If someone forgets their pen...

June 13, 2011

If someone logs one of your caches, noting that they forgot their pen, would you delete their log until such time they sign it?

I personally wouldn't. If they are BSing, and never actually found my cache, using the pen as an excuse, it's really not hurting me (unless the cache is disabled, or something like that)

I'm just curious as to how meticulous other CO's are.

8.6k · June 13, 2011

Almost sounds as though it would be a good learning experience in remembering to carry a writing implement.

June 13, 2011

I have also seen people take a picture of their gps with the log book, to prove they found it. I would accept this, but not require it. If i really suspected someone, I might email them and ask a couple of questions about the cache.

June 13, 2011

When I first started caching, I paid attention to the logs about BYOP. I sometimes did trips where I didn't target any BYOP so I wouldn't run into problems. I quickly learned... that I ran into problems. Luckily, I happend to have a pen handy so I could sign. I did ONCE find a cache and realized that I left my pen back in the car (not super close). I tried scratching my name and rubbing dirt in it (like I heard others had done) and emailed the CO. Since that mild embarassment, I have been really anal-retentive about ALWAYS having a pen with me regardless of BYOP, etc.

So... to answer your question, as someone who has asked forgiveness once, I'd be a hypocrit not to return the favor. If I started seeing a lot of requests from the same person about "oops, I forgot my pen", I'd be much less forgiving. That would start to raise the "arm chair logger" flag for me.

But no - in general, I believe people who cheat are really only cheating themselves. I don't get bent out of shape over it.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Redfist

June 13, 2011

There's always a way to make a mark on the log. I wouldn't delete their log if they had a picture of themselves with the cache at GZ. But yes No sig No smile.

3.6k · June 13, 2011

I know one person that said they forgot a pen and they "signed" the log and the cache is way up in a tree. The funny part is, there is a pen on a cord in the container. <_< Not sure if the CO deleted the log or not but funny to read that log saying they forgot a pen!

Edited June 13, 2011 by SwineFlew

3.2k · June 13, 2011

I don't get irritated, upset or even agitated. In fact, I don't give it a second thought as I hit the delete button.

"Forgot my pen" is really no different from "I couldn't get the log out", "There's too many muggles around", "Couldn't reach the it", "Could not find so I put down a replacement", etc., etc. All of which have been used as excused for not signing.

So, now the "puritan" description will come out as if it is an insult. That's OK, However there is no excuse for forgetting a pen and I have done it, albeit some time ago. I either came back and sign it before logging online or simply just moved on. I still had the experience so mission accomplished, however the listing service where it is listed has a simple stated process; find it, sign it and log it.

Will I take into account if they are a newbie? Possibly, however the logs I have seen like this has always been someone with 500 + finds. If you make note of the fact that you did not sign the log, I am confident in the knowledge my decision to delete would not be reversed by GS.

June 13, 2011

I did a fence post cap nano once It had no log I took a pic and sent it to the CO they said it was OK to log it as a find.

If I had the same happen to one of my own then Id do the same. Course I wouldnt be hiden no nano

Edited June 13, 2011 by sabrefan7

June 13, 2011

There's gotta be SOME proof. No sig, take a pic. Scratch it in the log with a piece of bark. Send me an email with details about the cache that only a finder could possibly tell. Something. Then I'm fine with it. Otherwise, deleted!

7.5k · June 13, 2011

I don't get irritated, upset or even agitated. In fact, I don't give it a second thought as I hit the delete button.

... However there is no excuse for forgetting a pen and I have done it, albeit some time ago. I either came back and sign it before logging online or simply just moved on.

What if the person mentioned in their online log that they made an X with a twig they broke in half and then use to smudge some dirt into the logbook. Does it count?

What if the container is stuck in some ice? It could probably be kicked out of the ice with a few good stomps, but the finder didn't want to take the chance of smashing the box so they submit a photo of the cache? Delete the log or let it stay?

