Jump to content

Cachers who don't sign the logs


Followers 4

Recommended Posts

Some of these posts are getting the question of the day. Good for you to at least answer the question. :blink: The irony in all of this is that I'm not even perturbed about the practice! A better word would be incredulous that it would be condoned to claim a find without finding it!

 

This all started out to simply be a poll of level-headed opinions about how one views a cacher who would cheat, and that Groundspeak doesn't seem to have any specific guideline or rule in place that states that the cache must be found for it to be considered a "find."

 

There are specific guidelines for rating Difficulty and Terrain, about saturation, etc. Yet no guideline that simply says, "A person must physically find a cache, and sign the log as proof of the find before logging the find on the website."

 

Bigger deals are made on how close containers can be in multi's, getting permission from Forest Service land, etc. Isn't this worthy of a guideline?

 

That's all... just a poll.

 

I haven't seen anyone condoning the practice of logging a cache as a find on a cache they have not found and signed the log. I've seen lots of suggestions that if you discover that someone has logged a found it long on a cache on which they didn't sign the log, that is within your right to delete the log. In fact, the guidelines specifically stipulate that it is the cache owners responsibility to delete bogus logs as part of maintaining the cache. Groundspeak has even taken this a step further by asking reviewers to archive virtual caches which are not properly being maintained (mostly caches that allow other log log the cache without any sort of verification that they visited the cache). However, some cachers will allow people to log a find a cache when for one reason or another a finder of the cache couldn't sign the log. At the end of the day, it's between the person that (alledgedly) found the cache and the cache owner as to whats deemed acceptable proof that the cache was found.

 

What you're asking though is the opinion of those about cache which you do not own, and again, I think the consensus is that it is not something that they would condone but most of the responses suggest that the issue is between the cache owner and the person posting the bogus logs. Yes, it may be annoying to see someone posting bogus logs on caches that they haven't found but it's still up to the CO owner as to whether any action should be taken.

 

Some of the responses have agreed that the practice of logging caches that you haven't actually found *is* cheating but it's more like cheating at solitaire than it is cheating on a spouse. Cheating at solitaire or how they're playing the geocaching game is only cheating themselves. It doesn't hurt other cachers in anyway. It doesn't change your find count. It shouldn't change how much enjoyment you get finding the same cache or others. If someone that was logging bogus finds on caches came here gloating about how many caches they have found and it was discovered that they really didn't find those caches you can bet that there would be a lot of responses less than complimentary.

 

If it seems that many of the responses don't seem to be expressing the amount of concern that you have about the practice it just may be that most of them are coming from people that have been playing the game a long time and have seen it all before and come to realize that, as in any game, some people just lack integrity for how it's played, but won't let it impact the enjoyment they get out it personally.

 

Thank you for an intelligent, balanced, and insightful post. I think this would be a good place to sign off, and officially declare this topic as being at the point of beating a dead horse.

 

I must say, though, this entire thread is why I went to the reviewer in the first place, rather than the Forums. There is way too much drama on here. It would have been nice to have had more level-headed input from people such as yourself, ohmerfam's original reply, GeoBain, uxorious, kmartcachier, BCProspectors, Setan Meyacha, Max and 99, Colonial Cats, dorqie, microvision, and Minimike2.

 

Thank you for participating in my "poll" and not judging me, rather than addressing the topic. Moving on, and off to go caching and have some fun today. ;)

Link to comment

Hmm imo half the fun in this game is being sneaky, obtaining and signing the log without drawing attention. simply walking up, looking at it, and going home to e-log it is kinda like saying you hit a home run if you never swung the bat.

 

Oops... also forgot to thank trainmanup. As a post script, I do want to note that I did write a very nice note to the cacher, (as I explained in my original post) who never replied, and that we don't make a practice of "policing" our caches. This one just came to our attention by another cacher. Other than that, I agree it's ridiculous to go out and look for offenders. Again, thanks to those who offered constructive advice as to what to do when something like this comes up.

 

Happy caching! :blink:

Link to comment
The OP appears to already know the answer she wants. If she read an understood the guidelines,

 

Perhaps that is something that would be helpful, rather than judgmental... help me by telling me how to get to these guidelines. As you can see we're not that experienced, and still learning. We have read a lot, but can always use more help.

 

Desert_Trailblazers, you have published 8 caches so far. Before you are allowed to submit those caches for publication, you must check 2 boxes. One states that you have read and understand the guidelines and it has a link to those guidelines right beside that statement. The other states that you have read and agree to the terms of use agreement. Again, there is a link to those terms right there.

