Geocaching rules debate please respond

[+sbell111]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this. In fact they only say "Share your experience at www.geocaching.com". They say nothing about an online find log. Clearly, even if you did not find the cache you can still share your experience. Most will do so with a DNF log.

 

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional......

 

And spare us your history of the unfortunate wording. When Groundspeak updated the knowledgebooks a few months ago, they conciously added that the the "Logging Guidelines". In my opinion, the only reason they don't word it even more severe, is that there is no way to enforce it. The intent is clear and those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues. Virtuals, AlRs etc...

He's still correct and you are still incorrect.

 

Just because the guidelines specifically allow a cache owner to require a log signature doesn't mean that all cache owners are required to do so in all instances.

[+M 5]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this. In fact they only say "Share your experience at www.geocaching.com". They say nothing about an online find log. Clearly, even if you did not find the cache you can still share your experience. Most will do so with a DNF log.

 

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional......

 

And spare us your history of the unfortunate wording. When Groundspeak updated the knowledgebooks a few months ago, they conciously added that the the "Logging Guidelines". In my opinion, the only reason they don't word it even more severe, is that there is no way to enforce it. The intent is clear and those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues. Virtuals, AlRs etc...

He's still correct and you are still incorrect.

 

Just because the guidelines specifically allow a cache owner to require a log signature doesn't mean that all cache owners are required to do so in all instances.

 

When there is an exception for logging online, stated in the guidelines, I think it's pretty clear that it is an EXCEPTION to the rule.

Edited April 6, 2011 by M 5

[+GeoGeeBee]

Its not the finders fault that your cache was in need of maintenance.

 

While I'm big on agreeing that the paper log needs signed, I also think there is an obvious exception when there is a physical problem with the cache or the log is destroyed.

 

Its obvious these people found the location, and they were able to see the contents of the cache, with the missing log book.

 

Its not their fault, its your fault.

 

I would say the logs should stand.

 

Now, when I say its your fault, yes, you did just take possession of the cache, and yes, you were working on it, but again, its not their fault.

 

Um, archived. Why were they even looking for a cache that has been archived for months?

 

 

This made me read the thread again... you should, too.

 

Not archived. Not even disabled. They found the cache before the OP adopted it. He adopted it, then immediately disabled it. Now he wants to delete logs based on a lack of signatures in a non-existent logbook of a cache that he did not, at the time, own.

 

I'd suggest that the OP should not try to police logs on finds that took place before he owned the cache. There's just no reason to go there.

[+GeoGeeBee]

I am the owner of a cache that I adopted about 6 months ago. I disabled it immediatly and am going out this week to redo it as it was destroyed by flood water or muggles. After it was reported not there it was logged numerous times as a find...

 

What say you?

 

If you archived it, it's not a find until you UN-archive it, in my opinion.

 

 

Disabled and archived are not the same thing. Besides, Groundspeak allows both disabled and archived caches to be logged.

[+sbell111]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this. In fact they only say "Share your experience at www.geocaching.com". They say nothing about an online find log. Clearly, even if you did not find the cache you can still share your experience. Most will do so with a DNF log.

 

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional......

 

And spare us your history of the unfortunate wording. When Groundspeak updated the knowledgebooks a few months ago, they conciously added that the the "Logging Guidelines". In my opinion, the only reason they don't word it even more severe, is that there is no way to enforce it. The intent is clear and those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues. Virtuals, AlRs etc...

He's still correct and you are still incorrect.

 

Just because the guidelines specifically allow a cache owner to require a log signature doesn't mean that all cache owners are required to do so in all instances.

 

When there is an exception for logging online, stated in the guidelines, I think it's pretty clear that it is an EXCEPTION to the rule.

Would you mind sharing with the rest of the class exactly what you believe the rule is and what you feel the exception is? What I get out of that guideline is that the 'rule' is that cache owners cannot create any requirements for logging their caches as found other than signing the physical log and that the exception is that cache owners can have additional requirements for challenge caches.

 

Also, it should be noted that the mere fact that the guidelines allow a cache owner to create a requirement that the logbook must be signed doesn't require the cache owner to having such a rule.

Edited April 6, 2011 by sbell111

[+L0ne.R]

In all honesty, this cache should have been archived. You could have then recycled whatever was still in good enough condition to make your own cache.

 

I agree. There would have been no issue with regards to the logs if it were archived and a new cache placed there. If there were some historic reason to acknowledge the cache that once was hidden there, the CO could link to the old archived cache in their new cache description.

[+darklighter]

There would have been no issue with regards to the logs if it were archived and a new cache placed there.

 

There would also have been no issue if the "finders" hadn't logged a find on a cache that was clearly no longer intact.

[+CanadianRockies]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this.

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

 

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional...

In this instance, Toz happens to be correct. You're making the erroneous assumption that the "converse" "inverse" of a true statement also must be true.

