Logging Caches you own?

[+Zwack_&_Irish_Eyes]

Greetings,

 

I realise it's bad form to log caches that you placed. After all, you know where it is, there is no difficulty to finding it, even a 5/5 is easier for you than for anyone else...

 

However, I now own five caches, of which I placed one. The others were placed by someone who is no longer caching and was planning on retiring them. One of their caches is such a nice cache that I wanted to keep it going, so, as I live near three of their four caches (near as in easy walking distance) I offered to adopt them. They agreed and so I took over the four caches that they owned. I had previously found and logged three of them, but had never found the fourth. I hunted up the fourth cache, checked it was all good, and logged it. After all I didn't know any more about where it was than any other finder, even though I was officially the owner.

 

Is this considered acceptable or should I delete my log (or change it to a notice or something)?

 

Thanks,

 

Z.

[+John in Valley Forge]

Under the circumstances, I vote that you log it as a find.

You should do it before the adoption process is complete, so it is always clear that you found it while it was owned by the original owner.

[+dfx]

yep, adopted caches are the big exception to the "don't log your own caches" pseudo-rule, even if you find them after you adopt them.

Edited November 15, 2010 by dfx

[+thecaswellfamily]

Thank you for this topic! I recently adopted a cache that I had been FTF on... I've only ever gotten two... and I wondered if I should delete my FTF log or just let it stand...

[+John in Valley Forge]

Does the owners name on an adopted cache automatically read "XYZ Adopted by ABC"? Some I've seen read that way.

[+NicknPapa]

Does the owners name on an adopted cache automatically read "XYZ Adopted by ABC"? Some I've seen read that way.

 

No. When you adopt a cache the name stays the same as it was originally. After you complete the adoption process the "Cache by" field will automatically link to the new owner's profile and you will be able to edit it. We recently adopted an old cache and added the "adopted by NicknPapa" but left the original owner's name to recognize the fact that he had made the hide. Some just change the name, some don't change it at all. We talked about it and decided to add the "adopted by" in order to reduce confusion that could be caused by someone clicking the user name and going to an unexpected profile while still giving credit for the creation of the cache to the original creator.

[+BlueDeuce]

I had previously found and logged three of them, but had never found the fourth. I hunted up the fourth cache, checked it was all good, and logged it. After all I didn't know any more about where it was than any other finder, even though I was officially the owner.

 

Previously found and then adopted? - leave the finds.

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

[Clan Riffster]

Is this considered acceptable?

Hi Z! Welcome to the madness.

Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to log your find. You found it, so why not log it?

I adopted a few caches from a friend, and once I find them, I plan on logging them.

[+Avernar]

Previously found and then adopted? - leave the finds.

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

Uh, why not? In both cases you don't know where it is since you're not the one that hid it.

[+John in Valley Forge]

As you can see, opinions will differ. That's why I say find it before you formally adopt it. Otherwise you will have to explain it to at least one person at every meet & greet. Save yourself the aggravation.

[+BlueDeuce]

Previously found and then adopted? - leave the finds.

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

Uh, why not? In both cases you don't know where it is since you're not the one that hid it.

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it just the way it goes.

 

My stats mean something to me, barely to anybody else I fully understand, but my finds don't come with an explanation.

[+tozainamboku]

Previously found and then adopted? - leave the finds.

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

Uh, why not? In both cases you don't know where it is since you're not the one that hid it.

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it just the way it goes.

 

My stats mean something to me, barely to anybody else I fully understand, but my finds don't come with an explanation.

Of course you are free to personally consider the find count and hdden by (owned) count as "credits" and make up your own rule about not getting duplicate credit for a cache. The find count is simply a count of the the find logs you have written. The incorrectly named Hidden By count is simply a count of the caches you own.

 

If you use this logic you should delete your find when you adopt a cache you previously found - as you would have two "credits" for it otherwise. Similarly - the old owner should log a find when the cache is adopted - because he lost the "credit" for hiding it. Really, I would suggest not not confusing the issue with this artifice of "credit" for the counts.

