Jump to content

Would this be considered 'cheating'?


Recommended Posts

Recently I found out that an area I used to frequent as a youth has a virtual cache near an old hangout of mine. All they are requiring for the find is the answer to a question about the area that I already know. The cache is about 2 states away and I have no plans to go back anytime soon.

 

Would this be considered cheating if I sent the CO a message with the answer to his question and counted the 'find'? He's not even asking for a photo.

Edited by pamlicojack
Link to comment

Why do you ask?

 

Generally, virtual cache owners placed a virtual for the purpose of calling attention to something. If you have been there already, then I suppose it could be argued that it would be pointless for you to revisit just so you can claim the find. But if you are going to do that, I'd sure suggest that you first clear it with the cache owner.

Link to comment
i wouldn't call it cheating if the answer is not readily available by googling for it

since you used to frequent the area and you know the answer because of that reason than i would say its OK to log it

The whole point of geocaching is to go someplace. If you log it without going there, then I would call it cheating.

 

There are several virts out there at places I went before I started caching. Doesn't mean I log them as "finds." Why? Because, to me, that would be cheating.

 

But you have to live with yourself; if you don't mind not having integrity, I say go for it.

Link to comment

I believe if someone is offering up a cache for logging without having visited the location, gc.com will lock it down.

 

The question is probably only shown to people who visit the area.

 

I have a similar situation. Except with the virtual in my case I have pictures from my youth at the location...

Link to comment
I believe if someone is offering up a cache for logging without having visited the location, gc.com will lock it down.

But he did visit the location, only he did it before he started geocaching. So... if he backdates his log to when he actually visited it, as long as it is after the cache is published, would it be OK? What if it is before the cache is published?

 

Personally I wouldn't log it.

Link to comment

It only matters in your mind. If you do in fact know the answers, then who's to know you weren't there specifically for geocaching? Nobody but you. If you are fine with logging it, then do it. If not, don't.

 

Reading my response, it sounds like I have an opinion, but I don't. It's a game/hobby/sport/addiction without a winner or loser. It is totally up to you how you choose to log (within reason :wub: ).

Link to comment
I believe if someone is offering up a cache for logging without having visited the location, gc.com will lock it down.

But he did visit the location, only he did it before he started geocaching. So... if he backdates his log to when he actually visited it, as long as it is after the cache is published, would it be OK? What if it is before the cache is published?

 

Personally I wouldn't log it.

 

Ah okay, I completely misread that. I thought owner was offering the option.

Link to comment

I have a virtual cache (High on a Windy Hill) in the Olympic National Park. I have had cachers say they use to cross country ski there and can they log it. My answer was I also crossed country skied there and the only way to get credit for it would be to post a picture of their self showing their gps in front of the visitors center. During the summer months I require answers to four questions. Picture is optional but appreciated during the summer months. Sometimes the visitor center is closed in the winter time but cachers can either ski or snow shoe to the location and take a picture showing a GPS. I am 85 and when I'm gone the cache is gone.

Link to comment
i wouldn't call it cheating if the answer is not readily available by googling for it

since you used to frequent the area and you know the answer because of that reason than i would say its OK to log it

The whole point of geocaching is to go someplace. If you log it without going there, then I would call it cheating.

 

There are several virts out there at places I went before I started caching. Doesn't mean I log them as "finds." Why? Because, to me, that would be cheating.

 

But you have to live with yourself; if you don't mind not having integrity, I say go for it.

 

i know that the point is to visit the location, wouldn't be right to log every cache you went by before you got in the game and i am totally against that, but his case seems to me like an exemption to the rule if as i said the answer is not readily available by googling for it and he knows it because he was there

 

the virtuals i have done all required a photo of yourself at the location...now we all know that many people are totally against that, so the result is that some CO of virtuals had to amend the requirements

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

Recently I found out that an area I used to frequent as a youth has a virtual cache near an old hangout of mine. All they are requiring for the find is the answer to a question about the area that I already know. The cache is about 2 states away and I have no plans to go back anytime soon.

 

Would this be considered cheating if I sent the CO a message with the answer to his question and counted the 'find'? He's not even asking for a photo.

I wouldn't log the find, but if you think that you should log it, you should first send an email to the cache owner explaining your situation and asking his permission.
Link to comment

i considered logging a virtual like that myself. i've been there years ago, only problem was that this was in 2001 or 2002 or so, and i'd have to log with a date before the virtual actually was published. that made be decide against it. :)

Link to comment

I've logged a couple of virtuals before visiting as I had been there before or had lived nearby and knew the answers to requirement. But I only did that knowing that I would revisit the sites again in the near term. I have since made good on those commitments.

