Jump to content

Logging your own cache as a find


_Wolverine
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

I also think its bad form.

It happens in my area, I once told the person that he shouldnt sign his own caches and the answer I got is that its their cache and he can... I left it at that...

 

Anyway, something that people forget is that numbers bring statut.

How many of you will give the same respect to a cacher with 100 finds compared to someone with 10000 finds?

 

So in a way the game is about the numbers. Numbers gets you respect and allow you to climb the geocaching community ladder. :)

 

This is good. I must re-think everything. I've been logging my caches as a time stamp so I can go back and look at the fun I had with friends while they checked out my caches. I never once thought about climbing the Geocaching community ladder. I didn’t realize that a person with less than a thousand finds could put so much pressure on the community. Wow. Do I want to be looked upon as a Geocaching extraordinaire? . . . . No, I don’t think I could handle the pressure. I guess I will continue to go out with friends, have fun, and not worry about my World Geocaching Ranking. But just to make everyone happy, I promise I won’t put out any more hides, although not one of my hides is a mindless micro under a lamppost, and if I’ve put that much pressure with my six finds to upset the balance of the Geocaching community then I will close the caches I have out there, and I will delete my find logs. Heck I’d hate to be the one to fluster the Geocaching Community.

Link to comment

This topic only exists because Groundspeak dropped the ball on it by making the number of hides a side note.

The most under appreciated group of people in geocaching are the volunteer reviewers the second most under appreciated group are those who hide caches.

 

Before you get the wrong idea, as of this writing we have placed 89 hides and we do not log “hides” as “finds”.

We don’t log hides as finds because we don’t believe it is” In The Spirit Of The Game”.

 

That being said, this topic exists because you get less, openly displayed, credit for going to the trouble and expense to hide a cache than those who go find your hard work.

Ground speak has enabled this problem to exist by showing up front the number of finds and making you dig into the bowels of your statistics to see how many hides you have.

 

We believe you should get equal displayed credit for hiding and finding caches. This could be easily accomplished if Groundspeak were to report “Total Caches” (Finds + Hides). This becomes a Win-Win if a CO wants to hide a thousand caches to pad his stats , then the rest of us get a thousand caches to pad our stats. With this method hides stay hides, finds stay finds, and for most of us any need to log a hide as a find is removed (No matter what you do there will always be some who considered themselves more special than the rest of us).

 

Groundspeak has almost no ability to enforce the rules they already have!!!

Why, is there such a large crowd that thinks more rules are the answer?

 

Being over 65, we long ago realized that no matter what you do, join, or participate in,

there will always be the crowd that tries to control you

with undocumented rules i.e. “Bad Taste”, “Etiquette”, “That’s how we always did it”.

 

In the end each of us will determine for ourselves what we consider to be

“The Spirit of the Game” and play according to that determination.

 

As you hike to a new find, enjoy the view and enjoy each other’s company,

one realizes that all of the posts on the forum have nothing to do with your enjoyment of the hobby!!!

Link to comment

That being said, this topic exists because you get less, openly displayed, credit for going to the trouble and expense to hide a cache than those who go find your hard work.

 

Most cache owners, the "credit" for taking the trouble and expense to hide a cache comes from finders posting a Thank You in their found it note. Usually instead of posting that they should claim a find on their caches to get "credit", cache owners post in thread about short cookie cutter log that don't even say "thank you".

 

It seems a rather petty reason to hide a cache in order to get a point somewhere in a silly mostly non-competitive game.

 

Certainly we see some people who justify logging a find on there own cache by claiming this is a way to get "credit" for hiding the cache. That may make a little more sense for a cache you have adopted out to someone else, since after an adoption the cache doesn't show up in your hides. And it may make more sense whey you hide a cache a part of a group, since only one account can be the cache owner. But in either case I find the "credit" claim silly. In the case of adoption or group hides a more substantial claim is that the cache shows up on your maps and searches. Premium members can use the ignore list to deal with this, but a basic member may find that logging a find is the only way to keep the cache from showing up

 

Groundspeak has almost no ability to enforce the rules they already have!!!