 

Suppose I state, "You can get credit for this course by passing the final exam." Does that mean you cannot get credit for this course if you don't pass the final exam? Not necessarily. It's logically invalid to jump to such a conclusion. An alternative way to get credit for this course might be by writing an acceptable 20-page essay.

 

When Groundspeak states that geocachers can log an online "Found it" once they sign the physical log, they don't necessarily mean geocachers cannot log an online "Found it" if they don't sign the physical log. Perhaps some cache owners will find a photograph of the log book to be acceptable alternative proof, for example.

 

The guideline you quoted protects geocachers from having to perform additional logging requirements (except for challenge caches). Once a geocacher signs the physical log, they are entitled to claim an online smiley.

 

The guideline you quoted remains silent about what actions other than signing the physical log are deemed acceptable for claiming an online smiley. Groundspeak generally has left this to the discretion of the cache owners.

Edited April 6, 2011 by CanadianRockies

[+BlueDeuce]

Also, it should be noted that the mere fact that the guidelines allow a cache owner to create a requirement that the logbook must be signed doesn't require the cache owner to having such a rule.

 

Although chronic virtual logging may get the attention of Groundspeak.

[+M 5]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this. In fact they only say "Share your experience at www.geocaching.com". They say nothing about an online find log. Clearly, even if you did not find the cache you can still share your experience. Most will do so with a DNF log.

 

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional......

 

And spare us your history of the unfortunate wording. When Groundspeak updated the knowledgebooks a few months ago, they conciously added that the the "Logging Guidelines". In my opinion, the only reason they don't word it even more severe, is that there is no way to enforce it. The intent is clear and those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues. Virtuals, AlRs etc...

He's still correct and you are still incorrect.

 

Just because the guidelines specifically allow a cache owner to require a log signature doesn't mean that all cache owners are required to do so in all instances.

 

When there is an exception for logging online, stated in the guidelines, I think it's pretty clear that it is an EXCEPTION to the rule.

Would you mind sharing with the rest of the class exactly what you believe the rule is and what you feel the exception is? What I get out of that guideline is that the 'rule' is that cache owners cannot create any requirements for logging their caches as found other than signing the physical log and that the exception is that cache owners can have additional requirements for challenge caches.

 

Also, it should be noted that the mere fact that the guidelines allow a cache owner to create a requirement that the logbook must be signed doesn't require the cache owner to having such a rule.

 

When I was in class I always played special attention to the bolded words. Usually were important. The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied. Although it allows armchair lawyers to try and bend the "rules" to their own interests. I know why geocaching doesn't state it more severe. They have no way to enforce it, but what is stated is very clear to most. They then state an exception to the requirement of signing the log, but I know you an Toz will chose to read it differently. Do you guys try to bend the rules of board games too? Must be a fun time. Yes I know that these are guidelines, which I think is silly, because some of them are just that, guidelines, some are almost hard and fast rules, but not quite and can be bent, and some are hard and fast rules. We shouldn't have to pick and choose which are which. I've seen you guys argure on other subjects like cache placements. Aren't they just guidelines too, or are they actual rules?

[+tozainamboku]

those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues.

That's funny, puritan

[+M 5]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this.

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

 

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional...

In this instance, Toz happens to be correct. You're making the erroneous assumption that the "converse" of a true statement also must be true.

 

Suppose I state, "You can get credit for this course by passing the final exam." Does that mean you cannot get credit for this course if you don't pass the final exam? Not necessarily. It's logically invalid to jump to such a conclusion. An alternative way to get credit for this course might be by writing an acceptable 20-page essay.

 

When Groundspeak states that geocachers can log an online "Found it" once they sign the physical log, they don't necessarily mean geocachers cannot log an online "Found it" if they don't sign the physical log. Perhaps some cache owners will find a photograph of the log book to be acceptable alternative proof, for example.

 

The guideline you quoted protects geocachers from having to perform additional logging requirements (except for challenge caches). Once a geocacher signs the physical log, they are entitled to claim an online smiley.

 

The guideline you quoted remains silent about what actions other than signing the physical log are deemed acceptable for claiming an online smiley. Groundspeak generally has left this to the discretion of the cache owners.

 

Groundspeak conciously put that statement in the new Logging section instead of the old Hiding a cache section in the new update. It is stated in many many many places that that intent is to sign the log. It just isn't enforcable, or in my opinion Groundspeak would. Why would they call other requirement ADDITIONAL logging requirement, if the aforementioned signing the log wasn't a logging reqirement. I know what you guys are saying, but it is just a symptom of how people think today. Always trying to bend rules into grey area to meet their own personal agendas.

[+CanadianRockies]

The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied.

No, the "converse" "inverse" most definitely is not implied.

 

"If it is a cat, then it is a mammal" does not imply "If it is not a cat, then it is not a mammal." A dog is not a cat, but a dog is a mammal.

Edited April 6, 2011 by CanadianRockies

[+M 5]

those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues.

