Jump to content

Logging "Find" and did not sign log


Recommended Posts

This thread hits home for me today, so I feel compelled to add my two cents. I just got back from finding three geocaches tonight. At the first one we had our bag full of stuff including a working pen so no problem - log signed. The next cache we went to had a log book that was wet and damaged to the extent that it was impossible to sign. We still logged it. The next cache we parked far away from, and being that it was already dark and we looked pretty suspicious lurking around at this particular area we were in a hurry to find the cache and head out. The problem was we forgot the pen back at the car. We still logged a find and let the CO know that if he/she wanted evidence we could describe the cache container and location to him/her in an email. Basically, I don't care about having huge numbers (we only have 102 finds so far). I just like to have the list of caches I've found listed on my profile so I can look back at them. It is also cool for us to see how many we have found just for our own personal enjoyment. If the CO wants to erase my log that is fine. I know that I wasn't trying to cheat. I'm just trying to have fun.

Link to comment

Ooops...I confess... looks like I've already committed the ultimate sin (only once though).... Found one without a pen and I didn't have one on me, took photo proof that I found it, left swaps and listed them... Didn't realise in all my newbie ignorance how much angst this causes!! This is all very serious!!! Looks like I'll be trecking back to "sign physical log" (with pen) because finding it, documenting it and providing alternative proof doesn't count - Live and learn. Note to self ... Must read rules again so as not to be a geo-pest. Thanks. :D

Link to comment

A lot of uncalled for sarcarismI see. But the bottom line is if there was not bunch of people out there falsely claiming finds there would be no need for this discussion. This is really simple when you go out take a pen and an pencil. On the other side of the coin there are a lot of caches out there that see no maintanence. Logs are full for months or wet and unsignable. Another simple solution if your not going to maintain the cache please do not place it. I travel a lot so I have not placed a cache. When I get to the point where I stay put I will hide a few.

Link to comment

I've looked over all the post on this topic ,and think the whole discussion is ridicules .i cache with a 4 year old with special needs most of the time and sometimes i don't sign logs .whether it be i'm busy trying to get her to make up her mind on what she want's to trade and put things back ,or laughing at her looking at all the pretty stamps in the log ,or sometimes just forget .My point being our game is just for me and her if i do forget or just don't it hurts no one .If i ever get questioned i'll just send the cache owner a description of cache and location via email for proof .

After all the game was invented for fun .The more rules and aggravation we crate the more people will stop playing and leave caches unattended .

just my 2 cents

Link to comment

Ooops...I confess... looks like I've already committed the ultimate sin (only once though).... Found one without a pen and I didn't have one on me, took photo proof that I found it, left swaps and listed them... Didn't realise in all my newbie ignorance how much angst this causes!! This is all very serious!!! Looks like I'll be trecking back to "sign physical log" (with pen) because finding it, documenting it and providing alternative proof doesn't count - Live and learn. Note to self ... Must read rules again so as not to be a geo-pest. Thanks. :D

 

Sarcasm in the hands of a wit can be a powerful tool; but you best not try to use it again--not workin for ya.

Link to comment

I've looked over all the post on this topic ,and think the whole discussion is ridicules ...

After all the game was invented for fun .The more rules and aggravation we crate the more people will stop playing and leave caches unattended .

just my 2 cents

 

And that's about what it's worth. Sorry , you walked into that and I couldn't resist. This discussion is not "ridicules" (sic). We do not "crate" (sic) aggravation when we make rules and enforce them. Cheaters are the ones who take the fun out of games...

Link to comment

This discussion is not "ridicules" (sic). We do not "crate" (sic) aggravation when we make rules and enforce them. Cheaters are the ones who take the fun out of games...

Then it must really bother you that so many people find caches and sign the log but don't always log their find online, in violation of rule 3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com After all if the find count is wrong for these people it must really take the fun out the game for you. Or, if you look to see when a cache was last found you might not go looking for this cache, especially if the last online log is a DNF.

 

Yet I never seem to see complaints about these "cheaters". As far as I can tell, they outnumber those that log online when they didn't sign the log for some reason. They certainly outnumber the people who log bogus logs for caches they didn't look for.

 

Fortunately, there are very few cache owners who take such an extreme view as you about signing the log. While many people will not log a find unless they have signed the log, they will accept found logs from others who found the cache but were unable to sign the log for some reason. There is no "rule" anywhere on Geoaching.com that says a Found log must be deleted if the physical log was not signed. And while there are guidelines which could be interpreted as allowing a cache owner to delete logs for this reason, it seems to me that the intention is that logs should only be deleted if the find is bogus. The point is that this is a fun activity that doesn't need to be burdened with unneccesary technical rules. The idea is that one should sign the log when you find a cache, but if your pen stops working or the log is too wet or you just forgot because you were having so much fun, then the online find log still can be used to share your experience.