Why, is there such a large crowd that thinks more rules are the answer?

The large crowd that opposes the logging of your own caches, does so because they also have a misconception of the "find" count. They truly believe that you should only get credit for the caches you find.

 

The problem is that the number that appears by the name is not your "find" score and it's not your "credit" score. It is simply a count of the number of Found It, Attended, and Photo Taken logs that you have. Groundspeak's "rules" are that these logs are to be used when you found a cache, attended an event, or posted a webcam photo of yourself from the webcam associated with the cache page. However Groundspeak leaves enforcement of the rules up to the cache owner. IMO there are legitimate reasons to log your own cache, so Groundspeak allow this. This does not mean you should log your own caches or justify it by claiming this is how you get "credit".

 

As you hike to a new find, enjoy the view and enjoy each other’s company,

one realizes that all of the posts on the forum have nothing to do with your enjoyment of the hobby!!!

+1 (but I still can enjoy a good argument on the forum)

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

I've learned through the years that this game is about how we each play it, and there are certain things built into the guidelines and general gameplay that are not worth getting my undies in a bundle about. So long as number of finds isn't a ranking system or valued in the community more than it should be, I just chuckle when I see folks logging their own caches or events.

 

...Then I move on.

Link to comment

This topic only exists because Groundspeak dropped the ball on it by making the number of hides a side note.

The most under appreciated group of people in geocaching are the volunteer reviewers the second most under appreciated group are those who hide caches.

 

I disagree. The most under appreciated group of people are land managers that allow us to play this game on the properties they manage them. Without them we'd have fewer places to hide and seek geocaches and reviewers would have a lot less to review.

 

In the end each of us will determine for ourselves what we consider to be

“The Spirit of the Game” and play according to that determination.

 

It's a good idea in theory, up to the point that how some consider the spirit of the game to be played has a negative impact on the enjoyment of others.

Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

 

I haven't seen an event yet that the host/ess didn't log it as "attended". There could be reasons why the host/ess did not attend, and those have been discussed in the forums a few times.

 

When it comes to Mega Events, the number of "attended" logs is important.

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=86

 

I don't see why there would be much concern about hosts logging their events as "attended".

 

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

I haven't seen an event yet that the host/ess didn't log it as "attended".

I've seen plenty of them, including the two events I've hosted. For me, personally, having them appear in my "hides" count and also logging them as "attended" would seem like double-counting.

 

I personally don't see any problem with hosts posting "attended" logs. Just because someone has organized an event doesn't necessarily mean that they also attended it.

 

And I don't think it's anywhere near the same as logging "found it" on a cache by the person who placed it. I know, I know, there's been examples of why cache owners justify logging their own caches, but I'm talking about "generally speaking", not specific instances.

 

But that does bring up something that does bug me: having "attended" logs included in my finds. I don't consider events attended as the same as caches found, so I don't like having them included in my finds total.

 

I always delete the number of events attended when I consider the number of finds we have.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

I teamed up with 20 others in the Kansas City metro area and we created a game of battleship. The final on it required you to find "hits" to sink all the ships and in turn get the clues to the final coordinates. This is the only hide of mine I have ever claimed as a find, but it also required me finding at a minimum 23 other caches, but took more like 50 to get all the clues. All the people involved with it, said they seen this as one of those very rare exceptions. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=3ce9971b-3c40-450e-9e2a-5b9a7f37e74e

 

As for my traditionals or multis or just normal puzzles, no way.

Link to comment

I teamed up with 20 others in the Kansas City metro area and we created a game of battleship. The final on it required you to find "hits" to sink all the ships and in turn get the clues to the final coordinates. This is the only hide of mine I have ever claimed as a find, but it also required me finding at a minimum 23 other caches, but took more like 50 to get all the clues. All the people involved with it, said they seen this as one of those very rare exceptions. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=3ce9971b-3c40-450e-9e2a-5b9a7f37e74e

 

As for my traditionals or multis or just normal puzzles, no way.

I'm not sure why you consider "finding" your battleship hide to be an exception simply because you also had to find at least 23 others. Would logging a "Write Note" instead of a "Found It" somehow reveal whether your cache was a hit or a miss?

