Cache Post and New Cachers..........

[+Mickey and Goofy]

Thursday I checked my email and there was an email from our caching reviewer:

FYI:

this "cacher" is logging bogus finds - not sure what it's about.

 

I had 6 caches logged by this cacher. I went up to the cachers profile and found that they had near 100 finds. But the cacher was NEW THAT DAY? I have never done that many cacher in one day! There were Traditional Caches*, Multi-caches*, Virtual Caches* and Unknown (Mystery) Caches* that they claim that they had found. I know that a couple of mine takes close to an hour to do and there would be no way to do all those caches in one day by one person. They had Not logged in one of my caches log books. I deleted all there posts with my caches.

 

Plus when they posted their find "Log" on the cache page they only put one letter as the log! (ie. "v")!!!

 

I sent the cacher an email telling them that I would be looking for their logs at every cache and today I got this letter.

"ive done all the cahces, just never had a login name, i did them with either my brother or my mom and they signed the log with their screen name. i made a screen name today and just wanted to log all the caches i know for a fact ive found before. i wrote letters instead of comments because i was not about to waste my time writing about all these caches when i just wanted log that ive found them. but now ive just wasted my time anyways because more than 50 of the cahces i found were reported or removed or whatever. so now im just deleting my account because its not even worth going through all that again when i dont have my name signed on them, the chache finders already dont like me and deleted my logs, and this was all blown out of proportion. i recieved dozens of emails from people with the same and many other complaints. i appologize, i didnt realize how strict and serious you guys take this.

"

 

My thoughts are this.......

Sorry........ But hay they didn't sign any of the logs and just putting a letter down and claiming a find is pretty lame, what are we to think.

Playing the geocaching game does include logging each find with your "geocaching name", not later when you finely decide to get a caching name on geocaching.com.

All they had to do is tell us why they were claiming the find their brother or Mom did. Not them, they were just along for the ride.... Oh well play the caching game right and they will have a blast. I have in the past let a cacher ride if they let me know why they were claiming the cache. This one NO just because of the lameness of their log post and no explanation for my consideration.

 

Today I got this email from the cacher "tencentdeposit" - jerrod:

 

i was along for the ride...? why are all you geocache people such douches.

 

This "douche" is just going by the rules....If I'm required by geocaching.com's rules to place a log in each cache hide that I put out for cachers to sign to claim the find. Simple...

I have to say this "why do we "waste my time" putting logs into cache hides and "waste my time" reading the logs posted by finders. "Because it's part of the game of caching" and we love it.

 

If

i was not about to waste my time writing about all these caches when i just wanted log that ive found them.

then I can waste my time deleting them.

 

So how do we know that Jerrod did find the caches? We don't!

 

Sorry for placing this stuff in the forums! I'm only trying to bring up a point for discussion not an argument.

[+Chokecherry]

I know it's been suggested on the forums when people split from a "team" account to go back and attempt to re-log those caches under the individual name. I take my friend with my caching and if he wanted his own screen name I wouldn't just say he tagged along as I found the caches but was an active caching participant.

 

Now, that being said, I would think the most tactful thing to do if one is re-logging caches due to splitting from a team account or changing a screen name (another common issue) one should be noting that in their logs. Putting one letter in a log and calling it a log is lacks tact. I would think cache owners are more sympathetic towards people logging if they explain their situation. In the time it took him to write his letter he could have had a preformatted cut and paste deal and just slapped that in there. But then I know most people who are doing replacement logs also back date them to the time they were originally found too (an extra step I'm sure).

[+Bear and Ragged]

If you have found a cache (Whilst with another cacher) and later get your own account, you should date the found log to when the cacher you were with found and logged.

And, if you don't want to post a comment, at least put "Found with cacher xxxxxx, now have my own account" that can at least be copied and pasted...

[+d+n.s]

We found a few caches with my friend before we signed up. He even wrote our initials on the log. We never officially logged the finds when we later got a screen name.

I think I would have deleted this dude also.

At the very least he could have wrote a message explaining his situation and copy and pasted it into each log.

He should only be mad at himself and missing out on some caches isn't a reason to quit.

 

I think you handled it well.

[+ADTCacheur]

He's going to quit because people are deleting his un-genuine looking logs. Either he's a fraud, or he's such an extreme numbers cacher that he won't care about trade up/trade even or he'll hide another long series of lame micros or he might not respect the cache and "accidentally" leave it more out in the open then it was supposed to be. Delete his logs, he's leaving anyway, and most likely good riddance!

