FTF situation opinions

19k · January 9, 2011

What's up with the avatars in this thread that are just a colored square? I must have missed something. I should probably roll with that, seeing as Groundspeak has received a complaint about my OJ Simpson mug shot avatar.

Sorry, but discussing that in this thread would be off-topic.

January 9, 2011

Didn't look that close to the container to see if there were initials on it or not.

Then I conclude that nobody can ever know who found it first. If you found it first, the other finder would have seen your name on the log, except he did not actually see the log. If you found it second, you would have seen initials on the container, except you did not check for that. So, nobody will ever know the truth.

This is the reason that the log sheet should be signed.

I suppose the other finder should have signed the log, so their claim is invalid, and you are the first to find it in the proper way.

Who knows -- maybe a muggle was the real first to find! Someone noticed it, did not sign, and put it back without telling anyone.

January 9, 2011

Claim the FTF. If you managed to sign the log, then the other cacher could have done so too. The other cacher has no way of knowing if he got there before you. If the other cacher also claims the FTF, ignore him and move on. There's nothing you can do to prevent him from doing so, and it's not worth the effort. If he complains to you, just tell him that you count your FTFs by log singing, and he is welcome to count his FTFs whichever way he chooses. Whatever you do, don't bother complaining in public or to him personally if he claims the FTF, there's nothing to be gained by that, and you know who signed the log first.

January 9, 2011

First, I'm a FTF hound.

I consider that the FTF is determined in site, i.e. the first to sign the logbook is the first finder. If you found a blank logbook, congratulations for the FTF.

If there's an argument about who is the FTF, this can easily be settled at the cache location: look in the logbook!

As a cache owner, if someone claims to have found my cache but was unable to open it and signed the container or took a photo, I might be angry but will probably let it slide. If said person claims the FTF on top of this, I will verify the logbook, and delete his log. On the other hand, my containers are either easy to open, or the challenge is opening them - a duct taped ziploc is not a geocache container.

If I find a geocache and was unable to open it (or didn't have a writing tool with me), I wouldn't claim a find. So far I was always able to open the container, and only once found myself without a pen but that time I bought one and returned to sign the log.

There's a cache where I consider myself to be FTF, although technically I wasn't. I found the cache about three months after placement, the logbook was blank, so by my judgement I was the first finder. However a bear had found the container before me, broke it and scattered the contents around. Several months after logging the find (and NM), I stumbled upon another site where a guy blogs about his hike and find of this cache, and the container was in good shape - so before the bear. Since neither the bear nor this guy signed the logbook, I claimed the FTF.

1.8k · January 9, 2011

So with no apparent intent on making the container difficult to figure out how to open, you Sir, are FTF. This is just my opinion, and means absolutely nothing.

I'm in no way trying to be pedantic or nitpicky, I'm just trying to make sure I understood something and didn't get it backwards. The way you phrased that, it seemed to imply that if there *was* an intent on making the container difficult to open that Scubasonic might not have been FTF. But that's the reverse of how I would normally think about it - the more the container was designed to be an on-site challenge, the less I'd consider the guy first on the scene to have a claim. Did I mis-parse this?

January 9, 2011

IMHO - FTF is the first to sign the log. With some caches, just finding the cache is only half the problem, then you have to open it! I've come across a couple of caches where I've had to sit for a while and work it out. Obviously the first person to find it was too impatient to work it out, as you showed it was possible, so therefore you can claim FTF.

If I was the CO, I'd be emailing the other guy and warning him he has to go out and sign the log to claim hes found it..... and possibly removing the 'find'. But thats just me.

1.4k · January 9, 2011

So with no apparent intent on making the container difficult to figure out how to open, you Sir, are FTF. This is just my opinion, and means absolutely nothing.

I'm in no way trying to be pedantic or nitpicky, I'm just trying to make sure I understood something and didn't get it backwards. The way you phrased that, it seemed to imply that if there *was* an intent on making the container difficult to open that Scubasonic might not have been FTF. But that's the reverse of how I would normally think about it - the more the container was designed to be an on-site challenge, the less I'd consider the guy first on the scene to have a claim. Did I mis-parse this?

I don't think the intent of the cache owner was to make opening the cache container part of the cache challenge. In our area we get a lot of rain so I think he was trying to use Duct Tape to make it a little more waterproof to protect the log.

Scubasonic

January 9, 2011

But i guess it will fall on the CO to assign FTF.