Link to comment

I'm not sure why you consider "finding" your battleship hide to be an exception simply because you also had to find at least 23 others. Would logging a "Write Note" instead of a "Found It" somehow reveal whether your cache was a hit or a miss?

 

Mine is the final, that required finding all the "hits". This one didn't reveal anything towards the rest of the game.

Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

Interesting. That hasn't been my experience. We've attended events in twelve or so different caching communities, around Alabama, Virginia, Maryland, and Germany. Other than the two mega events, which were put together by committees, I can't find one that the host didn't log it as attended -- and for both of those megas, individuals who were on the event committees logged "attended" logs.

 

Even Groundspeak attended their own Block Party event (though I'll grant you that, of the 23 events hosted by "Groundspeak," they've only logged one).

 

So, yup, we've logged the events we've hosted. It's totally for the numbers. I mean, come on -- our find count would almost be a whopping 0.2% lower if we hadn't. Can't have that.

Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

Interesting. That hasn't been my experience. We've attended events in twelve or so different caching communities, around Alabama, Virginia, Maryland, and Germany. Other than the two mega events, which were put together by committees, I can't find one that the host didn't log it as attended -- and for both of those megas, individuals who were on the event committees logged "attended" logs.

 

Even Groundspeak attended their own Block Party event (though I'll grant you that, of the 23 events hosted by "Groundspeak," they've only logged one).

 

So, yup, we've logged the events we've hosted. It's totally for the numbers. I mean, come on -- our find count would almost be a whopping 0.2% lower if we hadn't. Can't have that.

Hey, you know what? I'm speaking from my personal experience. We all are. The guidelines and structure of the website allow you to log a find on whatever you want. But, in my experience, logging your own event was frowned upon.

 

Just because Groundspeak does it doesn't mean that anyone else has to, or should see it as a precedent.

 

Perhaps I should have not said "generally". And the rest of us need to be sure to be clear that we're only speaking from our own personal perspective on the issue, right? :anibad:

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment

(Event owners logging their event as found...) And I don't think it's anywhere near the same as logging "found it" on a cache by the person who placed it.

 

+1. An event is not a cache hidden and then found by the person who hid it. It is a social event.

 

From NeverSummer

But, in my experience, logging your own event was frowned upon.

 

Frowned upon by whom? More specifically, what percentage of cachers frown upon owners logging their own event as attended?

 

I would be curious what the stats are regarding Event owners logging their events. My guess is that a very high percentage do this... and I would say anywhere up to 100% is acceptable.

Link to comment

I read back through this forum and found some of the answers interesting.

Our basic philosophy about caching is that it is up to the individual how they cache. What somebody else does or doesn't do has absolutely no impact on how we play the game and how we play the game is our business, too.

 

Having said that (and anticipating disagreement, but not caring), we log the events we hosted as "attended," 'cause we did attend. It's a social event and doesn't require searching for some hidden container.

 

And we would also log our challenge caches if we ever got around to it. Most challenge caches require a whole bunch of extra stuff to do before you can ever log the find, so signing the log is really a small part of the challenge...so small, it's insignificant.

 

But, once again, that's just how we roll.

 

Roll however you want to!

Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

I've learned through the years that this game is about how we each play it, and there are certain things built into the guidelines and general gameplay that are not worth getting my undies in a bundle about. So long as number of finds isn't a ranking system or valued in the community more than it should be, I just chuckle when I see folks logging their own caches or events.

 

...Then I move on.

 

Frowned upon? It actually is the norm. I don't do it, but I'm definitely in the minority.

Link to comment

Agreeing with Brian about logging Attended on events. Hardly frowned upon. I don't know of anyone, other than briansnat, who doesn't.

 

I've failed, twice, to attend my own events - family medical emergencies left me going elsewhere at the last minute, and recruiting someone else to do the modest hosting duties. When I manage to get to them, I definitely log it. This is the norm every where I've been or seen.

 

Logging finds on your own caches is not the norm, but it doesn't seem to be as uncommon as it once was. Nor does anybody much seem to care.