That's funny, puritan

 

Why were virtuals and alrs banned? Since you are the self appointed historian. People took them too far because of shaping the guidelines to thier own agendas, since it is very hard to word any rules where some cant wiggle out of them and it is hard to enforce many rules with the way this hobby is set up, they had to ban them. If they come up with a way to restrict, like geoaware with earthcaches, then they will allow them again. Like virtuals, why is it taking so long to get virtuals back after the announcement? Non-puritans

[+M 5]

The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied.

No, the "converse" most definitely is not implied.

 

"If it is a cat, then it is a mammal" does not imply "If it is not a cat, then it is not a mammal." A dog is not a cat, but a dog is a mammal.

 

Then why didn't they word it different. Like: Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" in addition to logging the field. Or many other ways

Edited April 6, 2011 by M 5

[+CanadianRockies]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this.

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

 

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional...

In this instance, Toz happens to be correct. You're making the erroneous assumption that the "converse" "inverse" of a true statement also must be true.

 

Suppose I state, "You can get credit for this course by passing the final exam." Does that mean you cannot get credit for this course if you don't pass the final exam? Not necessarily. It's logically invalid to jump to such a conclusion. An alternative way to get credit for this course might be by writing an acceptable 20-page essay.

 

When Groundspeak states that geocachers can log an online "Found it" once they sign the physical log, they don't necessarily mean geocachers cannot log an online "Found it" if they don't sign the physical log. Perhaps some cache owners will find a photograph of the log book to be acceptable alternative proof, for example.

 

The guideline you quoted protects geocachers from having to perform additional logging requirements (except for challenge caches). Once a geocacher signs the physical log, they are entitled to claim an online smiley.

 

The guideline you quoted remains silent about what actions other than signing the physical log are deemed acceptable for claiming an online smiley. Groundspeak generally has left this to the discretion of the cache owners.

 

Groundspeak conciously put that statement in the new Logging section instead of the old Hiding a cache section in the new update. It is stated in many many many places that that intent is to sign the log. It just isn't enforcable, or in my opinion Groundspeak would. Why would they call other requirement ADDITIONAL logging requirement, if the aforementioned signing the log wasn't a logging reqirement. I know what you guys are saying, but it is just a symptom of how people think today. Always trying to bend rules into grey area to meet their own personal agendas.

Some cache owners used to impose ADDITIONAL logging requirements (ALRs), such as taking a picture of yourself at the cache site wearing a silly hat. This was in addition to the log book signing requirement. Groundspeak now forbids these ALRs (except for challenge caches).

 

Forbidding restrictive logging requirements doesn't mean lenient logging requirements also are forbidden. They are two separate issues.

 

By the way, I've never claimed an online smiley for a physical cache where my name didn't appear on the physical log. So your conclusion that I'm trying to bend the rules to meet my own personal agenda is both invalid and incorrect.

Edited April 6, 2011 by CanadianRockies

[+wimseyguy]

I am the owner of a cache that I adopted about 6 months ago. I disabled it immediatly and am going out this week to redo it as it was destroyed by flood water or muggles. After it was reported not there it was logged numerous times as a find because they found some of the contents on the ground (no log just trinkets) I say per rule two since no log was signed it doesn't count. I have two people arguing with me that the last owner didnt delete it and I have no right to as the new owner since I am screwing up one of their 100 day find steak and anothers milestones on their 2500 finds since they logged their "find"

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

What say you?

Normally I'm a bit of a stickler on 'sign the log claim a find.'

But if I am reading the timeline as presented, it seems that they found the cache remnants before you adopted it and disabled it?

 

If that is the case, you shouldn't be deleting logs as it wasn't your cache when they logged it.

 

And six months is far to long to leave a cache disabled without posting any updates to the cache page. I understand that life gets in the way at times, but clear communication is the best way to approach these situations.

[+A & J Tooling]

Every day for the last 9, as I drive home, I pass the one cache I want sooo bad but a policeman seems to of adopted the spot for a speed trap. Can I describe it and still claim my prize? Didn't think so. Life isn't fair. It's your cache, your rulez.

 

OTOH, rules, in my opinion, are usually just a general guideline. Use/abuse at your own descretion. Are you gonna' burn some bridges just for a technicality?

 

Finally, as someone else pointed out, if other people are finding the spot and the owner isn't maintaining said spot/cache, isn't this now the owners problem?

 

OTOH, are you gonna' punish someone over something that happened before you assumed responsibility of this?

 

OTOH, the squeakiest wheel gets the grease. So if I scream and whine enough, you'll cave in?

 

There, all settled? Glad I could help. Carry on Ladies and Gentlemen.

[+CanadianRockies]

The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied.

No, the "converse" "inverse" most definitely is not implied.

 

"If it is a cat, then it is a mammal" does not imply "If it is not a cat, then it is not a mammal." A dog is not a cat, but a dog is a mammal.

 

Then why didn't they word it different. Like: Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" in addition to logging the field. Or many other ways

My guess: Because their current statement says exactly what they mean to say and because most logical people don't assume that the "converse" "inverse" is implied.

Edited April 6, 2011 by CanadianRockies

[+M 5]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this.