1.7k · June 13, 2011

I don't get irritated, upset or even agitated. In fact, I don't give it a second thought as I hit the delete button.

"Forgot my pen" is really no different from "I couldn't get the log out", "There's too many muggles around", "Couldn't reach the it", "Could not find so I put down a replacement", etc., etc. All of which have been used as excused for not signing.

So, now the "puritan" description will come out as if it is an insult. That's OK, However there is no excuse for forgetting a pen and I have done it, albeit some time ago. I either came back and sign it before logging online or simply just moved on. I still had the experience so mission accomplished, however the listing service where it is listed has a simple stated process; find it, sign it and log it.

Will I take into account if they are a newbie? Possibly, however the logs I have seen like this has always been someone with 500 + finds. If you make note of the fact that you did not sign the log, I am confident in the knowledge my decision to delete would not be reversed by GS.

While I would not call you a puritan, I see a couple flaws with your logic. For one, it's a "Found it" log, not a "signed it" log. As long as you actually opened the cache to prove that it had a log book, and was, indeed a geocache, then you should be good (This is why you can't log geocaches that you can't reach) after all, you found it.

Secondly, the rule in question that says you have to log it is not in direct regards to actually logging the online find. The rule you keep quoting seems to be more as a general, "here's what you SHOULD do if you happen to go geocaching" towards a newbie, rather then a, "Here's what you have to do to log a find".

If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.
Write about your find in the cache logbook.

Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

By your definition, if you log your experience online without signing the cache logbook, then they cheated and you will delete the "found it" log. However, I find this way of seeing these rules ridiculous. Let's say you, "Wrote about your find in the cache logbook." but didn't "log your experience online". Are they cheating too? After all, they didn't follow the rules, and the rules state you must log it online. What do you do to them? Do you rip out the page of the logbook "while not giving it a second thought"? What about if somebody states in there online log that they took a USB drive and left a yo-yo they got for $.50 at the dollar store. By your definition, if you didn't do EXACTLY what it said above, then you can't log a find online. Clearly the USB drive is worth more then $.50, do you delete there log too? Or is that different too? What you're doing is taking what is said, and twisting it around to meet your own personal agenda.

Lastly, you are saying that Groundspeak would stick by your solution. While I somehow doubt they would side with you if the cache owner took a picture of them at the cache site. There is a very easy way around this however, just don't mention it in there logs. I'm sure you don't go to your caches and compare logs on the logbook to logs online, and if you do, do you delete every single log if your logbook gets wet, or somebody replaces it and all the logs are lost? Let's say for example, said cacher finds your cache, doesn't bring a pen, but takes a picture of them at the cache. You delete it after comparing the offline logs to the online logs. I can't imagine Groundspeak siding with you, when there is no evidence his log didn't disappear with water, somebody wrote over it ECT, ESPECIALLY with a picture of them at the cache.

I know now not to mention not signing of logs on your caches now.

June 14, 2011

What if the container is stuck in some ice?

Like this? Yep, it's a geocache. And I did sign the log. But I also broke the container when trying to gently crack the ice. Luckily I had a spare on me.

June 14, 2011

I don't get irritated, upset or even agitated. In fact, I don't give it a second thought as I hit the delete button.

"Forgot my pen" is really no different from "I couldn't get the log out", "There's too many muggles around", "Couldn't reach the it", "Could not find so I put down a replacement", etc., etc. All of which have been used as excused for not signing.

So, now the "puritan" description will come out as if it is an insult. That's OK, However there is no excuse for forgetting a pen and I have done it, albeit some time ago. I either came back and sign it before logging online or simply just moved on. I still had the experience so mission accomplished, however the listing service where it is listed has a simple stated process; find it, sign it and log it.

Will I take into account if they are a newbie? Possibly, however the logs I have seen like this has always been someone with 500 + finds. If you make note of the fact that you did not sign the log, I am confident in the knowledge my decision to delete would not be reversed by GS.

