut me some slack. Oh wait it doesn't look like you do that. Thankfully I'm the type of person who will shrug and move on.

 

Yes you are :D ...slack cut... B) Thanks for your thoughts.....

Link to comment

If a cacher sent me an email that said they could see the cache (and described it) but were unable to reach it due to physical limitations, I would allow a find. You see, I don't have that stick lodged that some appear to have. I want people to be happy. Heck, some say I should apply for the Happiness Fairy job! I spread sunshine wherever I go.

 

I'm rolling thunder and pouring rain. B)

 

I expect a signature for every find posted. Many caches are challenge type caches and are purposely placed in a difficult spot to present a

 

....wait for it...

 

 

challenge!

 

 

However, if it wasn't a challenge type cache, and someone were unable to reach it due to physical limitations, yes I would allow a find. :D

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

It's not a find unless they sign the log or send bribe money.

A box or two of Girl Scout Thin Mint cookies would sway me. Tee, Hee, Hee, Hee

Gee, that might be considered an ALR and ...

 

There is a big difference between someone requesting to log a find without signing it, and someone who expects it to be okay.

 

Once people start expecting it, then my little business on the side is OVER! :D

 

..and it is not an ALR because they always have the option to actually sign the log.. B)

Link to comment

I have a cache in a tree and got this "find" log today:

 

I could see this cache, but it was too high for me to get to it safely, as I was alone and didn't want to fall and break a bone. So, I could not sign the log. Nice hide, though.

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks.

 

Generosity is a cachers friend.

:D

Link to comment
...Do you really want someone who is out there alone and unprepared attempting to climb 12 feet up a tree to sign a log?

I doubt that the cache owner's desires would play any role in a seeker's preparedness.

The cache page warned that there may be a need to climb. That, in itself, should tell folks they may need to climb.

Maybe 5'. Maybe 50'. Either way, the seeker needs to come prepared for any eventuality, or go home.

If someone looks at one of my cache pages and chooses to hunt the cache, everything after that point is a result of their choice.

We don't need a nanny state holding our collective hands, dictating what is, and what is not, too dangerous for us.

Nor do we need cache pages so detailed that the idea of a hunt fades to a distant memory.

Link to comment

I see no problem with that as long as they are rated correctly.

 

I have mobility issues... I am not lazy so i try to filter out my caches by the terrain rating. If I go searching for a terrain 1.5 or even 2.5 I do not expect to be required to bring a ladder or climb a tree.

 

And as have been pointed out by more experience cachers than I... there are no rules... only guidelines.

 

I myself prefer to follow the guidelines.

 

The bolded part has been mentioned a couple time in the thread and is incorrect.

 

Just because someone puts something that is perceived as incorrect by someone seeking the cache does not negate the need to sign the log. Where is the line? a .5 difference in a terrain or a full 1. (i.e. 2.5 to 3 or 2.5 to 3.5)

 

It is frustrating when caches are improperly rated, we have a cacher around here who just improperly rates every cache terrain at 1.5 and is constantly criticizing why others don't. One of these caches is up a tree, for someone with mobility issues after a short hike it might be disappointing, however since there is some limitation that precludes you from getting to it, it is not a find. Post a note to "log" the visit and possibly send email to the CO as to why you think the rating is incorrect and move on. I try to rate all my terrains correctly and think I do, you may not always agree. There is some intended wiggle room there.

 

There are lots of caches with incorrect ratings. People list preforms and 35mm as small, small tupperware as Regular and and caches requiring a climb as 1.5. Claiming the find doesn't correct it.

Link to comment

I have a friend who is in a wheel chair with limited mobility but is a very active cacher. There have been caches that she has FOUND but wasnt able to get to. Does this denote a DNF because physically the cache couldnt be reached?

 

I tend to think that many CO's, as well as cachers by the number of logs here, dont give thought to that challenged cacher, for lack of a better term, that would be disqualified just because they couldnt 'climb that tree, or get out on that rock out crop.'

 

Aside from this being something a cache owner should keep in mind it is also up to the CO to determine how much power do they want to have over another.

