Logging "Find" and did not sign log

[aniyn]

I guess all subsequent cachers are to throw bits and scraps of paper into the cache to add to the mess.

I wonder how the puritans feel about that practice. Since after all, the guideline says that you have to sign the log, and any old scrap of paper tossed into a cache is not the official log.

[Clan Riffster]

I wonder how the puritans feel about that practice. Since after all, the guideline says that you have to sign the log, and any old scrap of paper tossed into a cache is not the official log.

Being Puritans, they would probably point out that nowhere is it even hinted that the log needs to be official. Once a scrap of paper enters a cache, bearing a signature denoting that a cacher found it, that scrap of paper is a log.

[+uxorious]

If a cache owner can delete any on line log because the finder did not sign the log in the cache, then signing the log is required for those caches.

Since it appeared that you failed to finish your thought, I figured that I would help you out and add the bolded verbiage.

 

I did finish my thought, thank you. Just because most of us allow an on line log to stand, does not change the fact that because the signature on the physical log is required, the CO can delete.

 

If a cop sees you do a rolling stop at a stop sign and decides to let it slide, does that then mean the rolling stop at that time was not illegal.

Edited July 10, 2010 by uxorious

[+Harry Dolphin]

I recently arrived at GZ and had to climb 10 ft up a tree to sign a log.

There are several cachers in our area that have the physical ability to hike a short trail but could not climb a tree.

They made the hike, they spotted the container, are you really going to deny a find because of a physical handicap? Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?

Note, that there was no warning of needing the ability to climb listed in the cache description.

 

Wow! Is that insulting to the integrity of senior citizens, and handicapped geocachers! Are we entitled to gimmees? Are we devoid of integrity? Boy. Am I insuted! Listen, whippersnapper! Just because I booked my last vacation using the senior citizen discount does not mean that I expect to have the world handed to me on a silver platter! If I cannot climb the tree, then I cannot sign the log, and will log it as a DNF! I am quite capable of determining what I am able to do, and what I am not able to do. The terrain rating is enough for me. I got fifteen feet up a tree last year, and could touch the cache. But I was unable to open it to sign the log. DNF. Pure and simple. Don't go insuting me by telling me that everyone should give me everything for free. I know my limitations. I know what I can do. I don't want or expet the freebees that ou insist that everyone should give me.

Stop being so insulting and condescending, and face reality!

Hey, Slukster. Can I have automatic finds on all your tree climbing caches?!?

Wow! You've insulted all senior citizens, and all handicapped perople!

[+tozainamboku]

I recently arrived at GZ and had to climb 10 ft up a tree to sign a log.

There are several cachers in our area that have the physical ability to hike a short trail but could not climb a tree.

They made the hike, they spotted the container, are you really going to deny a find because of a physical handicap? Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?

Note, that there was no warning of needing the ability to climb listed in the cache description.

 

Wow! Is that insulting to the integrity of senior citizens, and handicapped geocachers! Are we entitled to gimmees? Are we devoid of integrity? Boy. Am I insuted! Listen, whippersnapper! Just because I booked my last vacation using the senior citizen discount does not mean that I expect to have the world handed to me on a silver platter! If I cannot climb the tree, then I cannot sign the log, and will log it as a DNF! I am quite capable of determining what I am able to do, and what I am not able to do. The terrain rating is enough for me. I got fifteen feet up a tree last year, and could touch the cache. But I was unable to open it to sign the log. DNF. Pure and simple. Don't go insuting me by telling me that everyone should give me everything for free. I know my limitations. I know what I can do. I don't want or expet the freebees that ou insist that everyone should give me.

Stop being so insulting and condescending, and face reality!

Hey, Slukster. Can I have automatic finds on all your tree climbing caches?!?

Wow! You've insulted all senior citizens, and all handicapped perople!

I don't understand how you can be insulted because someone logged a find online that you wouldn't have logged. Nobody can force you to log a find if you didn't climb the tree, or you couldn't get the container opened, or you lost your pen. But another cacher may feel that under the circumstances, they have done enough to use the find log to report their experience. Granted, that the cache owner may consider the find log is bogus for some reason and without a signature in the log, they cacher owner could delete the log. But if the cache owner is OK with the log, it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.

[+Mosaic55]

Ni to double posts!

Edited July 10, 2010 by Mosaic55

[+Mosaic55]

Got a thorn in my side and need to vent. I'm sure this topic has been posted before, but I get no results in "search" because ya gotta use words with five letters or more. Anyway, seems to me one of the requirements of logging a find is YOU MUST SIGN THE LOG in order to claim it as a "find". I see too many logs that state "found cache, forgot pen, could not sign log." In my caching world, that is NOT a find, I did not complete requirements for a "find". If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"? If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"? If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"? If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas? To me it is so simple. If I don't find the cache, AND SIGN THE LOG, I log a DNF or a NOTE. I have not deleted anybody's log that said they could not sign, YET, but it burns me up when I read their log! Anybody else feel the same way? Or, should I just get over it.