[+Mickey and Goofy]

We found a few caches with my friend before we signed up. He even wrote our initials on the log. We never officially logged the finds when we later got a screen name.

I think I would have deleted this dude also.

At the very least he could have wrote a message explaining his situation and copy and pasted it into each log.

He should only be mad at himself and missing out on some caches isn't a reason to quit.

 

I think you handled it well.

 

Thanks I tryed to be nice about it. I do agree that if he would have put something in the logs about why I would have just let it go. A copy and paste would have done the trick. Also I have let cachers from a split team post a find with their log note.

 

I have done a cache or two that with my age and handicap I could see but could not get to the cache (up a tree). I just sent the cache owner an email stating so and was given permission to post the find. Not hard just a little consideration to the cache hider for taking their time in placing the cache.

[Mr.Yuck]

We found a few caches with my friend before we signed up. He even wrote our initials on the log. We never officially logged the finds when we later got a screen name.

I think I would have deleted this dude also.

At the very least he could have wrote a message explaining his situation and copy and pasted it into each log.

He should only be mad at himself and missing out on some caches isn't a reason to quit.

 

I think you handled it well.

 

Thanks I tryed to be nice about it. I do agree that if he would have put something in the logs about why I would have just let it go. A copy and paste would have done the trick. Also I have let cachers from a split team post a find with their log note.

 

I have done a cache or two that with my age and handicap I could see but could not get to the cache (up a tree). I just sent the cache owner an email stating so and was given permission to post the find. Not hard just a little consideration to the cache hider for taking their time in placing the cache.

 

Now this is an interesting one. I believe someone should be "allowed" to go back and log old finds if they're breaking off from a team. However as some have mentioned, they should have taken a little effort to log on the days their team members found them, and at least write "found with xxxxxx on this date". The one letter logs left a stigma of bogusness on the logs, on top of being quite rude. Especially in this day and age where most the newbs are dropping "TFTC" only logs on us.

[+buttaskotch]

So writing 1 log and simply using a keyboard short cut for "paste" is so much more difficult that the letter "v"? Heck, all he needed was to use one more key to paste!

What a lazy individual, that reaped what he sowed. Not feeling any sympathy in the least.

 

Also, I think using the term "douche" to describe me and other cachers, from a person I don't know can construe as non solicited, email harrassment. Of which, if it were me, I would surely report to GC.

[+bittsen]

The guy has a plausible explanation for why he is logging caches and there is no signature (from him).

 

What's the big deal? What do you lose by saying "OK, I understand. Happy caching"?

 

Sheesh, some people just want to be (whats a good word for this?)...

[+thedeadpirate]

The guy has a plausible explanation for why he is logging caches and there is no signature (from him).

 

What's the big deal? What do you lose by saying "OK, I understand. Happy caching"?

Nothing; had he said that up front instead of being lazy.

 

From what I've read thus far in this thread, if the guy were to go back and log properly they'd let it stand.

 

That lazy cacher is the one who got a chip on his shoulder and quit just because cache owners had the audacity to email him and ask what was up.

 

Sheesh, some people just want to be (whats a good word for this?)...

 

Yep. Some people get asked to explain themselves and then they just want to be(insert the word you were looking for)

Edited May 22, 2010 by GeoBain

[+buttaskotch]

The guy has a plausible explanation for why he is logging caches and there is no signature (from him).

 

What's the big deal? What do you lose by saying "OK, I understand. Happy caching"?

 

Sheesh, some people just want to be (whats a good word for this?)...

Plausible, yes. this would have been a non issue if he simply cut and paste an explanation into the 50 logs, but chose the esy way out bringing suspicion onto himself.

He threw himself into the fire because no one knew until he wrote that note to CO, and got a friend to send out unsolicited emails.

Edited May 22, 2010 by buttaskotch

[+Setan Meyacha]

I've had a number of 'new cachers', I think, leave some pretty extensive logs on some of my caches on what they saw or some other comment about the cache/cache site that didn't even come close to a correct description of the area. Did they actually visit the cache? Or, did they confuse it with some other cache they visited? I have no idea. But, rather than create hard feelings or a 'stink' in the local geocaching community by deleting their logs, I chose to let sleeping dogs lie. However, if I came across a number of logs on my caches with just a simple letter (i.e., 'v') for a log I would probably delete the log. It is bad enough to receive e-mails of logs with nothing more than a 'TFTC/TFTH'; but, to be so rude as to only place a singel letter as a log is like a slap in the face to the CO.