 

I have a cache that I had in a tree, down low where it could be reached even by a child that I just moved because the tree it was in was damaged by a storm. A cacher had DL the Coords prior to it being moved. In their log they stated that they got to GZ but the caches location seemed to be seriously damaged & where they felt the cache WAS had been broken off & so no cache was to be found. They took a DNF. I sent them an email explaining I had just moved it & for them to change their DNF to found. They obviously found where it WAS & their description was enough for me. CO's perogative. It's a game & as such enjoy.

 

Do what you can live with but keep in mind that not everyone can 'climb that tree' but can still cache & find the containers.

Link to comment

I have a friend who is in a wheel chair with limited mobility but is a very active cacher. There have been caches that she has FOUND but wasnt able to get to. Does this denote a DNF because physically the cache couldnt be reached?

 

I tend to think that many CO's, as well as cachers by the number of logs here, dont give thought to that challenged cacher, for lack of a better term, that would be disqualified just because they couldnt 'climb that tree, or get out on that rock out crop.'

 

Aside from this being something a cache owner should keep in mind it is also up to the CO to determine how much power do they want to have over another.

 

I have a cache that I had in a tree, down low where it could be reached even by a child that I just moved because the tree it was in was damaged by a storm. A cacher had DL the Coords prior to it being moved. In their log they stated that they got to GZ but the caches location seemed to be seriously damaged & where they felt the cache WAS had been broken off & so no cache was to be found. They took a DNF. I sent them an email explaining I had just moved it & for them to change their DNF to found. They obviously found where it WAS & their description was enough for me. CO's perogative. It's a game & as such enjoy.

 

Do what you can live with but keep in mind that not everyone can 'climb that tree' but can still cache & find the containers.

 

(((HUGS)))

 

I hope that COs that are going to be sticklers about signing the log no-ifs-ands-or-buts, put that information in their cache description. Along with the fact that there's climbing involved i.e. don't put it in the hint so the finder doesn't know you need to climb a tree or a rock wall or whatever until you get to the site and decrypt the hint AND be accurate regarding your terrain and difficulty rating. Why bring finders to your cache only to irritate and frustrate them? Provide all the important information so they can decide for themselves whether they want to make the trip and whether they are physically capable of the challenge.

Link to comment

I have a friend who is in a wheel chair with limited mobility but is a very active cacher. There have been caches that she has FOUND but wasnt able to get to. Does this denote a DNF because physically the cache couldnt be reached?

 

I tend to think that many CO's, as well as cachers by the number of logs here, dont give thought to that challenged cacher, for lack of a better term, that would be disqualified just because they couldnt 'climb that tree, or get out on that rock out crop.'

 

Aside from this being something a cache owner should keep in mind it is also up to the CO to determine how much power do they want to have over another.

 

I have a cache that I had in a tree, down low where it could be reached even by a child that I just moved because the tree it was in was damaged by a storm. A cacher had DL the Coords prior to it being moved. In their log they stated that they got to GZ but the caches location seemed to be seriously damaged & where they felt the cache WAS had been broken off & so no cache was to be found. They took a DNF. I sent them an email explaining I had just moved it & for them to change their DNF to found. They obviously found where it WAS & their description was enough for me. CO's perogative. It's a game & as such enjoy.

 

Do what you can live with but keep in mind that not everyone can 'climb that tree' but can still cache & find the containers.

Counterpoint --

 

Not all have SCUBA for an underwater (I can see the cache, 35 ft. deep in Lake Superior); nor boat or kayak for the island (I can see the hiding spot, across the 150 yard channel); or the capability with 'dragging' four youngsters along a rocky cliff trail (the cache can be seen 80 ft. straight up). I think this is what the D/T rating system is all about, is it not?

 

As far as an outdated download is concerned -- we have done that (and learned from it). That is something that a cacher (should) learn about and take such into consideration. What you did, in effect is change your traditional into a virtual for that one person. But then, it's how you play the 'game'.

 

Not an argument, just a different point of view. :D

 

EDIT: We agree with Lone R. Posted while this was being typed.