 

Do you provide a writing utensil in your caches? A cut down golf pencil fits in a filmcan size container or even in a magnetic hide-a-key. I've even seen a pop-point glued to a toothpick in a bison tube. If you really want people to sign, make it easy for them to do so. If that's too much trouble for you, then I say "get over it".

[+Harry Dolphin]

Got a thorn in my side and need to vent. I'm sure this topic has been posted before, but I get no results in "search" because ya gotta use words with five letters or more. Anyway, seems to me one of the requirements of logging a find is YOU MUST SIGN THE LOG in order to claim it as a "find". I see too many logs that state "found cache, forgot pen, could not sign log." In my caching world, that is NOT a find, I did not complete requirements for a "find". If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"? If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"? If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"? If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas? To me it is so simple. If I don't find the cache, AND SIGN THE LOG, I log a DNF or a NOTE. I have not deleted anybody's log that said they could not sign, YET, but it burns me up when I read their log! Anybody else feel the same way? Or, should I just get over it.

 

Do you provide a writing utensil in your caches? A cut down golf pencil fits in a filmcan size container or even in a magnetic hide-a-key. I've even seen a pop-point glued to a toothpick in a bison tube. If you really want people to sign, make it easy for them to do so. If that's too much trouble for you, then I say "get over it".

Entitlement! Ain't it great? Should we help them sign it too?

[Clan Riffster]

I don't understand how you can be insulted...

As an official old fat crippled guy, I was pretty insulted by this line:

"Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?"

Having physical limitations does not grant me entitlements.

[+thedeadpirate]

I recently arrived at GZ and had to climb 10 ft up a tree to sign a log.

There are several cachers in our area that have the physical ability to hike a short trail but could not climb a tree.

They made the hike, they spotted the container, are you really going to deny a find because of a physical handicap? Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?

Note, that there was no warning of needing the ability to climb listed in the cache description.

 

Wow! Is that insulting to the integrity of senior citizens, and handicapped geocachers! Are we entitled to gimmees? Are we devoid of integrity? Boy. Am I insuted! Listen, whippersnapper! Just because I booked my last vacation using the senior citizen discount does not mean that I expect to have the world handed to me on a silver platter! If I cannot climb the tree, then I cannot sign the log, and will log it as a DNF! I am quite capable of determining what I am able to do, and what I am not able to do. The terrain rating is enough for me. I got fifteen feet up a tree last year, and could touch the cache. But I was unable to open it to sign the log. DNF. Pure and simple. Don't go insuting me by telling me that everyone should give me everything for free. I know my limitations. I know what I can do. I don't want or expet the freebees that ou insist that everyone should give me.

Stop being so insulting and condescending, and face reality!

Hey, Slukster. Can I have automatic finds on all your tree climbing caches?!?

Wow! You've insulted all senior citizens, and all handicapped perople!

I don't understand how you can be insulted because someone logged a find online that you wouldn't have logged. Nobody can force you to log a find if you didn't climb the tree, or you couldn't get the container opened, or you lost your pen. But another cacher may feel that under the circumstances, they have done enough to use the find log to report their experience. Granted, that the cache owner may consider the find log is bogus for some reason and without a signature in the log, they cacher owner could delete the log. But if the cache owner is OK with the log, it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.

 

You must be neither a senior citizen nor handicapped.

 

The insinuation that because someone is older or handicapped that they should be treated differently than everyone else is a bit insulting.

 

Some of us are used to it and realize that people do not really consider what that line of thinking really means.

 

You deny the find based on the lack of the signature in the physical logbook. You give an exception because someone forgot their pen, etc. You don't create a new set of rules just because someone is handicapped or older.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I recently arrived at GZ and had to climb 10 ft up a tree to sign a log.

There are several cachers in our area that have the physical ability to hike a short trail but could not climb a tree.

They made the hike, they spotted the container, are you really going to deny a find because of a physical handicap? Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?

Note, that there was no warning of needing the ability to climb listed in the cache description.

 

Wow! Is that insulting to the integrity of senior citizens, and handicapped geocachers! Are we entitled to gimmees? Are we devoid of integrity? Boy. Am I insuted! Listen, whippersnapper! Just because I booked my last vacation using the senior citizen discount does not mean that I expect to have the world handed to me on a silver platter! If I cannot climb the tree, then I cannot sign the log, and will log it as a DNF! I am quite capable of determining what I am able to do, and what I am not able to do. The terrain rating is enough for me. I got fifteen feet up a tree last year, and could touch the cache. But I was unable to open it to sign the log. DNF. Pure and simple. Don't go insuting me by telling me that everyone should give me everything for free. I know my limitations. I know what I can do. I don't want or expet the freebees that ou insist that everyone should give me.

Stop being so insulting and condescending, and face reality!

Hey, Slukster. Can I have automatic finds on all your tree climbing caches?!?

