Should I log a find?

[drewmm]

I doubt people are "[saying they] got a 5/5 cache on top of a 300 foot high cliff by climbing a multi-pitch 5.10 route to get there." If they are indeed saying that, we wouldn't have any reason not to believe them (assuming their name was actually on the log.) I was under the impression that we were discussing people who log a "Found it!" and say "so-and-so climbed up and brought it down, we all signed it."

 

Yes, they're logging a find. But they're not lying about what they did, unless you consider the "Found it!" log to be itself asserting that they in fact went to the location it was hidden rather than just signing the cache.

 

Maybe that's what "Found it!" means to you. If it does, all power to you. But unless you see geocaching as a competition, why do you care how many "Found it!"s people log?

 

People attempt caches with all different types of aids. Some people think it's unsportsman-like to drive to urban caches, and will only do them via bike. Some people think it's cheating to use satellite maps to help narrow down the location, others use them all the time to help find caches. Some people might think it's cheating to cache as part of a large group, others may rarely actually find the difficult cache and just sign it after it's found by one member of their group.

 

All of these situations could probably be covered by rules or guidelines, and would be if this were a competition. But unless you see it as a race to the most smilies, I just can't understand why you would care what other people mean when they log a cache as found.

 

Be honest to yourself about what "found" means. But that doesn't mean other people need to think about it the same way you do.

 

You've got some good points there. This isn't a competition, and when people are honest about how they got a cache, I guess it's up to them as to the method.

 

The reason I don't like it when people don't get a cache in the manner intended by the CO is that when someone else does, they have the same cache credit as the person gets who didn't do the hard work. As you said, though, it's not a competition.

 

When I started caching, I had the impression that people played the game the same, and got credit for equal effort. I'm starting to see that obviously there are lots of different kinds of people, and they play the game in a way that they enjoy.

 

I'll just keep doing things the way I think is right, and be proud of what I've done. To each his own!

 

"Credit" is very subjective, obviously. Find counts are a bad way to see how good a cacher someone is, I think.

 

Anyways, yeah. Everyone plays the game their own way. Be honest to yourself and be honest about what you post in a "found" log. Everyone wins.

[+niraD]

The reason I don't like it when people don't get a cache in the manner intended by the CO is that when someone else does, they have the same cache credit as the person gets who didn't do the hard work.

But they also get the same "cache credit" for a 5/5 cache as they do for a 1/1 cache:

 

Personally, I don't see difficulty/terrain stars as "points". I see them as a quick way for cache owners to communicate the general nature of the challenge to potential seekers.

[+Chokecherry]

Shoot I had no idea I was supposed to be racking up points in a game. I thought I was just using the ratings to find caches that I can access with the various people in my life who have different levels of ability.

 

I didn't know I was only supposed to do the hard ones to keep up with the Jones' of the caching world.

[+larryc43230]

However when I see many profiles full of charts and graphs of find counts and terrain levels, it's fairly evident that many others do compete. If they are waving their find count around like a banner and then having someone else retrieve the caches for them....

Please don't paint all of us with the same brush. I have lots of stats and charts in my profile, but I don't care one whit about anybody else's stats. I'm not the competitive type. I just like the charts and graphs and stats.

 

--Larry

[+simpjkee]

Yes, yes, and yes.

[+GeoGeeBee]

 

Please don't paint all of us with the same brush. I have lots of stats and charts in my profile, but I don't care one whit about anybody else's stats. I'm not the competitive type. I just like the charts and graphs and stats.

 

 

Me too. I'm actually a statistician by training.

[+redsox_mark]

As for how I personally play it: If I get "lucky" and find it in an easier way, I log it. If I find it in a different way than intended (e.g. by using a tool), I log it.

 

As for that "tallest tree" example, I'm torn. I can see the view that bringing in a professional climber is a "tool"; a different way of doing it. But I also see the point of the cache is that not everyone can climb that tree, and I could not climb it.

[+redsox_mark]

And I also have lots of stats on my profile, because I like stats. Not because I'm competing with anyone.

