Retroactive Logging

[+Andromeda321]

First of all yeah, feel free to grab popcorn on this one. The reason I'm posting about this though is I was reading up on the Kala Pattar cache in the shadow of Mt Everest link and because the only logging requirement is to post a picture of you with Everest in the background many, many people have been logging this virtual retroactively- some as far back as 2000!

 

Which has gotten me thinking- I have been to over 35 countries in my life on five continents but most of those were before I started caching (I did study abroad and a trip around the world and stuff like that), but that doesn't mean I hadn't visited some of the sites that now have virtuals or earthcaches at them. While some specifically say to post a photo of you with your GPS there are many that do not, so is there any official policy on such retroactive logging? For example I've been to this earthcache in New Zealand and know the answers (and have a photo but none is required in the listing), and while sure I'd love to go back to NZ and revisit all the amazing places there it just doesn't seem likely anytime soon.

 

Full disclaimer here, I maintain the moderately popular Victoria Falls earthcache, and so long as people send me the correct info and the picture I don't see why I'd worry about when they were there (as it's not like I'm sitting in Zimbabwe keeping track). I've deleted one or two logs by people who obviously hadn't been to Vic Falls, but so long as you were there I don't see how it'd make much difference. And while I'm sure there are some who won't agree with me, what do you think?

[+sbell111]

For me, it does matter. I think that people should actively seek out a virt, rather than just going through old vacation photos.

[+kunarion]

the only logging requirement is to post a picture of you with Everest in the background many, many people have been logging this virtual retroactively- some as far back as 2000!

One of those guys joined Geocaching in 2008, yet were actively caching in 2000 . If this is the way you roll, it's not a big issue. But it's probably part of the reason Virtuals are gone.

[Dinoprophet]

As I see it, if you have provided the required proof, you can log it. If someone accidentally found a cache before they started caching and they signed the logbook, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to log it. With a virtual, the photo is the signature in the log. If you have the proof, I think you should be able to log it.

 

I could see restricting such logs to the lifetime of the cache, i.e. none from before the cache existed. Maybe an exception even then for something like Everest.

[+briansnat]

I think it is between you, your conscience and the cache owners. If all three are good with it, then go ahead and log them.

[+kunarion]

If someone accidentally found a cache before they started caching and they signed the logbook, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to log it. With a virtual, the photo is the signature in the log.

But at Mt. Everest (for example), they ""signed the log" before there ever was a log. Are they're standing within the 30' radius of GZ? -- they'd have to be if there were a physical log. The way Geocaching is set up, accurate records are important. So if I had the urge to log it, I'd do my year 2000 Everest log as a "note". But yes, If I stumbled upon a cache and signed it (after it exists), I'd count it as a find. Edited October 27, 2010 by kunarion

[+Ecylram]

My two cents is that it's between the cache owner and the cacher. Whatever the cache owner wants is what goes (as long as it's not an ALR).

[+captnemo]

For me, it does matter. I think that people should actively seek out a virt, rather than just going through old vacation photos.

Agreed, but only for me. I have tons of old vacation photos that "I" wouldn't log, but don't care if anyone else does. I have only had to delete one log on one of my virts. as they didn't follow the instructions.

 

Right now I'm about 10 miles away from a virt. that I visited 20 years ago but didn't take the right picture so haven't logged it, hope to make it this trip.

[+John in Valley Forge]

My two cents is that it's between the cache owner and the cacher. Whatever the cache owner wants is what goes (as long as it's not an ALR).

 

I agree that it's up to the CO. Even the CO mentions that they were there in March 2001, though the cache wasn't created until well after. The CO does not seem to have any date range requirements on the cache, so go for it. How many people go back there a second time.

 

At the opposite end, this one Atlantis specifically states in its description NOT to log old vacation photos. I was there a few years ago and could probably dig up photos that would answer the questions, but why bother? There really is a chance I would go back there again, so it gives me something to look forward to.

 

If Richard Garriott explained geocaching to Gennady Padalka at lunch one day, would anyone deny Gennady the chance to log GC1BE91 ?

Edited October 27, 2010 by John in Valley Forge

[+David]

I wouldn't log it as a find. A note maybe, but not a find.

[+Ike 13]

If you had known that the cache was there but it was before you got your own account (basically caching with a friend) then yes go ahead.

 

My personal feelings is that no I should not log finds on virtual/Earthcaches that I visited before I started caching. Yes I was there and yes I may know (or be able to find) the answer, but I feel like I'm cheating myself. Plus it gives me a great excuse to return.