 

If I've done a string of caches for a day I will usually state something like, 'One of XX found today while in the area.' That is my copy and paste part of all my logs for that day. Then I'll make some comment on the particular log in question; even if it is a 'lame' hide. Afterall, someone took the time, expense and energy to place the cache and it deserves more than a simple 'TFTC/TFTH' log. I am guilty of leaving those types of logs in the past, but now make a special effort to make some kind of comment.

[+bittsen]

The guy has a plausible explanation for why he is logging caches and there is no signature (from him).

 

What's the big deal? What do you lose by saying "OK, I understand. Happy caching"?

Nothing; had he said that up front instead of being lazy.

 

From what I've read thus far in this thread, if the guy were to go back and log properly they'd let it stand.

 

That lazy cacher is the one who got a chip on his shoulder and quit just because cache owners had the audacity to email him and ask what was up.

 

Sheesh, some people just want to be (whats a good word for this?)...

 

Yep. Some people get asked to explain themselves and then they just want to be(insert the word you were looking for)

 

With all due respect. Some people read a personality into whatever they read. Many people tend to think the person on the other end is of a similar mindset and treat them that way. It's called "projecting" in the psychology circle.

Perhaps the person who logged the finds with just a letter is not a middle aged person (arguably the largest demographic) but a 12 year old who si just being a 12 year old. Or perhaps it's a person like my cousin who just has a societal personality disorder that doesn't allow him the ability to interact with others very well.

 

At any rate it would be very easy to say "OK, thanks. Happy caching."

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

This guy (currently) has 74 "finds", all of them on May 20, the day he created his/her account.

 

Despite group "breakaways" and the like, I would think he could provide some info outside of single (or some double letters) in order to get the post to go through. He doesn't even try to come up with a proper date when he would've/could've been at the cache(s).

 

I think the entire thing is bogus. It just plain has that ring to it, more like a 'clank' now that I think about it.

 

Motive? Who knows, or cares for that matter.

 

I doubt that the account would be locked, but reporting same to GS could well be in order regarding that follow-up unsolicited email. All of the other info should also be provided to GS.

 

My 2¢.

[+thedeadpirate]

With all due respect.

With all due respect, you are wrong.

 

*** Edited to fix messed up quote.

Edited May 22, 2010 by GeoBain

[4wheelin_fool]

Yes, someone who is projecting the personality of others by calling them a "douche", for cleaning up (or irrigating) all the bogus logs, is also inversely revealing a more concise image of themself.

Edited May 22, 2010 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Mosaic55]

I don't think I'd let the logs stand as written, but I would email him/her back and invite him to re-log if he adds a simple explanation such as "Found last year with my brother _____, now logging on my own account "

[+bittsen]

With all due respect. Some people read a personality into whatever they read.

With all due respect, you are wrong.

So nobody projects a personaility into what they are reading?

 

Interesting....

Edited May 22, 2010 by bittsen

[+scorpio_dark]

Sure, you were probably nice enough in your messages and actions to any one who has a few caches under their belt.

 

However, this is a new account they were logging under. From the order of things in the OP, it sounds like you deleted the logs and then sent him a (according to you, polite) "I think you are a geo-criminal and will be investigating" message.

 

He wrote back and obviously had a cavalier attitude about logging old finds. Maybe you could have educated him nicely about the value that YOU put on those logs he wasn't going to bother with. Tell him it's nice to have a budding cacher starting off on his own and that you like to read about it. And did you notice that he actually apologized! It wasn't an "I'm sorry, but . . . . . ." like you went on to do in your very own OP. He actually said "I apologize" and went on to explain that he didn't realize you were so strict and serious. He also said this got blown out of proportion. There is your friggin clue that you and some other CO's collectively slammed your foot down too hard on somebody. That is if this is a game and not a professional sport.

 

Maybe you could have gone in blank slate -written the new user nicely before deleting the logs welcoming him to geocaching and then offering him some friendly reminders on how things are done. No threats of deletion or accusations until you open a dialogue or get nothing back in a couple or few days.

 

Seems like even the reviewer who alerted you made a bad assumption. Actually I am wondering if you would have approached this differently had the reviewer not already deemed them "bogus finds" in the e-mail to you. I'm hoping and thinking you would have been less of a "douche" sans the assumptions you went in with.

 

IMO, it's kind of the responsibility of the CO to be a bit benevolent. You obviously took offense at the "waste my time" line. Taking in his whole message, I don't think he meant it harshly. Again referring to the message. He was obviously bombarded with people slinging accusations and deleting or threatening to delete logs. You seem like a good candidate for PMO caches. You play well with other cachers, but not noobs. I don't mean that in a rude way. It's just seems like premiums would help you avoid airing noob laundry like this one and give people who like noobs a chance to foster in a player instead of stomping on his head.