 

You really should read those before submitting any more caches.

 

You can find them easily by editing one of your listing and scrolling to the bottom just above the submit button.

Link to comment

I've not hidden caches yet but as a newbie I really don't think it would bother me if someone just pretended to find my cache and didn't log it. They are just playing a different game to the one I am playing and I don't really get the point of their game, but I don't think it detracts from mine. Someone stealing my trackables, or stealing the caches does detract from my game. Those behaviours bother me. The idea of armchair cachers I just find a bit odd.

Link to comment

I've not hidden caches yet but as a newbie I really don't think it would bother me if someone just pretended to find my cache and didn't log it. They are just playing a different game to the one I am playing and I don't really get the point of their game, but I don't think it detracts from mine. Someone stealing my trackables, or stealing the caches does detract from my game. Those behaviours bother me. The idea of armchair cachers I just find a bit odd.

Link to comment

I have never deleted a log on any of my caches, but if you want justification for doing so on your cache, you need to go no further than the guidelines:

 

Cache Maintenance

The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings. The responsibility of your listing includes 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.

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment

 

My goodness! I think you have completely misunderstood my response! It came on the heels of someone suggesting that you shouldn't have a say in this thread because you currently don't have a caches showing as hidden. I think that is outrageous! I was defending the value of your opinion on here! How in the world did you get that I was looking down my nose at you? Not at all! I was doing just the opposite! Good luck with your new caches! :laughing:

 

Desert_Trailblazers!

 

Oh my! :laughing:

 

i read, and RE-READ your reply before posting my response the other day, and somehow i missed your intended message. i am SO sorry! For some reason, i misread your reply and understood that you too thought i should not have replied since it appeared i do not have any hides.

 

A thousand apologies for misunderstanding you! After the rude reply in which someone edited my reply, i guess i was a bit muddled. :laughing:

 

Again, sorry and thanks for the email you sent! :laughing:

Link to comment

I have never deleted a log on any of my caches, but if you want justification for doing so on your cache, you need to go no further than the guidelines:

 

Cache Maintenance

The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings. The responsibility of your listing includes 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.

 

VERY succinctly put.

Link to comment

Alright, I didn't read through all the responses to this question before posting, but that's okay. The question I see posed is about people not actually finding the cache but logging online, if I have that confused then I apologize for the misinturrpretation.

 

While the signing of a log proves the find, a lack of signature doesn't prove a non-find. You, or anyone else for that matter, can't prove that someone didn't find your cache. You can suspect it, but in the end, it is about signing VS. not signing. Like those before me, I say if you feel like deleting the log because you think the person in question didn't find the cache, go for it.

 

I support your decision :laughing:

 

This has probably been covered somewhere in the 50 or so responses I didn't bother to read. :laughing:

Link to comment

To answer the question: Yes, logging a cache online without finding it is clearly cheating.

You probably should have just asked the question point blank without all of the background if thats the only answer you wanted.

 

Side discussion:

Would it bother me if I were in your shoes? Maybe. When I hide a cache I hope the first find isn't phony.

Would I delete the log? Yes.

Would I police the logs for a cahe's life? probably not.

 

I've logged a DNF do to forgeting my pen and I am far from a puritan. The LOG is almost the "prize" for the cache hider from my viewpoint.

Link to comment

I have never deleted a log on any of my caches, but if you want justification for doing so on your cache, you need to go no further than the guidelines:

 

Cache Maintenance

The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings. The responsibility of your listing includes 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.

 

I do check my physical vs. online logs (easy as I only have 2 hides). I do so because:

1) The guidelines, as quoted above. It is part of my job as CO.

2) False logs can cause confusion and impact others; e.g. someone saying they found a cache which is actually missing.

 

Not because of any concerns about cheating or an individuals find count.

 

So far, everyone has signed the logs on my caches. If I find a missing signature, I will first contact the finder and ask. If they reply with a valid reason (e.g. did not have a pen), I would let it stand. Otherwise I will delete it. I'm not a "puritan" but I think COs need to help protect the integrity of the game. Sure, the odd bad log doesn't do much harm. But consider if false logs became the norm, that would impact the quality of the game for all (e.g. the missing cache being reported as found).

Link to comment

While we don't routinely reconcile logbooks, we have in the past. Most of what we find are cachers who sign the logbook and never log online. It's rare that I find a discrepancy during a reconciling. I haven't done one in years.

 

However, if we get an odd log we'll check when we can. It's especially troubling when a very experienced cacher routinely will use the "found it" log-type and the text of the log indicated they didn't find the log.