 

I've considered logging finds on a couple of mine - tough hunts after someone "improves" the hide by moving it 60 feet.

Link to comment

IMHO, for single geocaching accounts

 

(I do understand how it could get logged as a team account)

 

 

 

Logging a find on your own cache.

 

Well no, as I didn't find it .... I know where it was cause I put it there :blink:

 

Logging a Attended on your own

Event,

 

Well yes, I was there and attended the event :D (My one and only hosted Event)

 

 

 

But in the end people will play the way they want and enjoy , I play my way... you play yours

Edited by EvilTree
Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

I've learned through the years that this game is about how we each play it, and there are certain things built into the guidelines and general gameplay that are not worth getting my undies in a bundle about. So long as number of finds isn't a ranking system or valued in the community more than it should be, I just chuckle when I see folks logging their own caches or events.

 

...Then I move on.

 

It might be "generally frowned upon" in your area, but i can't imagine why. Logging my own cache as found is one thing that i would never do. Logging an attended on one of my events would be just fine.

 

Just seems obvious to me that there are differences in the two. Finding my own cache is something i can't do since i'm the one who hid it in the first place. I know right where it is. If i arrive and partake of the fun at one of my events, then it would be hard for me, or anyone for that matter, to come to the conclusion that i didn't attend.

 

It really doesn't matter though so feel free to find your own cache. Heck, be first and take the ftf prize you put in it if you want. Doesn't bother me any but i do reserve the right to :rolleyes: !

Link to comment

The only reason anyone might think you shouldn't log an attended on your owe event is when you look at the find/placed counts as some kind of score. One of the sites that used to provide a so-called leader board (perhaps they still, do but I haven't looked in years as the idea of a leader board for geocaching no longer makes any sense to me) provided a ranking based on the sum of finds and caches owned. So some players may believe you get a point for each cache you find and for each cache you hide. If so, logging attended on an event you hosted would, in their minds, be getting double credit.

 

THE FIND COUNT IS NOT A SCORE. It simply is a statistic that shows the number of Found It, Attended, and Webcam Photo Taken logs you have. The so-called placed count is not a score either. It is simply the number of caches (including events) that you own. If you've ever adopted a cache or let one of yours be adopted, it doesn't even represent what you placed.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment
I would be curious what the stats are regarding Event owners logging their events.
I had no idea what the numbers would look like around here, so I conducted a completely non-scientific study: I checked the events I had attended to see whether their owners had logged them as Attended. It turned out that a little more than half had been Attended by their owners, and a little less than half had not been Attended by their owners. I'm pretty sure all the owners were actually there.

 

Make of it what you will.

Link to comment

The only reason anyone might think you shouldn't log an attended on your owe event is when you look at the find/placed counts as some kind of score.

I look at my find and hide counts as counts, not scores. I don't log events that I host as attended for the same reason I don't log maintenance visits to caches I own as finds: It would feel like I was double counting the same event/cache. Maybe I should become a CPA.

Link to comment

The only reason anyone might think you shouldn't log an attended on your owe event is when you look at the find/placed counts as some kind of score.

I look at my find and hide counts as counts, not scores. I don't log events that I host as attended for the same reason I don't log maintenance visits to caches I own as finds: It would feel like I was double counting the same event/cache. Maybe I should become a CPA.

I'm not so sure. I wouldn't want my CPA to not count my house because he already counted my mortgage.

 

I can accept that some people won't claim finds on their own hides because they believe that "you can't find something if you know where you hid it". But the idea that you can only count something as a find or as a hide is absurd. These are two completely different things.

Link to comment

The only reason anyone might think you shouldn't log an attended on your owe event is when you look at the find/placed counts as some kind of score.

I look at my find and hide counts as counts, not scores. I don't log events that I host as attended for the same reason I don't log maintenance visits to caches I own as finds: It would feel like I was double counting the same event/cache. Maybe I should become a CPA.

I'm not so sure. I wouldn't want my CPA to not count my house because he already counted my mortgage.