[+thedeadpirate]

With all due respect. Some people read a personality into whatever they read.

With all due respect, you are wrong.

So nobody projects a personaility into what they are reading?

 

Interesting....

 

Thank you for pointing out my messed up quote.

[+bittsen]

Sure, you were probably nice enough in your messages and actions to any one who has a few caches under their belt.

 

However, this is a new account they were logging under. From the order of things in the OP, it sounds like you deleted the logs and then sent him a (according to you, polite) "I think you are a geo-criminal and will be investigating" message.

 

He wrote back and obviously had a cavalier attitude about logging old finds. Maybe you could have educated him nicely about the value that YOU put on those logs he wasn't going to bother with. Tell him it's nice to have a budding cacher starting off on his own and that you like to read about it. And did you notice that he actually apologized! It wasn't an "I'm sorry, but . . . . . ." like you went on to do in your very own OP. He actually said "I apologize" and went on to explain that he didn't realize you were so strict and serious. He also said this got blown out of proportion. There is your friggin clue that you and some other CO's collectively slammed your foot down too hard on somebody. That is if this is a game and not a professional sport.

 

Maybe you could have gone in blank slate -written the new user nicely before deleting the logs welcoming him to geocaching and then offering him some friendly reminders on how things are done. No threats of deletion or accusations until you open a dialogue or get nothing back in a couple or few days.

 

Seems like even the reviewer who alerted you made a bad assumption. Actually I am wondering if you would have approached this differently had the reviewer not already deemed them "bogus finds" in the e-mail to you. I'm hoping and thinking you would have been less of a "douche" sans the assumptions you went in with.

 

IMO, it's kind of the responsibility of the CO to be a bit benevolent. You obviously took offense at the "waste my time" line. Taking in his whole message, I don't think he meant it harshly. Again referring to the message. He was obviously bombarded with people slinging accusations and deleting or threatening to delete logs. You seem like a good candidate for PMO caches. You play well with other cachers, but not noobs. I don't mean that in a rude way. It's just seems like premiums would help you avoid airing noob laundry like this one and give people who like noobs a chance to foster in a player instead of stomping on his head.

 

Exactly!!

[+buttaskotch]

Sure, you were probably nice enough in your messages and actions to any one who has a few caches under their belt.

 

However, this is a new account they were logging under. From the order of things in the OP, it sounds like you deleted the logs and then sent him a (according to you, polite) "I think you are a geo-criminal and will be investigating" message.

 

He wrote back and obviously had a cavalier attitude about logging old finds. Maybe you could have educated him nicely about the value that YOU put on those logs he wasn't going to bother with. Tell him it's nice to have a budding cacher starting off on his own and that you like to read about it. And did you notice that he actually apologized! It wasn't an "I'm sorry, but . . . . . ." like you went on to do in your very own OP. He actually said "I apologize" and went on to explain that he didn't realize you were so strict and serious. He also said this got blown out of proportion. There is your friggin clue that you and some other CO's collectively slammed your foot down too hard on somebody. That is if this is a game and not a professional sport.

 

Maybe you could have gone in blank slate -written the new user nicely before deleting the logs welcoming him to geocaching and then offering him some friendly reminders on how things are done. No threats of deletion or accusations until you open a dialogue or get nothing back in a couple or few days.

 

Seems like even the reviewer who alerted you made a bad assumption. Actually I am wondering if you would have approached this differently had the reviewer not already deemed them "bogus finds" in the e-mail to you. I'm hoping and thinking you would have been less of a "douche" sans the assumptions you went in with.

 

IMO, it's kind of the responsibility of the CO to be a bit benevolent. You obviously took offense at the "waste my time" line. Taking in his whole message, I don't think he meant it harshly. Again referring to the message. He was obviously bombarded with people slinging accusations and deleting or threatening to delete logs. You seem like a good candidate for PMO caches. You play well with other cachers, but not noobs. I don't mean that in a rude way. It's just seems like premiums would help you avoid airing noob laundry like this one and give people who like noobs a chance to foster in a player instead of stomping on his head.