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

 

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional...

In this instance, Toz happens to be correct. You're making the erroneous assumption that the "converse" of a true statement also must be true.

 

Suppose I state, "You can get credit for this course by passing the final exam." Does that mean you cannot get credit for this course if you don't pass the final exam? Not necessarily. It's logically invalid to jump to such a conclusion. An alternative way to get credit for this course might be by writing an acceptable 20-page essay.

 

When Groundspeak states that geocachers can log an online "Found it" once they sign the physical log, they don't necessarily mean geocachers cannot log an online "Found it" if they don't sign the physical log. Perhaps some cache owners will find a photograph of the log book to be acceptable alternative proof, for example.

 

The guideline you quoted protects geocachers from having to perform additional logging requirements (except for challenge caches). Once a geocacher signs the physical log, they are entitled to claim an online smiley.

 

The guideline you quoted remains silent about what actions other than signing the physical log are deemed acceptable for claiming an online smiley. Groundspeak generally has left this to the discretion of the cache owners.

 

Groundspeak conciously put that statement in the new Logging section instead of the old Hiding a cache section in the new update. It is stated in many many many places that that intent is to sign the log. It just isn't enforcable, or in my opinion Groundspeak would. Why would they call other requirement ADDITIONAL logging requirement, if the aforementioned signing the log wasn't a logging reqirement. I know what you guys are saying, but it is just a symptom of how people think today. Always trying to bend rules into grey area to meet their own personal agendas.

Some cache owners used to impose ADDITIONAL logging requirements (ALRs), such as taking a picture of yourself at the cache site wearing a silly hat. This was in addition to the log book signing requirement. Groundspeak now forbids these ALRs (except for challenge caches).

 

Forbidding restrictive logging requirements doesn't mean lenient logging requirements also are forbidden. They are two separate issues.

 

By the way, I've never claimed an online smiley for a physical cache where my name didn't appear on the physical log. So your conclusion that I'm trying to bend the rules to meet my own personal agenda is both invalid and incorrect.

 

The guideline never states anywhere that some CO's require logging and some don't. They don't ever state you have an option. If that was an accepted practice, it would state it somewhere. It is a made up contingency by some cachers for various reasons. The whole quideline is based on signing the log. It just isn't enforcable, so some CO's don't require it.

[+tozainamboku]

The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied.

No, the "converse" most definitely is not implied.

 

"If it is a cat, then it is a mammal" does not imply "If it is not a cat, then it is not a mammal." A dog is not a cat, but a dog is a mammal.

 

Then why didn't they word it different. Like: Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" in addition to logging the field. Or many other ways

The phrase was added to prevent cache owners who had ALRs from deleting Found logs solely based on the failure to do an ALR, and to let finders know they could log the find without needing to do any ALR that was on the cache page. At the time of this change ALRs were allowed, so there were cache owners deleting logs and cacher who would not log their find if they didn't comply with the request on the page.

 

TPTB likely chose the wording they did because they still feel that signing the log is an intended part of geocaching. They want to encourage people to continue to sign the log and they wanted to allow cache owners the option to use the signature as proof for certain caches (for example, when part of challenge is retrieving the cache or getting the log out of the cache).

 

those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues.

That's funny, puritan

 

Why were virtuals and alrs banned? Since you are the self appointed historian. People took them too far because of shaping the guidelines to thier own agendas, since it is very hard to word any rules where some cant wiggle out of them and it is hard to enforce many rules with the way this hobby is set up, they had to ban them. If they come up with a way to restrict, like geoaware with earthcaches, then they will allow them again. Like virtuals, why is it taking so long to get virtuals back after the announcement? Non-puritans

I'd be happy to discuss this in another topic.

 

I believe that the OP was asking about deleting found logs because the log book wasn't signed. It seems that most people agree that he can if he wants to but there may be reasons to allow those logs made on this cache while it was in disrepair to stand.

 

I don't believe the situation being discuss in this thread is going to result in any changes to the guidelines or any clarification from Groundspeak. There may be other situations that Groundspeak would find necessitate a guidelines change or clarification.

[mresoteric]

 

When I was in class I always played special attention to the bolded words. Usually were important. The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied.

 

If they meant it the way you say it would read "Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" only once the physical log has been signed."

 

The way it is written now leaves room for other methods of proof but only guarantees logging as found if the log is signed.

 

Technically it doesn't even say you have to sign the log. Once the first person signs the logbook, everyone could then log finds if you interpret it strictly.

[Andronicus]

My take? Deleting logs will always result in Angst. I have only ever deleted logs is outragous situations. If the cachers found a destroid cache, does it really matter to you if they post a log? In the example of finding a toy duck, then yah, that is not finding the cache. But finding a destroid cache container, and Swag strewn around? I think they found it, log book or no log book. This is supposed to be fun. No need to try to be the Cache Police.

 

All that said, if you don't mind the angst, you are well within your right to delete these logs.