I want my CPA to count my house once as an asset and my mortgage once as a liability. I don't want my CPA to count my house as both an asset and a liability and my mortgage as both a liability and an asset.

 

I can accept that some people won't claim finds on their own hides because they believe that "you can't find something if you know where you hid it". But the idea that you can only count something as a find or as a hide is absurd. These are two completely different things.

I also could log multiple "Found its" for a single cache, regardless of whether or not I actually found it. But that doesn't mean I would feel right doing this.

Link to comment

did an informal analysis of regular event logging in my area and slightly over 60% of the unique CO's logged their own event. I chose not to, but its hardly not the norm to do this. A CITO event probably has a higher percentage, I would probably log my own CITO, but have never had to make the choice yet.

Link to comment

I also think its bad form.

It happens in my area, I once told the person that he shouldnt sign his own caches and the answer I got is that its their cache and he can... I left it at that...

 

Anyway, something that people forget is that numbers bring statut.

How many of you will give the same respect to a cacher with 100 finds compared to someone with 10000 finds?

 

So in a way the game is about the numbers. Numbers gets you respect and allow you to climb the geocaching community ladder. :)

Respect?

When I first started I remember a cacher said newbies are not taken seriously unless they have numbers.

Now I have serious numbers and newbies slam me thinking I act better then them because I do.

I know there are many out there better then me so I don't try to act like I am better then anyone.

I do get frustrated with some (not all) newbies who think they know what they are doing even when you can see they are not.

As I mentioned before, I log ones I own only when I adopted it or no longer own it. I have one I hid under Tango501's name and I have not log it as a find.

Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

Interesting. That hasn't been my experience. We've attended events in twelve or so different caching communities, around Alabama, Virginia, Maryland, and Germany. Other than the two mega events, which were put together by committees, I can't find one that the host didn't log it as attended -- and for both of those megas, individuals who were on the event committees logged "attended" logs.

 

Even Groundspeak attended their own Block Party event (though I'll grant you that, of the 23 events hosted by "Groundspeak," they've only logged one).

 

So, yup, we've logged the events we've hosted. It's totally for the numbers. I mean, come on -- our find count would almost be a whopping 0.2% lower if we hadn't. Can't have that. :anibad::anibad::anibad:

Hey, you know what? I'm speaking from my personal experience. We all are. The guidelines and structure of the website allow you to log a find on whatever you want. But, in my experience, logging your own event was frowned upon.

 

Just because Groundspeak does it doesn't mean that anyone else has to, or should see it as a precedent.

 

Perhaps I should have not said "generally". And the rest of us need to be sure to be clear that we're only speaking from our own personal perspective on the issue, right? :anibad:

 

Hang on -- that wasn't meant to be taken personally. That's why I wrote "That hasn't been my experience," to make it clear that I was speaking from my experience. Then I described what my experience has been.

 

Guess I could have thrown some smilies in that last sentence to convey the humor. Hope the edited quote helps.

Link to comment

What about logging your event as a find?

Generally frowned upon, but done more often than finding your own non-event cache.

 

Interesting. That hasn't been my experience. We've attended events in twelve or so different caching communities, around Alabama, Virginia, Maryland, and Germany. Other than the two mega events, which were put together by committees, I can't find one that the host didn't log it as attended -- and for both of those megas, individuals who were on the event committees logged "attended" logs.

 

Even Groundspeak attended their own Block Party event (though I'll grant you that, of the 23 events hosted by "Groundspeak," they've only logged one).

 

So, yup, we've logged the events we've hosted. It's totally for the numbers. I mean, come on -- our find count would almost be a whopping 0.2% lower if we hadn't. Can't have that. :anibad::anibad::anibad:

Hey, you know what? I'm speaking from my personal experience. We all are. The guidelines and structure of the website allow you to log a find on whatever you want. But, in my experience, logging your own event was frowned upon.

 

Just because Groundspeak does it doesn't mean that anyone else has to, or should see it as a precedent.

 

Perhaps I should have not said "generally". And the rest of us need to be sure to be clear that we're only speaking from our own personal perspective on the issue, right? :anibad:

 

Hang on -- that wasn't meant to be taken personally. That's why I wrote "That hasn't been my experience," to make it clear that I was speaking from my experience. Then I described what my experience has been.

