Logging out of order

[+John in Valley Forge]

Would it be wrong to log finds out of order?

 

I have two scenarios:

 

1. A mystery/puzzle cache with a final that is near 2 known caches in a park. If a person were to log KnownCache1, then the Puzzle, then KnownCache2, it would leave a trail in the finders history that could give a clue to the Puzzle. There is a relationship between all 3 caches, but it is otherwise very very subtle. It is not a case of look in 1 and in 2 to get specific clues to the Mystery. Would it be wrong to log these out or order? To for instance log the known caches with the actual find date of Saturday morning, but the Mystery on Sunday, or to log other caches you found later on Saturday first?

 

2. Cacher is approaching a particular milestone, 100, 500, 1000 finds, whatever. Cacher wants a particular cache to be #1,000. The cacher maps out the remaining finds to get the favorite cache to be the milestone. On the way from cache 999 to the favored cache they get a notification of a new cache placement nearby. They scurry over to try for FTF, but are beaten to it and find it after the FTF. They go back and find the favored cache. Is it wrong to log the favored cache as 1,000 and the not-first-to-find as 1,001?

 

I just wanted some opinions. In either case, the only person that would know about the date switching is cacher themselves. I could live with Scenario 1 as he motivation here is to preserve the integrity of the Mystery. I've seen this scenario, though with my caching abilities (or lack of) it took me five legitimate trips to the park to find all three anyway, so my logs gave nothing away.

As I approach find #100, I have a particular cache in mind for it. I think that if I did that, I (and only I) would always know and thus it wouldn't be meaningful. Instead I guess I would quite when I hit #99 and then concentrate solely on the favored cache.

 

What do you think?

[+StarBrand]

Logging caches out of order is really no big deal. Many of my cach days get logged slightly out of order. I cannot imagine why it would matter to anybody but myself.

 

If you are interesed in your own stats then logging in the correct order is a must. But outside of that - suit yourself. So long as you log with the correct date of the find.

[+addisonbr]

1. A mystery/puzzle cache with a final that is near 2 known caches in a park.

A particular mystery cache near me has a final location that, should you understand in general *about* where it was, would be a huge lever into solving the puzzle. As a courtesy to the CO, when I searched for the final I refrained from looking for any other nearby caches, even though there were several that I hadn't yet claimed. I don't think it would be rude of someone to *not* take that precaution; I just thought it was a potentially useful gesture and one I was willing to make.

 

Is it wrong to log the favored cache as 1,000 and the not-first-to-find as 1,001?

No, do whatever you want.

 

I have mild OCD about some things, and like you the inconsistency would nag at me. So I'd keep it in order and either bypass the FTF attempt or be prepared to accept that my special milestone won't match up with the special cache I picked out.

 

But if someone else wants to commemorate a special cache to represent her 100th, 1000th, 5000th, etc. find, and if she doesn't have my mild case of OCD, I say do whatever makes her look at her personal caching history and smile.

 

You don't even need to specifically enter caches in the wrong order or with the wrong date. mygeocachingprofile.com, for example, will allow you to override any auto-generated milestones with the cache of your choice. If you want to call a great cache you found a week after your 1000th as your commemorated 1000th find, you can do it up.

[+John in Valley Forge]

1. A mystery/puzzle cache with a final that is near 2 known caches in a park.

A particular mystery cache near me has a final location that, should you understand in general *about* where it was, would be a huge lever into solving the puzzle. As a courtesy to the CO, when I searched for the final I refrained from looking for any other nearby caches, even though there were several that I hadn't yet claimed. I don't think it would be rude of someone to *not* take that precaution; I just thought it was a potentially useful gesture and one I was willing to make.

 

 

That is exactly the scenario. Of course I wasn't trying to be noble, I just couldn't find the others on the first try. But on another I have figured out the cache without solving the puzzle, by looking at lots of other peoples logs.