 

Should not and Can not are very different. But itt is between the cache finder and the cache owner.

 

* I have never been anywhere as great as Everest and have rarely left the South East US.

Edited October 27, 2010 by IkeHurley13

[+Semper Questio]

I'm with briansnat on this one although my personal position is that I only log finds on locations I have visited since I started caching.

[+mrcanoehead224]

If you had known that the cache was there but it was before you got your own account (basically caching with a friend) then yes go ahead.

yup.

 

...no I should not log finds on virtual/Earthcaches that I visited before I started caching.

yup

 

Yes I was there and yes I may know (or be able to find) the answer, but I feel like I'm cheating myself. Plus it gives me a great excuse to return.

This to me says it perfectly. A perfect excuse to see an area again and I wouldn't feel like I was cheating.

[+Andromeda321]

Yes I was there and yes I may know (or be able to find) the answer, but I feel like I'm cheating myself. Plus it gives me a great excuse to return.

This to me says it perfectly. A perfect excuse to see an area again and I wouldn't feel like I was cheating.

 

My point is more that c'mon, while if this was a cache a few miles down the road (as a poster here has said about a virtual) or even one in a country I'd have a chance of seeing again soon- I assure you I'm not eying caches in Europe- I feel pretty confident in saying I will never return to, say, the Sossusvlei sand dunes in Namibia. I was lucky enough to be in Namibia for about ten days last year and while it was gorgeous I don't have a feeling like I need to return there over the expense of all the other amazing countries in Africa I haven't seen yet! And there are a few other countries I could say this about too- I doubt I'll visit the Cook Islands again though it was lovely because by the time I'm going Pacific island hopping I'd pick another set.

 

Seriously, I wouldn't mind returning someday, but as a mere mortal I need to concede that the world is so darn big! And for those wondering I haven't decided yet whether I'll be logging these caches (and obviously won't if there's a note saying I need to be actively looking for it during my visit), but knowing I've met all the requirements is making me kick myself even more for some of these.

[Mr.Yuck]

Yes I was there and yes I may know (or be able to find) the answer, but I feel like I'm cheating myself. Plus it gives me a great excuse to return.

This to me says it perfectly. A perfect excuse to see an area again and I wouldn't feel like I was cheating.

 

My point is more that c'mon, while if this was a cache a few miles down the road (as a poster here has said about a virtual) or even one in a country I'd have a chance of seeing again soon- I assure you I'm not eying caches in Europe- I feel pretty confident in saying I will never return to, say, the Sossusvlei sand dunes in Namibia. I was lucky enough to be in Namibia for about ten days last year and while it was gorgeous I don't have a feeling like I need to return there over the expense of all the other amazing countries in Africa I haven't seen yet! And there are a few other countries I could say this about too- I doubt I'll visit the Cook Islands again though it was lovely because by the time I'm going Pacific island hopping I'd pick another set.

 

Seriously, I wouldn't mind returning someday, but as a mere mortal I need to concede that the world is so darn big! And for those wondering I haven't decided yet whether I'll be logging these caches (and obviously won't if there's a note saying I need to be actively looking for it during my visit), but knowing I've met all the requirements is making me kick myself even more for some of these.

 

I can see where you're coming from here, especially if you've been all over the world. I haven't, but I do sometimes think of the places I've been before Geocaching existed, and sometimes even check the listings there. Most of these were military related, and I will most likely never return to the area. Can't think of any virtuals I know the answers to, or have a picture in front of off the top of my head, but I'll bet there's some out there.

 

It's all between you and the cache owner I suppose, assuming they are virtuals, and have active owners. Earthcaches, there's a much greater chance of an active owner. Personally, I don't think I would do it, but I will not call the Geocaching Police, or point at you and laugh, if you logged a handful of these things.

Edited October 28, 2010 by Mr.Yuck

[+tozainamboku]

Depends on what a virtual cache is and what you think the purpose of a found log is.

virtual cache is:				   purpose of found log is:   logging retroactively is:
A specific object you find using	a point for finding		cheating
a GPS and coordinates on			a geocache
Geocaching.com and go to get the
answers to a question or take	   a way to share your		why not log a note then?
a picture						   experience

A cool place the cache owner		a point for finding a	  virtual caches shouldn't 
wants you to visit. In other		geocache				   count as finds
words: a waymark
								a way to share your		go ahead you earned it.
								experience

Edited October 28, 2010 by tozainamboku

[+popokiiti]

If it is a cache where you have signed the physical log, but forgotten to log online - go for it. Some place you went to before you started caching, but have the photos/knowledge as in an Earthcache? Ask the CO and abide by their decision......