Now, let's all join hands and sing, KUMBAYAH. Not.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

I'd have to agree with the logger in this case, it's perfectly normal and acceptable to go back and log all your finds made with a team, after you create your own individual account. Deleting those logs is out of line. Asking the new account holder to share more than a single letter is reasonable, but maybe laborious for them if they have hundreds or thousands of finds. People who feel the need to micro manage the logs of others are ruining the game just as much as people who log bogus finds.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

He's going to quit because people are deleting his un-genuine looking logs. Either he's a fraud, or he's such an extreme numbers cacher that he won't care about trade up/trade even or he'll hide another long series of lame micros or he might not respect the cache and "accidentally" leave it more out in the open then it was supposed to be. Delete his logs, he's leaving anyway, and most likely good riddance!

Or...he's trying to just play the game, and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

just for the record...when I started reading the first post, I instantly thought..."someone has changed their name, or broken off from a team and is logging old finds" not "Someone's cheating". As if there's any way to cheat in a game with no score.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

This guy (currently) has 74 "finds", all of them on May 20, the day he created his/her account.

 

Despite group "breakaways" and the like, I would think he could provide some info outside of single (or some double letters) in order to get the post to go through. He doesn't even try to come up with a proper date when he would've/could've been at the cache(s).

 

I think the entire thing is bogus. It just plain has that ring to it, more like a 'clank' now that I think about it.

 

Motive? Who knows, or cares for that matter.

 

I doubt that the account would be locked, but reporting same to GS could well be in order regarding that follow-up unsolicited email. All of the other info should also be provided to GS.

 

My 2¢.

Deleting someone's find log is just about te same as soliciting an email from them. especially since mose log deleters are not polite enough to even send a note either before or after. I don't know how many of you have gotten a log deletion notice, but it comes with no explanation, and reade like a slap in tha face.

[+ADTCacheur]

He's going to quit because people are deleting his un-genuine looking logs. Either he's a fraud, or he's such an extreme numbers cacher that he won't care about trade up/trade even or he'll hide another long series of lame micros or he might not respect the cache and "accidentally" leave it more out in the open then it was supposed to be. Delete his logs, he's leaving anyway, and most likely good riddance!

Or...he's trying to just play the game, and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

 

I was reffering to the fact that deleted logs are the thing that's making him quit. If he were just playing the game, he wouldn't care.

[+thedeadpirate]

and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

The finder is the one who stated he didn't have enough time to write more than just a "v". Had he found the time to write one cut and paste note to add to the logs, he could have avoided a lot of trouble.

 

This is not a one off CO who deleted what they suspected to be a bogus log.

 

By the finder's own admission, 50+ cache owners emailed him to find out what was up. That tells me that there was a failure to communicate. It is my opinion that the failure was on the finder's part.

 

Because 50+ cache owners emailed him to ask him to explain, he decided to quit.

 

I'm not sure how that translates into people thinking they are better than someone else.

[+ADTCacheur]

If

i was not about to waste my time writing about all these caches when i just wanted log that ive found them.

 

The guidelines state that (unless it's a challenge cache) the ONLY thing you can delete a found log for is if the name isn't in the log, and it wasn't. By 100 finds he should know that, and also he should know that it's impolite to only post a single letter for his log. If he had indeed found these previously, he had to have had a previous account (or he couldn't have seen the coordinates) in which case he had the previous dates from logging them on his previous account, and he should have either looked back and put them on the right dates or put them a month or so back, to make sure that they didn't stop people from realizing that a cache was stolen (out of 100 caches, one of them must have been gone at that time)

[+thedeadpirate]

If

i was not about to waste my time writing about all these caches when i just wanted log that ive found them.

 

The guidelines state that (unless it's a challenge cache) the ONLY thing you can delete a found log for is if the name isn't in the log, and it wasn't. By 100 finds he should know that, and also he should know that it's impolite to only post a single letter for his log. If he had indeed found these previously, he had to have had a previous account (or he couldn't have seen the coordinates) in which case he had the previous dates from logging them on his previous account, and he should have either looked back and put them on the right dates or put them a month or so back, to make sure that they didn't stop people from realizing that a cache was stolen (out of 100 caches, one of them must have been gone at that time)

It's not unreasonable that he would not have his new account name in the logs if he previously found the caches with someone else. It happens a lot, actually.

 

What is unreasonable is to not explain that via at least a cut and past log instead of thinking that post a single letter because he didn't want to wast time. It seems to me that he wasted more time by not wasting time.

[4wheelin_fool]

The cacher clearly misconmunicated, along with showing an entitlement attitude, expecting cache owners to accept fake logs.

 

There was a similar logger a few months ago doing the exact same thing on caches all over the world which definitely were fake and the account was shut down. It would be very difficult to see a difference between the two.

Edited May 22, 2010 by 4wheelin_fool

[+scorpio_dark]

Sure, you were probably nice enough in your messages and actions to any one who has a few caches under their belt.