If I were the CO I wouldn't touch issues like this.

If I were the CO, nobody will get the FTF. If you cant act like adult, no FTF for you.

Why are we assuming the OP is acting like a child again? Seems more curious than childish. I'm curious wht people say too and I don't even hunt FTFs. It's a funny scenario.

January 9, 2011

For us it's simple:

If you didn't sign it (the logbook) then you didn't find it.

The first person or group of people (co-ftf) to sign the logbook is the FTF or Co-FTF. The logbook shows the order in which the cache was found.

1.3k · January 9, 2011

There are no official rules to the FTF game, at least of that I'm aware. However, if it was me, I'd not claim the FTF.

1.3k · January 9, 2011

For us it's simple:

If you didn't sign it (the logbook) then you didn't find it.

The first person or group of people (co-ftf) to sign the logbook is the FTF or Co-FTF. The logbook shows the order in which the cache was found.

I agree and it brings up a good question. Are the E.T. Highway finds legitimate?

10.1k · January 9, 2011

Ah, where is Toz when we need him??? (You may note on your calendar, in red ink, that I have said this.)

In a meeting of the minds between the purists and the heretics, (it might have been on Walpurgisnacht), and after careful bickering over the guidelines, it was determined that a cacher owner may delete as bogus, any log that is not accompanied by a signature in the log book. Likewise, the cache owner may accept any log, not accompanied by a log signature if s/he so chooses. (Certain logs accompaied by a signature in the log may be deleted for certain violations.)

If the cache owner chooses to accept the log by ThatOtherPerson, then it is considered a valid log. Then, the question becomes: Who found the cache first? Since OP did not see TOP's signature, and, obviously, since TOP did not see OP's signature, then it becones anybody's guess. (Unless, of course, TOP dated the log on a previous day than OP.) If the CO deletes TOP's log as bogus (for not signing the log), I would support that decision, and consider OP to be FTF. Otherwise, no one knows. Neither, one, t'other, or both, FTF claims are valid.

January 9, 2011

I would claim FTF. Guidelines require that we sign the logbook.

ALso no way of telling when the other person found it.

If it was my cache, I would delete the other log. Simply because I require my logbooks to be signed. Also wouldn't be happy someone was writing on my cache.

In the end you should claim a FTF and not worry about the other cacher.

1.3k · January 9, 2011

I would claim FTF. Guidelines require that we sign the logbook.

ALso no way of telling when the other person found it.

If it was my cache, I would delete the other log. Simply because I require my logbooks to be signed. Also wouldn't be happy someone was writing on my cache.

In the end you should claim a FTF and not worry about the other cacher.

Yes, but is this often verified? I have never rushed over to one of my caches to verify a signature.

1.8k · January 10, 2011

Yes, but is this often verified? I have never rushed over to one of my caches to verify a signature.

I think in the OP's scenario, the other cacher was upfront about the situation - he wrote in his log that he couldn't open the container, and that he initialed the exterior.

1.8k · January 10, 2011

They signed the outside of a container, but how do they know it was the correct container? Ink the log or quitcherbitchin.

Congrats on your FTF.

19k · January 10, 2011

They signed the outside of a container, but how do they know it was the correct container? Ink the log or quitcherbitchin.

Congrats on your FTF.

How do you know if you do sign the log? Very few caches that I find have the cache name, or even the waypoing number on the log. ( I guess you could compare the lack of signatures on the log to the lack of signatures online :lol:

.)

January 10, 2011

FTF and 2 quarters will buy you a can of pop from the local vending machine.

Come to think of it - just the 2 quarters will do fine.

Signing the contaier instead of the logbook is lame whether you are FTF or 737th to find.

FTF and 2 quarters will NOT buy you a can of pop from the local vending machine. It takes FTF and 3 quarters... I guess you can put 2 quarters in and sign the side of the machine, then hope you get to claim the soda pop.

1.4k · January 10, 2011

FTF and 2 quarters will buy you a can of pop from the local vending machine.

Come to think of it - just the 2 quarters will do fine.

Signing the contaier instead of the logbook is lame whether you are FTF or 737th to find.

FTF and 2 quarters will NOT buy you a can of pop from the local vending machine. It takes FTF and 3 quarters... I guess you can put 2 quarters in and sign the side of the machine, then hope you get to claim the soda pop.