Link to comment

 

 

Fortunately, there are very few cache owners who take such an extreme view as you about signing the log....

 

The point is that this is a fun activity that doesn't need to be burdened with unneccesary technical rules.

 

Actually, the truth is most cache owners want their finders to sign the logbook. This is not an "extreme" view. We never delete find logs if the online log says they couldn't sign for valid reasons. And we don't check the logs to the cache page.

 

The extreme notion that signing the log is an "unneccesary (sic) technical rule" would be laughable if it was not so troubling.

 

Again, as we have said, breaking the rules can ruin the fun for everybody. There are actually reasons for rules...

Link to comment

I think our biggest problem is the people that spend most of their time on the forum complaining about the guideline or rules not being followed in a game that from the looks of their cache count they hardly ever play .

Caching is all about experiencing new places ,enjoying nature and meeting new people .anything other than that is mindless ramblings of someone with a over active spell check finger .

Just cache and leave everything else to those in charge ,if you don't like the way things are find letterboxes .

Link to comment

Actually, the truth is most cache owners want their finders to sign the logbook. This is not an "extreme" view. We never delete find logs if the online log says they couldn't sign for valid reasons. And we don't check the logs to the cache page.

Beautiful. You've been arguing for four pages that "sign the book" is a hard and fast rule of the website, and now you're saying you violate it. In the very same post where you say:

Again, as we have said, breaking the rules can ruin the fun for everybody. There are actually reasons for rules...

Please to explain?

Link to comment

I haven't read this thread before but it seems relevant to a situation that I had recently. A cacher claimed a find with the statement: "Couldn't sign log since it was too wet but I can describe it if you wish". I suspected fraud since the container is waterproof. I went to the location and sure enough, it was dry as a bone. I contacted the cacher and requested a detailed description. By return email, he said that it was in the right side railing. I asked for more details and he said that it was in a wooden plug which was too swollen to extract. Wrong. I politely informed him that he was incorrect, that I was going to delete his post (which I did) and invited him to try again as it would give him great satisfaction if he found it.

 

This is the first time that I have deleted a member's post but I feel that it was justified as they clearly had not found my well hidden cache.

Link to comment

 

 

Fortunately, there are very few cache owners who take such an extreme view as you about signing the log....

 

The point is that this is a fun activity that doesn't need to be burdened with unneccesary technical rules.

 

Actually, the truth is most cache owners want their finders to sign the logbook. This is not an "extreme" view. We never delete find logs if the online log says they couldn't sign for valid reasons. And we don't check the logs to the cache page.

 

The extreme notion that signing the log is an "unneccesary (sic) technical rule" would be laughable if it was not so troubling.

 

Again, as we have said, breaking the rules can ruin the fun for everybody. There are actually reasons for rules...

That was a pretty bold statement. <rimshot>

Link to comment

We never delete find logs if the online log says they couldn't sign for valid reasons. And we don't check the logs to the cache page.

 

I'm glad to see you are not as puritan as I had thought.

 

I still argue that there is no rule saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online. The intent may be to sign the physical log as it verifies to you, the finder, that you have really found the cache and not some other object that happened to be nearby. Some cache hiders leave decoys or hide caches involving a physical challenge to retrieve the cache or sign the log. Signing the log tells you that you have accomplished the task the cache owner presented. However, many cache owners simply put the cache there hoping to bring you to some interesting place. They may not care at all if you found the cache, let alone signed the log. While this sounds to me more like Waymarking than Geocaching, why would I care that someone posted a found log who didn't sign the log? The find count is not a score. Inventing rules about signing a log in order to make sure people aren't "cheating" is unnecessary for the enjoyment of the game. It's fine to have a personal rule that you won't post a found log unless you have signed the log. Others will be satisfied they have found the cache with less and so long as the cache owner is satisfied that they have found the cache, the found log should stand.

Link to comment

Sometimes the post for finding a cache just sounds too phony to be true. For example, a person claims a fast find when a fast find is impossible for the particular cache. On a couple of those circumstances, I have checked the logs and found nothing for the alleged finders. I then emailed the alleged finders to ask if there had been problems signing the log books. When I received no response, I deleted the online posts. Phony sounding posts can be very misleading to future searchers.

Link to comment

And personally, I will continue to hike a mile back to my cache-mobile to get a writing stick if I don't have one with me. For me, it's part of the "FUN!"

 

I figure that god invented green leaves to allow log books to be signed when a pen is missing. It's at least as legible as my signature which tends to be different than my online name.

Cactus spines can be used on those times you forget a pen in the desert.

 

I walked about a quarter mile to a puzzle cache at night in the winter with my best friend and our two daughters and we still had another quarter mile to go, when I realized I left my pen in the car. Best Friend didn't have one, of course our daughters didn't either. I wasn't going back to the car because it was going to eat up too much time. (Our husbands thought we were shopping for wedding supplies, but we'd been "shopping" for about 4 hours by this time.