Wow! You've insulted all senior citizens, and all handicapped perople!

I don't understand how you can be insulted because someone logged a find online that you wouldn't have logged. Nobody can force you to log a find if you didn't climb the tree, or you couldn't get the container opened, or you lost your pen. But another cacher may feel that under the circumstances, they have done enough to use the find log to report their experience. Granted, that the cache owner may consider the find log is bogus for some reason and without a signature in the log, they cacher owner could delete the log. But if the cache owner is OK with the log, it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.

 

True. You are one who thinks, through some convoluted logic, that anyone can log any cache, whether they've even driven nearby, or not. Still haven't figured out what game you're playing.

The insult was to senior citizens/handicapped geocachers.

Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?

If a cache owner agrees to it, then it's between the cache owner, and the person who did not sign the log. But to expect every cache owner to allow this 'because the logger is elderly' is insulting to senior citizens. This is the premise that is insulting. But you seem to have problems understanding such things.

Oh. well. Have fun. May I log all of your caches, because I qualify for a senior citizen's discount? Even though I've never been near any of them? Nah. You see, I have standards! I know my limitations. I do what I can. I know how this game is supposed to be played! If I can't sign the log, I do not claim a find. I don't ask for freebees!

Well? Can I log all of your caches because...

[+BulldogBlitz]

this thread has devolved into proof of why geocaching should have age limits on it. no one under 27 or over 48. problem solved.

 

[+slukster]

Hey, Slukster. Can I have automatic finds on all your tree climbing caches?!?

Heck no!!! I did delete a log from someone who stated that they saw the cache from the ground but did not want to make the climb. My tree climbing caches are called "Climb tree, find cache" and are rated at 3 or above for terrain so if you show up and can't make the climb, you had fair warning long before you left your house. Even if you are a pocket query person who doesn't look at the cache page before you show up at a cache, the cache name clearly tells you what is expected of you. Is the tree climb an ALR? No way. If I was able to see one of the Psycho Urban Cache series with my binoculars from a quarter of a mile away, should I be able log it?

 

I have to admit that the only caches that I am a hard a** about signing the log and check the logs to confirm sigs are those that require a difficult climb to get to (climb tree, climb rocks, etc.). People say I am a puritan for expecting someone to sign the log on these caches. I guess I am a walking contradiction since

I also feel that if you found the cache, was able to retrieve it, open it and then found the log unsignable, then you can claim the find on my caches. If you climbed the 34ft to find my cache and found the log soaked, I certainly would allow the find although someone will say how do you know they made the climb. I don't and may be naive to put my trust out there. But don't tell me in your log that you got there and didn't have the proper footwear but could see the cache so that is good enough for a find. Even if you found the cache frozen in ice and took a pic of it I would accept it. These circumstances are out of the finders control (frozen container, wet log, etc.). But being afraid of heights, unable to climb trees or simply seeing the cache from a distance or thinking you are in the correct spot and the cache was indeed missing does not justify a find. I had a CO offer to allow my find after seaching in the correct spot (as verified by the CO) but the container was indeed missing so I waited until he replaced it and then returned to log it.

Edited July 10, 2010 by slukster

[+tozainamboku]

<snip>

 

True. You are one who thinks, through some convoluted logic, that anyone can log any cache, whether they've even driven nearby, or not. Still haven't figured out what game you're playing.

The insult was to senior citizens/handicapped geocachers.

Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?

If a cache owner agrees to it, then it's between the cache owner, and the person who did not sign the log. But to expect every cache owner to allow this 'because the logger is elderly' is insulting to senior citizens. This is the premise that is insulting. But you seem to have problems understanding such things.

Oh. well. Have fun. May I log all of your caches, because I qualify for a senior citizen's discount? Even though I've never been near any of them? Nah. You see, I have standards! I know my limitations. I do what I can. I know how this game is supposed to be played! If I can't sign the log, I do not claim a find. I don't ask for freebees!

Well? Can I log all of your caches because...

My "convoluted" logic is not that is always OK to log a find. Only that cache owner can decide when a find log is bogus and that it doesn't have to be determined by a signature in the log. I argue that cache owners that insist on calling every find log that lacks a signature "bogus" are basing it on a rule that doesn't actually exist. Clearly, sitting at home an lying about finding a cache is bogus and these logs should be deleted.

 

I do apologize that I didn't pay enough attention to Snow_Friends post. I have always agreed that not every geocache is placed for every geocacher. My caches are all hiking caches - some quite long hikes - so there are many geocachers that don't do them. However, 80 year old garagedude and shirconn managed to get FTF on one of my caches - so you never know. If you take her statement out of context it sounds like a call for special rules for senior citizens and handicapped cachers. I suppose that some seniors could be offended by special rules (I assume these seniors also don't accept the senior discount when they eat out. ) I believe that, minus the possibly offensive statement, Snow_Friends was giving an example of someone doing a hike to find the cache in the tree and since there was no indication that this was a tree cache in the description and the terrain seem consistent with the hike, this person decided to log the cache as found since they were not able or not prepared to climb the tree. I personally wouldn't log a find in this situation but if the cache owner agrees, then I have no problem with someone else who does.