 

When we confirm a bogus log it's deleted. Period.

 

Now, to the heart of you question as I read it: should a reviewer, or any representative of the hobby, not hold firm to the principles of the hobby? Absolutely they should! "Probably not," is not an answer that should have been given. "Yes, they should unless there are extenuating circumstances which you will allow," is the proper answer. How hard would that be?

 

This all falls at Groundspeak's feet. The idea that reviewers and TPTB have better things to do than maintain a quality experience for the hobbyists to which they cater is ludicrous. You've come to these forums and asked a question to which about half of the responses are correct, "No signature, no find except in special situations." How hard is that?

 

Groundspeak has washed their hands of many important aspects of the hobby. Quality. Adventure. The caching experience. ...and, yes, whether a core component of the hobby should be adhered to--the signing of the logs. When the folks who run and administer the hobby fail in their leadership it falls to the masses. But then, who has the authority? Those who seem to not care.

 

As an illustration of my point on quality, what are the percentage of caches placed that would should of enough quality to be in a promotional video about geocaching? Today, the figure is a lot lower than it was a few years ... and falling. Just one case in point.

 

Without getting into implementing any sort of "Wow factor" Groundspeaks could start a campaign, "Make every cache worthy of a video!" Maybe even put Signal in an "Uncle San needs You" style poster. Groundspeak could encourage quality caching without judging it.

 

So, yes, I think you have point in being a little taken aback by that reviewer's response.

Link to comment

I don't spend much time worrying about it, but if I knew someone had logged a cache of mine online, without signing the log in the cache, I would delete their find.

 

There could be extenuating circumstances, but if so they should be able to provide some proof they were there.

 

I find some of these responses to very intriguing, especially the fact that there seems to be very little middle ground.

 

If you feel that the online logger never visited your cache, you have every right to delete the log, in fact, Groundspeak encourages it thought their guidelines.

 

What bothers me is those that that would call me a cheater because I found a cache, held it in my hand but could not sign the log because of extenuating circumstances.

 

A few month ago, I was hiking a trail in the Santa Monica Mountain seeking three caches that had been added, (by the same CO), since the last time I was on that trail. I found the first two and on the way to the third, the sky let loose. By the time I reached the third cache, I was totally drenched, despite my rain jacket. I was making squishy sounds as I walked, and I was standing about 4" higher because of the mud stuck to my boots. The rain was coming down so fast that I was having trouble seeing though it. It took about five minutes to find and retrieve the cache. I held it in my hand and then made the decision not to crack it open and hold the log out in the thunderstorm. It would have destroyed a perfectly good cache. You can be sure that I logged it online, explaining the circumstances in my log. If that makes me a cheater, so be it.

Link to comment

I'm on the "liberal" side of the debate; but I can see why there is no middle ground for some. If your view is signing the log is mandatory - no signature, no smiley - then by definition that is where the line is drawn. It is clear. It doesn't matter if the reason is wasps, pouring rain, or the finder got bitten by a poisonous snake just as he was about to sign. Or if it was because they didn't have a pen... or because they didn't want to get their hands dirty by touching the box.

 

Taking the view that it is sometimes acceptable to claim a find without signing the log means the CO (and the finder) needs to decide what is acceptable; here there are various shades of middle ground. Some leave it totally up to the finder to do what they think is right. Others will want evidence or a good excuse (and how "good" the excuse needs to be will vary).

 

I don't think we will ever reach agreement. So finders and COs need to continue to do what they think is right. It only becomes a real issue if there are specific cases where they disagree (and it bothers one or both of them). I've signed the log in 700 of my 702 physical finds. I have a clear conscience that I did not "cheat" in those 2 cases; and in both cases I explained to the CO what I was doing and why. If the CO took exception to that and deleted my log, I'd accept that and move on.

 

This thread was started as a CO was seeing logging of their caches without signing the log happening a lot, and it is bothering them. To that I only see 2 choices; either ignore it, or delete those logs which are bothering you.

Link to comment

I won't compare the logbook to the online logs.

But when someone logs online as saying they didn't sign the actual log book because they did not have a pen or were too busy to do so then I delete the log.

I mean really? you remember to bring a GPS'r but not a pen? I have never went looking for a cache without a pen.

I have also never found a log book so damp or full that I could not make a mark on there.

 

It really is up to each cache owner to decide what to do within the guidelines.

 

I DNF'd a cache yesterday after an hour drive to get there and about a 45 minute hike through the mountains in the woods.

I and my wife looked for about 20 minutes in +30 heat.

We saw where it would have been and even looked around the whole area.