[+BlueDeuce]

Previously found and then adopted? - leave the finds.

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

Uh, why not? In both cases you don't know where it is since you're not the one that hid it.

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it just the way it goes.

 

My stats mean something to me, barely to anybody else I fully understand, but my finds don't come with an explanation.

Of course you are free to personally consider the find count and hdden by (owned) count as "credits" and make up your own rule about not getting duplicate credit for a cache. The find count is simply a count of the the find logs you have written. The incorrectly named Hidden By count is simply a count of the caches you own.

 

If you use this logic you should delete your find when you adopt a cache you previously found - as you would have two "credits" for it otherwise. Similarly - the old owner should log a find when the cache is adopted - because he lost the "credit" for hiding it. Really, I would suggest not not confusing the issue with this artifice of "credit" for the counts.

 

My find before I owned it was an honest find. Nobody can say different

 

You might consider my stats to be simply a counter instead of a count, but I don't. Why don't you just call me a puritan and move on.

[+Sagefox]

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

 

Wow. Normally I agree with the Iowa blue duck but not here. I don't understand why finding a cache I didn't hide should not be considered as a find.

 

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it (is) just the way it goes.

 

 

This didn't really clear it up for me. I guess I don't equate Owner Stat v. Found It stat as a one-or-the-other claim in this situation. OP both adopted and found a cache they did not hide. I don't see how the timing of these events changes anything.

 

I believe the act of adopting a cache to keep it alive should not result in the loss of a find here. That might be considered cruel and unusual punishment for their kind act.

[+hydnsek]

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

 

Wow. Normally I agree with the Iowa blue duck but not here. I don't understand why finding a cache I didn't hide should not be considered as a find.

 

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it (is) just the way it goes.

 

 

This didn't really clear it up for me. I guess I don't equate Owner Stat v. Found It stat as a one-or-the-other claim in this situation. OP both adopted and found a cache they did not hide. I don't see how the timing of these events changes anything.

 

I believe the act of adopting a cache to keep it alive should not result in the loss of a find here. That might be considered cruel and unusual punishment for their kind act.

+1 on both points. The Sage is wise.

[+BlueDeuce]

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

 

Wow. Normally I agree with the Iowa blue duck but not here. I don't understand why finding a cache I didn't hide should not be considered as a find.

 

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it (is) just the way it goes.

 

 

This didn't really clear it up for me. I guess I don't equate Owner Stat v. Found It stat as a one-or-the-other claim in this situation. OP both adopted and found a cache they did not hide. I don't see how the timing of these events changes anything.

 

I believe the act of adopting a cache to keep it alive should not result in the loss of a find here. That might be considered cruel and unusual punishment for their kind act.

 

Once I own a cache nothing about it gives me the opportunity or privilege to add another Found it stat. I haven't lost anything. I've gained the honor of maintaining a cache I can now call my own.

[+John in Valley Forge]

 

Logging a Find after adopting? - Absolutely not.

 

Wow. Normally I agree with the Iowa blue duck but not here. I don't understand why finding a cache I didn't hide should not be considered as a find.

 

 

Because I now have the stat for the hide even if I wasn't the one who placed it. Getting the owner stat after having found it before it (is) just the way it goes.

 

 

This didn't really clear it up for me. I guess I don't equate Owner Stat v. Found It stat as a one-or-the-other claim in this situation. OP both adopted and found a cache they did not hide. I don't see how the timing of these events changes anything.

 

I believe the act of adopting a cache to keep it alive should not result in the loss of a find here. That might be considered cruel and unusual punishment for their kind act.

 

Once I own a cache nothing about it gives me the opportunity or privilege to add another Found it stat. I haven't lost anything. I've gained the honor of maintaining a cache I can now call my own.

 

But what if you logged the find before you adopted it?

[+Avernar]

My find before I owned it was an honest find. Nobody can say different

I'll agree with you for a multi as you gain access to the hidden stage coordinates. But for a traditional? How does gaining controlling access to the listing give you any extra insight to where it's hidden than any other cacher?