 

To Snow_Friends: Although I believe that not every cache is meant for every geocacher, this example doesn't even come close to excluding senior citizens and handicapped cachers. We had a recent thread where a tree cache owner wanted to require that everyone climb the tree. There was discussion as to whether this was allowed or if it would be considered an ALR under the guidelines. If we have the case where a senior citizen, or a handicapped cacher, goes with a younger physically fit cacher who climbs the tree and brings the cache down for both to sign, should the find be allowed? After all the senior citizen or handicapped geocacher could claim that he brought a TOTT (the younger geocacher) to retrieve the cache. If you have a cache owner that goes by the once you signed the log you can log a find online guideline, I would suspect the find would stand. So being a puritan cache owner is not in this case saying to a senior citizen or handicapped cacher that they are not welcome to log a find on the cache.

[+Douce Us 5]

Sorry, but I think it's time to lighten up a bit. Like someone else said...."it's only a game". Not worth getting all worked up about.

[+Logscaler and Red]

Yea, I read this whole thing.

 

Got kinda monotonous after a while.

 

It all comes down to personal ethics.

 

If your comfortable claiming a find that you did not physically sign the log on without a valid reason, so be it.

 

If the log is wet, do your level best to sign it one way or the next. I try and carry extra paper, bags or even a permanent marker. Then you need to post a NM log or archive log if the owner is no longer active or a real pinhead and will not maintain their caches.

 

One point I have to make here and I know I will catch flak over it but so be it.

 

We have solved the problem of getting micro - nano cache logs out of and back into the container.

 

Don't hunt them. Simple and easy to just ignore them either with PQ's or GSAK.

 

As for the other type of caches, when we started caching, signing the log was a given for the found it online log. No question asked about it, it was a given

 

Let's hear the purist - elitist - slams and move along to something worthwhile.

 

Got it out of your system yet? Good.

 

Now as for several of the people in this thread who said it was alright to log a find if you even see the container. Wrong on several levels but if your ethics are such, so be it.

 

I have seen several caches that I could not get at and sign the log. DNF. Remember, you don't loose points for DNF's. I have a couple out that I will make you earn a found it and I do check the log. Yea, I do delete logs without concern for your feelings. Grow up and realize the world does not revolve around you, sorry.

 

There are a lot of puzzle caches out there where you will find the cache but not be able to get the cache or log book out without some sort of special equipment, some sort of special knowledge or some special skill, will you log a found it even if you do not solve the puzzle as the cache owner intended the cache to be completed? I hope not but then personal ethics come into play again don't they.

 

No scribble stick? You did intend to find the cache did you not? You understand that not all caches will have a scribble stick in them or that not all of the pens will work or that not all the pencils will be sharp and YOU did not bring one with you? Why is that the CO's fault and why should they give you special dispensation because you screwed up?

 

My final point. If you do not sign the (a) logsheet - logbook or make the effort to do either even if it means placing your own piece of paper into the cache with your handle on it , you did not complete the challenge set forth for you.

 

Simple isn't it? Find it, sign it, claim it.

[+redsox_mark]

My final point. If you do not sign the (a) logsheet - logbook or make the effort to do either even if it means placing your own piece of paper into the cache with your handle on it , you did not complete the challenge set forth for you.

 

Simple isn't it? Find it, sign it, claim it.

 

Yes it is simple, and I have no issue with your interpretation (though mine is different, e.g. I would accept a photo of the log). But others take even a "stricter" view, and have posted that you need to sign THE log, adding additional paper is not valid. So what may seem simple and obvious to you, others may not agree with. That is why the thread is so long.

[+naj2000us]

IMO, who cares? It's a game you can't really cheat at... cause if you cheat.. ya only cheat yourself. You wanna say you found my cache and you didn't.... go ahead. I don't care. *shrugs*

[+Logscaler and Red]

My final point. If you do not sign the (a) logsheet - logbook or make the effort to do either even if it means placing your own piece of paper into the cache with your handle on it , you did not complete the challenge set forth for you.

 

Simple isn't it? Find it, sign it, claim it.

 

Yes it is simple, and I have no issue with your interpretation (though mine is different, e.g. I would accept a photo of the log). But others take even a "stricter" view, and have posted that you need to sign THE log, adding additional paper is not valid. So what may seem simple and obvious to you, others may not agree with. That is why the thread is so long.

 

Each cache owner has their own level of acceptance for what they will constitute as signing the log.

 

I have no problem with your accepting a photo, I have no problem with owners wanting you to sign only "THE" log as long as the owners do maintenance in a timely manner so cachers can sign as required.