 

Today the cache owner emailed me saying it was indeed gone and I was looking in the right place.

She said I should go ahead and log it as a find now. I won't.

 

You either found it and signed the log book or you didn't.

Link to comment

I won't compare the logbook to the online logs.

But when someone logs online as saying they didn't sign the actual log book because they did not have a pen or were too busy to do so then I delete the log.

I mean really? you remember to bring a GPS'r but not a pen? I have never went looking for a cache without a pen.

I have also never found a log book so damp or full that I could not make a mark on there.

 

It really is up to each cache owner to decide what to do within the guidelines.

 

I DNF'd a cache yesterday after an hour drive to get there and about a 45 minute hike through the mountains in the woods.

I and my wife looked for about 20 minutes in +30 heat.

We saw where it would have been and even looked around the whole area.

 

Today the cache owner emailed me saying it was indeed gone and I was looking in the right place.

She said I should go ahead and log it as a find now. I won't.

 

You either found it and signed the log book or you didn't.

 

To be fair, there are situations where you simply can't get to the log for fear of ruining it or where the log is too wet to sign.

 

I had a situation recently where I brought not one, but TWO pens... hiked two miles from my house, and found the cache with ease--only to discover I'd lost both of my pens on the way.

 

I left some swag, explained I'd come back to sign later, but logged a find.

 

I don't see anything wrong with what I did--I certainly didn't intend for my pen to fall out of my pocket while I was walking.

 

On another occasion I found a nano cache, but wasn't able to get the log out. The log was already torn in a few places from people forcing it in and out of the container, and I was afraid I'd wind up ripping it in two if I tried to force it out, so I just logged a find online, and replaced the cache. I'd have gladly signed the log, if I could have gotten it out without damaging it. :/

Link to comment

I won't compare the logbook to the online logs.

But when someone logs online as saying they didn't sign the actual log book because they did not have a pen or were too busy to do so then I delete the log.

I mean really? you remember to bring a GPS'r but not a pen? I have never went looking for a cache without a pen.

I have also never found a log book so damp or full that I could not make a mark on there.

 

It really is up to each cache owner to decide what to do within the guidelines.

 

I DNF'd a cache yesterday after an hour drive to get there and about a 45 minute hike through the mountains in the woods.

I and my wife looked for about 20 minutes in +30 heat.

We saw where it would have been and even looked around the whole area.

 

Today the cache owner emailed me saying it was indeed gone and I was looking in the right place.

She said I should go ahead and log it as a find now. I won't.

 

You either found it and signed the log book or you didn't.

 

To be fair, there are situations where you simply can't get to the log for fear of ruining it or where the log is too wet to sign.

 

I had a situation recently where I brought not one, but TWO pens... hiked two miles from my house, and found the cache with ease--only to discover I'd lost both of my pens on the way.

 

I left some swag, explained I'd come back to sign later, but logged a find.

 

I don't see anything wrong with what I did--I certainly didn't intend for my pen to fall out of my pocket while I was walking.

 

On another occasion I found a nano cache, but wasn't able to get the log out. The log was already torn in a few places from people forcing it in and out of the container, and I was afraid I'd wind up ripping it in two if I tried to force it out, so I just logged a find online, and replaced the cache. I'd have gladly signed the log, if I could have gotten it out without damaging it. :/

 

I agree with a lot of what most people in this thread have posted and I agree with you.

 

"It really is up to each cache owner to decide what to do within the guidelines"

 

I would not delete your log if you explained it as such.

 

BTW, STOP LOSING PENS!!! :anibad:

Link to comment

I have never went looking for a cache without a pen.

 

I did once (and I'm sure I'll do it again, though I try not to). Actually I think I had a pen in my pocket at the start, but it may have fallen out on the hike. It is one of my 2 personal times I claimed a find without signing (the other being a wasp attack). The lack of pen one involved a hike of several hours, and I took a photo of the log as "proof".

 

I could have put some mud or blood on the log and said that is my signature, but as I had a camera I thought taking a photo was a reasonable alternative and didn't mess up the log. I truly feel no guilt about that, and this CO didn't have a problem with it either. But I know know that some COs will delete my log if I do that again. (Edit - but not brslk!). That's OK. Some might accept the mud or blood... others might only accept a legible signature.

Edited by redsox_mark
Link to comment

I have read your entire original post and I think it is not OK for people to log online without a physical signature. There is no way for you to know this isn't an armchair cacher who never found the cache. Delete his log.

 

This should have ended the thread.