Edited by Gitchee-Gummee
Link to comment

It would be a find for me if I was the owner.

Because I don´t want that somebody puts himself in a danger just to get a found-log. Never underestaminate a cacher. He/she might be so stubborn to try to get it logged even if it is too dangerous for the one. :D

Edited by swift23
Link to comment

As far as an outdated download is concerned -- we have done that (and learned from it). That is something that a cacher (should) learn about and take such into consideration. What you did, in effect is change your traditional into a virtual for that one person. But then, it's how you play the 'game'.

 

Sorry about how this above is here but couldnt remember how to do the boxed in quote thing.

 

Good point Gitchee & noted.

 

I felt since the cachers obviously were there it was ok for me. I understand the learning aspect of outdated DL. I check my list of caches Im hunting the night before or sometimes morning of, if I have time, to be sure nothing has been changed but have still run into the occasional situation where the cache was moved but hadnt been noted by CO or coords were changed etc.

 

My intention here was to just suggest CO's keep in mind when they place a cache that not everyone is able to reach it. ie: I am short & sometimes have difficulty reaching caches that are placed at what the CO feels is an acceptable height. (I also may not be back to that area) It most likely isnt mentioned cache requires the cacher needs to be at least XXX tall or will need a ladder. Rate the cache appropriately but in the end it is still at the CO's discretion. If that CO wants total POWER then dont except anything less than a signiture. Just my .02.

Link to comment

 

I hope that COs that are going to be sticklers about signing the log no-ifs-ands-or-buts, put that information in their cache description.

 

1. I seriously think that "Easy Steps to Geocaching" should be entitled "Subjective Steps Open to Debate for Geocaching." At least for the forum geocachers....

 

2. Why should a "stickler" put that a find log online requires a logbook signature? The "easy" steps under getting started include "Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location." A cache owner has no obligation to restate the easy steps for each listing.

 

3. Why should a cache owner annotate that a cache is not accessible by everyone? Any terrain rating above a 1 states this already!

 

4. Mother Wolf - it has nothing to do with "control" over another person. It has to do with their choice, not mine. If someone approaches a physical cache and decides to not sign the log, then it is their choosing to not complete the cache within the easy steps outlined on the listing site. When they make this choice, then they are now outside the minimum requirements that a cache owner is required to allow for a "found it" log. That is fairly simple - they then embark into the realm of possibly being allowed to log a "found it" but they certainly are not entitled to that log.

 

All this being said, before being added to any "ignore list" (oh, the horror!!! The HORROR!), I'd like to point out that I have, by exception, been fine with a finder leaving a "found it" online log without having signed the physical cache logbook. However, these are exceptions, and not an entitlement. In fact, I don't think I've ever deleted an online log - although if these forums are a trend out in the field (which is probably not the case), then it appears as if this 6 year trend may be coming to an end... :D

Link to comment

I'm sure this one has been duked out many times in the past. From the GC FAQ page:

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

I get stuck on the "write about your find in the cache logbook." I can take it that each cache would require a logbook and in order to log the experience I would be required to write something in the log....

Link to comment

When the ALR guideline were changed, simply to indicate that a cache owner could no longer delete a find log solely base on the failure to do an additional task, I figured that some people would read this as meaning that you had to sign the log the physical log in order to log a find online. This guideline does not say this; reading this way is a well known logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.

 

 

Ok, Harry Dolphin described all of this best. "Bizarre."

 

From the Getting Started section of geocaching.com site:

 

Easy Steps to Geocaching

 

- Register for a free Basic Membership.

- Click "Hide & Seek a Cache."

- Enter your postal code and click "search."

- Choose any geocache from the list and click on its name.

- Enter the coordinates of the geocache into your GPS Device.

- Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache.

- Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

- Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

 

So, what logical fallacy would it be to interpret the above as online "find" = "sign physical cache log"??? So, what logical fallacy would it be to interpret the above as online "find" = "sign physical cache log"??? Logical fallacy of "applying the simple and obvious" perhaps?