 

The bottom line is, if you have to ask then you must have doubt. So follow your gut instinct. Asking for unanimous approval here will bring out the buzzards.

Link to comment

I wouldn't log it but that's just me.

 

If you log it I will not know.

 

And, even if you do log it, and even if people start thinking about it, what does it hurt? It's not like someone gets denied a smiley because you get one. These little issues are so silly, really. Smileys are handed out and are not subject to the restrictions of nature. Unlike tangible matter, smileys aren't endangered. You can hand out a gazillion smileys and the ability for others to hand out smileys has not changed one iota.

 

Follow your own conscience.

Link to comment

I would not log a virtual where I found the answer by doing research rather than by visiting the cache.

 

If I went somewhere, learned something (or took a photo) and then discovered it was a virtual, I would consider myself to have a legitimate find if (1) I was there sometime after it was published, and (2) it was not my only find in the state. Otherwise, I don't think I would log it.

 

My rationale is like this: Consider a hiker who stumbles upon an ammo can beneath some sticks in the woods. The hiker opens it and finds stuff, including a log book and something about a website. The hiker signs the log book, replaces the ammo can and leaves. Back at home, the hiker goes to the website and discovers geocaching and that the ammo can was a geocache. Is it fair for the hiker to log it as a "find"? Of course, the hiker found it and signed the log. If finding a traditional cache before knowing what caching is, counts, then the same should go for a virtual.

 

Incidentally, there is a virtual, not too far from me. It is underwater and requires scuba equipment. I've visited it many times. However, to log it requires the cacher to dive with a buddy. I've never had a buddy when I've dived that spot ... so, I have not logged it as a find. But, that's just me.

Link to comment

I wouldn't call it cheating but neither would I log it and claim it as a find. Geocaching has a lot of room to play by different rules. So if you want to log that cache, then I have no problem with it. But since the rules that I play by require me to go there, I wouldn't log it.

 

There is a virtual cache in China that requires answering a question. I know the answer because I have been there. But I visited the location before I started caching and also before the virtual was placed. It's real tempting to log that cache (and by doing so add another country to my list...) But I won't break my own rules. It's just the way I play...

Link to comment

You will not get anything resembling a consensus on this issue. You'll see everything from "Dude! It's cool, man" to "You have no integrity if you do". Both answers are equally idiotic, as you've probably already figured out. The real answer is between you and the cache owner. Do you feel OK logging it as a find? Does the owner concur? If so, have at it. If either answer is no, then wait till you go back, if you ever do.

 

Personally, I would not log it.

Link to comment

The question is not wheter this is cheating but whether this is a couch potato log. TPTB frown on couch potato logging of virtual caches. As several people have pointed out, the purpose of geocaching is to go out and find something with the option of using your GPS to guide you there. Groundspeak has decided that logging finds on vitual caches that you have never visited is not within the guidelines of Geocaching. They have asked cache owners to delete couch potato logs and have implied that virtual caches where the owner is knowingly allowing these logs may be archived. I happen to disagree with this tactic. If someone in Germany wants to claim a find for something they looked up on the internet why deny other geocachers who intend to visit the site the opportunity to do so and log a find? Groundspeak and I have a difference of opinions here. As NeecesAndNephews says "Tozspeak is not Groundspeak" <_<

 

So the question is, if you visited a place years ago and know the answer would it be considered a couch potato log?

Link to comment

I think I would not log it but would probably leave a note saying I'd been there and recommend it being visited <_< To me it wouldn't feel like a true virtual cache log unless I were purposefully geocaching while there. I'm guessing you would prob be happier doing that since you felt the need to come ask :)

Link to comment

Recently I found out that an area I used to frequent as a youth has a virtual cache near an old hangout of mine. All they are requiring for the find is the answer to a question about the area that I already know. The cache is about 2 states away and I have no plans to go back anytime soon.

 

Would this be considered cheating if I sent the CO a message with the answer to his question and counted the 'find'? He's not even asking for a photo.

It's not a competition, therefore there can be no cheating.

Link to comment

I would contact the CO and ask if it was okay with them. As long as nothing has changed since you were last there, it isn't entirely necessary to physically go there again. Then in you log (if allowed) don't mention that you haven't been there recently, but do post about the childhood memories you have of the location. That way you don't let other cachers on to the exact method of your log, they'll be oblivious and never know you hadn't been there when you posted for the smiley. The whole point of a virtual is to take you to an interesting place. You've already been there without provocation from a website. I say take your smiley and be proud of it.

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...