 

I don't agree with this. There are other ways to provide evidence of a find; e.g taking a photo of the log, or describing the cache in detail (to the CO directly, not posting a spoiler). Conversely, if I want to do armchair caching, I could have a friend of mine in another country sign my name whenever he makes a find, and I could do the same for him. By all means, if there is no signature and no explanation and you believe a log to be bogus, delete it. But I don't accept that a signature is conclusive proof, nor that it is impossible to know a cache is (likely) to be genuine without a signature.

Edited by redsox_mark
Link to comment

<snip>I could have put some mud or blood on the log and said that is my signature, but as I had a camera I thought taking a photo was a reasonable alternative and didn't mess up the log.<snip>

It can be done if you really want to take the time and effort - example: mud.

58760df4-1163-45cb-9b5d-2cf3c9b2f906.jpg

Link to comment

I don't spend much time worrying about it, but if I knew someone had logged a cache of mine online, without signing the log in the cache, I would delete their find.

 

There could be extenuating circumstances, but if so they should be able to provide some proof they were there.

 

I find some of these responses to very intriguing, especially the fact that there seems to be very little middle ground.

 

If you feel that the online logger never visited your cache, you have every right to delete the log, in fact, Groundspeak encourages it thought their guidelines.

 

What bothers me is those that that would call me a cheater because I found a cache, held it in my hand but could not sign the log because of extenuating circumstances.

 

A few month ago, I was hiking a trail in the Santa Monica Mountain seeking three caches that had been added, (by the same CO), since the last time I was on that trail. I found the first two and on the way to the third, the sky let loose. By the time I reached the third cache, I was totally drenched, despite my rain jacket. I was making squishy sounds as I walked, and I was standing about 4" higher because of the mud stuck to my boots. The rain was coming down so fast that I was having trouble seeing though it. It took about five minutes to find and retrieve the cache. I held it in my hand and then made the decision not to crack it open and hold the log out in the thunderstorm. It would have destroyed a perfectly good cache. You can be sure that I logged it online, explaining the circumstances in my log. If that makes me a cheater, so be it.

 

Where you went off track there is letting people get to you.

And then posting in here about it.

Edited by Team Cotati
Link to comment

Lest I be accused of being directive...

 

Here's what I do

 

find the hide

sign the log

log online with a log unique to the hide.

 

In the caches I've found there were 2 or 3 where i could not sign the log. IMHO the excuse that I didn't have a pen is simply wrong. Would you go out to cache without a GPS? without pants? Why would you go out without a pen?

 

The 3 instances i couldn't sign were as follows:

 

First, a PVC container that i could not unscrew. Logged a find, PMd the CO with a detailed description of what and where i found with a REQUEST that if i had not found it, please delete my log. No findey, no smiley.

Result, a note from the CO that I had found a red herring and that s/he would go out with the proper tools and make the fish openable. Also requested that I delete my own log, as s/he considered it rude to delete someone else's logs. I changed it to a DNF and adjusted the description accordingly.

 

Second, very similar. A PVC container i did not feel comfortable opening without breaking. Logged online and sent a similar note th the CO. No reply, the smiley stands.

 

Third, a pill bottle in a rotted knot in a tree. It was jammed in so far and so tight I could not get it out without damage. Logged a find and sent a PM to the Co with similar request. No reply, the smiley stands.

Link to comment

<snip>I could have put some mud or blood on the log and said that is my signature, but as I had a camera I thought taking a photo was a reasonable alternative and didn't mess up the log.<snip>

It can be done if you really want to take the time and effort - example: mud.

 

That's impressive - better than my handwriting with a pen!

Link to comment
Why would you go out without a pen?

Because I forgot.

Because it fell out of my pocket in the vehicle.

Because it fell out of my pocket on the way to the cache.

Because it ran out of ink.

 

There are lots of reasons. And if Groundspeak would stop keeping score for everyone, it would become a non-issue.

 

*** BTW, I have found myself without a pen for all 4 of those reasons, even though I keep several in the vehicle just for caching.

Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

 

Please don't confuse the forums with real-life caching. Go out there and have fun.

Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

In 10 more days we will celebrate the Thanksgiving Holiday and remember the Puritans who came to the New World to practice their faith and take things over-the-top serious. Fortunately, we can be thankful that on that day we can watch football or even go geocaching. We just aren't as over-the-top serious as the puritans. But if you do go geocaching on Thanksgiving, for one day at least remember the Puritan forefathers and sign the log.