 

We spent 20 minutes, all 4 of us, looking for that cache. My luck, there was no pen. So I walked 25 ft to the nearby cactus and stabbed my right index finger and "signed" the logbook in the upper left-hand corner. And I made note of it online. When I saw the cache owner a few weeks later, he asked me if I really did that and I said absolutely. As a geocacher, I will do what I have to do to log a cache!

Link to comment

Sometimes the post for finding a cache just sounds too phony to be true. For example, a person claims a fast find when a fast find is impossible for the particular cache. On a couple of those circumstances, I have checked the logs and found nothing for the alleged finders. I then emailed the alleged finders to ask if there had been problems signing the log books. When I received no response, I deleted the online posts. Phony sounding posts can be very misleading to future searchers.

 

A cacher near me always sounded phony,every find is quick & easy,especially some I struggled to find. It's like they are some kind of ninja finder of well hidden containers. It used to really bug me until I figured out he must be overcompensating for something..lacking...somewhere. I suppose he liked to make the difficult look easy because he was so good. It never occurred to me he may not have actually found the cache.

Link to comment

So I walked 25 ft to the nearby cactus and stabbed my right index finger and "signed" the logbook in the upper left-hand corner. And I made note of it online. When I saw the cache owner a few weeks later, he asked me if I really did that and I said absolutely. As a geocacher, I will do what I have to do to log a cache!

 

And nothing could more get me to not touch the log, let alone sign, than to see blood on it.

Link to comment

 

And nothing could more get me to not touch the log, let alone sign, than to see blood on it.

 

That's why it was done in a corner that wouldn't be touched by others and wasn't recognizable as blood, since it dried.

 

If the cache owner were worried, he would have rushed out and replaced the log. He didn't. And it didn't stop any other cacher from finding/signing the log, no one even made mention of it.

 

And if you think a half-drop of blood on a cache log is bad, you should run a culture of the bacteria you can find on the dollar bill in your pocket....I'll bet it's a lot worse than that drop of blood on the logbook.

Link to comment

I am very new to this with about 16 finds. Two of my earliest were done without a pen. But I went back later in the day to sign the log. Since these finds were done on my walk to or from work it wasn't out of my way.

 

Now if I don't have a pen I won't go hunt for a cache. I have also created a small ziplog bag of cache swag which includes a pen.

Link to comment

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. :huh:

 

If the log is not signed, no find. However I had one cacher post a log and they said their pen stopped working and couldn't sign the log. I set them an e-mail asking them to describe the local the cache was in and they did, so I let them keep the smiles. :blink:

Link to comment

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. :huh:

 

If the log is not signed, no find. However I had one cacher post a log and they said their pen stopped working and couldn't sign the log. I set them an e-mail asking them to describe the local the cache was in and they did, so I let them keep the smiles. :blink:

Link to comment

In my area we have problems with people hiding a 35mm film canister with their name signed on the log sheet when they can't find your cache. Their geocaching day starts out I presume with their pockets full of these caches and when the find gets too tough they just hang one of their own caches. When they get home they log their find online saying something to the effect that the cache was missing and being the nice guy we replaced it for you or that it was an easy find LOL... I guess these people realy don't like DNF's I'm assuming?

 

The following day another cacher goes out and now finds and signs the illegitimate cache and or finds more then one cache per cache site. Now what am I to do as the cache owner when I eventually get back out to the cache site and see that some cachers have signed the wrong cache? Is it my responsibility as the cache owner to delete logs to preserve the integrity of the game?

 

Is it just me or is everyone "cheating" these days?

Link to comment

This thread hits home for me today, so I feel compelled to add my two cents. I just got back from finding three geocaches tonight. At the first one we had our bag full of stuff including a working pen so no problem - log signed. The next cache we went to had a log book that was wet and damaged to the extent that it was impossible to sign. We still logged it. The next cache we parked far away from, and being that it was already dark and we looked pretty suspicious lurking around at this particular area we were in a hurry to find the cache and head out. The problem was we forgot the pen back at the car. We still logged a find and let the CO know that if he/she wanted evidence we could describe the cache container and location to him/her in an email. Basically, I don't care about having huge numbers (we only have 102 finds so far). I just like to have the list of caches I've found listed on my profile so I can look back at them. It is also cool for us to see how many we have found just for our own personal enjoyment. If the CO wants to erase my log that is fine. I know that I wasn't trying to cheat. I'm just trying to have fun.

Sounds like you did the right thing. I recently found a cache that had a completely full log. I had no paper to start a new one so I used tiny little letters in the tiniest of space. I logged the cache as found and immediately added a note about the full log which the owner has seen and has attended to. I'm a birder as well and I refuse to mark down a specie that I'm not 100% sure of but I've witnessed many others who will make a positive ID from a "glimpse of red" or a "flash of white". People who claim to find caches but don't, are only fooling themselves and I don't let it bother me. I'm only really interested in what I find.