I'd be interested to know who amoungst the "no sig - no log" side of the argum^h^h^h^h discussion exhaustively audits their physical logs? That is, removes the physical log from the cache and then sits down in front of their PC and compares each on-line entry with the coresponding log in the logbook. (This would of course mean disabling the cache while the audit is done or waiting until the logbook is full and replaced).

I suspect a real cheat would simply make the on-line log and not put their deceit in harm's way by professing to having 'forgot' their pen. If someone 'fesses up to not having a pen and provides some sort of other verification, photo or leaving some identifiable trade item I see no harm in letting the log stand.

2.2k · June 14, 2011

I am notorious for forgetting a pen, or losing them while in the middle of a cache run. I have never had a cache owner give me grief about it since I am always willing to use some alternate method of proving my find if asked.

I extend the same courtesy to people who find my caches. It's a game, not a legal document.

1.7k · June 14, 2011

I suspect a real cheat would simply make the on-line log and not put their deceit in harm's way by professing to having 'forgot' their pen. If someone 'fesses up to not having a pen and provides some sort of other verification, photo or leaving some identifiable trade item I see no harm in letting the log stand.

That's not the issue, ballo & BD wished to force his morals of geocaching on everyone else, whether or not they truly found it. Some people call these people, "puritans" but that can be an insult so I would advise against using it.

June 14, 2011

There is always a way to sign, I once used bark and used my initials and took a pic as a back up. we have a few around here that people claim to have found, then the owner takes a pic of the log and posts it and tells people um yeah right and erases their logs, oops! :lol:

June 14, 2011

I've forgotten my pen on a FTF, so I didn't want to hike back out, since someone else might think they had FTF if I hadn't signed it. Instead I wrote it in mud. It took a while, but it did the job. Once STF came around, they said they wrote my info again in pen so it would stay. Fixed it fine. There is always a way to prove you were there- if you can't, delete the log.

1.1k · June 14, 2011

It probably stems from my upbringing, but no pen, no smiley. I remember guys used to show up on the job (construction) without their tools and Dad sent them home. I did it once and he sent me home. We have passed on a smiley or two because we forgot a pen. Wouldn't want to log a smiley if we didn't have our name on the physical log.

2.4k · June 14, 2011

I always take a pen with me - but on TWO occasions that I can recall, I've left it in the previous cache. With two of us that isn't such a problem. However, on checking I see I now have 4 pens in my caching bag and one of those has four colours...so I should be good.

7.9k · June 14, 2011

I don't get irritated, upset or even agitated. In fact, I don't give it a second thought as I hit the delete button.

"Forgot my pen" is really no different from "I couldn't get the log out", "There's too many muggles around", "Couldn't reach the it", "Could not find so I put down a replacement", etc., etc. All of which have been used as excused for not signing.

So, now the "puritan" description will come out as if it is an insult. That's OK, However there is no excuse for forgetting a pen and I have done it, albeit some time ago. I either came back and sign it before logging online or simply just moved on. I still had the experience so mission accomplished, however the listing service where it is listed has a simple stated process; find it, sign it and log it.

Will I take into account if they are a newbie? Possibly, however the logs I have seen like this has always been someone with 500 + finds. If you make note of the fact that you did not sign the log, I am confident in the knowledge my decision to delete would not be reversed by GS.

I don't reconcile my logs, but if someone actually says they didn't sign...adios smiley.

This is how the game is played.

Find the cache, and get your hands on it.

Make your mark in the log, and put the cache back.

No feelgood BS about marking (for your own purposes) cache sites you visited and don't need to go back to.

2.3k · June 14, 2011

When all else fails I leave DNA.

7.9k · June 14, 2011

I suspect a real cheat would simply make the on-line log and not put their deceit in harm's way by professing to having 'forgot' their pen. If someone 'fesses up to not having a pen and provides some sort of other verification, photo or leaving some identifiable trade item I see no harm in letting the log stand.