[chephy]

Hee hee hee. But I found it, so I'm taking credit for it. Was it 'the intended method?' Well, no. But I did find it!

 

If a professor assigns a math problem that requires a lot of tedious steps and you find a quicker solution - I say you deserve extra credit. I got final coords for a multi-puzzle once without leaving my chair. The "intended method was to visit seven or eight different locations, with a reference book, to find bits of knowledge and specialized trivia that would enable you to answer questions about plants growing at certain coordinates, and then manipulate the answers in a complicated way to extract the coordinates. The cache owner did not, however, take into account that there was really only a couple of ways that these manipulations would produce reasonable coordinates (regardless of what the answers actually ARE!) Not my fault for spotting that and yes, I am gonna use that shortcut.

 

Now, if the same professor assigns the same problem and you just CHEAT outright (copy it off someone else's paper), that's different. But if it was just a "non-intended method" I think the find is all yours. In fact, non-intended methods are better. In all aspects of life, strictly following "intended methods" keeps you thinking inside the box and limits creativity. We'd never have any progress if people only used things via "intended methods" for "intended purposes".

[chephy]

As for that "tallest tree" example, I'm torn. I can see the view that bringing in a professional climber is a "tool"; a different way of doing it. But I also see the point of the cache is that not everyone can climb that tree, and I could not climb it.

 

But then what about going out caching with family or friends? When I go out caching with my boyfriend, we never find the cache together at the same time: it's only one of us who finds it, and the other may very well have missed it on one's own. Does it mean the other is not eligible to log a find? Surely not.

[+Kit Fox]

People who have others retrieve difficult caches for them need to find a new hobby.

 

It's a step up from couch potato caching, more like plain potato caching. If they have the CO's permission, then it's sweet potato caching. If it's a bunch of micros, then I'd call it tater tot caching...

 

More like affirmative action caching. This is for cachers who can't, or DON'T have the ability to find the cache as intended. Since this meets the liberal criteria of being UNFAIR, SOMETHING MUST BE DONE TO RECTIFY THE DISPARITY.

[GermanSailor]

Would you log a find on these Caches since you didn't find them in the intended way?

Yes, I would!

 

You signed the logbook - You log a find!

 

GermanSailor

[+scorpio_dark]

If the cache location was changed by an act of nature, then I'd log it and write what happened. If I was out group caching and someone else found it then I'd log it. However, if the cache was intended to be a phyisical challenge, and only one person completed the challenge while everyone else gathered around with their inkpens out, then I would not, and consider it pretty cheesy. I have found a cache which required climbing equipment, and I noticed a log from a muggle who said they were retrieving it for a cacher (they may have even signed for the cacher, I don't remember exactly) but I thought that was extremely cheesy.

 

I totally agree on logging a find after a change by an act of nature. I especially would do it if the tree is felled for example. That tree probably is never going back up, so there's (at least around here) a likelihood that the CO will make it eligible for a new find if/when he/she rehides it anyway. I mean the CO may decide to archive it or completely change things up anywho. . .

 

And on the developed discussion: I go back and forth on the cheese factor with logging challenges without going through the physical part. Yeah. I think if someone made it a parisitic habit where cacher A always goes and fetches for me, that fails. But if I were part of a group of adventurers, and we each took turns, or had specific team assignments that actually contributed to the goal, that could be kind of cool. It especially wins if you put together a team of friends who each have some expertise and/or handicap. Someone else is always there to fill in the blank for you while you do so for them.

 

I kind of think of it like an RPG group or mercenary team maybe. One guy makes the killing blow, or maybe infiltrates X in a particular situation, but the whole team gets something out of it.

 

BTW, I undestand of the whole thing is leaking cheese in your opinion

 

People who have others retrieve difficult caches for them need to find a new hobby.

 

It's a step up from couch potato caching, more like plain potato caching. If they have the CO's permission, then it's sweet potato caching. If it's a bunch of micros, then I'd call it tater tot caching...

 

love it!

 

<SNIP>

I'll just keep doing things the way I think is right, and be proud of what I've done. To each his own!