Link to comment

In my area we have problems with people hiding a 35mm film canister with their name signed on the log sheet when they can't find your cache. Their geocaching day starts out I presume with their pockets full of these caches and when the find gets too tough they just hang one of their own caches. When they get home they log their find online saying something to the effect that the cache was missing and being the nice guy we replaced it for you or that it was an easy find LOL... I guess these people realy don't like DNF's I'm assuming?

 

The following day another cacher goes out and now finds and signs the illegitimate cache and or finds more then one cache per cache site. Now what am I to do as the cache owner when I eventually get back out to the cache site and see that some cachers have signed the wrong cache? Is it my responsibility as the cache owner to delete logs to preserve the integrity of the game?

 

Is it just me or is everyone "cheating" these days?

 

I would delete the logs of those who "replace" the cache but not those of the people who followed. Those later cachers searched in good faith.

Link to comment

It may have been stated elsewhere and I just missed it, but I have a REALLY hard time with Nano logs. If they are unable to be removed, I will try and sign the top of it, something to indicate i was there, but sometimes that just doesn't even work. That is about the only circumstance when I don't sign: when I am unable to sign it (no different than a soaked log).

Link to comment

I found to be quite amusing reading all the excuses for not signing the logs and claim a find.

 

Geocaching is a game and everybody can play it however they want it but GC has rules on how to play the game.

 

"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

If you want to play by your rules then please go play on that new website with the beaver mascot.

 

With this said, I think its time for the responsibility to be shifted to the cache owners. They should be the ones enforcing the rules.

Reviewers make sure the cache hiders follow the rules and it should be the hiders that should enforce it to cachers.

 

More often than not, people just hide caches and once they are published they treat them like its no longer their problem.

The onus should be on cache owners to make sure the game is played accordingly to the rules and that they do proper maintenance.

GC should implement a system that would allow reporting of deadbeat cache owners that could lead among other things to suspension of hiding privileges to him/her.

Edited by ZeMartelo
Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Still, TPTB leave it to the cache owner to determine whether a find is a appropriate if the logbook was not signed.
Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Still, TPTB leave it to the cache owner to determine whether a find is a appropriate if the logbook was not signed.

Only because there is no way to fully enforce it. It is clear that signing is what they want.

Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

There are many places where GC.com discusses signing your name. There is no place they actually say you may not log a find online unless your name is signed.

 

The quote of the so-called "rules" from the FAQ even show this.

 

You write about your find in the log book. If it's a DNF until you write in the log, then how can you write about your find. You haven't found the cache until you have written about your find. That makes no sense. In reality you

first find the cache, they you can write in the log.

 

You log your experience on geocaching.com. That clearly is not predicated even on finding the cache. If you didn't find the cache, you can certainly still share your experience. Many people do, by logging a DNF. I contend that people who don't log their DNFs are in violation of rule #3. The people who find the cache but for some reason didn't write in the log are in violation of rule #2 but they certainly can share their experience and I contend the proper log to use is the find log. (However, a cache owner may decide that the log appears to be bogus because there is no signature in the log and could delete the online found log).

 

If you want to play by your rules then please go play on that new website with the beaver mascot.

 

With this said, I think its time for the responsibility to be shifted to the cache owners. They should be the ones enforcing the rules.

Reviewers make sure the cache hiders follow the rules and it should be the hiders that should enforce it to cachers.

 

More often than not, people just hide caches and once they are published they treat them like its no longer their problem.

The onus should be on cache owners to make sure the game is played accordingly to the rules and that they do proper maintenance.

GC should implement a system that would allow reporting of deadbeat cache owners that could lead among other things to suspension of hiding privileges to him/her.

This is quit a rant. What's with the reference to the Garmin site? (BTW, according to that site, their mascot is a squirrel)

 

You first need to understand the rules of the Groundspeak website. The find count is not a competition and Groundspeak doesn't spend a whole log of effort determining what is or isn't a find. For the most part that is left up to the cache owner. Only in a few instances where they felt that people are abusing the site by logging bogus or couch potato logs or conversely when cache owners were deleting logs for arbitrary and capricious reasons, have they stepped in with guidelines for logging caches. Cache owners are supposed to delete logs that appear bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate. That should handle people who write bots to falsely log finds. But TPTB realize that a cache owner can't always tell. While Groundspeak hopes that cache owners can deter most bogus logs, in some recent cases, TPTB have deleted the bogus logs themselves; and in egregious cases the offending accounts are quickly banned. On the other hand cache owners cannot delete logs for capricious and arbitrary reasons. When the guidelines were changed to prevent cache owners from deleting logs for what were known as additional logging requirements, the new guideline was written is such away as to allow cache finder and cache owners the ability to use the physical logbook to resolve such differences. It did not change the ability of cache owners to accept online logs without having to check the log book (or to accept reasonable excuses for not signing the log). It basically told finders that if they sign the log, that was sufficient to show that the online claim of a find was not bogus. (The online log could still be deleted if it was off-topic or inappropriate).