[+Team Dennis]

I generally try to log my finds online in the order I found them in the real world. However, I've had some big days wandering around big parks and I sometimes forget what route I took to get to which cache and thus there might be a cache or two out of place.

 

As far as logging the find for the final for a mystery cache with respect to other known caches in the area, I say keep them in order you found them. I like the idea of providing a slight hint for some enterprising cacher willing to dig deep for a break on solving a mystery cache.

[+Ecylram]

1. A mystery/puzzle cache with a final that is near 2 known caches in a park. If a person were to log KnownCache1, then the Puzzle, then KnownCache2, it would leave a trail in the finders history that could give a clue to the Puzzle. There is a relationship between all 3 caches, but it is otherwise very very subtle. It is not a case of look in 1 and in 2 to get specific clues to the Mystery. Would it be wrong to log these out or order? To for instance log the known caches with the actual find date of Saturday morning, but the Mystery on Sunday, or to log other caches you found later on Saturday first?

The only person it affects is you as it doesn't hurt anybody else. There is no guideline that says that caches must be logged in order.

2. Cacher is approaching a particular milestone, 100, 500, 1000 finds, whatever. Cacher wants a particular cache to be #1,000. The cacher maps out the remaining finds to get the favorite cache to be the milestone. On the way from cache 999 to the favored cache they get a notification of a new cache placement nearby. They scurry over to try for FTF, but are beaten to it and find it after the FTF. They go back and find the favored cache. Is it wrong to log the favored cache as 1,000 and the not-first-to-find as 1,001?

Again, this only affect you and nobody else. There is no official recognition of FTF or any balloons that pop out of the ceiling when you match the 'perfect' cache to a 'milestone' number. It makes no difference at all.

 

As for ourselves, we had the opportunity to match a milestone to grabbing the oldest cache in the state. When the day came we decided we'd rather visit more caches than hold off until we made it to the 'special' cache. It was a good choice. (We didn't log out of order, after all, logging doesn't change reality.)

 

Keep enjoying the game!

[+niraD]

I log my finds in order. But I've been known to deliberately find a puzzle cache "out of order" just to throw off anyone using my logs to brute-force the puzzle location. Just because I found cache A, then a puzzle cache, then cache B, doesn't mean that the puzzle cache is somewhere between cache A and cache B.

 

And I don't really see the point in claiming that one cache is your nth find, when that cache is really your (n+1)th find, or your (n-1)th find. But I wouldn't be surprised if someone did that with a supposed milestone find.

[+Chrysalides]

The order of finds displayed by the site for a user is somewhat strange, depending on the phase of the moon and the version of site update. I've tried to brute force a puzzle in the past by looking at a user's finds (that puzzle specifically asked to be brute forced), and I noticed that the order in which the logs are displayed is not necessarily the order in which they are entered. In fact, sometimes they are not even in chronological order.

 

The log ID are in the order the logs are entered. But it takes a little bit more effort to trace that.

[+Chokecherry]

I log in order typically. Didn't at first but do now to get more accurate mileage on my travel bug. I'll find caches that are in the same vicinity as each other as well. So if the end of the puzzle is near traditionals I will find them at the same time as I don't have time to make multiple trips regularly to places.

 

The one serious puzzle I did that took some time has other caches in the vicinity and I didn't find it at first. However I can say if anyone is really willing to wander around all that woods based on the fact I found two other caches in the area more power to them.

[+Ike 13]

Log in which ever order suits you. If you like stats and memorializing finds then logging in the order you find them is critical. I do this, but sometimes you forget to log a cache, or log the wrong cache or log the wrong date, etc. This throws things out of whack, but most stats programs have a way to fix this.

[+KJcachers]

my field notes on the Delorme PN-40 keep things in order so I don't have to remember.

As to the question, I have only logged 1 cache out of order. It was the final for the New Englands Oldest Caches Challenge. The final was along my way to the rest of the caches so I found it and post dated the log in the cache. I then logged the find after finding the rest of the ccahes in the Challenge. BTW, I requested CO permission to do it this way before attempting the challenge.