[+bflentje]

I say that as soon as the new CO can prove the finders AREN'T on the lost log book, that's when the new CO can delete the logs prior to adoption. Until then, the new CO is wrong, no ifs, ands, or buts. Problem solved.

[+M 5]

 

When I was in class I always played special attention to the bolded words. Usually were important. The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied.

 

If they meant it the way you say it would read "Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" only once the physical log has been signed."

 

The way it is written now leaves room for other methods of proof but only guarantees logging as found if the log is signed.

 

Technically it doesn't even say you have to sign the log. Once the first person signs the logbook, everyone could then log finds if you interpret it strictly.

 

Exactly my point. People try to twist the wording to fit them. Everyone knows you are supposed to sign the log. I'm just saying it isn't enforcable, even your "only" wording would apply to your last statement if I was a lame non-puritan cacher and tried to bend the rules that way.

[+NeecesandNephews]

I am going to weigh in, without a ten page disertation on what the "intended" meaning of the Guidelines is. The following is "my opinion".

 

The logs prior to your adoption of the cache should not be your concern. What the previous owner did, or did not do, was his/her choice, and in my opinion. should not be subject to your views, nor altered by you because your views differ.

 

Any log on a cache that was clearly marked "Disabled" should be deleted. I don't care about any of the multitude of excuses or justifications for the logging. You don't update your PQ's? Not the Owners problem. ( I don't feel the need to feed someone's sense of entitlement)

 

My opinion- no signature in the cache log... no find. I am not interested in the hyperbole of myriad reasons to grant exceptions, even though I believe there are exceptions where I would allow logs to stand. YOU (as CO) have the ultimate right of deletion, subject to appeal and overturn by Groundspeak. Regardless of the "intended meaning" of the Guidelines, this is an "etched in stone" right granted to you by TPTB.

 

Regardless of the many "turn the other cheek" or " take the high road" posts, it is your decision how to respond. If you feel like you should foster the "play any way you want " mentality, and therefore are willing to accept any manner of consequences regarding your cache, then rock on!! Do that!!

 

If you feel like you should foster the "lets all play in a structured orderly manner" then take that stance!!

 

I personally find the "free love, do what feels good" mentality has eroded the foundation of morals, character, and judgement of the inhabitants of this country, but that is better left for another thread, another time and place.

 

I post this response to the OP, not to anyone who feels like having a debate. If you wish to debate my views, save it. I'm not interested. If you want to present a rebuttal of my post to the OP, feel free to do that.

 

Happy caching !!!

[+CanadianRockies]

The guideline never states anywhere that some CO's require logging and some don't. They don't ever state you have an option. If that was an accepted practice, it would state it somewhere. It is a made up contingency by some cachers for various reasons. The whole quideline is based on signing the log. It just isn't enforcable, so some CO's don't require it.

I agree that, other than a signed physical log, the guidelines don't tell cache owners what is and is not acceptable proof of finding a cache.

 

But it's logically invalid to conclude that not providing such a guideline implies that such discretion does not exist. One possible explanation is that such a guideline might be difficult to enforce. Another possible explanation is that Groundspeak generally prefers flexible guidelines.

[mresoteric]

Exactly my point. People try to twist the wording to fit them. Everyone knows you are supposed to sign the log. I'm just saying it isn't enforcable, even your "only" wording would apply to your last statement if I was a lame non-puritan cacher and tried to bend the rules that way.

 

I think everyone agrees that signing the logbook is the defacto method of proof for claiming finds. But I also think geocaching.com could come up with better wording if they meant it to be the only proof acceptable.

Edited April 6, 2011 by mresoteric

[+GeoGeeBee]

those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues.

That's funny, puritan

 

Time to invoke Knowschad's signature!

[+moose61]

My two cents: Logbook should be signed, else the log removed unless the CO gives permission.

 

BUT also:

- The CO has responsibilities. He should keep the cache up to date.

- Disabling the cache does not mean it cannot be logged! This depents on the local situation.

- If a CO feels a log is not valid, it should be removed quickly, prefeable the same day. For sure not after weeks or months! Also preferrable after consulting the cacher who logged!

- If the log was done before you adopted it you were not the cache owner, so leave the logs anyhow

- Did somebody put a logsheet with their name in the remains of the cache? Is this a valid log? Even if the sheet is missing when you replaced the cache?

 

Last but not least: It's all a game. Some people tend to cheat, but they're only fooling themselves. Are these logs worthwhile all this hassle they make?

[+kpanko]

Time to invoke Knowschad's signature!

Which is? He has not even posted on this page yet so I do not see it.

[+aka Momster]

 

Any log on a cache that was clearly marked "Disabled" should be deleted. I don't care about any of the multitude of excuses or justifications for the logging. You don't update your PQ's? Not the Owners problem. ( I don't feel the need to feed someone's sense of entitlement)

 

 

Several searchers DNF a hide and the CO disables it until the CO can check to see if it is still there. I end up in the area with some time to kill, so I decide to search for the cache. Maybe my loaded PQ is old; maybe I just decide to knowingly search for a cache that may or may not be there. The container is found in perfect condition, I sign the log and log the find online, which also lets the CO know that the hide is fine and does not need maintenance. The CO enables the cache. Do you really think the CO should delete my find, forcing me to return to the hide to sign the log a second time?