 

You might consider my stats to be simply a counter instead of a count, but I don't. Why don't you just call me a puritan and move on.

I place value in my stats too. But there's an exception to every rule. I just find it silly (no offense) than you're going to split hairs depending on the order of you logging and Groundspeak flipping the owner switch. In both cases you'd still have a the cache counting in both your find and hide numbers.

 

What if the adoption was going to go through tomorrow and you went out and found the cache today. So according to you that's a valid find. But when you got home you find out Groundpeak jumped the gun and already transferred the ownership to you. Now it's not a valid find anymore?

Edited November 15, 2010 by Avernar

[+BlueDeuce]

I don't claim a find for a cache that I own.

 

Anything that happened before or might happen after doesn't make much difference to me.

[+Avernar]

I don't claim a find for a cache that I own.

 

Anything that happened before or might happen after doesn't make much difference to me.

So it's only a personal rule then?

 

Because you made it sound in your reply to the OP that he really, REALLY shouldn't do it either. Like something bad was going to happen.

[+Keith Watson]

To me, placing a cache and then claiming a find on it is wrong no matter how someone tries to rationalize it. Now if you adopt a cache you did not hide, go a head an claim a find. If you found it be fore you adopted it, then it is a find and nobody can argue that. If you haven't found it, then go out and do your first maintenance visit and claim your find.

[+Avernar]

To me, placing a cache and then claiming a find on it is wrong no matter how someone tries to rationalize it. Now if you adopt a cache you did not hide, go a head an claim a find. If you found it be fore you adopted it, then it is a find and nobody can argue that. If you haven't found it, then go out and do your first maintenance visit and claim your find.

That's my position exactly.

 

One exception would be:

 

1) You adopt it but can't go out to it right away.

2) The container goes missing.

3) You go out to replace it with a new container.

 

In this case I wouldn't claim a find as you're not finding something you didn't place.

[+StarBrand]

To me, placing a cache and then claiming a find on it is wrong no matter how someone tries to rationalize it. Now if you adopt a cache you did not hide, go a head an claim a find. If you found it be fore you adopted it, then it is a find and nobody can argue that. If you haven't found it, then go out and do your first maintenance visit and claim your find.

ditto!

[Andronicus]

Unless the previous owner came with you and showed you were it was, I would log the find. Just comment on the situation in your found it log, and that should clear up any questions others may have.

[Clan Riffster]

I took logging my own hide to a whole new level, just to aggravate the Puritans:

a geocaching group I belong to was planning a big event, and the call went out for containers & swag. We were planning on meeting a couple weeks prior to the event weekend, so we could put a bunch of caches together and hide them. I had a family emergency come up and could not attend the gathering of hiders, so I met with one of them, passed off my bags of swag and begged him to hide at least one cache in a swamp. I meant that they hide one in a swamp so I could go find it, but he interpreted that to mean they should hide one in a swamp for me to own. That evening I got a set of coords in my email, and a vague description of the environment, along with a request to create a cache page: Thus, Not In A Lamppost was born. Naturally, I had to go find the dern thing once I got to the actual event. And yes, I logged it as a find.

[vagabond]

I took logging my own hide to a whole new level, just to aggravate the Puritans:

a geocaching group I belong to was planning a big event, and the call went out for containers & swag. We were planning on meeting a couple weeks prior to the event weekend, so we could put a bunch of caches together and hide them. I had a family emergency come up and could not attend the gathering of hiders, so I met with one of them, passed off my bags of swag and begged him to hide at least one cache in a swamp. I meant that they hide one in a swamp so I could go find it, but he interpreted that to mean they should hide one in a swamp for me to own. That evening I got a set of coords in my email, and a vague description of the environment, along with a request to create a cache page: Thus, Not In A Lamppost was born. Naturally, I had to go find the dern thing once I got to the actual event. And yes, I logged it as a find.

 

There are always exceptions