 

Guess I could have thrown some smilies in that last sentence to convey the humor. Hope the edited quote helps.

Aww, fooey. My winky face didn't work either. :laughing: No harm done, hzoi! I've generally steered clear of this thread since my post for a few reasons. But, I thought what I read was interesting. I even got an email through my profile about my "generally frowned upon" comment. Wow, I must have hit a nerve!

 

I might be crazy, but I seem to remember that events were once logged as "Found it". Am I crazy? Don't answer that...

 

So, until the "Attended" log idea became a way to say that you "attended" the event you put on, I often heard of events as being the same as your own caches--you don't log them as "Found it". I liken the whole process to a traditional (small "t") cache: You have a logbook that is signed, and it is your logbook. You can write on your own logbook, I suppose, but why would you? So, therein was my own personal thought about writing on the logbook of your own event and then logging it online. Seemed like numbers padding to me, personally. I hold nothing against folks that do log their own events, mind you; no ill will whatsoever.

 

In some cases where I have lived people have logged their events online as an "Attended"/"Found it". But when it came up in conversation, it seemed like some folks (who usually didn't put on events anyway) said it was taboo. When I learned to geocache here using Geocaching.com's guidelines, and using input from my "geo-mentors", I was under the impression that you don't log a smiley for anything you, yourself own. So, I carried that personal opinion in addition to the learned behaviors of the other cachers I met in the field or at events.

 

But, as I've said honestly and clearly elsewhere in the forums, to each their own. So long as you aren't rubbing your interpretation of the game's guidelines in others' faces, game on. :smile:

Link to comment

I will add a squirrel into this discussion.

 

The other day I found a newly published cache (was second to find). As I waited to post a log for it, someone who was there when it was placed logged it as a find.

 

So, can you actually claim a find when you are there when it was placed?

Again, I wouldn't and I think most cacher's (that I have ever met) would find that a bit of a cheesy thing to do.

 

Well, then I know a few cachers made of cheese.

Link to comment

I looked for a cache that was published last night, except it was about 3 hours after it got published, so I knew I wouldn't be FTF. Well, when I pulled up the cache on my phone to find out who the FTF was, I was surprised to discover that the CO herself logged it as a find first! And no one else had yet looked for her cache! So I was FTF on a cache published several hours before I even looked for it. I think her log must've turned people off from looking for it. I took it in stride though, and sign the log as usual.

Link to comment

Reply to Konza Coyote:

 

It's not at all uncommon for some cachers to log beta finds. This occurs when a cacher is with the cache owner when the cache is placed and verifies the placement and coordinates. This is generally in off the beaten path locations where the beta finder is not likely to return to the area, such as out of state or in another country etc. The beta find shouldn't be logged as a find until such time as the cache has been activated and actually found. Sometimes this takes weeks, months and even years. The log sheet is signed by the beta finder at the bottom or back of the log sheet including the notation, beta & the date. Some approve of this practice and other don't. A beta finder cannot log a first to find unless he/she actually returns to the area after publication and signs a clean log sheet. (This opens another can of worms -- what constitutes a FTF? and who really cares?) I know of no rules covering either practice...

Edited by RonFisk
Link to comment

I looked for a cache that was published last night, except it was about 3 hours after it got published, so I knew I wouldn't be FTF. Well, when I pulled up the cache on my phone to find out who the FTF was, I was surprised to discover that the CO herself logged it as a find first! And no one else had yet looked for her cache! So I was FTF on a cache published several hours before I even looked for it. I think her log must've turned people off from looking for it. I took it in stride though, and sign the log as usual.

 

I think it's a kid. Then again, plenty of adult n00bs log every cache with "yay" (including their own) too. :P

Link to comment

It seems that this summer we have a bunch of young people with phones logging caches, sometimes up to 4 times. One of them decided to hide a cache.

 

The cache didnt last long and he is the only one to claim a find on it.