[+BlueDeuce]

I haven't decided yet whether I'll be logging these caches (and obviously won't if there's a note saying I need to be actively looking for it during my visit), but knowing I've met all the requirements is making me kick myself even more for some of these.

 

I hear ya. I used to travel quite a bit for my job. I even went on vacation to Boston just a few days before learning about geocaching. I wish I had known about this game rather than sitting around the hotel room or down in the bar.

 

My advice is to enjoy the experience of geocaching. Don't try to 'make up' for having been there by claiming a find. Set your sights on the places you are going to journey to from here on out.

 

Seven years later I made it back to Boston and the satisfaction of those cache finds mean far more now than any retro-logging could ever do.

Edited October 28, 2010 by BlueDeuce

[+releasethedogs]

Its between you and the cache owner.

Edit: post #100

Edited October 29, 2010 by releasethedogs

[+Castle Mischief]

I don't do it. It's the geocaching equivalent to crossing the beams.

[+sbell111]

I don't do it. It's the geocaching equivalent to crossing the beams.

Didn't crossing the beams destroy the staypuff marshmallow man?

[Dinoprophet]

I don't do it. It's the geocaching equivalent to crossing the beams.

Didn't crossing the beams destroy the staypuff marshmallow man?

That was crossing the streams, which is often necessary in geocaching but not usually as cataclysmic as in the movie. It usually just ends in uncomfortable squishiness.

[+Ike 13]

Now that a general consensus has been reached I have a few thoughts.

 

You're very lucky to be able to see all these beatiful places that some of us can only dream about.

 

Should you be able to post a Found It log before a cache was placed (not published)? This is only viable for virtuals and Earthcaches, but it's shaky ground. ***I have seen one mystery that allowed it.

 

A Note would indicate you were there and enjoyed the area. As a CO I would love to see a great story and photos of that.

 

Would you become the FTF?

 

I am wondering what your purpose of posting a found it log? The only reason I can think of is to increase your stats?

 

If I have learned one thing in the forums it's that people have a wide interpretation of what the Found It log means. I'm okay with that, and GS's lack of response to any of these threads means they are as well. So go ahead post the Found It log. Some Co's will let it stand, others may delete it. If I owned the cache I would ask you to change it to a note.

 

Happy Caching

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

I only log the ones when I actually had a geocaching account. There's been a couple where I've went back and logged virtuals that I missed because I didn't cache as much. Most importantly I've actually met the logging requirements.

[+hzoi]

I've been tempted. We've found caches in 35 countries, but I've actually visited 40, and we have yet to cache in all of the states I've visited. One sore spot with me -- especially since I knew of geocaching at the time, I just wasn't doing it yet -- was that I have a photo from Iraq that is taken in the exact spot of the cache that's at the foot of the Ziggurat of UR.

 

I'm sure I could dig through photos and get retroactive credit for visiting virtuals or earth caches in places we've been (or even beg permission for traditional caches, for that matter), but that defeats the point to me.

 

Of course, the longer I stay in the Army, the more likely it is I'll have another chance to log caches in Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.

[+Castle Mischief]

I don't do it. It's the geocaching equivalent to crossing the beams.

Didn't crossing the beams destroy the staypuff marshmallow man?

That was crossing the streams, which is often necessary in geocaching but not usually as cataclysmic as in the movie. It usually just ends in uncomfortable squishiness.

 

I'd offer that the destruction of Stay Puft resulted in uncomfortable squishiness too.

 

But yeah, beams, streams whatever. Cats and dogs living together, bla bla bla...

[+JL_HSTRE]

I visited Gettysburg for the first time in May 2009. I started geocaching in Jan 2010.

 

It eventually occured to me to see if there were any Virtuals at Gettysburg (since it is a National Battlefield Park no physical caches are permitted). Turned out there are 4 Virtuals and 2 Earthcaches. I didn't have the info for the Earthcaches nor one of the Virtuals (which required some specific information), but I did have the info and pictures for the other 3 Virtuals (2 different COs).

 

I explained the situation to the COs and provided the required information and was permitted to do so. One was completely fine with it. The other said it 'felt wrong' but as I had met all the requirements he didn't see grounds to deny it.

 

I don't feel wrong about my backlogging: I legitimately visited the monuments in question (and very distinctly remembered 2 of them), none of which I was aware of before my visit. Waiting to log them until I visit Gettysburg again and visited those specific monuments again wouldn't add anything.