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Did any of you notice the OP abandoned this thread just like he did the cache in question?

[+Castle Mischief]

Time to invoke Knowschad's signature!

Which is? He has not even posted on this page yet so I do not see it.

 

It's kind of a variation on Godwin's law, except in regards to the word "puritan" and the lack of meaningful discussion that occurs once the word is invoked.

 

Me paraphrasing: Basically once Toz starts the name-calling the thread turns to poo.

[+Castle Mischief]

Did any of you notice the OP abandoned this thread just like he did the cache in question?

 

I think their question was answered. I don't think I'd read more into it than that.

[+M 5]

Exactly my point. People try to twist the wording to fit them. Everyone knows you are supposed to sign the log. I'm just saying it isn't enforcable, even your "only" wording would apply to your last statement if I was a lame non-puritan cacher and tried to bend the rules that way.

 

I think everyone agrees that signing the logbook is the defacto method of proof for claiming finds. But I also think geocaching.com could come up with better wording if they meant it to be the only proof acceptable.

 

I think it is worded just fine. It's only twisted by those that would twist anything.

[mresoteric]

 

I think it is worded just fine. It's only twisted by those that would twist anything.

 

And it's misinterpreted by those without proper reading comprehension skills.

[+Avernar]

Any log on a cache that was clearly marked "Disabled" should be deleted. I don't care about any of the multitude of excuses or justifications for the logging.

How about "I signed the log?"

 

There are lots of reasons why a cache is disabled that has nothing to do with the state of the physical log. For example, some are disabled for the winter and if I find it on a warm day with no snow on the ground does that mean my log should be deleted?

 

Even if the disable was because the log book was missing or damaged, the deletion would be for the fact the log wasn't signed, not because of some flag on the cache page.

[+sbell111]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this. In fact they only say "Share your experience at www.geocaching.com". They say nothing about an online find log. Clearly, even if you did not find the cache you can still share your experience. Most will do so with a DNF log.

 

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional......

 

And spare us your history of the unfortunate wording. When Groundspeak updated the knowledgebooks a few months ago, they conciously added that the the "Logging Guidelines". In my opinion, the only reason they don't word it even more severe, is that there is no way to enforce it. The intent is clear and those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues. Virtuals, AlRs etc...

He's still correct and you are still incorrect.

 

Just because the guidelines specifically allow a cache owner to require a log signature doesn't mean that all cache owners are required to do so in all instances.

 

When there is an exception for logging online, stated in the guidelines, I think it's pretty clear that it is an EXCEPTION to the rule.

Would you mind sharing with the rest of the class exactly what you believe the rule is and what you feel the exception is? What I get out of that guideline is that the 'rule' is that cache owners cannot create any requirements for logging their caches as found other than signing the physical log and that the exception is that cache owners can have additional requirements for challenge caches.

 

Also, it should be noted that the mere fact that the guidelines allow a cache owner to create a requirement that the logbook must be signed doesn't require the cache owner to having such a rule.

 

When I was in class I always played special attention to the bolded words. Usually were important. The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied. Although it allows armchair lawyers to try and bend the "rules" to their own interests. I know why geocaching doesn't state it more severe. They have no way to enforce it, but what is stated is very clear to most. They then state an exception to the requirement of signing the log, but I know you an Toz will chose to read it differently. Do you guys try to bend the rules of board games too? Must be a fun time. Yes I know that these are guidelines, which I think is silly, because some of them are just that, guidelines, some are almost hard and fast rules, but not quite and can be bent, and some are hard and fast rules. We shouldn't have to pick and choose which are which. I've seen you guys argure on other subjects like cache placements. Aren't they just guidelines too, or are they actual rules?

On one hand, you are making an argument that a rule is implied, even though a very large set of guidelines have been spelled out. On the other hand, you are accusing others misreading this unwritten 'rule'. Strange.

[+sbell111]

 

Any log on a cache that was clearly marked "Disabled" should be deleted. I don't care about any of the multitude of excuses or justifications for the logging. You don't update your PQ's? Not the Owners problem. ( I don't feel the need to feed someone's sense of entitlement)

 

 

Several searchers DNF a hide and the CO disables it until the CO can check to see if it is still there. I end up in the area with some time to kill, so I decide to search for the cache. Maybe my loaded PQ is old; maybe I just decide to knowingly search for a cache that may or may not be there. The container is found in perfect condition, I sign the log and log the find online, which also lets the CO know that the hide is fine and does not need maintenance. The CO enables the cache. Do you really think the CO should delete my find, forcing me to return to the hide to sign the log a second time?

Here's another example:

 

I run a fresh PQ first thing in the morning and dump it into my GPSr. I then head out to find some geocaches. That evening, when logging my finds, I discover that one of the caches has been disabled (or archived). Why in the world would my find not stand?

