Etiquette

[+Marg886]

I just picked up my damp log book today doing maintenance on my cache. For fun I checked the log book to the logs online. I was very surprised to find 2 people did not sign the log book but logged a find on line. Not sure what to do.

[danoshimano]

I just picked up my damp log book today doing maintenance on my cache. For fun I checked the log book to the logs online. I was very surprised to find 2 people did not sign the log book but logged a find on line. Not sure what to do.

 

I don't think you need to do anything, because it really doesn't matter.

 

Also, are you 100% positive? A damp log book can be a tough thing, both to read through and to sign. (Unless there are very few entries.)

 

The entries don't necessarily go in order, and pages get skipped all the time (for example, the upper page if the book is bound at the top). And if the names really are missing, maybe the pen didn't work, and they didn't have one.

[+northernpenguin]

I just picked up my damp log book today doing maintenance on my cache. For fun I checked the log book to the logs online. I was very surprised to find 2 people did not sign the log book but logged a find on line. Not sure what to do.

 

I don't think you need to do anything, because it really doesn't matter.

 

Also, are you 100% positive? A damp log book can be a tough thing, both to read through and to sign. (Unless there are very few entries.)

 

The entries don't necessarily go in order, and pages get skipped all the time (for example, the upper page if the book is bound at the top). And if the names really are missing, maybe the pen didn't work, and they didn't have one.

 

Also watch out for team logging.

 

Sometimes groups will use a "combined" name like GHMGC, BFL Crew, Team WEB or similar to save space in the logbook rather than writing out 10, 20, or even 40 names and filling the logsheet on a micro.

 

You're best off emailing the individuals and asking about the discrepency - or as the above poster pointed out, just not worry about it.

[+Happy Paddlers]

There are plenty of discussions on this in other areas of the forums, you can also look there for information.

 

You have a few options.

 

1) Check the user ID. Did they log a surprising number of caches that day, or over a wide geographic area? Maybe a bot or a couch-cacher. Delete.

 

2) Does their online log say anything about the state of the physical log, or that they couldn't sign it for some reason? (I know I've found caches that I can't sign for some reason, but I say that online.) Delete at your discretion, depending how picky you want to be, since one of the few rules of this game is to sign the log. If they care, then they'll try to reclaim it, or send you a note.

 

2b) Some people like to find caches, but not bother signing them. Delete at your discretion. see above.

2c) Some people arrive at the cache area, look around unsuccessfully, then claim a find for getting there.

 

3) Remember that for some people, the numbers are the only thing that counts. Some of them do "cheat", but it's not as if anyone else is being penalized by their actions. If you think it's suspicious, then delete, and allow them to relog if they contact you and explain it. Most likely you'll never hear from them.

 

Ultimately, it's your cache, and your rules.

[+Keith Watson]

To many variables for me to even think about deleting a log based on that. Unless oy uare ready for the fight that usally follows a log deletetion, I wouldn't bother.

[Mr.Yuck]

To many variables for me to even think about deleting a log based on that. Unless oy uare ready for the fight that usally follows a log deletetion, I wouldn't bother.

 

Yeah, too many variables. I'd forget about it. For example, I changed my username at 7 years. You think you could relate a 2008 "TWU" signature to "Mr.Yuck"? Not that I've found your caches. What I find more, especially from my oldest caches from 2003 and 2004, are many people who sign the logbooks and never log on the website.

[+Marg886]

Thanks eveyone for your input.

[+ventura_kids]

If they have more finds than me ..... send me a Private Message or an e-mail telling me who and when.

I'll go call them cheaters!

 

Nothing irks me more than High Count cachers cheating.

I pride myself in Actually signing Every logsheet.

 

Some cachers think this is some sort of competition. If it was....we would win a prize.

[+Flintstone5611]

When I first started placing caches I was way too concerned with people 'actually' logging my hides. I very quickly came to the realization that if they never come to see my cache then they just cheat themselves out of the fun part of geocaching. They can't relate a story about my cache or show a picture of it or share it with anyone, they lose out, not me.