 

<SNIP FOR SPACE>

 

IMO, it's kind of the responsibility of the CO to be a bit benevolent. You obviously took offense at the "waste my time" line. Taking in his whole message, I don't think he meant it harshly. Again referring to the message. He was obviously bombarded with people slinging accusations and deleting or threatening to delete logs. You seem like a good candidate for PMO caches. You play well with other cachers, but not noobs. I don't mean that in a rude way. It's just seems like premiums would help you avoid airing noob laundry like this one and give people who like noobs a chance to foster in a player instead of stomping on his head.

Now, let's all join hands and sing, KUMBAYAH. Not.

 

whatev . . .

 

and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

The finder is the one who stated he didn't have enough time to write more than just a "v". Had he found the time to write one cut and paste note to add to the logs, he could have avoided a lot of trouble.

 

This is not a one off CO who deleted what they suspected to be a bogus log.

 

By the finder's own admission, 50+ cache owners emailed him to find out what was up. That tells me that there was a failure to communicate. It is my opinion that the failure was on the finder's part.

 

Because 50+ cache owners emailed him to ask him to explain, he decided to quit.

 

I'm not sure how that translates into people thinking they are better than someone else.

 

Because you and the other folks taking your approach and putting yourselves in a position of judgement over (what reads like) a poor kid who was trying to get a starting point on his own in the game. Maybe you don't like his perception of the game, sure. But he is a noob. His perception of having 100 finds may be wrong, his hasty and careless posts are wrong, but what else?

 

It comes off as better than someone else because you make it a members only club. Its a club where if the people that know better deem the noob to have made a mistake, they show them the door first and then are surprised or show mirth when the guy doesn't want to come back to the door to hope he'll measure up against your experience and knowledge to be let in again. Or in the case of the OP, come to the geo-police station to be interrogated on his "crimes".

 

I don't think many are arguing here that the logger is a great communicator. But should we not allow him a little breathing room while he adjusts?

 

Should we sing KUMBAYAH again?

[+simpjkee]

If the person had back logged the find logs and written in the log something like:

 

"I'm [so and so] and I found this cache with [so and so]. I just created my account so I am logging this cache now under my new account. Thanks."

 

I would have had no problem accepting it.

 

The way he just logged them all on the same day and with just a letter raises suspicion. At that point, I would have probably e-mailed him to ask what's going on. If I got no response within 2 days. I would delete it.

 

It looks like this person was just a n00b and didn't really understand that what he was doing was raising suspicion. His goal was not wrong, but his means of achieving the goal was wrong. I think he just needed some help or someone to point him in the right direction on how to appropriately do what he was trying to do.

[+simpjkee]

On another note, I think the mass e-mails sent to the cacher who logged the caches was due mostly to the reviewer sending out the e-mail saying that the finds were bogus.

 

I'm surpriseed the reviewer did this since Groundspeak typically has the position that cache owners are responsible for quality control over their cache pages.

 

Additionally, (assuming the finder did find the caches with their siblings, the finds weren't 'bogus'. They were just logged incorrectly.

[+bittsen]

On another note, I think the mass e-mails sent to the cacher who logged the caches was due mostly to the reviewer sending out the e-mail saying that the finds were bogus.

 

I'm surpriseed the reviewer did this since Groundspeak typically has the position that cache owners are responsible for quality control over their cache pages.

 

Additionally, (assuming the finder did find the caches with their siblings, the finds weren't 'bogus'. They were just logged incorrectly.

 

And, if the logger was, indeed, just logging finds on their own account from finding them previously then the reviewer needs to shoot someone an apology. IMHO.

 

It sounds as if the reviewer really overstepped.

[+thedeadpirate]

Because you and the other folks taking your approach and putting yourselves in a position of judgement over (what reads like) a poor kid who was trying to get a starting point on his own in the game.

Who's passing judegment?

 

In my eyes, this is a simple case of poor communication. As many, many, many people have pointed out, a simple cut and past line in the log would have gone a long way towards ensuring there was no problem.

 

However, the finder, by his own admission, did not have the time to do that. And you see that as someone being judgmental?

 

The only judgmental comment I have made is that the finder was lazy. And if you can't see someone not having the time to post more than "v" as lazy, then I guess you can call me judgmental.

 

There has been a lot of wasted time by a number of people just because one finder was too lazy to post a simple 30 second note.

 

BTW, I don't even check logbooks. It's not something I really give a darn about. For the most part, I'm with Bittsen on the whole live and let live aspect of geocaching.