I'll agree that the Easy-Steps-To-Geoaching in the Getting Starting section are pretty clear that you should to sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location. I think a newbie who is starting out would find that a useful answer to what to do when they go geocaching. But I wouldn't read that as a "rule". If you do so then wouldn't you need to "Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache"? Are you suggesting that people who find geocaches without using a GPS device should be allowed to log a find online? For that matter it says "Enter your postal code and click "search". What if I use a different method for finding a cache? If I have Geomate Jr. I skip the first 5 steps. I still need to do step 1 in order to log my finds on line, but you're suggesting that I can't because I didn't do some other steps?

 

Finally you should look at the last step. It says "Share your geoaching stories and photos online." It doesn't say "Log a Find online". One could be literal and say you can't even log a DNF since you didn't sign the log. Or you could interpret the final step to say the cache owner can delete a log that says TFTC since no story or photo was shared. Instead, I prefer to read step 8 as saying "The purpose of online logging is to share experiences geocaching with other cachers. The purpose is not keeping score". If you are going to look at a find as a score your are going to keep looking for "rules" to support your definition a find. If you decide that it simply someone sharing their experiences you might begin to accept that some individuals consider it a find only if they sign the log while others are less strict on this point and view a find as indicating that the found the cache whether or not they were able to sign the log.

Link to comment

Know how many caches I could have logged found its on if counted seeing the cache as a find?

That's right my find count.

Don't let the tired old bitter "Controlling CO" argument sway you. You want a person on the ground, you hide on the ground.

The Speak allows you to reconcile the online logs with the log book.

Delete it if you want.

 

I'm not one for quoting GS...

So I'll site, Logging of All Physical Caches first sentence.

 

Nuff said.

OK OK fine I'll quote it.

I'll strike out all the unrelated parts.

Logging of All Physical Caches

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

If it is appropriate for your cache location or theme, you may ask the cache seeker to accomplish an optional and simple task, either close to the cache site (normally within 0.1 miles or 161 meters) or when writing their online log. For example, wear the goofy hat inside the cache container and upload a photograph. Cache finders can choose whether or not to attempt or accomplish optional tasks. Cache owners may not delete the cache seeker's log based solely on optional tasks.

 

This guideline change applies immediately to all logs written from April 4, 2009 and going forward. Older caches with "additional logging requirements" (ALRs) are not grandfathered under the older guideline. If you own an existing cache with mandatory additional logging requirements, we request that you:

 

* Cease deleting logs based on additional logging requirements.

* Review your own cache listing to see if the ALR can be made into an optional and simple task, or whether it must be removed altogether.