:D

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

In 10 more days we will celebrate the Thanksgiving Holiday and remember the Puritans who came to the New World to practice their faith and take things over-the-top serious. Fortunately, we can be thankful that on that day we can watch football or even go geocaching. We just aren't as over-the-top serious as the puritans. But if you do go geocaching on Thanksgiving, for one day at least remember the Puritan forefathers and sign the log.

:D

 

You turkey!! :P

Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

 

and don't mistake that all geocaching forums are created equal!!

 

yes some are even more angsty than this one (believe it or not), but some are less.

Try "off-topic" if you're wild enough. But even there, avoid the political threads.

Link to comment
Why would you go out without a pen?

Because I forgot.

Because it fell out of my pocket in the vehicle.

Because it fell out of my pocket on the way to the cache.

Because it ran out of ink.

 

There are lots of reasons. And if Groundspeak would stop keeping score for everyone, it would become a non-issue.

 

*** BTW, I have found myself without a pen for all 4 of those reasons, even though I keep several in the vehicle just for caching.

 

I've had my pen fall out of my pocket many times. I also bought a bad batch and they would write a few times then blowup.

Link to comment

I'll add the following, that we got as a log in one of our hides today.....

 

My GPSr really took me on a goose chase! Then my pen was out of ink. Can send a description of the cache and log if CO requests, as proof of the find.

 

Mrs. DazD sent back a note that it's all good. If you're willing to prove you were there, we're good with it. Back in GA, we hid 4.5 terrain cache. An older gentleman in our caching group there approached us, and said that he'd been all around GZ, and described, in detail, where our container was, but that he wasn't able to reach it because he was alone and walks with a cane, etc. We let him log the find, even knowing full well he never touched the container. The hide is hard to get to intentionally, but we don't want to ruin the fun for people who might not be able to find help either. He offered to return when a group was going out and sign the log, and we said it was cool.

 

It's a game. Have fun, and don't sweat the small stuff. As has been said, as the CO, you have the power to control logs on your cache. And, if someone gets upset that you deleted their fabricated log, that's their problem.

 

Later!

Link to comment
Why would you go out without a pen?

Because I forgot.

Because it fell out of my pocket in the vehicle.

Because it fell out of my pocket on the way to the cache.

Because it ran out of ink.

 

There are lots of reasons. And if Groundspeak would stop keeping score for everyone, it would become a non-issue.

 

*** BTW, I have found myself without a pen for all 4 of those reasons, even though I keep several in the vehicle just for caching.

 

I've had my pen fall out of my pocket many times. I also bought a bad batch and they would write a few times then blowup.

 

exploding%20pen.jpg

 

 

 

(Knowschad thanks you for allowing his poster of the hour to enter this post for him, he will resume his normal posting activities after the rest of us catch up to his highly outrageous posting totals)

Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

 

You could always choose the option of not logging finds online either. Then it doesn't really matter if you sign a log or not. It's a very liberating feeling.

Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

 

You could always choose the option of not logging finds online either. Then it doesn't really matter if you sign a log or not. It's a very liberating feeling.

 

If you're going to like geocachng or not should have nothing to do with this forum.

Link to comment

There have been 2 caches I found but could not for technincal reasons sign. In each instance I claimed a find and sent a PM to the CO alerting them to the issue with their cache. My PMs described the (spoiler) container and the maintenance that would be required to return it to findable condition. I also asked them to verify I had found the cache, and assist me by deleting my "found it" log in the event I had found a red herring. In one instance the container was wedged in a tree too tightly for me to remove without damage, in another the container was a PVC pipe and I could not remove the screw cap without a tool that I didn't have. I received no reply and to my knowledge my found it logs still stand. Recently, I found a cache that was a match safe suspended in a fence post on a wire. I picked up the wire and promptly dropped it down the pipe, making it irretrievable. In that instance I did NOT claim a find, and instead logged a needs maintenance, fessing up to my mistake. One could reasonably argue that this latter instance is the same as the first two and I could have claimed the find. I disagree and will not log that cache. The point is, with few exceptions I will not claim a find unless I sign the log. As everyone else has said, the only valid reason for a CO to delete a find is if the log sheet is not signed. Deletion should be accompanied by a simple note stating the reason for the deletion. Having said that, we must realize that this sport is self regulating. There are few rules, only guidelines. In the end I answer to myself first and foremost. Armchair cachers have existed since the beginning. They will always exist. I do not support the practice, but I also understand that those who commit that practice are cheating themselves out of an outdoor experience. It doesn't really

affect how I play then game.

Link to comment

I occasionally cache with a friend who more or less has a "I don't sign logs" policy. For him, it's a wholesome activity that shouldn't be policed. If questioned, he is prepared to describe the container and the hiding place, but it doesn't mean his log should be deleted. He simply uses it as a list to keep track of where he's been and how many he's found.