 

 

People who have others retrieve difficult caches for them need to find a new hobby.

 

Glad to see that you relaxed your stance in later posts to condone people having fun in their own way. For some, the "fun" is the social aspect of going out with a group of friends on an adventure. I love to read their logs and have no problem with them claiming finds. And I'm glad they don't find a new hobby. This group of people is much more interesting than it would be if it were only people who could climb trees and cliffs.

 

Relaxed my stance? Not sure what exactly you're referring to by that.

 

If one person solves a puzzle, and someone goes along with them for the ride, I can understand to a certain extent. If that person just got the solution from someone else and claimed a find, that's pretty crass and shows a lack of character.

 

By the same token -- getting someone else to climb a tree so a whole herd of people can sign a log is ridiculous. What's the point of putting it up a tree, then? Just set it on the ground and let everyone sign away. No -- these people will still claim the high terrain rating find, even though they did nothing to warrant their find.

 

As I've stated before, I'm definitely in favor of ALR's. Since it's up to each of us individually how and where we place caches, we should be able to say what's necessary for claiming a find on them.

 

It seems a lot of folks feel entitled to not be excluded from anything, so we have to enable them by not actually requiring them to do any difficult tasks to claim a smilie for a difficult cache. This does not make sense.

 

You say this group of caching people is much more interesting than it would be if only comprised of those who can climb trees and cliffs. While that may be, it's not a valid reason for allowing people to let others get a cache and then sign the log. By that reasoning, NASA would be a lot more interesting if they didn't set such high standards for the astronauts. If you can't climb a tree/cliff, don't claim a find on a cache there! Good grief.

 

If I place a cache with a high terrain rating, I will expect people to actually do the work to get it.

 

Do you see geocaching as a competition?

I do... I see it as a competition between myself and any challenges that have been set befor me by other players. Am I competing against other players, No.

 

I don't compete, I do it for fun.

 

However when I see many profiles full of charts and graphs of find counts and terrain levels, it's fairly evident that many others do compete. If they are waving their find count around like a banner and then having someone else retrieve the caches for them....

 

I agree with hukilaulau.

 

And on the NASA analogy. The Discovery Shuttle team consists of more than just the astronauts on board. The team gets credit for accomplishments - and individuals get copies of awards.

 

Yeah I do it for fun too. I like see other people charts and such. But if you do proactively shove your stats in my face or wave a flag around about how accomplished you are (I don't see the presence of charts as that) , I will find holes. Not competing, and probably won't start poking holes publicly. But I'll have my opinion and will move on.

[+ADTCacheur]

"Credit" is very subjective, obviously. Find counts are a bad way to see how good a cacher someone is, I think.

Finally, somebody who agrees with me! Too many other people are rallying that you shouldn't be allowed to hide a cache until you've found at least 100-250 depending on the post.

 

We'd never have any progress if people only used things via "intended methods" for "intended purposes".

I'm assuming you're not taking into account the school board where I'm not allowed to use this method, even though it's easier, faster and simpler, just because it's harder to teach and isn't taught for another 5-6 grades.

[+redsox_mark]

As for that "tallest tree" example, I'm torn. I can see the view that bringing in a professional climber is a "tool"; a different way of doing it. But I also see the point of the cache is that not everyone can climb that tree, and I could not climb it.

 

But then what about going out caching with family or friends? When I go out caching with my boyfriend, we never find the cache together at the same time: it's only one of us who finds it, and the other may very well have missed it on one's own. Does it mean the other is not eligible to log a find? Surely not.

 

I agree with you about the general case. If I'm caching with others, and we are all looking for the cache, we all are contributing, so I see no issue in logging it regardless of who in the group found it. If the others weren't there, most likely I would have found it eventually.

 

Where it is a bit different (in my view), is a case where I know I am not physically capable of retrieving the cache. (Which is this "tallest tree" example, where a group arranged for a professional to climb the tree and bring it to them to sign). As a finder, I would not feel right claiming a find for something designed as a physical challenge, which I could not do my myself. To me, this is more similar to my asking a friend to go find a cache for me and bring it back to my house to find.