 

However, in this situation, I am 100% in support of the CO's decision to delete the log. I guess if the finder wants to continue playing, he'll have to do a little extra work now. Actually, he'll probably need to do a lot more work than he would have had to if he'd spent the 30 seconds to begin with.

[+ADTCacheur]

If

i was not about to waste my time writing about all these caches when i just wanted log that ive found them.

 

The guidelines state that (unless it's a challenge cache) the ONLY thing you can delete a found log for is if the name isn't in the log, and it wasn't. By 100 finds he should know that, and also he should know that it's impolite to only post a single letter for his log. If he had indeed found these previously, he had to have had a previous account (or he couldn't have seen the coordinates) in which case he had the previous dates from logging them on his previous account, and he should have either looked back and put them on the right dates or put them a month or so back, to make sure that they didn't stop people from realizing that a cache was stolen (out of 100 caches, one of them must have been gone at that time)

It's not unreasonable that he would not have his new account name in the logs if he previously found the caches with someone else. It happens a lot, actually.

 

What is unreasonable is to not explain that via at least a cut and past log instead of thinking that post a single letter because he didn't want to wast time. It seems to me that he wasted more time by not wasting time.

 

It's not unreasonable to not have his new name in the log, but it is unreasonable not to say "switched accounts, logged as ***"

[+thedeadpirate]

It's not unreasonable that he would not have his new account name in the logs if he previously found the caches with someone else. It happens a lot, actually.

 

What is unreasonable is to not explain that via at least a cut and past log instead of thinking that post a single letter because he didn't want to wast time. It seems to me that he wasted more time by not wasting time.

It's not unreasonable to not have his new name in the log, but it is unreasonable not to say "switched accounts, logged as ***"

That's what I said.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

He's going to quit because people are deleting his un-genuine looking logs. Either he's a fraud, or he's such an extreme numbers cacher that he won't care about trade up/trade even or he'll hide another long series of lame micros or he might not respect the cache and "accidentally" leave it more out in the open then it was supposed to be. Delete his logs, he's leaving anyway, and most likely good riddance!

Or...he's trying to just play the game, and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

 

I was reffering to the fact that deleted logs are the thing that's making him quit. If he were just playing the game, he wouldn't care.

If I were trying to play the game, and started getting loads of deleted log notifications from multiple players, I'd be very offended, hurt, and likely to decide that I didn't want to play this game with people like that. Anyone who has ever gotten a log deletion notice will know how impersonal and rude they can appear when there's no explanation.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

The finder is the one who stated he didn't have enough time to write more than just a "v". Had he found the time to write one cut and paste note to add to the logs, he could have avoided a lot of trouble.

 

This is not a one off CO who deleted what they suspected to be a bogus log.

 

By the finder's own admission, 50+ cache owners emailed him to find out what was up. That tells me that there was a failure to communicate. It is my opinion that the failure was on the finder's part.

 

Because 50+ cache owners emailed him to ask him to explain, he decided to quit.

 

I'm not sure how that translates into people thinking they are better than someone else.

Because there's NO WAY that 50+ Cachers decided to do that on their own, this was some sort of ganging up or rumormill that bombarded the player with loads of accusatory email. You can't possibly beleive that even half of those were actually polite? If I got 50 emails from different players accusing me of logging bogus finds and also all the deletion notices that also came, I'd be the one complaining to GS. Sounds like group harrassment to me.

[+bittsen]

If I were trying to play the game, and started getting loads of deleted log notifications from multiple players, I'd be very offended, hurt, and likely to decide that I didn't want to play this game with people like that. Anyone who has ever gotten a log deletion notice will know how impersonal and rude they can appear when there's no explanation.

 

Yup. And especially disheartening if the one receiving al the hassles is only a teenager.

[Mr.Yuck]

He's going to quit because people are deleting his un-genuine looking logs. Either he's a fraud, or he's such an extreme numbers cacher that he won't care about trade up/trade even or he'll hide another long series of lame micros or he might not respect the cache and "accidentally" leave it more out in the open then it was supposed to be. Delete his logs, he's leaving anyway, and most likely good riddance!

Or...he's trying to just play the game, and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

 

I was reffering to the fact that deleted logs are the thing that's making him quit. If he were just playing the game, he wouldn't care.

If I were trying to play the game, and started getting loads of deleted log notifications from multiple players, I'd be very offended, hurt, and likely to decide that I didn't want to play this game with people like that. Anyone who has ever gotten a log deletion notice will know how impersonal and rude they can appear when there's no explanation.