 

The interesting thing is that if you personally have a rule to not log a find online unless you sign the cache, there is nothing the cache owner can do to force you to log online. If the cache owner is allowing online finds by people who found the cache but didn't sign the log for some reason, you will have a hard time convincing Groundspeak that this harms you in some way. Setting up a system to enforce your personal rules on others is not something that Groundspeak is likely going to do.

Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

There are many places where GC.com discusses signing your name. There is no place they actually say you may not log a find online unless your name is signed.

 

The quote of the so-called "rules" from the FAQ even show this.

 

You write about your find in the log book. If it's a DNF until you write in the log, then how can you write about your find. You haven't found the cache until you have written about your find. That makes no sense. In reality you

first find the cache, they you can write in the log.

 

You log your experience on geocaching.com. That clearly is not predicated even on finding the cache. If you didn't find the cache, you can certainly still share your experience. Many people do, by logging a DNF. I contend that people who don't log their DNFs are in violation of rule #3. The people who find the cache but for some reason didn't write in the log are in violation of rule #2 but they certainly can share their experience and I contend the proper log to use is the find log. (However, a cache owner may decide that the log appears to be bogus because there is no signature in the log and could delete the online found log).

 

If you want to play by your rules then please go play on that new website with the beaver mascot.

 

With this said, I think its time for the responsibility to be shifted to the cache owners. They should be the ones enforcing the rules.

Reviewers make sure the cache hiders follow the rules and it should be the hiders that should enforce it to cachers.

 

More often than not, people just hide caches and once they are published they treat them like its no longer their problem.

The onus should be on cache owners to make sure the game is played accordingly to the rules and that they do proper maintenance.

GC should implement a system that would allow reporting of deadbeat cache owners that could lead among other things to suspension of hiding privileges to him/her.

This is quit a rant. What's with the reference to the Garmin site? (BTW, according to that site, their mascot is a squirrel)

 

You first need to understand the rules of the Groundspeak website. The find count is not a competition and Groundspeak doesn't spend a whole log of effort determining what is or isn't a find. For the most part that is left up to the cache owner. Only in a few instances where they felt that people are abusing the site by logging bogus or couch potato logs or conversely when cache owners were deleting logs for arbitrary and capricious reasons, have they stepped in with guidelines for logging caches. Cache owners are supposed to delete logs that appear bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate. That should handle people who write bots to falsely log finds. But TPTB realize that a cache owner can't always tell. While Groundspeak hopes that cache owners can deter most bogus logs, in some recent cases, TPTB have deleted the bogus logs themselves; and in egregious cases the offending accounts are quickly banned. On the other hand cache owners cannot delete logs for capricious and arbitrary reasons. When the guidelines were changed to prevent cache owners from deleting logs for what were known as additional logging requirements, the new guideline was written is such away as to allow cache finder and cache owners the ability to use the physical logbook to resolve such differences. It did not change the ability of cache owners to accept online logs without having to check the log book (or to accept reasonable excuses for not signing the log). It basically told finders that if they sign the log, that was sufficient to show that the online claim of a find was not bogus. (The online log could still be deleted if it was off-topic or inappropriate).

 

The interesting thing is that if you personally have a rule to not log a find online unless you sign the cache, there is nothing the cache owner can do to force you to log online. If the cache owner is allowing online finds by people who found the cache but didn't sign the log for some reason, you will have a hard time convincing Groundspeak that this harms you in some way. Setting up a system to enforce your personal rules on others is not something that Groundspeak is likely going to do.

I will repost what I put after that in post 187

 

Only because there is no way to fully enforce it. It is clear that signing is what they want.

 

Just for clarification since you are the resident self appointed historian. What was the wording just before they redid the knowledge books this latest time? I would like to compare it to the redone, clearer guidelines.

Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Still, TPTB leave it to the cache owner to determine whether a find is a appropriate if the logbook was not signed.

Only because there is no way to fully enforce it. It is clear that signing is what they want.

Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

(If you found out that even Jeremy has logged a find without signing the logbook would you come off that position at all?)

Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Still, TPTB leave it to the cache owner to determine whether a find is a appropriate if the logbook was not signed.

Only because there is no way to fully enforce it. It is clear that signing is what they want.

Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

(If you found out that even Jeremy has logged a find without signing the logbook would you come off that position at all?)

 

There are facts all over the place. To name a few.

 

Groundspeak will uphold a deleted online log for not signing the log

One of the only basic requirements for a cache is a container and a log book

It is mentioned in many places. Knowledgebooks, Brochures for non geocachers, easy steps for geocaching etc..