Edited April 6, 2011 by sbell111

[+nikcap]

I am the owner of a cache that I adopted about 6 months ago. I disabled it immediatly and am going out this week to redo it as it was destroyed by flood water or muggles. After it was reported not there it was logged numerous times as a find because they found some of the contents on the ground (no log just trinkets) I say per rule two since no log was signed it doesn't count. I have two people arguing with me that the last owner didnt delete it and I have no right to as the new owner since I am screwing up one of their 100 day find steak and anothers milestones on their 2500 finds since they logged their "find"

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

What say you?

 

It doesn't matter what I say, you are the cache owner and it's your call. I can tell you that if it were my cache I'd probably let the logs stand because it's not worth the bad blood that deleting logs will generate. The finders found enough of the cache to consider it a find to their satisfaction. Obviously it's not to your satisfaction and yours is the only opinion that matters, but you have to ask yourself "is it worth it?".

 

Brian's advice is good. I would most likely do the same.

 

However, without a singed log, I'd say you have absolutely no proof that these players found anything that remotely resembles the cache. Can they prove that the trinkets left behind weren't lost by someone who was searching for the cache previously?

(BTW, were they nice enough to CITO out the remains?)

 

Enough people have slammed your perspective on this, but from my point of view, the FINDERS should have known better. The cynical side of me wonders if someone would plan a 100 day find around some disabled caches so they could do a courtesy drive by on it and virtually log them. I've heard of other cachers doing this. Kind of like the butcher leaning his thumb on the scale.

[knowschad]

As I stated weather has kept me from getting to it, right wrong or indifferent.

OK, so it sounds as though you have reinstated the logs already, but here is what I was going to write:

 

Was it during this period of bad weather and deer hunting that the remains of the cache was found? If so, then I would say that if they can go looking for it, but you aren't willing to, that in itself goes a long way toward letting them keep their smiley if they want to claim it, especially if what Car54 suggested here;

 

I probably shouldn't wade into this issue, but here goes. For those of you blasting the CO for "ignoring" his cache and letting it trash up the area, I think you're being a little harsh. He/she adopted it in November. From what I have read, this cache requires you to cross a spillway and it is definitely *not* winter-friendly. Add to that the fact that IN had a fairly harsh winter and I think it's reasonable for the new owner to wait until spring to replace the cache.

[+sbell111]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this.

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

 

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional...

In this instance, Toz happens to be correct. You're making the erroneous assumption that the "converse" of a true statement also must be true.

 

Suppose I state, "You can get credit for this course by passing the final exam." Does that mean you cannot get credit for this course if you don't pass the final exam? Not necessarily. It's logically invalid to jump to such a conclusion. An alternative way to get credit for this course might be by writing an acceptable 20-page essay.

 

When Groundspeak states that geocachers can log an online "Found it" once they sign the physical log, they don't necessarily mean geocachers cannot log an online "Found it" if they don't sign the physical log. Perhaps some cache owners will find a photograph of the log book to be acceptable alternative proof, for example.

 

The guideline you quoted protects geocachers from having to perform additional logging requirements (except for challenge caches). Once a geocacher signs the physical log, they are entitled to claim an online smiley.

 

The guideline you quoted remains silent about what actions other than signing the physical log are deemed acceptable for claiming an online smiley. Groundspeak generally has left this to the discretion of the cache owners.

 

Groundspeak conciously put that statement in the new Logging section instead of the old Hiding a cache section in the new update. It is stated in many many many places that that intent is to sign the log. It just isn't enforcable, or in my opinion Groundspeak would. Why would they call other requirement ADDITIONAL logging requirement, if the aforementioned signing the log wasn't a logging reqirement. I know what you guys are saying, but it is just a symptom of how people think today. Always trying to bend rules into grey area to meet their own personal agendas.

From where I am sitting, it appears that you are teh one that is attempting to bend the guideline to fit your agenda.

 

Also, if this is such an important requirement, how do you explain that even Jeremy has logged finds on caches when he didn't actually sign the physical logbook?

[knowschad]

I have often wondered why TBTP continue to leave this issue vague and have not yet come out with a definitive stand on the matter, but I am now convinced that whenever this issue arises, those at the Pond order donuts or pizza, stop whatever they were working on, and just sit back and watch the debate. I'm sure they have pools going for how long it will take for certain people to state their version of the "facts", for the word "puritan" to be used, etc. etc. I can just imagine the party atmosphere around the office on those days. Why would they settle this matter when they are having so much fun with it?

[+Ecylram]

I have often wondered why TBTP continue to leave this issue vague and have not yet come out with a definitive stand on the matter, but I am now convinced that whenever this issue arises, those at the Pond order donuts or pizza, stop whatever they were working on, and just sit back and watch the debate. I'm sure they have pools going for how long it will take for certain people to state their version of the "facts", for the word "puritan" to be used, etc. etc. I can just imagine the party atmosphere around the office on those days. Why would they settle this matter when they are having so much fun with it?