 

What I have a problem with is the cache finders not making the effort to follow the "Spirit" and original "intent" of the game, and yes it is only a game. I have to wonder about people who take short cuts at a hobby as that makes me think they take bigger short cuts at work. Seems to me it is just being sloppy and lazy. If your not going to complete the effort, why make it in the first place?

 

But say "It's just a game" to someone who is an avid Major Sport's fan when their team losses when another team uses "irregular" methods to win. (Patriots come to mind.)

[+Team Luvbassn]

Yes, I feel the same way. And yes, you should just get over it. I wouldn't delete a log because of it. It's only a game.

 

 

I have been a lurker for some time now and finally see someone with common sense. This is a game, treat it that way. If not signing the log is ok for you then log it as a find, I don't care and it does not effect my game one bit.. No one is going to punish you for it. I personally have some ethics left, but it is my ethics not anyone else s. Be honest to yourself and the game will be a lifetime hobby.

[+sbell111]

I guess all subsequent cachers are to throw bits and scraps of paper into the cache to add to the mess.

I wonder how the puritans feel about that practice. Since after all, the guideline says that you have to sign the log, and any old scrap of paper tossed into a cache is not the official log.

This post reminded me of the 'sticker' threads. There were a few puritans who were against stickers and claimed that if the sticker were to become disattached to the log, then the find would be invalid. It seems to me that the formerly attached sticker would be exactly the same as a signed scrap of paper swimming around in the cache.

[+sbell111]

If a cache owner can delete any on line log because the finder did not sign the log in the cache, then signing the log is required for those caches.

Since it appeared that you failed to finish your thought, I figured that I would help you out and add the bolded verbiage.

I did finish my thought, thank you. Just because most of us allow an on line log to stand, does not change the fact that because the signature on the physical log is required, the CO can delete.

 

If a cop sees you do a rolling stop at a stop sign and decides to let it slide, does that then mean the rolling stop at that time was not illegal.

Here’s the problem with your analogy: Cops don’t make laws. A cache owner, however, does get to decide what constitutes a find on his cache if the log was not signed.

 

A better analogy would be for a king to decide that a rolling stop is legal in his kingdom. It matters not if rolling stops are verboten in all the other nearby kingdoms. If the king declares that they are legal in his kingdom, they are legal.

 

Similary, it matters not if all other local cache owners and forum residents think, if a cache owner decides that a good description/photo of the hide is sufficient to prove that a cache was found, then it is a ‘legal’ find.

[+sbell111]

I don't understand how you can be insulted...

As an official old fat crippled guy, I was pretty insulted by this line:

"Or would you say that if you are elderly or handicapped you are not allowed to geocache?"

Having physical limitations does not grant me entitlements.

It does, actually. You can choose to partake in those entitlements, or not.

 

You can utilize an AARP discount, or not. Your decision has no effect on whether others should take the discount.

 

If you have a handicapped plackard, you can park in a handicapped spot, or not. Your refusal to park in the spot does not have any bearing on whether the next driver chooses to park there.

 

If a cache owner chooses to allow finds on their cache to those people who's physical situation does not allow them to retrieve the cache to sign the log, then that is his decision. You still have the option of NOT logging a find on that cache.

[+sbell111]

Each cache owner has their own level of acceptance for what they will constitute as signing the log.

 

I have no problem with your accepting a photo, I have no problem with owners wanting you to sign only "THE" log as long as the owners do maintenance in a timely manner so cachers can sign as required.

 

What I have a problem with is the cache finders not making the effort to follow the "Spirit" and original "intent" of the game, and yes it is only a game. I have to wonder about people who take short cuts at a hobby as that makes me think they take bigger short cuts at work. Seems to me it is just being sloppy and lazy. If your not going to complete the effort, why make it in the first place?

I can’t help but wonder what you think the ‘spirit and intent’ of the game is.

But say "It's just a game" to someone who is an avid Major Sport's fan when their team losses when another team uses "irregular" methods to win. (Patriots come to mind.)

Comparing geocaching to professional sports does not make for a workable analogy.

[+tozainamboku]

If a cache owner can delete any on line log because the finder did not sign the log in the cache, then signing the log is required for those caches.

Since it appeared that you failed to finish your thought, I figured that I would help you out and add the bolded verbiage.

I did finish my thought, thank you. Just because most of us allow an on line log to stand, does not change the fact that because the signature on the physical log is required, the CO can delete.

 

If a cop sees you do a rolling stop at a stop sign and decides to let it slide, does that then mean the rolling stop at that time was not illegal.

Here’s the problem with your analogy: Cops don’t make laws. A cache owner, however, does get to decide what constitutes a find on his cache if the log was not signed.

 

A better analogy would be for a king to decide that a rolling stop is legal in his kingdom. It matters not if rolling stops are verboten in all the other nearby kingdoms. If the king declares that they are legal in his kingdom, they are legal.

 

Similary, it matters not if all other local cache owners and forum residents think, if a cache owner decides that a good description/photo of the hide is sufficient to prove that a cache was found, then it is a ‘legal’ find.