Good one

SS

1k · January 10, 2011

When I have found caches that I was unable to open or couldn't figure out how to open, I would post a note stating, "Found the cache but was unable to open to sign log. I'll come back later with the right equipment or tools."

To claim a find on a cache you couldn't open would be like claiming a find on a cache in a tree that you can see but never climbed to get.

The other finder should have posted a note about their experience and difficulties.

January 10, 2011

I like to keep it simple.

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

Signing the container is lame and the log should be deleted.

Agreed. simple as that.

If I don't have the proper tott's to retrieve and sign the log then I will not log it as a find, but rather write a note saying I will return when I have the the right tool and/or pen to sign my find. If a cacher gets lazy and doesn't want to play the game fairly then he or she will be treated the same. I take pride in my FTF's and I don't get many (always working) and this situation would piss me off, but like others have said, it's not that big of a deal to stay mad about. If you really want justice email the cache owner and just ask to be CO-FTF! so the lazy cacher doesn't feel completely robbed. :lol:

1.8k · January 10, 2011

If you really want justice email the cache owner and just ask to be CO-FTF! so the lazy cacher doesn't feel completely robbed.

For minimum drama, if you feel you were the FTF or co-FTF or whatever, feel free to note it on your own private bookmark list or check the box in GSAK without worrying about the other cacher or the CO signing off on it.

2.1k · January 10, 2011

If you really want justice email the cache owner and just ask to be CO-FTF! so the lazy cacher doesn't feel completely robbed.

For minimum drama, if you feel you were the FTF or co-FTF or whatever, feel free to note it on your own private bookmark list or check the box in GSAK without worrying about the other cacher or the CO signing off on it.

+1

14k · January 10, 2011

If you really want justice email the cache owner and just ask to be CO-FTF! so the lazy cacher doesn't feel completely robbed.

For minimum drama, if you feel you were the FTF or co-FTF or whatever, feel free to note it on your own private bookmark list or check the box in GSAK without worrying about the other cacher or the CO signing off on it.

Here's how I see it.

Since the FTF game is not an officially recognized stat and there are no rules or agreed upon guidelines it essentially boils down to the personal ethics of the individual geoacher whether someone claims and adds a FTF for a specific cache to their personal list (whether it's a bookmark or some local file that a geocachers uses for that purpose). If the OP chooses to add that cache to their list because they believe they were legitimately were FTF that's his prerogative. If the other geocacher also chooses to "claim" FTF on that cache, based on their personal ethics of what constitutes a find, there is nothing that we, the OP, or even the CO can do to prevent it. Even if the CO deletes the online find log because the container was signed instead of the log sheet, the finder can still "claim" a FTF and add it to their personal list, there is nothing that anyone can do about it. Although I don't care about the FTF game at all, I think the OP has a legitimate cause to count the cache as a FTF, however if SS is expecting anyone to initiate some sort of action which attempts to keep the other cachers from claiming (i.e. lobbying the CO to delete the find) the FTF that's not something that I would condone.

1.4k · January 10, 2011

however if SS is expecting anyone to initiate some sort of action which attempts to keep the other cachers from claiming (i.e. lobbying the CO to delete the find) the FTF that's not something that I would condone.

As I posted originally was just getting opinions on the matter don't really care what happens either way was more of a curiosity thing that's all. Actually what happened was the cache owner wound up giving the FTF to the guy that signed the container. However he did not delete my post of being FTF so there you go. But I never contacted the CO or the cache container signer at any point, nor did I ever go back and check to see if the container was signed.

Scubasonic

3.8k · January 10, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

3.8k · January 10, 2011

however if SS is expecting anyone to initiate some sort of action which attempts to keep the other cachers from claiming (i.e. lobbying the CO to delete the find) the FTF that's not something that I would condone.

As I posted originally was just getting opinions on the matter don't really care what happens either way was more of a curiosity thing that's all. Actually what happened was the cache owner wound up giving the FTF to the guy that signed the container. However he did not delete my post of being FTF so there you go. But I never contacted the CO or the cache container signer at any point, nor did I ever go back and check to see if the container was signed.

Scubasonic

How the heck do you GIVE a FTF?

January 10, 2011

paypal. duh.

January 10, 2011

How the heck do you GIVE a FTF?

Some cache owners will write "Congratulations to XYZ for getting FTF!!!" in the cache description area.