 

While I don't play this way, I don't see anything wrong with it. It doesn't hurt anyone and he's having fun, which is really the important thing, right?

Link to comment

Wow. I just joined this site, and was going to start going out and finding but after reading how off the wall some of these over-the-top serious replies were I don't think I'm that interested anymore. If I want to find a cache and not sign the log then that's my business...

 

You could always choose the option of not logging finds online either. Then it doesn't really matter if you sign a log or not. It's a very liberating feeling.

 

If you're going to like geocachng or not should have nothing to do with this forum.

 

Well, I'd say it was a troll (first post ever, joined the day before the post) but it would be pretty hard to fake the premium member designation, which means he plonked down at least 10 bucks for a 3 month membership. Probably had no intention of ever signing any logs, searched for it in the forums, and didn't like what he saw. Perhaps it's a privacy thing for him. In which case I'd say don't log these things online, period.

 

Tough call, I mean the guy has no Geocaching experience, and was probably put off by it on the surface. But those of us who have been doing it for years know that opening these things up and signing the log is pretty much a no-brainer, and people have been known to cheat.

 

All just speculation of course, until we hear from him again. :blink:

Link to comment

We recently had a situation come up that we had never heard of, let alone thought might be acceptable. We had placed a cache, and it had been logged on the site as having been found once. When the second person found the cache, he mentioned that there was no signature on the log sheet in the cache.

 

For discussion purposes of this thread, let's forget the FTF issue. I know that Groundspeak does not get involved in that, and doesn't want to discuss it. Non-issue.

 

We, as relative newcomers to geocaching, have taken it for granted that signing the log sheet is part of the find. Heck, it's even in the little video they made to describe the game! However, I have had several back and forths with a reviewer who, if I am reading his responses correctly, make this out to be just a part of the game, and that I should just chill.

 

To back track a little, I should mention that my first email from the reviewer mentioned that this cacher had logged three other finds in the same area as our cache that same day (as if this somehow validated that he had actually been there.) Just out of curiosity, and because we are very close to the other two caches that were found by this cacher that day, we went to those caches and looked at their logs, and they were not signed by this cacher either. (And, yes, I wrote a very polite note to the cacher explaining that we didn't see his signature in the log, and could he please let us know, for the purposes of other cachers who were a little peeved by this, to let us know what happened. We have never received a response.)

 

When I brought this point up to the reviewer, his response was, "Is it OK to log online if you did not visit a cache? Probably not. Is it

something to fret over? No."

 

Probably not???! How about NOT! I just don't get this, and if I'm out in left field, I welcome a different viewpoint, but how in the world is it okay to sit at home and log finds on your computer without actually going out and finding them? And please... no comments about, well maybe he didn't have a pen with him, or you don't really know if that is what happened. THIS thread is about one question, and one question only. Is it okay for a cacher to claim a find without really finding it? A secondary question might be, is it okay for a cacher to go around making finds, and being too lazy to open the cache and sign the log? But that's really where the "chill" part comes in. I get that this is going to happen, we're dealing with the masses, etc., etc., and it's a waste of energy for me, personally, to "fret over."

 

But to not even find the cache?

 

Awhile ago, I asked a question about something I thought was equally unscrupulous, and the thread was bombarded with outraged responses. It was about COs who deliberately put out coordinates that are "off" to make the find more difficult. If all of you think that is unethical, how could it even be considered remotely okay for cachers to log finds without getting their butt out of their easy chair at home? I would really think that this crosses the line from just being unethical, to an outright violation of the guidelines/rules of the game.

 

Now I will sit back and see what everyone else thinks.

Link to comment

 

I do check my physical vs. online logs (easy as I only have 2 hides). I do so because:

1) <snipped>

2) False logs can cause confusion and impact others; e.g. someone saying they found a cache which is actually missing.

 

<snipped>

 

As a finder, this has caused me to waste a lot of time and effort. If the last 5 log entries are 4 DNFs followed by 1 Found, I shouldn't have to look up the latest finders posting history to try and work out if they were bulls***ting. :mad:

Link to comment

I did read your question and I agree with all others that it is NOT ok to sign the online log without visiting the cache.

 

Now....for the purpose of discussion.....

 

I have hidden 5 caches and have more in the works. When we hid our first one, I thought I would care if someone logged it online without signing the physical log. Also, it is a puzzle cache and at first wasn't ok with someone getting the solution from a friend. Now that it has been out there a while and we have more hides, I really don't care how they play the game. It only ruins the fun for themselves. I can sit here and let it bother me or I can go about my own life and only worry about the things that I can change. I can't change how people play the game or change their mentality so I don't worry about it. It just isn't worth my time to get all bothered by it.