 

It is clear that the intention is to sign the log. I don't think it is enforcable on the CO level, so it is commonly done.

I have let people slide on mine, just to avoid an argument, not that I think its right.

 

As far a the Jeremy comment, I guess I would have to hear the story before making an educated opinion on that. The wording and policies of his company seem to support the fact that they would prefer that you sign the log.

Edited by M 5
Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Still, TPTB leave it to the cache owner to determine whether a find is a appropriate if the logbook was not signed.

Only because there is no way to fully enforce it. It is clear that signing is what they want.

Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

(If you found out that even Jeremy has logged a find without signing the logbook would you come off that position at all?)

 

There are facts all over the place. To name a few.

 

Groundspeak will uphold a deleted online log for not signing the log

One of the only basic requirements for a cache is a container and a log book

It is mentioned in many places. Knowledgebooks, Brochures for non geocachers, easy steps for geocaching etc..

 

It is clear that the intention is to sign the log. I don't think it is enforcable on the CO level, so it is commonly done.

I have let people slide on mine, just to avoid an argument, not that I think its right.

 

As far a the Jeremy comment, I guess I would have to hear the story before making an educated opinion on that. The wording and policies of his company seem to support the fact that they would prefer that you sign the log.

'Prefer you to sign the log' is a far cry from 'require you to sign the log'. I prefer that people sign my caches' logs, but I am open to all kinds of scenarios as to why that didn't happen. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
"What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com."

 

It cant be any simpler than that.

Didnt sign the logbook, its a DNF.

 

So, if I only write my name in the logbook it's a DNF because I didn't write about my find in the logbook?

 

The "rules" you quote are the "ultra high level let me explain this to someone who has no idea what caching is" rules. Like anything else, once you dive into the nuances of a subject the black and white rules often dissolve into shades of gray.

 

There are many places that GC.com says to sign your name. Not just the place he/she posted.

Still, TPTB leave it to the cache owner to determine whether a find is a appropriate if the logbook was not signed.

Only because there is no way to fully enforce it. It is clear that signing is what they want.

Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

(If you found out that even Jeremy has logged a find without signing the logbook would you come off that position at all?)

 

There are facts all over the place. To name a few.

 

Groundspeak will uphold a deleted online log for not signing the log

One of the only basic requirements for a cache is a container and a log book

It is mentioned in many places. Knowledgebooks, Brochures for non geocachers, easy steps for geocaching etc..

 

It is clear that the intention is to sign the log. I don't think it is enforcable on the CO level, so it is commonly done.

I have let people slide on mine, just to avoid an argument, not that I think its right.

 

As far a the Jeremy comment, I guess I would have to hear the story before making an educated opinion on that. The wording and policies of his company seem to support the fact that they would prefer that you sign the log.

'Prefer you to sign the log' is a far cry from 'require you to sign the log'. I prefer that people sign my caches' logs, but I am open to all kinds of scenarios as to why that didn't happen.

 

You objected to a statement that didn't say require anywhere in it. Overruled!

Edited by M 5
Link to comment

There are facts all over the place. To name a few.

 

Groundspeak will uphold a deleted online log for not signing the log

Groundspeak will generally side with the cache owner for any log deletion. They try to avoid getting involved in these disputes. From the knowledge book on Log Deletion:

We know that sometimes this issue can be contentious. If the other party is being stubborn, ask yourself, "Is this dispute really worth my time?" Try being the bigger person and conceding the point. You may discover that you feel better for doing so. At the very least, it will put the matter quickly behind you.

Groundspeak has the ability to restore a deleted log but they will use this only if a cache owner is trying to enforce an additional logging requirement or if the cache owner is capriciously deleting logs.

 

Note that the knowledge book does not say anything about deleting logs because the log book is not signed. It says "Logs that fail to meet stated requirements (such as Found It logs by people who have never found the cache) or logs that conflict with our Terms of Use Agreement may be deleted." There is a link to the guidelines for Logging of Physical Caches, which we know only refers to not being able to delete logs becase of ALRs, despite how some people will misread it.

 

One of the only basic requirements for a cache is a container and a log book

This guideline was added to prevent people from trying to hide virtual caches and listing them as traditional. A physical cache must be a container your find and it must have a log book or log sheet in it. There is no requirement that a finder sign or write in the log book. I have found caches where the log book or sheet was missing (not just that it was too wet to write on). When possible I have replaced the missing sheet and claimed the find. If I didn't have a sheet to replace it, I still claimed the find, because I found the cache.

 

It is mentioned in many places. Knowledgebooks, Brochures for non geocachers, easy steps for geocaching etc..

 

It is clear that the intention is to sign the log. I don't think it is enforcable on the CO level, so it is commonly done.

I have let people slide on mine, just to avoid an argument, not that I think its right.