Actualy the case here is that there is no law (guideline) that you must come to a full stop at the stop sign (sign the log before you log a find online), the law (guideline) is that the cops (cache owners) must ticket unsafe drivers (delete bogus logs). What happens is that some cops (cache owners) find it simpler to ticket people for rolling through stop signs (delete find logs because the physical log was unsigned), then to have to determine if rolling through the stop sign was actually unsafe (the log was really bogus).

 

I can be fairly certain that puritans will say that "rolling through a stop is is by definition unsafe". I don't see that definition anywhere, but many of us take for granted that if we have laws like stopping at stop signs there must be a good reason, so we assume that anything other than stopping completely is unsafe. My guess is that this carries over to geocaching. The guidelines say a cache must have a physical log to sign, and various instructions tell finders to sign the log. Therefore they assume that not signing the log is an indication that the cache was not found and the log should be deleted as bogus. I see this a faulty logic.

 

But say "It's just a game" to someone who is an avid Major Sport's fan when their team losses when another team uses "irregular" methods to win. (Patriots come to mind.)

Comparing geocaching to professional sports does not make for a workable analogy.

It's actually not bad. The example was given of a bad call by an official changing the outcome of the games. The puritans may believe that a cache owner who allows a find log to stand where the finder did not sign the log is a "bad call", but it doesn't change the fact that someones can log the find without signing the log. Bad calls can go both ways. And some of us believe that a cache owner who deletes a find because someone forgot their pen or because the log is too wet to write on, is making the wrong call. The issue that is commonly brought up is that if you allow finds for forgetting a pen or finding a wet log, where do you draw the line. Puritans like having a firm line to determine a find. The signature in the log provides what seems like a firm line (though someone could sign the log for a friend who was never at the cache, so I'm not sure that a signature is really any better than taking someone's word). Non-puritans, will say this is just a game where the find count is not really a score and the online find log is just the finder keeping track of their caching experience. The non-puritan will determine from the log and other evidence if the find is bogus or not and wlll delete the log if necessary, but will allow most find logs to stand. Note that the signature in the physical is one piece of evidence that can be used. A bogus logger is most likely to be a serial bogus logger. If someone claimed to find 50 caches in a day and none of these caches had his signature, that would be pretty strong evidence that the logs are bogus. If some found just a few caches and on one of them wrote that the log was too wet to sign, that would most likely not be a bogus find.

[+naj2000us]

Is it really this serious? Lol

[+mchaos]

there are many reasons some one doesn't sign a log. And if you physically find the cache, how can you say some one didn't find it, when they didn't sign the log.

 

If you don't have a writing utensil and there is none in the cache, and some one finds it, then doesn't sign the log, let it be. If you feel the need to seek proof that they found it, just email them and say, "HI, I see that you did not sign the log book but found the cache. Could you please tell me some specifics about the cache container and where it is hidden." If they answer well, then they found it, and who cares if they signed the log.

 

Most people who geocache don't armchair cache, so I don't think its a big problem.

 

I do however think that CO's should scrutinize this sort of thing to some extent. Not get mad, but just check to make sure some one has really found it, so that when some one is armchair caching it can be stopped.

 

If someone admits they did not sign it because they say, "didn't have a pen" and its a micro or nano, then they probably found it. Why would they log that they didn't sign it. Better chance of not saying anything about signing and not getting deleted, then anything.

 

I have done this once. I was near where a cache was, with out my gps, and It was a super easy find. Not pencil in the container, although it was big enough. So i put something in the container as proof I found it and noted on the cache pages log. " Didn't have a pen, so I left a small piece of my granola bar wrapper as my signature. "

 

For some one to get all bent out of shape for this would be real lame. I wouldn't delete a log for that. THey found it, let them have the find.

[Clan Riffster]

Is it really this serious? Lol

Only for a very small, yet highly vocal minority.

[+BulldogBlitz]

Is it really this serious? Lol

for a couple of them.. yes. they are also the people you'd not be in front of at the buffet line... or getting the last ticket to the trekkie convention... and you better not beat them to a newly released cache.

 

[+Team Cotati]

Is it really this serious? Lol

 

I know. Quite astonishing isn't it.

 

But trust me, 'tis oh so true.

[+naj2000us]

Again I say...how can you cheat at geocaching? Someone says they have finds that they haven't actually found?? THey get what? Is there a prize for having the most finds that someone forgot to tell me about? Who cares if they sleep better at night knowing they cheated.. themselves. Just my opinion.

[+Logscaler and Red]

Is it really this serious? Lol

 

I know. Quite astonishing isn't it.

 

But trust me, 'tis oh so true.

 

Sometimes, I just like to argue and stir the pot.

 

Kinda like a rubber band airplane. Wind them up and see where they fly off too.

 

Sorry

Edited July 13, 2010 by logscaler & Red

[+Take A Hike!]