14k · January 10, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

I don't particularly care whether you consider this bashing or not but what gives you the authority to dictate how a subset of the game that has no official rules or guidelines how others play that subset of the game?

Edited January 10, 2011 by NYPaddleCacher

3.8k · January 10, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

I don't particularly care whether you consider this bashing or not but what gives you the authority to dictate how a subset of the game that has no official rules or guidelines how others play that subset of the game?

Precisely.. I was speaking my opinion and that's the way I play. Where on earth did I dictate to you how you should play the game? Perhaps you should spend more time caching and less time here being arguementative with every post on these here forums.

January 10, 2011

I've only gotten 1.5 FTFs so far.The half-FTF came about on a cache where I found a clean log and logged it as a FTF. Soon soon after I'd logged it another geocacher said he'd found it earlier that morning but had forgotten to bring along his pen. I advised the cache owner that it wasn't a major deal to me so maybe we could just split the FTF. He agreed with this solution. So now all I need is another Half-FTF to even out my score at an impressive 2 FTFs. Anyone want to split a FTF with me?

14k · January 10, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

I don't particularly care whether you consider this bashing or not but what gives you the authority to dictate how a subset of the game that has no official rules or guidelines how others play that subset of the game?

Precisely.. I was speaking my opinion and that's the way I play. Where on earth did I dictate to you how you should play the game?

You didn't dictate anything to me specifically, but this should look familiar (you wrote it):

"If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question."

Perhaps you should spend more time caching and less time here being arguementative with every post on these here forums.

So now you're telling me how often I should go geocaching as well?

1.4k · January 10, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

I don't particularly care whether you consider this bashing or not but what gives you the authority to dictate how a subset of the game that has no official rules or guidelines how others play that subset of the game?

Precisely.. I was speaking my opinion and that's the way I play. Where on earth did I dictate to you how you should play the game? Perhaps you should spend more time caching and less time here being arguementative with every post on these here forums.

+1

SS

3.8k · January 10, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

I don't particularly care whether you consider this bashing or not but what gives you the authority to dictate how a subset of the game that has no official rules or guidelines how others play that subset of the game?

Precisely.. I was speaking my opinion and that's the way I play. Where on earth did I dictate to you how you should play the game?

You didn't dictate anything to me specifically, but this should look familiar (you wrote it):

"If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question."

Perhaps you should spend more time caching and less time here being arguementative with every post on these here forums.

So now you're telling me how often I should go geocaching as well?

You flatter yourself with the implication I was even referring to you or anyone near you.

You see, with my statement...

"If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question.",

I was referring to the collective in terms of those that play the game in my realm. Not YOURS. You were the last thing on my mind.

And yes, there are some here, perhaps me included, that should get out and cache more. No emoticon needed.. that's the Gospel.

1k · January 11, 2011

If you're playing the FTF game, then it's the first written name on the paper log (excluding beta-testers), no question. Another whiney FTF-Hound wannabe that should get over it or be more prepared next time. Bash me if you want.. don't care.

A lot of the pre-printed log sheets I've seen have FTF printed on the first line. To me, the name on that line is the First to Find.

January 11, 2011

I've only gotten 1.5 FTFs so far.The half-FTF came about on a cache where I found a clean log and logged it as a FTF. Soon soon after I'd logged it another geocacher said he'd found it earlier that morning but had forgotten to bring along his pen. I advised the cache owner that it wasn't a major deal to me so maybe we could just split the FTF. He agreed with this solution. So now all I need is another Half-FTF to even out my score at an impressive 2 FTFs. Anyone want to split a FTF with me?

Go to my profile and pick anyone you like. I'm happy to oblige. Except for my first one as I still remember how excited I was to finally get one. There are a few other memorable ones for me but for me it's not about the numbers, it's about keeping the monthly streak alive.

10.2k · January 11, 2011

So with no apparent intent on making the container difficult to figure out how to open, you Sir, are FTF. This is just my opinion, and means absolutely nothing.

I'm in no way trying to be pedantic or nitpicky, I'm just trying to make sure I understood something and didn't get it backwards. The way you phrased that, it seemed to imply that if there *was* an intent on making the container difficult to open that Scubasonic might not have been FTF. But that's the reverse of how I would normally think about it - the more the container was designed to be an on-site challenge, the less I'd consider the guy first on the scene to have a claim. Did I mis-parse this?

