+Danbike_Lizbike Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 The city of Lake Forest Illinois has placed a series of caches that have a "scannable" square on each container lid. I found two of them yesterday and was surprised that I was the first person to sign the paper log in the containerature. On the cache page there were multiple people who logged a find, but no signature. Is this the appropriate way to log a cache? Comments IF you want to look at them, there are around 15 placed for Earth Day. Do a search on Lake Forest, Il, you'll see them. Quote Link to comment
+Gitchee-Gummee Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Claim a find w/o signing the log (book or paper) is a good way to get your stats all mucked up. Many cache owners will delete the online log, some are adamant. From the Knowledge Books: Logs can be deleted by the owner of the log, by the owner of the listing (the cache owner) and by site administrators. Logs that fail to meet stated requirements (such as Found It logs by people who have never found the cache) or logs that conflict with our Terms of Use Agreement may be deleted. It is a reasonable deduction that if a person didn't find the cache if they didn't sign the cache log. Common saying here in the forums: No signee = No findee Quote Link to comment
AZcachemeister Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 I am a 'PURITAN', and I don't think the logging method is appropriate. Clever use of technology to get you to the cache page using your smartphone, but no proof that the previous loggers ever visited the cache at all. I would have to say you are the FTF, if you care about those things... ...might as well sit at home and log caches as they get published. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) This is going to be a good one. It's not as bad as it sounds, but I'm sure no one will read this post for an explanation. Find all 15 and you win a tote bag, if you scan this QR code on the outside of the container, which sends an email to the cache owner verifying your find for the purposes of the contest. Nothing to do with using any of the smartphone Geocaching apps, all you need is a QR code reader. People still need to post their find log on Geocaching.com Of course (in my opinion) this QR code should have been inside the logbook, inside the container. Otherwise, we could just as well put laminated cards out in the woods, and call them Geocaches. EDIT: I still can't be totally sure whether or not you need to open the container in this case. Edited April 21, 2011 by Mr.Yuck Quote Link to comment
+NYPaddleCacher Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 I am a 'PURITAN', and I don't think the logging method is appropriate. Clever use of technology to get you to the cache page using your smartphone, but no proof that the previous loggers ever visited the cache at all. I would have to say you are the FTF, if you care about those things... ...might as well sit at home and log caches as they get published. The way I read the OP the cache had a symbol on the container lid that could be scanned (for example, a QR code) in lieu of signing a physical log. While I agree that the use of technology for signing a log is a degradation of the tradition of signing a physical log book, it doesn't provide a mechanism for producing proof that one did find the container and I wouldn't equate it with armchair logging. Quote Link to comment
AZcachemeister Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 This is going to be a good one. It's not as bad as it sounds, but I'm sure no one will read this post for an explanation. Find all 15 and you win a tote bag, if you scan this QR code on the outside of the container, which sends an email to the cache owner verifying your find for the purposes of the contest. Nothing to do with using any of the smartphone Geocaching apps, all you need is a QR code reader. People still need to post their find log on Geocaching.com Of course (in my opinion) this QR code should have been inside the logbook, inside the container. Otherwise, we could just as well put laminated cards out in the woods, and call them Geocaches. EDIT: I still can't be totally sure whether or not you need to open the container in this case. You must have done something really silly...like actually READ the cache page? Shame on you for wasting valuable caching time that way! Quote Link to comment
+Gitchee-Gummee Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) People still need to post their find log on Geocaching.com I do not think this is the requirement to claim a find. I can to that from my easy-chair and computer w/o ever going to Lake Forest. Edited April 21, 2011 by Gitchee-Gummee Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 The cache has a physical logbook The cache owner is allowing finds when the logbook has been signed, and is not requiring that the QR code be scanned. Cache owners have the authority to allow an online 'find' log to stand if the logbook was not signed. The cache owner is able to verify that these finds were made. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a way that these caches are in violation of the guidelines. Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 People still need to post their find log on Geocaching.com I do not think this is the requirement to claim a find. I can to that from my easy-chair and computer w/o ever going to Lake Forest. In lieue of the physical logbook being signed, the requirement to claim an online find is pretty much left up to the cache owner. Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 I am a 'PURITAN', and I don't think the logging method is appropriate. Clever use of technology to get you to the cache page using your smartphone, but no proof that the previous loggers ever visited the cache at all. I would have to say you are the FTF, if you care about those things... ...might as well sit at home and log caches as they get published. The way I read the OP the cache had a symbol on the container lid that could be scanned (for example, a QR code) in lieu of signing a physical log. While I agree that the use of technology for signing a log is a degradation of the tradition of signing a physical log book, it doesn't provide a mechanism for producing proof that one did find the container and I wouldn't equate it with armchair logging. Did you mean 'does provide'? Quote Link to comment
+A & J Tooling Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 So, could I take a picture of this bar code and then someone at work on their computer could pull it up, take a snap shot and get credit? Wow, ain't technology great?! Quote Link to comment
+StarBrand Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Sheer silliness. Allowed by the system. Not cared about by the owner. Sheer silliness. Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 So, could I take a picture of this bar code and then someone at work on their computer could pull it up, take a snap shot and get credit? Wow, ain't technology great?! I suppose so. However, you could also find pretty much any cache and write your buddies name in the paper log. Wow. Ain't pens great?! Quote Link to comment
+A & J Tooling Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Yeap you could. I do believe a lot of these teams already do that. Quote Link to comment
+Danbike_Lizbike Posted April 21, 2011 Author Share Posted April 21, 2011 That is the heart of the issue. The scans are purported to being circulated electronically, with NO visit to any cache. Yeap you could. I do believe a lot of these teams already do that. Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) Yeap you could. I do believe a lot of these teams already do that. That is the heart of the issue. The scans are purported to being circulated electronically, with NO visit to any cache.Well, someone is obviously finding that caches. Frankly, I'm a little bit confused as to what your issue is. Are you concerned that people are logging caches without signing the logbook or are you concerned that some people are cheating on a contest put on by a cache owner where the prize is a tote bag? Edited April 21, 2011 by sbell111 Quote Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) Claim a find w/o signing the log (book or paper) is a good way to get your stats all mucked up. Many cache owners will delete the online log, some are adamant. From the Knowledge Books: Logs can be deleted by the owner of the log, by the owner of the listing (the cache owner) and by site administrators. Logs that fail to meet stated requirements (such as Found It logs by people who have never found the cache) or logs that conflict with our Terms of Use Agreement may be deleted. It is a reasonable deduction that if a person didn't find the cache if they didn't sign the cache log. Common saying here in the forums: No signee = No findee It is a reasonable deduction that if a person didn't find the cache they they didn't sign the log.* It is not a resonable deduction that if they didn't sign the log then they didn't find the cache. There are many reasons why a log might not be signed (including that the cache owner has provided an alternate method, in this case scanning a QR code, for proving a find). *Although a person may have had a friend put a sticker or sign on their behalf. Edited April 21, 2011 by tozainamboku Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.