 

http://coord.info/GC55VBF

 

I know some people love having different cache type icons show up under their name but i've never heard of anyone logging their own cache multiple times to get the different log type icons. :laughing:

Link to comment

It seems that this summer we have a bunch of young people with phones logging caches, sometimes up to 4 times. One of them decided to hide a cache.

 

The cache didnt last long and he is the only one to claim a find on it.

 

http://coord.info/GC55VBF

 

Yup. Here's a young man (You would think by the username, but the avatar is confusing) who has logged their own cache as found twice. Seems like a decent hide with no complaints though. take a seat

Link to comment

We adopted a cache we had never found. We went out and found it and replaced it. It was a find for us as we had never found it and it took a while. We still didn't log it as a find though. We even have a series around a lake and we let others place them while on our boat and still maintain them but never log any of them as a find but would be nice to get those 5* terrains. So for us. NO on logging your own caches.

Link to comment

We adopted a cache we had never found.

 

I adopted a bunch of caches from a CO that moved out of the area. I had found all of them before I adopted them. That's how I knew that the caches were worth adopting and keeping active for others to find.

 

Yeah, I think it's generally agreed upon that finding caches you later adopted is not a problem. Just did it for the first time ever a couple months ago, actually. Caches you adopted you've never found too, I imagine.

Link to comment

We adopted a cache we had never found.

 

I adopted a bunch of caches from a CO that moved out of the area. I had found all of them before I adopted them. That's how I knew that the caches were worth adopting and keeping active for others to find.

 

Yeah, I think it's generally agreed upon that finding caches you later adopted is not a problem. Just did it for the first time ever a couple months ago, actually. Caches you adopted you've never found too, I imagine.

 

My point was more along the lines of "how can you know of a cache is worth adopting if you haven't found it?" To me, adopting a cache serves the purpose of keeping a cache alive as it was originally intended and suggests that there was something special about a specific cache such that it's worth keeping alive. I suppose that if you're adopting a cache that has significantly percentage of favorite points, adopting it sight unseen might be worth adding to ones cache maintenance duties, but actually finding the cache would help determine if a cache is worth saving or if just letting it be archived and hiding a new one in the same area is a better choice.

Link to comment

We adopted a cache we had never found.

 

I adopted a bunch of caches from a CO that moved out of the area. I had found all of them before I adopted them. That's how I knew that the caches were worth adopting and keeping active for others to find.

 

Yeah, I think it's generally agreed upon that finding caches you later adopted is not a problem. Just did it for the first time ever a couple months ago, actually. Caches you adopted you've never found too, I imagine.

 

My point was more along the lines of "how can you know of a cache is worth adopting if you haven't found it?" To me, adopting a cache serves the purpose of keeping a cache alive as it was originally intended and suggests that there was something special about a specific cache such that it's worth keeping alive. I suppose that if you're adopting a cache that has significantly percentage of favorite points, adopting it sight unseen might be worth adding to ones cache maintenance duties, but actually finding the cache would help determine if a cache is worth saving or if just letting it be archived and hiding a new one in the same area is a better choice.

 

That actually came up a few weeks ago, when someone asked if they should log adopted caches they've never found as found. Never heard that angle before, but a few people did bring that up. Eh, I suppose it depends on how well you know the CO, and if you know they don't put out any duds. If you're just adopting all the caches of someone you hardly know, or maybe never even met in person, that's a different thing. And I was once asked to adopt a few caches by someone I'd never met in person, although I believe I had found them all. And he changed his mind and decided not to leave town anyways.

Link to comment

We adopted a cache we had never found. We went out and found it and replaced it. It was a find for us as we had never found it and it took a while. We still didn't log it as a find though. We even have a series around a lake and we let others place them while on our boat and still maintain them but never log any of them as a find but would be nice to get those 5* terrains. So for us. NO on logging your own caches.

I think you are being a little too puritanical to yourself. The reason I don't log my caches as found is that I already know where they are. If you adopt a cache, but have never found it, and the old CO doesn't take you there and show you, then it is a found. If I ever ran into that situation, I would definatly log a find.

 

Strangly, I have logged DNFs on my own caches....

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...