Almost didn't see this! No, you got me, I'm a knucklehead. I was more interested in asking about the minimalist avatars, then thinking about what I typed. If there was no intention on tricking finders, according to my original logic, FTF could be disputed. But I do lean heavily towards the "first to sign the logbook" theory. I think you summed the whole thing up nicely in this post anyways.

8k · January 11, 2011

Ah, where is Toz when we need him??? (You may note on your calendar, in red ink, that I have said this.)

In a meeting of the minds between the purists and the heretics, (it might have been on Walpurgisnacht), and after careful bickering over the guidelines, it was determined that a cacher owner may delete as bogus, any log that is not accompanied by a signature in the log book. Likewise, the cache owner may accept any log, not accompanied by a log signature if s/he so chooses. (Certain logs accompaied by a signature in the log may be deleted for certain violations.)

If the cache owner chooses to accept the log by ThatOtherPerson, then it is considered a valid log. Then, the question becomes: Who found the cache first? Since OP did not see TOP's signature, and, obviously, since TOP did not see OP's signature, then it becones anybody's guess. (Unless, of course, TOP dated the log on a previous day than OP.) If the CO deletes TOP's log as bogus (for not signing the log), I would support that decision, and consider OP to be FTF. Otherwise, no one knows. Neither, one, t'other, or both, FTF claims are valid.

The fish marine mammal is correct.

You see this thread was not about whether you have to sign the log to post a find log online, this thread was about who was first to find. The issue of signing the outside of the container or signing the log book is irrelevant.

Suppose the situation was as follows: The OP found the cache. He opens the log book and sees on the first page a blank space next to "FTF:", so he signs that space and goes home to log his FTF online. When he gets home he sees there is already a log. It says "Found the cache and signed the blank log book. Yippee FTF!" Well no doubt ThatOtherPerson is a cheater. The OP signed in the FTF space so he is sure he is FTF. A day later there is another log. "Found the cache. Saw Scubasonic's name in FTF slot, but ThatOtherPerson had opened the log book backwards and signed upside down on the last page".

3.3k · January 11, 2011

Ah, where is Toz when we need him??? (You may note on your calendar, in red ink, that I have said this.)

In a meeting of the minds between the purists and the heretics, (it might have been on Walpurgisnacht), and after careful bickering over the guidelines, it was determined that a cacher owner may delete as bogus, any log that is not accompanied by a signature in the log book. Likewise, the cache owner may accept any log, not accompanied by a log signature if s/he so chooses. (Certain logs accompaied by a signature in the log may be deleted for certain violations.)

If the cache owner chooses to accept the log by ThatOtherPerson, then it is considered a valid log. Then, the question becomes: Who found the cache first? Since OP did not see TOP's signature, and, obviously, since TOP did not see OP's signature, then it becones anybody's guess. (Unless, of course, TOP dated the log on a previous day than OP.) If the CO deletes TOP's log as bogus (for not signing the log), I would support that decision, and consider OP to be FTF. Otherwise, no one knows. Neither, one, t'other, or both, FTF claims are valid.

The fish marine mammal is correct.

You see this thread was not about whether you have to sign the log to post a find log online, this thread was about who was first to find. The issue of signing the outside of the container or signing the log book is irrelevant.

Suppose the situation was as follows: The OP found the cache. He opens the log book and sees on the first page a blank space next to "FTF:", so he signs that space and goes home to log his FTF online. When he gets home he sees there is already a log. It says "Found the cache and signed the blank log book. Yippee FTF!" Well no doubt ThatOtherPerson is a cheater. The OP signed in the FTF space so he is sure he is FTF. A day later there is another log. "Found the cache. Saw Scubasonic's name in FTF slot, but ThatOtherPerson had opened the log book backwards and signed upside down on the last page".

It seems to me those who choose to play the FTF game should be well prepared to support their claims. I have often seen the FTF log with the time of day noted. I do this when I have a rare FTF. I will toss my vote in with the sign the log crowd. But I also do not care enough to worry about it.

January 11, 2011

I have had an issue with a geocacher before trying to claim an FTF on a cache of mine they didnt even sign. I deleted his log, and he re-logged it, but not as an FTF. Anyone who doesnt sign shouldnt get credit for either the FTF or the find.

January 11, 2011

I think we're missing the whole point of this thread. That is that the cache is a ziplock bag that is wrapped in duct tape!