 

I dunno here. Do we know this is a kid? This was an extremely (self-admitted) lazy, half-arsed, and perceivably rude attempt at logging these caches. Step your game up there, cache logger. Attempt to excel at everything you do. There's a life lesson for you.

[+brslk]

and keeps getting slapped in tha face by people who think they are better than him??

The finder is the one who stated he didn't have enough time to write more than just a "v". Had he found the time to write one cut and paste note to add to the logs, he could have avoided a lot of trouble.

 

This is not a one off CO who deleted what they suspected to be a bogus log.

 

By the finder's own admission, 50+ cache owners emailed him to find out what was up. That tells me that there was a failure to communicate. It is my opinion that the failure was on the finder's part.

 

Because 50+ cache owners emailed him to ask him to explain, he decided to quit.

 

I'm not sure how that translates into people thinking they are better than someone else.

Because there's NO WAY that 50+ Cachers decided to do that on their own, this was some sort of ganging up or rumormill that bombarded the player with loads of accusatory email. You can't possibly beleive that even half of those were actually polite? If I got 50 emails from different players accusing me of logging bogus finds and also all the deletion notices that also came, I'd be the one complaining to GS. Sounds like group harrassment to me.

 

Did you not read the OP at all? It said that the cache reviewer sent him an email saying that those logs from that cacher were bogus and he most likely sent it to other cache hiders whose caches he had logged online.

 

So, no. No group harassment at all.

 

As has been said numerous times already, this could have been easily avoidable if he would have explained in his online logs using a simple cut and paste instead of "v".

 

I am sure that at least one of those 50 people that "harassed" him / her let them know this.

Edited May 23, 2010 by brslk

[+brslk]

Why is everyone assuming this is a 12 year old? or young kid?

I have no idea how old he/she is.

[+thedeadpirate]

If I got 50 emails from different players accusing me of logging bogus finds and also all the deletion notices that also came, I'd be the one complaining to GS. Sounds like group harrassment to me.

If I got 50+ log deletions, I'd figure I did something wrong and figure out how to fix it.

[+thedeadpirate]

I dunno here. Do we know this is a kid? This was an extremely (self-admitted) lazy, half-arsed, and perceivably rude attempt at logging these caches. Step your game up there, cache logger. Attempt to excel at everything you do. There's a life lesson for you.

Exactly.

[+brslk]

If I got 50 emails from different players accusing me of logging bogus finds and also all the deletion notices that also came, I'd be the one complaining to GS. Sounds like group harrassment to me.

If I got 50+ log deletions, I'd figure I did something wrong and figure out how to fix it.

 

Ditto. To do anything else would mean I had a persecution complex.

[+BlueDeuce]

If I were trying to play the game, and started getting loads of deleted log notifications from multiple players, I'd be very offended, hurt, and likely to decide that I didn't want to play this game with people like that. Anyone who has ever gotten a log deletion notice will know how impersonal and rude they can appear when there's no explanation.

 

Okay, so now we know there are reasons to let a second Found it stand and that sometimes people make mistakes and you can certainly ask them to post a Note instead, BUT when it comes time to delete a log I think being able to add a comment the additional communication is a very good thing.

 

I vote - yes.

 

How many logs are you deleting that it becomes a problem to just use the regular email link for the user?

 

Hundreds.

[+bittsen]

Why is everyone assuming this is a 12 year old? or young kid?

I have no idea how old he/she is.

 

We don't assume it's a 12 year old. We assume it COULD be a 12 year old who was just harassed by a bunch of adults with control issues.

 

I make the assumption because the OP said the logger said they were caching with their "mom". I know some older people still live with their mother but the likelihood is it's a younger person. Plus the whole thing wreaks (to me) of a kid who was trying to get in the game on his own but made a younger kids mistake of just lazily logging with a letter.

 

The point is there is no online log length requirement and there is the option of belated logging of caches found with a team as an individual. The fact that (apparantly) a reviewer overreacted and a bunch of cache owners got their knickers bunched (possibly because of previously mentioned reviewer) is unfortunate. If the cache owners never received an email warning of bogus logs then everything would probably have never been an issue.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Did you not read the OP at all? It said that the cache reviewer sent him an email saying that those logs from that cacher were bogus and he most likely sent it to other cache hiders whose caches he had logged online.

 

So, no. No group harassment at all.

 

actually, that would be the definition of group harassmant, with the "Reviewer" who sent out those emails as the ring leader. on the other hand, I would be extremely surprised to find out is any real reviewer would actually do that. I think that's the fishiest thing about the whole story.