 

As far a the Jeremy comment, I guess I would have to hear the story before making an educated opinion on that. The wording and policies of his company seem to support the fact that they would prefer that you sign the log.

I think that this is based on tradition. When Dave Ulmer hid the first geocache it had a log book and he asked that finders write about their experience in the log book. When Jeremy created the Geocaching.com website, he created the ability to log your find online and write about it there. There were now two ways to write about your find. There was no connection between them. You could do one, the other, or both. But if you go back to early forum discussions, I suspect you will find some who said "Now that we can log online, there is no need for a log book" and others who said "You have to at least sign the log book as it is the only proof you actually found the cache." The consensus soon formed that it was a good idea to still sign the physical log and the descriptions of the game on Geocaching.com and elsewhere began to reflect this.

 

It was soon decided to give caches owners the ability to delete online logs, because there were some bogus logs, and others that were inappropriate. A few cache owners felt that without the proof of a physical signature, an online log would appear to be bogus and therefore subject to deletion. Most caches owners, however, were willing to accept most online logs at face value, and certainly would allow online finds when a cache provided a reasonable excuse for not having signed the physical log.

 

There was still no official connection between signing the phyiscal log and logging a find online until the guidelines for logging of physical caches that were added to disallow deletion of online logs because of additional logging requirements. This now seems to indicate that Grounspeak does intend for finders to sign the physical log as it indicates that once the physical log is signed you may log a find online. But it is carefully worded so as to not require the log be signed. I find it unfortunate, anyhow, because it establishes a link that was never there before. I think TPTB could have phrase this differently to make it clear that the intent was only to stop the enforcement of ALRs. In the forum discussion when this guideline was put in place there were a number of statement by lackeys and volunteers that the only intent of the new guideline was to stop cache owners from deleting online finds due to ALRs. But now that this link is there, there may be nothing that can dissuade puritans from reading more into them.

 

I believe that the intent is and has always been that people can log a find online if they find a cache and that cache owners should only delete the online logs if they are bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or inappropriate.

Link to comment

Our area has recently had a pair of cachers come through that are logging finds that were not signed. They are not pretending to not have pens or other situations in which they were unable to sign a log, they "claim" they found it and post their "finds". We discovered this as there was a particularly pesky cache that we could not find and went after it when I saw someone had found it recently. After much hunting we did in fact find the cache only to notice that the last find was several months back...not the week before!!! After that particular instance we started talking to several other local cachers only to discover that they were finding the same thing with the same pair. Some of their logs have been deleted but not all cache owners are comfortable deleting finds and some are no longer in the area. Ironically, this cacher is very proud of their "numbers"...over 10,000 finds--I just don't understand why a fake find number would make someone proud.

Link to comment

Our area has recently had a pair of cachers come through that are logging finds that were not signed. They are not pretending to not have pens or other situations in which they were unable to sign a log, they "claim" they found it and post their "finds". We discovered this as there was a particularly pesky cache that we could not find and went after it when I saw someone had found it recently. After much hunting we did in fact find the cache only to notice that the last find was several months back...not the week before!!! After that particular instance we started talking to several other local cachers only to discover that they were finding the same thing with the same pair. Some of their logs have been deleted but not all cache owners are comfortable deleting finds and some are no longer in the area. Ironically, this cacher is very proud of their "numbers"...over 10,000 finds--I just don't understand why a fake find number would make someone proud.

In a recent thread on this topic, someone mentioned that they never sign the logbooks when they find a cache, but always log their finds online. Most everybody agrees that this method runs teeh risk of having logs deleted. Perhaps your referenced couple are cast from the same mold. Had one of the cache owners shot them a 'whats up with that' email, perhaps the rest of the story would be known. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

There are facts all over the place. To name a few.

 

Groundspeak will uphold a deleted online log for not signing the log

Groundspeak will generally side with the cache owner for any log deletion. They try to avoid getting involved in these disputes. From the knowledge book on Log Deletion:

We know that sometimes this issue can be contentious. If the other party is being stubborn, ask yourself, "Is this dispute really worth my time?" Try being the bigger person and conceding the point. You may discover that you feel better for doing so. At the very least, it will put the matter quickly behind you.

Groundspeak has the ability to restore a deleted log but they will use this only if a cache owner is trying to enforce an additional logging requirement or if the cache owner is capriciously deleting logs.

 

Note that the knowledge book does not say anything about deleting logs because the log book is not signed. It says "Logs that fail to meet stated requirements (such as Found It logs by people who have never found the cache) or logs that conflict with our Terms of Use Agreement may be deleted." There is a link to the guidelines for Logging of Physical Caches, which we know only refers to not being able to delete logs becase of ALRs, despite how some people will misread it.