In my opinion not taking the time to properly find the cache and sign the log indicates a tendancy to not follow the other "ethics" of Geocaching. Like being careful to put the cache back exactly like you found it, taking some good swag and leaving nothing, or taking a TB or Geocoin and just keeping it cause it looks cool, or taking the time to CITO once in awhile. I'm just sayin'!

[Clan Riffster]

In my opinion not taking the time to properly find the cache and sign the log indicates a tendancy to not follow the other "ethics" of Geocaching.

Do you have any examples to share, or is that just guess work? I'm finding it really tough to grasp how someone who, on occasion, logs a find on a cache with a moldy log, without getting their name added to the spitwad, would be the same type to steal geocoins. While I would personally find the second act to be unethical, I can't quite call the first act a moral sin.

[+redsox_mark]

 

Each cache owner has their own level of acceptance for what they will constitute as signing the log.

 

I have no problem with your accepting a photo, I have no problem with owners wanting you to sign only "THE" log as long as the owners do maintenance in a timely manner so cachers can sign as required.

 

What I have a problem with is the cache finders not making the effort to follow the "Spirit" and original "intent" of the game, and yes it is only a game. I have to wonder about people who take short cuts at a hobby as that makes me think they take bigger short cuts at work. Seems to me it is just being sloppy and lazy. If your not going to complete the effort, why make it in the first place?

 

But say "It's just a game" to someone who is an avid Major Sport's fan when their team losses when another team uses "irregular" methods to win. (Patriots come to mind.)

 

I fully agree that each cache owner has their own level of acceptance as to what is valid.

 

I also agree that the spirit of the game includes actually having the container in your hands and signing the log (and that is what should happen most of the time).

 

Personally, I'm not too bothered if some finders cut corners, but I can understand having a problem with that. I have more issue with those who say that the only valid view is the one where the finder absolutely must physically sign the original log - no exceptions ever - or the finder is somehow cheating. But even there, I accept that is their right to take such a view.

[+sweetj]

Excellent topic Dad! Since i have 172 hides i get alot of logs that the cache was found but log was damp....couldn't open container to sign log...One of mine, the container is in a section of pipe, the "finder" found the pipe but didn't find the container inside but logged it as a find. That's been the only one of mine that i wouldn't let em' log as a find till they went back and found the log sheet and signed it! Me on my finds i have had a couple that i found the container but couldn't open or forgot a pen...I posted a note online that i found that cache but have to return to sign the log. Then once i do return and SL i then post my find online. Guess it all comes down to honesty. If someone really wants to log finds that they haven't really found whats the fun in that???

[+sweetj]

In my opinion not taking the time to properly find the cache and sign the log indicates a tendancy to not follow the other "ethics" of Geocaching. Like being careful to put the cache back exactly like you found it, taking some good swag and leaving nothing, or taking a TB or Geocoin and just keeping it cause it looks cool, or taking the time to CITO once in awhile. I'm just sayin'!

VERY GOOD POINT!!

[Clan Riffster]

Guess it all comes down to honesty.

If a cacher posted the following, "Found a pipe, but couldn't find a log sheet", have they been dishonest?

If they selected "Found It", from the drop down menu, because their experience matches what they define as a find, have they been dishonest?

Dishonesty requires an intent to deceive.

[+buzzy_cacher]

Any proof of visit (IMHO) can be used as a find. I won't log a find without leaving proof of visit (whether that's signing the logbook or not).

[Mr.Yuck]

Any proof of visit (IMHO) can be used as a find. I won't log a find without leaving proof of visit (whether that's signing the logbook or not).

 

What do you mean? Such as leaving a signature item?

 

You bumped an old thread. But if you didn't do that, I would have never noticed that GeoBain changed his username to XXRIPXX, and Geocided. All his caches are archived. Umm, RIP, XXRIPXX.

[Andronicus]

Ni!

+1

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

Is it really this serious? Lol

for a couple of them.. yes. they are also the people you'd not be in front of at the buffet line... or getting the last ticket to the trekkie convention... and you better not beat them to a newly released cache.

 

 

Yes, there are leaders in all aspects of life whether in sports, business, or "games". They gravitate to the front and make life better for all the whiners they are ahead of.

[+God of Caching]

When I 1st started caching I didn't do alot of research on types of cache containers. One in particluar I found a few of were the nano containers. Now being a n00b @ that time, I didn't realize that the container actually unscrewed and came apart. LOL I prolly logged at least 10 of these within the 1st month of caching. I did log the find but didn't sign the log. I think I just been too lazy to go back and actually sign the logs on those. I do know exactly where they are located though! LOL

[GPS-Hermit]

I once found a cache that I could not reach because of short arms and I didn't really want to put my hands in an unknown crevice. I tried hard to get it. I logged a find because I blamed the owner for not making it possible for ME to get the cache. Arm length should not be a requirement.

 

I would not be picky about it as long as the person "Saw the cache" - that is good enough for me! I would rather see them trade and log and most do. I really don't care about the numbers at all. It is up to them to care. Just get out there come to my lure and tell others what ya did.