* Adjust your geocache listing by editing the text then contact a reviewer to change the cache type, if appropriate.

~~~edit to add~~~

Now people dont have to quote and argue "Easy Steps to Geocaching"

Edited by Vater_Araignee
Link to comment
I forgot that some caches were designed to exclude people from "finding" it.

 

My bad.

 

Tell those cachers that their physical inability to reach the cache is no excuse. Deny them the find. Make no excuses. Let them know, in no uncertain terms that people who are unable to climb are not welcome at this cache.

 

~note substantial dose of sarcasm~

The cache in question is a physical cache.

 

There seems a plethora of opinion about climbing, and rating, and.... whatever else comes to mind of passionate posters in the forum. Yet, it seems to me to be a question of logging.

 

Don't let the guidelines get in the way of opinions, however. Pesky guidelines.

 

Owners are required to ensure "quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements."

 

Far out.

 

Another section of the guidelines, quite clearly entitled Logging of All Physical Caches outlines that "geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed."

 

Hopefully, this is of assistance to the OP in making a decision, since in this case it seems quite obvious that the physical log had not been signed.

 

~note substantial dose of "just the facts"~

You are misapplying the guidelines.

 

The guideline in question forbids a cache owner from deleting a 'found' log if the log book is signed. It makes no demand of the cache owner (or cache finder) if the log book is not signed.

 

TPTB's position has always been that the cache owner is the arbiter of whether a 'found' log is appropriate if the physical log has not been signed.

Wow, I just had this exact thing happen on two of my tree climbing caches this past weekend. Here are the logs:

 

"Found it, though didn't want to climb to sign log, it was a cold, rainy day."

"Wow!! That is very high up!! We found it looking up, didn't climb to retrieve it. It was a cold, rainy day, was afraid to slip."

 

The cacher is a newbie so I sent them the following email:

Hello and welcome to geocaching!! I see that you searched for two of my tree climbing caches but was unable to climb the trees due to the weather. In geocaching it is required that you sign the log in the container in order to log the cache as found. If you could please delete your logs or if you would like I can delete them for you. Hopefully nice weather is on the horizon and you can return to climb the trees and log the finds. Thanks and happy caching!!

 

In both of our cases I consider them DNF's since the whole point of the cache is to have cachers climb the tree.

That reply would get you a front row seat on my ignore list. And, I assure you that I am not the only person who feels this way.
Whether slukster allows 'found' logs on his caches when the physical logs have not been signed is completely up to him. Further, I didn't find his hypothetical email to be excessively rude.
Maybe sending a link to the cache guidelines that state that you must sign the log would have been more appropriate? They have only been caching since Feb. and obviously don't fully understand the guidelines. If I wanted my cache to be able to be logged without having to climb the tree I wouldn't have hidden it there. And the caches are rated 4 for terrain and are called "Climb tree, find cache...".
Can you provide that link for me? I don't remember seeing that rule.
http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

Under logging of all physical caches.

"Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

I hope this helps.

That guideline does not say what you think it does. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

sbell111,

 

Explain your interpretation of "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed."

Displaying word definitions if they are conductive to getting your point across.

 

The only way I interpret it is...

Once you have found the cache and signed the log, if you want, you may log your find online.

I can not see any other interpretation of it that would lead me to believe you can log a find online without signing the log book.

Signing the log book is not an ALR or OLR, it is the LR.

Edited by Vater_Araignee
Link to comment

Here's the thing that many people are overlooking (beyond the fact that the guidelines don't say what they claim they do). If I am looking for a bird and I spot one in a tree, I have found the bird. I don't need to climb the tree and sign the bird.

 

If a cache owner accepts a 'found' log as valid knowing that the physical log wasn't found, then the online 'found log IS valid.

Link to comment

sbell111,

 

Explain your interpretation of "Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed."

Displaying word definition if they are conductive to getting your point across.

 

The only way I interpret it is...

Once you have found the cache and signed the log, if you want, you may log your find online.

I can not see any other interpretation of that that would lead me to believe you can log a find online without signing the log book.

Signing the log book is not an ALR or OLR, it is the LR.

I explained my 'interpretation' of this guideline in the post just before yours. Here it is again:

 

The guideline in question forbids a cache owner from deleting a 'found' log if the log book is signed. As you so eloquently posted, once you have found the cache and signed the log, if you want, you may log your find online.

 

The quoted guideline makes no demand of the cache owner (or cache finder) if the log book is not signed.

 

TPTB's position has always been that the cache owner is the arbiter of whether a 'found' log is appropriate if the physical log has not been signed.

Link to comment

Here's the thing that many people are overlooking (beyond the fact that the guidelines don't say what they claim they do). If I am looking for a bird and I spot one in a tree, I have found the bird. I don't need to climb the tree and sign the bird.

 

If a cache owner accepts a 'found' log as valid knowing that the physical log wasn't found, then the online 'found log IS valid.

This is true, but I haven't seen anyone claim a CO can not except an unsigned log as a valid find.

Then again I have not read every single post, I kind of glanced over a few nests, so some one may have changed their mind.

Link to comment

Here's the thing that many people are overlooking (beyond the fact that the guidelines don't say what they claim they do). If I am looking for a bird and I spot one in a tree, I have found the bird. I don't need to climb the tree and sign the bird.

 

If a cache owner accepts a 'found' log as valid knowing that the physical log wasn't found, then the online 'found log IS valid.

This is true, but I haven't seen anyone claim a CO can not except an unsigned log as a valid find.

Then again I have not read every single post, I kind of glanced over a few nests, so some one may have changed their mind.

You appeared to be trying to make that argument, as were a number of other posters who were trying to use the ALR guideline to support their arguments.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...