 

The other thing is unless you can prove they didn't visit the cache, there is no way for you to know for sure if they were there or not. Just because they didn't sign the log doesn't mean they didn't physically visit it. Now, I can understand if someone forgot a pen in the car or something and weren't able to sign the log. I didn't realize this until a couple days ago but some people actually visit the cache and don't sign the log book even though there is a pen inside the container. I ran into other cachers the other day in a park and while we were signing a log book they asked us if we were geocachers. I said yes and they said they had just found the one we were signing along with a couple others at that park. Well, we were only the second people to sign the log book and I personally know the cacher who signed before me and it wasn't the person we just ran into. There was a pen in the cache so they could have signed the log but for some reason chose not to. I am not sure why and wasn't my business to ask either. I didn't realize some people just don't sign the log. I have no idea if they logged it online either as I didn't go searching the logs. I really don't care. I also know that some people sign the physical log but don't log it online. I don't know why people chose to do the things they do but sure don't waste my time worrying about it. I did think it was interesting about the cachers a couple days ago and thought I would share that experience.

 

Now.....if you get mad for me for discussing something other than the original question than......oh well.....doesn't bother me.

Edited by SmallsKC
Link to comment

I did read your question and I agree with all others that it is NOT ok to sign the online log without visiting the cache.

 

Now....for the purpose of discussion.....

 

I have hidden 5 caches and have more in the works. When we hid our first one, I thought I would care if someone logged it online without signing the physical log. Also, it is a puzzle cache and at first wasn't ok with someone getting the solution from a friend. Now that it has been out there a while and we have more hides, I really don't care how they play the game. It only ruins the fun for themselves. I can sit here and let it bother me or I can go about my own life and only worry about the things that I can change. I can't change how people play the game or change their mentality so I don't worry about it. It just isn't worth my time to get all bothered by it.

 

The other thing is unless you can prove they didn't visit the cache, there is no way for you to know for sure if they were there or not. Just because they didn't sign the log doesn't mean they didn't physically visit it. Now, I can understand if someone forgot a pen in the car or something and weren't able to sign the log. I didn't realize this until a couple days ago but some people actually visit the cache and don't sign the log book even though there is a pen inside the container. I ran into other cachers the other day in a park and while we were signing a log book they asked us if we were geocachers. I said yes and they said they had just found the one we were signing along with a couple others at that park. Well, we were only the second people to sign the log book and I personally know the cacher who signed before me and it wasn't the person we just ran into. There was a pen in the cache so they could have signed the log but for some reason chose not to. I am not sure why and wasn't my business to ask either. I didn't realize some people just don't sign the log. I have no idea if they logged it online either as I didn't go searching the logs. I really don't care. I also know that some people sign the physical log but don't log it online. I don't know why people chose to do the things they do but sure don't waste my time worrying about it. I did think it was interesting about the cachers a couple days ago and thought I would share that experience.

 

Now.....if you get mad for me for discussing something other than the original question than......oh well.....doesn't bother me.

Some cachers play by their own rules so yes they are only cheating themselves.

Link to comment

Well I don't know the particulars about the Cache Container but I keep finding nano and mini caches that I can't open. In the City there are a lot of skirt lifters and Caches that are easier for the handicapped. I have some nerve damage to my finger tips and opening these nano and mini caches can be a problem because the threads on the container are not very good and they get caught. Plus even when I get them open I can't always get the log out to sign it. So I didn't sign the log on a few.

 

Maybe this cacher has a problem writing because of a handicap. My had writing is really bad because of my nerve damage but I can type.

Also these persons if they are cheating they are mostly cheating themselves. They will stop having fun with their deception and they will go away. Problem solved.

The only time I will delete logs is if they put something in the cache that is in violation of the rules. There was a guy in San Antonio going around putting AK47 ammo in cache containers. I would possibly delete the log if I ask them to not post spoiler logs or pictures that spoil it. Even then I may just delete the pic or permanently encrypt the log. I would also delete the log if I have a cache with a quiz and they don't answer the quiz question, with in reason.

Lastly we're here to have fun and if we worry to much about someone else it isn't going to be fun. I know I catch myself doing that. I get really irritated and it stops being furn when I worry to much about the jerks in the world or that dadgum critter that keeps eating my cache container. Nuff said.

Have fun. Be safe!

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...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...