 

Enjoying nature, get exercise, learn the woods, that is what it is all about. I would contact a logger that said he did not see the cache and ask them to change the log to DNF. If no results just delete it. I would rather keep the comments copied to a note and explain why it is a DNF. I treasure all the comments I get - if they say something to read.

[+briansnat]

I once found a cache that I could not reach because of short arms and I didn't really want to put my hands in an unknown crevice. I tried hard to get it. I logged a find because I blamed the owner for not making it possible for ME to get the cache. Arm length should not be a requirement.

 

Same thing happened to me. The cache was in a tree. I could just touch it with my fingers but couldn't get a hold of it to sign the log. Logged a DNF and returned with a chair to stand on, so I could sign the log.

 

Enjoying nature, get exercise, learn the woods, that is what it is all about. I would contact a logger that said he did not see the cache and ask them to change the log to DNF. If no results just delete it. I would rather keep the comments copied to a note and explain why it is a DNF. I treasure all the comments I get - if they say something to read.

 

Actually geocaching is largely about finding geocaches. Enjoying nature, getting exercise and learning the woods are side benefits that make it an attractive sport, but if you are just doing that and not finding caches and signing logs you are just hiking.

[MisterEFQ]

I once found a cache that I could not reach because of short arms and I didn't really want to put my hands in an unknown crevice. I tried hard to get it. I logged a find because I blamed the owner for not making it possible for ME to get the cache. Arm length should not be a requirement.

 

That is not a find. Do yourself a favor, get one of these:

 

 

Go back to the cache, actually find it and sign the log. Then your find will be legit.

[+sbell111]

I once found a cache that I could not reach because of short arms and I didn't really want to put my hands in an unknown crevice. I tried hard to get it. I logged a find because I blamed the owner for not making it possible for ME to get the cache. Arm length should not be a requirement.

 

Same thing happened to me. The cache was in a tree. I could just touch it with my fingers but couldn't get a hold of it to sign the log. Logged a DNF and returned with a chair to stand on, so I could sign the log.

 

Enjoying nature, get exercise, learn the woods, that is what it is all about. I would contact a logger that said he did not see the cache and ask them to change the log to DNF. If no results just delete it. I would rather keep the comments copied to a note and explain why it is a DNF. I treasure all the comments I get - if they say something to read.

 

Actually geocaching is largely about finding geocaches. Enjoying nature, getting exercise and learning the woods are side benefits that make it an attractive sport, but if you are just doing that and not finding caches and signing logs you are just hiking.

If only you would remember the bolded bit in all the threads that you respond to.

[+TeamOgaz]

Personal rules for myself only.

 

If you don't sign the log, you didn't find the cache.

[Dinoprophet]

I once found a cache that I could not reach because of short arms and I didn't really want to put my hands in an unknown crevice. I tried hard to get it. I logged a find because I blamed the owner for not making it possible for ME to get the cache. Arm length should not be a requirement.

 

That is not a find. Do yourself a favor, get one of these:

 

 

Go back to the cache, actually find it and sign the log. Then your find will be legit.

If the cache owner knows the situation and let the log stand, then it is legit.

[mddbkzr]

Physical contact with cache = logged find

I believe that if I find the cache, signed a piece of paper or not, I found it and I will log it on the website. The official rules say nothing about "no written log = no online log".

 

Granted everything is circumstantial.

 

For example, many times I will just load the coords into my GPS and go find it, sometimes weeks or months later when I am in that area. My GPS (Bushnell Onix200CR) does not have a "notes" area so the title is usually the clue up to 10 characters. I have been adding a few into my car GPS (Garmin, added via CSV I create) to at least get me close that will include a few more notes for future reference.

 

In one case it needed tweezers that I do not carry on me, another time it required a screwdriver. The one with the screwdriver I do plan to go back to sign since it is so close to my house, the tweezer one I do not plan to go back since it is a long hike through snake territory.

 

I may stop at the dollar store for a few things next time I am out, a little carrying or belt bag that I will put a few pens, tweezers, screwdriver and replacement paper in.

 

Now if it is up a tree I am unable to climb, I will add a note (not a find or DNF) stating I found it but was unable to reach it. If it is underwater (common after heavy rains in the area) or something else like that and unable to sign then I will note it. Requiring extra tools that are not on hand such as tweezers, screwdrivers, tiny fingers, in a snake/animal den or something else special, if I had it in my hands or at least within reach, I will log it as a find. Let someone else get bitten.

 

This is all for fun, REQUIRING a scribble before posting it online is just asinine if you at least have it in your hands. So if the log is gone or cache is missing, all those that logged it before now have to remove it from their list of finds since it is no longer there? It is gone so how can we know for sure that you actually found it? That is pretty much was most of the purists are saying as far as I can tell. Guess that knocks some of these master geocachers down a few ranks...

Edited October 2, 2010 by mddbkzr