 

One of the only basic requirements for a cache is a container and a log book

This guideline was added to prevent people from trying to hide virtual caches and listing them as traditional. A physical cache must be a container your find and it must have a log book or log sheet in it. There is no requirement that a finder sign or write in the log book. I have found caches where the log book or sheet was missing (not just that it was too wet to write on). When possible I have replaced the missing sheet and claimed the find. If I didn't have a sheet to replace it, I still claimed the find, because I found the cache.

 

It is mentioned in many places. Knowledgebooks, Brochures for non geocachers, easy steps for geocaching etc..

 

It is clear that the intention is to sign the log. I don't think it is enforcable on the CO level, so it is commonly done.

I have let people slide on mine, just to avoid an argument, not that I think its right.

 

As far a the Jeremy comment, I guess I would have to hear the story before making an educated opinion on that. The wording and policies of his company seem to support the fact that they would prefer that you sign the log.

I think that this is based on tradition. When Dave Ulmer hid the first geocache it had a log book and he asked that finders write about their experience in the log book. When Jeremy created the Geocaching.com website, he created the ability to log your find online and write about it there. There were now two ways to write about your find. There was no connection between them. You could do one, the other, or both. But if you go back to early forum discussions, I suspect you will find some who said "Now that we can log online, there is no need for a log book" and others who said "You have to at least sign the log book as it is the only proof you actually found the cache." The consensus soon formed that it was a good idea to still sign the physical log and the descriptions of the game on Geocaching.com and elsewhere began to reflect this.

 

It was soon decided to give caches owners the ability to delete online logs, because there were some bogus logs, and others that were inappropriate. A few cache owners felt that without the proof of a physical signature, an online log would appear to be bogus and therefore subject to deletion. Most caches owners, however, were willing to accept most online logs at face value, and certainly would allow online finds when a cache provided a reasonable excuse for not having signed the physical log.

 

There was still no official connection between signing the phyiscal log and logging a find online until the guidelines for logging of physical caches that were added to disallow deletion of online logs because of additional logging requirements. This now seems to indicate that Grounspeak does intend for finders to sign the physical log as it indicates that once the physical log is signed you may log a find online. But it is carefully worded so as to not require the log be signed. I find it unfortunate, anyhow, because it establishes a link that was never there before. I think TPTB could have phrase this differently to make it clear that the intent was only to stop the enforcement of ALRs. In the forum discussion when this guideline was put in place there were a number of statement by lackeys and volunteers that the only intent of the new guideline was to stop cache owners from deleting online finds due to ALRs. But now that this link is there, there may be nothing that can dissuade puritans from reading more into them.

 

I believe that the intent is and has always been that people can log a find online if they find a cache and that cache owners should only delete the online logs if they are bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or inappropriate.

 

I wonder if you can answer the question posted on and earlier post of mine.

 

Just for clarification since you are the resident self appointed historian. What was the wording just before they redid the knowledge books this latest time? I would like to compare it to the redone, clearer guidelines.

Link to comment

I wonder if you can answer the question posted on and earlier post of mine.

 

Just for clarification since you are the resident self appointed historian. What was the wording just before they redid the knowledge books this latest time? I would like to compare it to the redone, clearer guidelines.

You obviously have something in mind. Why don't you tell us what changed that makes it all of sudden clearer that it now says you have to sign the log. Because, while there were minor changes as the result of the reorganization, I don't see any substantive change.

 

The only thing I see, I already complained to Grounspeak about. It isn't a guideline, but a comment on the guidelines page that links to the actual guideline that are now in the knowledge book. It says "Logging Guidelines cover the requirements that must be fulfilled in order to log a find." However when you read these guidelines you only find a guideline that says

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.
This is now clarified to indicate that challenge caches are excepted. If I want to misread the guidelines I suppose it now means that I can log a find on challenge cache after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction and thus don't even have to find the challenge caches let alone sign the log. :unsure:

 

The guideline remains the same as before. The cache owner may not delete an online find for failure to meet an additional logging requirement. (BTW both before and after, cache owners were allowed to delete logs if the physical log is not signed. That didn't change. It should be clear however that nowhere are cache owners required to delete logs for this reason and, in fact, the majority of cache owners don't.)

Link to comment

I don't remember the old wording, that is why I was asking. I'm kind of remembering you and others saying that the often quoted quideline was under the Hiding a cache guidelines. Now there is the statement you quoted that is in the logging a cache guidelines. It was also stated by some moderators that the guidelines were reworded some to make them more clear. It seems pretty clear to me now, that it says you can log the find online ONCE you sign the physical logbook. So I'm thinking that the guideline was always stating that, and it was many others that where misreading it. I'm still not sure what the old wording was exaclty and am still curious of the change made. I also know, that it would be very diffucult, if not impossible to regulate that at the CO level, but it is still my opinion, based on the many reasons I cited earlier and others, that TPTB would make it a hard and fast rule, if possible.

Edited by M 5
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...