[+DragonsWest]

The only impact I see of logging caches out of sequence is my lackey doesn't reflect my true 'drunken bee' path.

 

I try to remain true to my inner drunken bee.

[+briansnat]

2. Cacher is approaching a particular milestone, 100, 500, 1000 finds, whatever. Cacher wants a particular cache to be #1,000. The cacher maps out the remaining finds to get the favorite cache to be the milestone. On the way from cache 999 to the favored cache they get a notification of a new cache placement nearby. They scurry over to try for FTF, but are beaten to it and find it after the FTF. They go back and find the favored cache. Is it wrong to log the favored cache as 1,000 and the not-first-to-find as 1,001?

 

Wrong, no. Silly, yes.

[+captnemo]

2. Cacher is approaching a particular milestone, 100, 500, 1000 finds, whatever. Cacher wants a particular cache to be #1,000. The cacher maps out the remaining finds to get the favorite cache to be the milestone. On the way from cache 999 to the favored cache they get a notification of a new cache placement nearby. They scurry over to try for FTF, but are beaten to it and find it after the FTF. They go back and find the favored cache. Is it wrong to log the favored cache as 1,000 and the not-first-to-find as 1,001?

 

Wrong, no. Silly, yes.

wrong No in fact I just remembered that there is one I have forgotten to log, will do it now! Thanks for acting as a memory jogger for this old mind.

 

Lost my mind once, so I bought a GPS to find it didn't work

[eseurat]

The order of finds displayed by the site for a user is somewhat strange, depending on the phase of the moon and the version of site update. I noticed that the order in which the logs are displayed is not necessarily the order in which they are entered. In fact, sometimes they are not even in chronological order.

 

 

Does anyone know why the site does this? I've encountered this situation twice where it has flipped the order of two or three caches. It seems random.

[+SwineFlew]

I dont worry how others are playing the game. Do whatever you please.

[+paleolith]

Reading logs is often part of finding a cache. More so for those of us who aren't terribly good at just walking up and spotting them. It's no different with puzzle caches. If there's specific info that the CO doesn't want in logs, he/she should make sure it doesn't get in the logs, or at least doesn't stay there. The CO cannot control the order of logging and those logging can't change the order later (in any reasonable way), so the CO should consider this in designing a puzzle where the order and/or dates of logs could provide clues that the CO doesn't want made public.

 

Edward

[Andronicus]

If you are using mygeocachingstats.com, you can tweek the milestones so that the correct one (or desired one) shows up.

 

Personaly, I would rather log the story about screwing up my milestone, than fudging my logs to show #1001 as 1000 (or whatever).

[+Mudfrog]

This is all up to you. But if you do this and then get somewhat serious about your stats later on, they won't be accurate. There are a few stat programs out that many cachers use to keep up with the order and dates of their found caches. Some of the features of those programs would be wasted if you logged out of order or with incorrect dates. For me, it's kinda neat to look back at my milestones every once in awhile, but it wouldn't be worth a hoot if i knew they weren't the right caches at those certain milestones.

[+Harry Dolphin]

If you go to "My Profile" it shows all the caches in the ordered logged. (Well, after you click on "show all logs for: Geocaches".) If you go to "Your public profile", click on "Geocaches" "All Goecache Finds", it sorts by day, but within the day it sorts by geocache number. Sort of confusing. Oh, well.

These days, I keep notes on the Paw Pilot, and log them in the order found. But, there was a trip with friend, and sister, where we logged from her laptop via WIFI, from the hotel, using notes on paper. Got that order all screwed up. Had a stat on my profile showing 'longest distance cached in a day'. That day came up at over 700 miles, because it jumped all over Maine. I stopped using that stat.

As to what you choose to log as a milestone: You know what you logged as cache #666! #666 found is #666 found. (Or whatever milestone you are logging...) You know that you've lied about it. And I shall laugh at you! But only you know for sure. Why lie to yourself???