 

I tend to agree, but I believe that if that happens the argument will just shift and the side that loses will be ticked off at TPTB as well.

[+M 5]

Sure there are some who believe that if you don't sign the physical log you can't post a find. But the "rules" don't say this. In fact they only say "Share your experience at www.geocaching.com". They say nothing about an online find log. Clearly, even if you did not find the cache you can still share your experience. Most will do so with a DNF log.

 

Toz always says this, or similar, and he is always wrong.

 

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner's satisfaction.

 

For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the geocache and signing the logare considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional......

 

And spare us your history of the unfortunate wording. When Groundspeak updated the knowledgebooks a few months ago, they conciously added that the the "Logging Guidelines". In my opinion, the only reason they don't word it even more severe, is that there is no way to enforce it. The intent is clear and those that want to shape the wording to their way are part of the problem and are the ones that take things to far that result in further issues. Virtuals, AlRs etc...

He's still correct and you are still incorrect.

 

Just because the guidelines specifically allow a cache owner to require a log signature doesn't mean that all cache owners are required to do so in all instances.

 

When there is an exception for logging online, stated in the guidelines, I think it's pretty clear that it is an EXCEPTION to the rule.

Would you mind sharing with the rest of the class exactly what you believe the rule is and what you feel the exception is? What I get out of that guideline is that the 'rule' is that cache owners cannot create any requirements for logging their caches as found other than signing the physical log and that the exception is that cache owners can have additional requirements for challenge caches.

 

Also, it should be noted that the mere fact that the guidelines allow a cache owner to create a requirement that the logbook must be signed doesn't require the cache owner to having such a rule.

 

When I was in class I always played special attention to the bolded words. Usually were important. The rule is Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.. You shouldn't have to also state the opposite. It is implied. Although it allows armchair lawyers to try and bend the "rules" to their own interests. I know why geocaching doesn't state it more severe. They have no way to enforce it, but what is stated is very clear to most. They then state an exception to the requirement of signing the log, but I know you an Toz will chose to read it differently. Do you guys try to bend the rules of board games too? Must be a fun time. Yes I know that these are guidelines, which I think is silly, because some of them are just that, guidelines, some are almost hard and fast rules, but not quite and can be bent, and some are hard and fast rules. We shouldn't have to pick and choose which are which. I've seen you guys argure on other subjects like cache placements. Aren't they just guidelines too, or are they actual rules?

On one hand, you are making an argument that a rule is implied, even though a very large set of guidelines have been spelled out. On the other hand, you are accusing others misreading this unwritten 'rule'. Strange.

 

Yes it has been spelled out, I was just trying to hook you up on some phonics, but you still refuse to see it. That is not so strange considering the source.

Edited April 6, 2011 by M 5

[mresoteric]

Yes it has been spelled out, I was just trying to hook you up on some phonics, but you still refuse to see it. That is not so strange considering the source.

 

If it has been spelled out, please point us to the section that says "You cannot log a find online if you did not sign the physical logbook".

[+M 5]

Yes it has been spelled out, I was just trying to hook you up on some phonics, but you still refuse to see it. That is not so strange considering the source.

 

If it has been spelled out, please point us to the section that says "You cannot log a find online if you did not sign the physical logbook".

 

This ia abbott and costello meets geocaching. Geez.

Very simple

There is a section in the guidelines that says "logging of all physical geocaches" I think it is safe to assume (fingers crossed) that this is the section that covers logging of all physical geocaches. I can't find anyway for this to be misread.

In that section there is a ONE sentance statement that references online logging. That is it. There are no alternative ways offered. Show me where it is spelled out, or even implied anywhere, where you can log online WITHOUT signing the logbook. The only thing I can even think of besides saying that explicitly in the guidelines (which they shouldn't have to, since they say you should in the only reference to the online log in that section about logging) is that there is no way to enforce it at the CO level. That doesn't meet its not against the guidelines, just that they can't enforce it.

[mresoteric]

Show me where it is spelled out, or even implied anywhere, where you can log online WITHOUT signing the logbook.

 

You are the one that said something was spelled out. I asked you to point to this and then you flip it and ask me to show where it spells out you can log online without signing the logbook. I never said that was spelled out anywhere, so why are you asking me that? Is it because you cannot find where it is spelled out that you cannot log online without signing the logbook? Care to change your previous statement?

[+M 5]

Show me where it is spelled out, or even implied anywhere, where you can log online WITHOUT signing the logbook.

 

You are the one that said something was spelled out. I asked you to point to this and then you flip it and ask me to show where it spells out you can log online without signing the logbook. I never said that was spelled out anywhere, so why are you asking me that? Is it because you cannot find where it is spelled out that you cannot log online without signing the logbook? Care to change your previous statement?

 

Its copied and pasted from the guidelines too many times in this post already. If you really haven't read the guidelines posted. Just scroll back aways.

Edited April 6, 2011 by M 5