1.4k · January 12, 2011

I have had an issue with a geocacher before trying to claim an FTF on a cache of mine they didnt even sign. I deleted his log, and he re-logged it, but not as an FTF. Anyone who doesnt sign shouldnt get credit for either the FTF or the find.

Well setting the FTF aside if a cacher forgot a pen and can explain the container and the surroundings well that's ok in my book

Scubasonic

January 13, 2011

I currently have 150 goecaches published.

I have noticed issues with some FTF'ers. I also have gotten the opinion that those who SHOULD be able to get FTF first are those geocachers with s "Premium" level.

So what I did on my 150'th cache is release it as "Available & Viewable only by Premium Members".... Later after about a week or so and deffinately after its been found a couple of times by "Premium Members" I will edit the cache page and make it available to ALL geocachers.

I looked through the rules & regulations on geocaching.com & found nothing that "Disallows" this practice. Maybe some of you agree with this concept. Maybe some of you don't.

I think its a good alternative to provide ADDITIONAL benefit to being a "premium member" of geocaching.com

TGC

1.4k · January 13, 2011

I currently have 150 goecaches published.

I have noticed issues with some FTF'ers. I also have gotten the opinion that those who SHOULD be able to get FTF first are those geocachers with s "Premium" level.

So what I did on my 150'th cache is release it as "Available & Viewable only by Premium Members".... Later after about a week or so and deffinately after its been found a couple of times by "Premium Members" I will edit the cache page and make it available to ALL geocachers.

I looked through the rules & regulations on geocaching.com & found nothing that "Disallows" this practice. Maybe some of you agree with this concept. Maybe some of you don't.

I think its a good alternative to provide ADDITIONAL benefit to being a "premium member" of geocaching.com

TGC

Sounds great to me, I think that is a good idea and there isn't anything wrong with that.

Scubasonic

3.8k · January 14, 2011

I currently have 150 goecaches published.

I have noticed issues with some FTF'ers. I also have gotten the opinion that those who SHOULD be able to get FTF first are those geocachers with s "Premium" level.

So what I did on my 150'th cache is release it as "Available & Viewable only by Premium Members".... Later after about a week or so and deffinately after its been found a couple of times by "Premium Members" I will edit the cache page and make it available to ALL geocachers.

I looked through the rules & regulations on geocaching.com & found nothing that "Disallows" this practice. Maybe some of you agree with this concept. Maybe some of you don't.

I think its a good alternative to provide ADDITIONAL benefit to being a "premium member" of geocaching.com

TGC

While I COMPLETELY agree with your right to do that, I never would and think it's silly. And I am a Premium Member.

June 14, 2013

Well here is my two (or three) cents worth.

To claim a FTF (or any find) you must lay your writing device onto and sign the on site pyhsical log.

That is why that log is required to be a part of any geocache that is not a virtual or that is not an earth cache.

Additionally, if you go out looking for caches that are not virtual or that are not earth caches and you do not take

(or if you lose)your writing utensil then you are just asking for problems.

If you are REALLY into the FTF game, then you should also be REALLY into the "Bring my own writing device." and also REALLY into the "Being two or three backup writing devices" games.

You should also know what the correct date and time are and be writing that information as the FTF in the physical log. Most new caches have a spot indicated for the FTF to sign.

Look for and use that spot.

If you find the FTF spot and there are no marks there, put your marks there, then you are the FTF.

At least, if you must, you can burn a stick or a twig, or use a soft piece of a stone or even punch a little hole

or two in the physical on site paper log at the FTF spot.

Then post what you did on your "Found It" log so the CO and others can see what evolved.

There are no guidelines as to what your signature must be.

But I would say that to claim an FTF (or any find) you must make some kind of a mark on the on site physical log.

Now there are those special cases where the physical log may be completely missing, or may be a nasty wad of moldy wet mush. But these cases are unlikely on a newly published cache.

But remember, in any questionable circumstance, the CO has the final right as the cache owner to say who was FTF, or if any find is legitimate or not.

Claiming a FTF without signing the physical log is the same as claiming an FTF with a note saying "I was 30 miles away and my car broke down.

I will return later to sign as First to Find !!

Again, this is just my opinion, no need to start firing daggers my way. [] []

Ajax One

Edited June 14, 2013 by Ajax One

1.1k · June 14, 2013

That's good. But why drag it up 2 years after the thread died off? Just curious.

FTF situation opinions

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation