Jump to content

Skip the log sheet


MHCacher
Followers 7

Recommended Posts

To the OP, not I don't skip signing the log.

 

To insure the geocache has indeed been found, it must be opened. If a logbook is inside, you have found the cache. This eliminates decoys and incorrect assumptions. Since you have the logbook handy, why not sign it to eliminate any confusion or potential online log deletions?

 

I am curious. Which side of the game is the most important? The hider or the seeker?

 

You can't have seekers without hiders. Obviously, the hider is most important.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Actually, there is someone more important than the hider. The land manager/owner. Without permission from land managers there wouldn't be any hiders/seekers. Okay, in reality there are lot of caches placed without permission, but I still consider land owners or managers to be a vital component if we want this game to continue. Sorry for the thread drift.

Link to comment

This question got me thinking about a couple of caches I've found that the log sheet is lock away inside the container.

 

This one for example. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...30-832ed84717f4

 

I've also seen one that the ammo can had a lock on it and you needed to figure out the combination to the lock to get at the log sheet.

 

I don't agree with not signing the log sheet but just wondering how would you deal with this situation where getting to the log is half the hunt.

Link to comment

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed. In the guidelines.

 

Seems real easy to me. Find the cache sign the log and claim the find. If you don't sign the log, no find. Simple.

Did you even read the thread?

 

Why? It seems pretty simple. Except to you and one other guy, who likes to type a lot. :D

 

Are you referring to me? I found one cache this weekend, after looking for two!

 

I could have easily not signed the log, as I spotted the cache before my friend even stopped the truck.

I would have been happy with the find as is, but, because you all seem to complain, I actually stopped, and opened the container, to justify visiting a log and a find , and find a Canadian quarter, and physically sign the log.

 

TFTC

Link to comment

Back to the OP:

 

The guidelines are written the way they are to allow for some smidgen of head-room to allow for exceptions.

 

When you start making a habit out of not signing the physical log it's no longer the exception.

 

An Exception. My point exactly!

 

I will point out that I was 400 miles from home this weekend, and I found 1, just 1 cache, which I DID sign the log

Link to comment

I have to say that I sign most caches I find, however I almost never sign the nano's. I have big fingers and can never get the paper back inside. So when I do find the cache, I take a photo of it to prove I was there and actually found the cache.

 

Is this considered taboo? LOL

 

swiss-army-knife.jpg

 

The tweezers on these are a cacher with big hands best friend on a nano. :sad:

Link to comment
Tweezers dont help you roll it up tight enough to get it into the log, which is his problem.
I've found a couple techniques helpful for rerolling blinker logs.

 

Many blinker logs have a small bit of steel wire at one end. You can use this bit of wire to remove the log (using the magnet in the other part of the blinker). You can also use it to reroll the log. Hold the bit of wire between your index finger and your thumb. With the other hand, pull the end of the log. The log will wrap tightly around the bit of wire. Wrap the extra log around the tightly wrapped core, and repeat the process until the whole log is wrapped tightly enough around the core to fit in the blinker easily.

 

With logs that don't have this small bit of wire, unroll the log. Starting at the end that is inside the roll, rub the end of the log between your thumb and finger in a way that rolls the paper on itself. Each time you do this, you'll roll another inch or two of the log tightly, so just repeat until the whole log is rolled up.

Link to comment

It seems a little rude. I kind of view the logs as the CO's reward.

Just because it doesn't benefit me doesn't mean I skip it.

I can understand feeling that way about the online log, but not the paper log.

I think ink on paper has more intrinsic value than pixels on a computer screen.

 

When you start viewing the online log as a reward for either the cache owner or the finder is when you get people making up a rules about what you need to do to be allowed to log a find online. If the online find is not a reward, then it becomes a simply a way for cachers to share their experience and owners don't need to delete logs unless they appear to be bogus.

Link to comment

It seems a little rude. I kind of view the logs as the CO's reward.

Just because it doesn't benefit me doesn't mean I skip it.

I can understand feeling that way about the online log, but not the paper log.

I think ink on paper has more intrinsic value than pixels on a computer screen.

 

When you start viewing the online log as a reward for either the cache owner or the finder is when you get people making up a rules about what you need to do to be allowed to log a find online. If the online find is not a reward, then it becomes a simply a way for cachers to share their experience and owners don't need to delete logs unless they appear to be bogus.

 

I don't consider an online log to be a reward to the CO, but it might be thought of as a "public service". Assuming one has found the cache (not going to try to find "found" here), an online log tells the cache owner that the cache is in it's place, and tells other geocachers that might want to look for it that there is a container there to be found. If one thinks of an online log as a courtesy to the owner an other cachers, rather than just a requirement to obtain a smiley face, then adding something more to the log other than TFTC has some value. For example, if you found the cache around lunch time and there were a bazillion muggles around, that's useful information that a future seeker could use. No, you don't *have* to post anything more than a TFTC, but it's just a courteous thing to do.

Link to comment

Fine, go ahead and call me a puritain - for I am one.

 

If you can't be bothered to stoop over and pick up the cache and write something in the logbook. You just are missing the point.

 

I am saddened when I look at my logbooks in my oldest caches. Every cacher used to write a few sentences. Then after a few years, most just wrote no more than 1 sentence. Over the past 2 to 3 years - the vast majority only write a username and a date.

 

Now some folks just want to skip the logbook altogether. Yikes..........how sad.

Link to comment

If I sound like a robot, it is because I have to keep responding to the robo-puritans insisting that geocaching has a rule that in fact does not exist anywhere on the Geoaching.com website.

 

Not sure what a "robo-puritan" is, but I found this fact....

 

From http://www.geocaching.com/faq/default.aspx

 

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.

 

These look like pretty simple rules to me....or am I missing something?

 

Rule #2 causes a lot of issues for me on nano caches, and the logsheet is usually completely full with comments when I get done. The typical nano cache owner will always fly into a rage and tell me to not write anything but my username and date. However, rules are rules... :sad:

Link to comment
Rule #2 causes a lot of issues for me on nano caches, and the logsheet is usually completely full with comments when I get done. The typical nano cache owner will always fly into a rage and tell me to not write anything but my username and date. However, rules are rules... :sad:

The knowledgebase also adds, "Sometimes, for smaller cache containers, there is no book but only sheet. It is best to simply write your username and the date on these sheets." :(

Link to comment
Rule #2 causes a lot of issues for me on nano caches, and the logsheet is usually completely full with comments when I get done. The typical nano cache owner will always fly into a rage and tell me to not write anything but my username and date. However, rules are rules... :sad:

The knowledgebase also adds, "Sometimes, for smaller cache containers, there is no book but only sheet. It is best to simply write your username and the date on these sheets." :(

I think 4wheelin_fool's point may be that the "simple" rules in the FAQ are not so simple and that they need to be read with flexibility in mind. The rules say "Write about your find in the cache logbook". Since nano caches have a scroll instead of a log book, and many caches of all sizes have log sheets instead of logbooks, what does the rule really mean? The puritans interpret it to mean "sign the log." It seems reasonable to me that other interpretations may be just as valid. In particular, rule 3: "Log your experience at www.geocaching.com." doesn't say "Log a find on www.geocaching.com but only if your have first completed rule 2". A person may write about their experience on www.geocaching.com whether or not they found the cache. They should use a Found It log when they have found the cache. What they (and the cache owner) feel constitutes a find may or may not including the actual signing of a log (book, sheet, or scroll).

Link to comment

Back to the OP:

 

The guidelines are written the way they are to allow for some smidgen of head-room to allow for exceptions.

 

When you start making a habit out of not signing the physical log it's no longer the exception.

 

Well said. I agree there can be exceptions; but signing the log is part of the game. Routinely not signing because it takes time and you can't be bothered doesn't seem right to me.

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

But seeing the word 'puritan' one more time just makes it all worth while. B)

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

But seeing the word 'puritan' one more time just makes it all worth while. :anibad:

B)

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I'm going to be another Terrible Cacher and confess I haven't always signed the log, usually if it's a micro and I realize I don't have a pen. You can argue with me however you like on this, but I sincerely don't see how me just writing my name on another line on another lamppost cache is going to make much difference in the game, as anything I have to say will be online and not in the actual cache itself anyway.

 

Of course I realize the CO could technically pore over his logs and delete my find, but unless it's something unusual like a FTF I doubt it would happen, and if I was contacted I'd just say sorry but I didn't have a pen on me. If someone ever got upset that my name wasn't slapped onto his 1.5/1.5 I wouldn't lose sleep over it, but so far no one's even noticed.

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

Link to comment

I'm going to be another Terrible Cacher and confess I haven't always signed the log, usually if it's a micro and I realize I don't have a pen. You can argue with me however you like on this, but I sincerely don't see how me just writing my name on another line on another lamppost cache is going to make much difference in the game, as anything I have to say will be online and not in the actual cache itself anyway.

 

I've solved that problem... as soon as I see my GPS pointing to a lamp post, I go look for a different cache. Seriously, people, don't you have better things to do than play in the Wally World parking lot?

Link to comment

I'm going to be another Terrible Cacher and confess I haven't always signed the log, usually if it's a micro and I realize I don't have a pen. You can argue with me however you like on this, but I sincerely don't see how me just writing my name on another line on another lamppost cache is going to make much difference in the game, as anything I have to say will be online and not in the actual cache itself anyway.

 

Of course I realize the CO could technically pore over his logs and delete my find, but unless it's something unusual like a FTF I doubt it would happen, and if I was contacted I'd just say sorry but I didn't have a pen on me. If someone ever got upset that my name wasn't slapped onto his 1.5/1.5 I wouldn't lose sleep over it, but so far no one's even noticed.

 

I don't think anybody is saying that every single time you have to absolutely, always, without fail, sign the log in blue or black ink with a fine to medium point. I think what people are saying is that most of the time, the vast majority of the time, they are signing the log in some manor and that they expect cachers to, most of the time, make the effort to sign the logs in some manor on their caches too.

 

 

EDIT: Half the angst (in this and every thread about signign the log) seems to be that some folks are reacting like everybody that says "sign the log, get the find" is really saying "you MUST ALWAYS sign the log OR ELSE YOU SHOULD NEVER EVER get the find EVER BLARG BLARGGLE!!!!"

 

They aren't.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

 

It doesn't. And never, in all of his 4000+ posts, has Toz ever claimed that it does. If you don't understand the argument that Toz repeatedly makes, then you don't understand logical reasoning, or at least are refusing to understand it. Toz's posts are always logically sound and technically correct.

Link to comment

I'm going to be another Terrible Cacher and confess I haven't always signed the log, usually if it's a micro and I realize I don't have a pen. You can argue with me however you like on this, but I sincerely don't see how me just writing my name on another line on another lamppost cache is going to make much difference in the game, as anything I have to say will be online and not in the actual cache itself anyway.

 

Of course I realize the CO could technically pore over his logs and delete my find, but unless it's something unusual like a FTF I doubt it would happen, and if I was contacted I'd just say sorry but I didn't have a pen on me. If someone ever got upset that my name wasn't slapped onto his 1.5/1.5 I wouldn't lose sleep over it, but so far no one's even noticed.

 

And so long as you understand that someday, one of those CO's MIGHT delete your log, and so long as you don't throw a hissy fit IF it happens, then there's really no reason to change your ways, if you are satisfied. :laughing: As I said before, what it really comes down to, is what the CO will allow, no matter what anybody else thinks. It is highly, highly unlikely that gc.com will ever intervene in such cases.

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

There is no guideline anywhere that says what you have to do to get a find. The only guideline regarding Found logs is the one that says when a cache owner must allow one.

Edited by Dinoprophet
Link to comment

If I found someone who routinely skips signing in on caches and claimed a find on one of our caches I'd delete the online log.

 

I find it's pretty simply to say I'd do so without exceptions like the log being wet, or full, or too small, etc. etc. We only place decent sized caches in sturdy containers and have pens or pencils in them for folks to use to sign in. Our caches have yet to be so wet as to prevent signing in.

 

Walk-by caching is not how it's done. I could go on and on with reasons why this is the case: decoys, trash, caches from other sites, letterboxes, etc. But the most simple reason is "because that's the way it's done." Meaning because when everyone is on the same page things go smoother.

 

No, being on the same page in no way stifles creativity. (Just to head off a non-starter argument.)

 

Oh, and for the guy who asked whether to sign the logs on lame caches or not. I don't. But I don't bother to log them online either. The ignore list is wonderful. Too bad it's not available to non-paying members--they're forced to either legitimately find and log the trache in order to remove it from their Nearest Cache List.

Link to comment

There is no guideline anywhere that says what you have to do to get a find. The only guideline regarding Found logs is the one that says when a cache owner must allow one.

 

Considering how that one single, often quoted guideline is read by a large portion of cachers you would think that it would be written a little differently by now. I mean, there are plenty of ways you could write that so that it actually says what I think we know it means.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

There is no guideline anywhere that says what you have to do to get a find. The only guideline regarding Found logs is the one that says when a cache owner must allow one.

 

Considering how that one single, often quoted guideline is read by a large portion of cachers you would think that it would be written a little differently by now. I mean, there are plenty of ways you could write that so that it actually says what I think we know it means.

If it meant "You must sign the log to get a Found log", it would be in the Getting Started or How To Find a Cache sections. Instead it's on the How To HIDE a Cache page.

 

Put it this way (which I believe I've done before): take someone who doesn't come to the forums and hasn't hidden a cache but has read all the How To Find A Cache introductory stuff. He finds a cache but can't get it open. He later goes online to log his experience. What would make that person believe that Found is not the appropriate log type?

 

Before someone answers that with those three rules, I'll point out that it says nothing about types of logs, just what your experience is. His experience is he found it.

Edited by Dinoprophet
Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

 

It doesn't. And never, in all of his 4000+ posts, has Toz ever claimed that it does. If you don't understand the argument that Toz repeatedly makes, then you don't understand logical reasoning, or at least are refusing to understand it. Toz's posts are always logically sound and technically correct.

 

Let us not confuse ASD-level tenacity and compulsion with logic.

Link to comment

There is no guideline anywhere that says what you have to do to get a find. The only guideline regarding Found logs is the one that says when a cache owner must allow one.

 

Considering how that one single, often quoted guideline is read by a large portion of cachers you would think that it would be written a little differently by now. I mean, there are plenty of ways you could write that so that it actually says what I think we know it means.

If it meant "You must sign the log to get a Found log", it would be in the Getting Started or How To Find a Cache sections. Instead it's on the How To HIDE a Cache page.

 

Put it this way (which I believe I've done before): take someone who doesn't come to the forums and hasn't hidden a cache but has read all the How To Find A Cache introductory stuff. He finds a cache but can't get it open. He later goes online to log his experience. What would make that person believe that Found is not the appropriate log type?

 

I'm with you for the most part, but...

 

Somebody that doesn't come to forums and has read "Getting Started" and "Finding your First Geocache" and has seen "Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location" and also "Sign the logbook with your name, the date, and a few words about your experience" I think there's a good chance that they will either not log a "found it" or they will then come to the forums and get tied up in the discussion.

 

And I don't think that you can determine how a hypothetical person would believe about any one thing or another. Plenty of folks have read all the guidelines and still stand by "sign the log, get the find" as the basis for how the game is played.

 

I'm just saying that with a few re-writes all this could be avoided. I'm not saying that the guidelines should be lawyered up to infinity, but a few well placed qualifiers here and there would go a long way.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

It doesn't. And never, in all of his 4000+ posts, has Toz ever claimed that it does. If you don't understand the argument that Toz repeatedly makes, then you don't understand logical reasoning, or at least are refusing to understand it. Toz's posts are always logically sound and technically correct.

 

I understand logical reasoning. I also understand brevity.

Link to comment

There is no guideline anywhere that says what you have to do to get a find. The only guideline regarding Found logs is the one that says when a cache owner must allow one.

 

Considering how that one single, often quoted guideline is read by a large portion of cachers you would think that it would be written a little differently by now. I mean, there are plenty of ways you could write that so that it actually says what I think we know it means.

If it meant "You must sign the log to get a Found log", it would be in the Getting Started or How To Find a Cache sections. Instead it's on the How To HIDE a Cache page.

 

Put it this way (which I believe I've done before): take someone who doesn't come to the forums and hasn't hidden a cache but has read all the How To Find A Cache introductory stuff. He finds a cache but can't get it open. He later goes online to log his experience. What would make that person believe that Found is not the appropriate log type?

 

I'm with you for the most part, but...

 

Somebody that doesn't come to forums and has read "Getting Started" and "Finding your First Geocache" and has seen "Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location" and also "Sign the logbook with your name, the date, and a few words about your experience" I think there's a good chance that they will either not log a "found it" or they will then come to the forums and get tied up in the discussion.

 

And I don't think that you can determine how a hypothetical person would believe about any one thing or another. Plenty of folks have read all the guidelines and still stand by "sign the log, get the find" as the basis for how the game is played.

Certainly. I don't think anyone disagrees that that's generally how it's done. We only disagree that there is or ever has been a rule on this site that says it must be done that way.

I'm just saying that with a few re-writes all this could be avoided. I'm not saying that the guidelines should be lawyered up to infinity, but a few well placed qualifiers here and there would go a long way.

I agree with that.

Link to comment

I'm going to be another Terrible Cacher and confess I haven't always signed the log, usually if it's a micro and I realize I don't have a pen. You can argue with me however you like on this, but I sincerely don't see how me just writing my name on another line on another lamppost cache is going to make much difference in the game, as anything I have to say will be online and not in the actual cache itself anyway.

 

I've solved that problem... as soon as I see my GPS pointing to a lamp post, I go look for a different cache. Seriously, people, don't you have better things to do than play in the Wally World parking lot?

Don't you have better things to do then judge what gives people pleasure in a game that's not supposed to be about what others are doing anyway?

 

I'll just say that signing the log is the whole point for me. Sort of "Kilroy was here". That is what gives me the feeling of accomplishment, when I can prove I found it.

 

But I suppose others may feel differently.

 

Yup I do- for me the whole point is that little "aha!" moment when you look again and see the cache hiding there. :laughing: Sure I'll open it an examine what's inside, even if it's just a micro, but something like signing the log is purely a secondary afterthought which is why I won't get all obsessed about putting my name there. I probably would've felt differently back in the day when writing more than just your name and date on the log was what was done (because as a CO it'd be fun to read over later) but electronic logging has taken the place of that IMO and I just enjoy reading the comments logged online. I've never had anything interesting written in a cache, though I'll stick in a logsheet for those who enjoy doing so.

 

Put it this way, I tend to view what I do in geocaching as my own personal record, so even if a CO were to go and knock off a few smilies for logs I forgot to sign it doesn't matter much to me because I know that I found it. And if I'm enjoying myself along the way with this game I refuse to see why such an attitude is an incorrect one.

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

Show me the actual guideline where it states that physical logs must be signed and that cache owners are required to delete online logs if the physical logs are not signed. Show me. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

Show me the actual guideline where it states that physical logs must be signed and that cache owners are required to delete online logs if the physical logs are not signed. Show me.

Never said anything about deleting a log. I showed you where it says to sign the log, but you seem to understand that to be a different meaning. So show me where it says you claim a find for seeing the cache from a distance or not even opening the cache to claim a find. YOU CAN"T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now go out and find some caches that you just drive by and get a find.......................What a joke!

Link to comment

So much fail...

 

There are very few actual 'rules' to geocaching, but signing the log book is one of them. I hope that all of those cache owners are deleting your logs.

There is actually no rule that says you must sign the log book in order to log a find online. (The puritans knew I would say this). There are rules that allow cache owners to delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Should a cache owner decide to delete your log, do not expect Groundspeak to reinstate it if you didn't sign the log. There may even be cases where you did sign the log where Groundspeak will not reinstate your find, but at least if you have signed you may have some luck.

tozainamboku,

I wonder how many of your 4,000+ forum posts are dedicated to pointing out this fact?

 

**Only meant to be an rhetorical question to an observation I made. Not meant to be an attack on tozainamboku. Any post in a thread pointing out "the guideline" about signing the log is sure to have a post not long after by tozainamboku clarifying the guideline.**

+1. He does this all over the forum. It gets old. But HE knows

Seems like all those posts would prompt some people to actually learn the actual guidelines rather than twisting them into what they think they should be.

Show me where the actual guideline where it says to look at a cache from a distance, or not open the cache and you get a find. Show me.

Show me the actual guideline where it states that physical logs must be signed and that cache owners are required to delete online logs if the physical logs are not signed. Show me.

Never said anything about deleting a log. I showed you where it says to sign the log, but you seem to understand that to be a different meaning. So show me where it says you claim a find for seeing the cache from a distance or not even opening the cache to claim a find. YOU CAN"T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now go out and find some caches that you just drive by and get a find.......................What a joke!

If you are going to come from an emotional place, then there is no point discussing this.

 

The guidelines are for cache owners. They state very clearly when a log must be accepted. Cache owners may not delete the log if the book was signed. The guidelines do not address what a cache owner must do if the book wasn't signed. If the book is not signed, the guidelines leave it up to the individual cache owner to decide whether 'finds' are appropriate.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 7
×
×
  • Create New...