 

Some people are super competitive by nature, I hope they can enjoy their stat fluffing as much as when I am taken to beautiful places and meet nice people and have stories to share with my friends about the cool things I got to do because of geocaching!

Edited November 12, 2010 by Flintstone5611

[+KDotBlueDot]

While I agree with the sentiments, my guess is that 'stat fluffing' (love that term and with use it regularly!) is rarely the reason for an unsigned log. Forgetting a pen, distracted by the swag or clues to another puzzle in the container and simply forgetting to sign, or even deciding to not open the cache because of torrential rain are all much more likely scenarios. They've NEVER happened to me, but I could see how a lesser cacher could succumb to these pitfalls.

[+geezer55]

A couple of weeks ago located a cache. The information didn't say anything about needing a pen and also the size of the cache there should have been one there. When we located the cache the was no writing stick so I used a stick to etch my name into log book and then rubbed a little dirt to darken the etching, this was to show that I had been there. The only other way that I can prove that I was there is that I took a tradeable item. Sometimes there just is no way of signing the logbook.

[+Tequila]

One of the side effects of the plethora of micros/nanos is that most cachers now carry a writing instrument by default.

 

Another alternative is to take a picture, with your iPhone, of the cache location/container/GPS/yourself. You don't have to post it but be able to email to owner if there is a question about whether you found the cache or not.

[+discovery3]

In some cass, I did not log it in the logbook but did online, wether I forgot my pencil in the car or in one instance, the log was so small that I decided not to remove it rom its cache holder fearing that I probably could not get it back in without damaging the log.

 

discovery3

[+Jayloki]

Nothing irks me more than High Count cachers cheating.

I pride myself in Actually signing Every logsheet.

 

I hear ya brother!

Many of them high cache counters over here doing just that. Bad form bad form.

 

That's up there with " Well i hiked 4 k, found the indent of the spot where I suspect the cache should have been so I'm counting it as a find." Tsk tsk tsk INDEED.

 

 

I'm a firm believer in " No signee the log sheet no findy!"

 

And then they have the nerve to run their stats! LOL. Works of fiction.

[+mrcanoehead224]

many people who sign the logbooks and never log on the website.

actually, this is the one that bugs me a bit (ok more than a bit), if you're going to take the time to visit the spot let me know about it. I like to tell a bit of a story with most of my finds and I have never left just a TFTC (although I've been tempted). Part of the reason I place caches is to hear about people's adventures, whether it be a woodpecker spotting or getting poked in the eye by a branch then rubbing it while still walking and tripping over a log that you didn't see because my er, their hand was over my their eye. The unnamed cacher in this story made a full recovery and carried on that day to find more caches.

[+RCA777]

I've written logs with chlorophyll (no pen - grabbed a leaf and a stick and left the greenest mark possible!). I've written logs in mud. I've left extra pieces of paper in a cache... and I've also logged the WRONG cache on the gc.com web site; that's when the fabled "I know I've been here before....!" kicks in when heading to the cache-you've-actually-found-before-but-didn't-log-coz-you-logged-another-one-and-thought-it-was-this-one. It hasn't happened often --- but it does happen. I've even gone to grab a trackable that someone has logged in my cache... and there's nothing there. It then turns up being in a cache nearby. Group (or even buddy caching) is sometimes a culprit; you assume that the fellow with the pencil signed you both in... but then you started talking about this... that....

I'm walked back to the Jeep a few times with the cache pencil/pen behind my ear. When I go back to the cache.. I often have to check to make sure I *did* actually sign it... I didn't remember stealing the pencil... so I wanna make sure I wasn't completely in cuckoo land.

 

I check my cache logs vs. web site logs and 90% of the time they match. If someone seems to be habitually doing it.. I'd send them a note to their GC profile. It's never happened.

 

People oops. Typically, if I check their profile and see caches/group caches/photos/evidence of "participation".. then I'm not going to worry.

 

If they've got 15 finds with one word logs,on the same day spread from Cobourg to North Bay.... and they don't appear to have locality... I figure it MIGHT be fishy.