That's not the issue, ballo & BD wished to force his morals of geocaching on everyone else, whether or not they truly found it. Some people call these people, "puritans" but that can be an insult so I would advise against using it.

Signing the log is a basic tenant of the game...from DAY ONE.

If you want to play Geofudging, then go ahead and try.

June 14, 2011

If it is a relatively easy cache, then I am not as diligent about it. But when it comes to a tough challenge or a very difficult hide, I would need some verification. Describe the cache container, what colour was it? How was it hidden? Any of those types of details will do, it is more often an innocent occurance than a fiendish plot. I have forgotten my pen after a long hike and had to use other verification methods for a cache, live and learn. Never lose sleep over it!

7.9k · June 14, 2011

If it is a relatively easy cache, then I am not as diligent about it. But when it comes to a tough challenge or a very difficult hide, I would need some verification. Describe the cache container, what colour was it? How was it hidden? Any of those types of details will do, it is more often an innocent occurance than a fiendish plot. I have forgotten my pen after a long hike and had to use other verification methods for a cache, live and learn. Never lose sleep over it!

Someone was heading out to do an epic 4/4 multi and forgot their pen?

Redonkulous!

3.2k · June 14, 2011

That's not the issue, ballo & BD wished to force his morals of geocaching on everyone else, whether or not they truly found it. Some people call these people, "puritans" but that can be an insult so I would advise against using it.

First, it is spelled Baloo, it's in the spellchecker.

This is not about our imposing our morals on anyone or about anyone cheating. Geocaching has no rules. You can have a moving cache, buy a cache, hide one 50 feet from railroad tracks or whatever you want. However if you choose to list your cache with Groundspeak, we agree to abide by certain guidelines. GS chooses to be stringent about some and others they sometimes are less so.

As pointed out by the majority in this thread, signing the log is a reasonable and basic expectation. Stating openly that you did not sign the log is an open invitation to get it deleted and while you may not agree with it, the deletion would stand with GS if disputed. Even deleted, it does not affect their find or count, just the one on GC.

Auditing the logs is something most owners do not do and then usually only on particulary unique caches. Using the argument that a person who puts in their log they did not sign should not be deleted because others may not have mentioned they didn't sign is unreasonable. Try that defense in traffic court. "Yes I was speeding your honor, however I should not be fined as there were many others who did also but did not get caught".

To address one other of your earlier points, I never stated whether or not I would accept any alternate means of verification. The comment I made was limited in scope to the OP.

If you choose to allow a log such as this to stand on a cache you listed here, terrific, but do not impose your "morals" on us by insisting we let it stand on a cache we are responsible for, "whether or not they truly found it".

[EDIT: See bolded and underlined "not do".]

Edited June 14, 2011 by baloo&bd

June 14, 2011

Have no pen? Then take a picture of the cache and i'll class it as found.

I mean seriously, who goes caching without a pen? it's almost as bad as going without a GPS/Phone.

June 14, 2011

Someone was heading out to do an epic 4/4 multi and forgot their pen?

Redonkulous!

It happens, but it is still hilarious!

5.3k · June 14, 2011

If someone logs one of your caches, noting that they forgot their pen, would you delete their log until such time they sign it?

If I am reasonably convinced they actually visited it, no.

I don't hold other cachers to the same standards as I do myself.

Lack of a pen is never an excuse; human bodies come with built-in ink. Blood. And yes, I have made use of that.

1k · June 14, 2011

It's nice to see we're sticking to the schedule.

June -- Monday: Forgot to bring pen to GZ

Edited June 14, 2011 by Ambient_Skater

8k · June 14, 2011

I don't reconcile my logs, but if someone actually says they didn't sign...adios smiley.

This is how I play the game is played.

Find the cache, and get your hands on it.

Make your mark in the log, and put the cache back.

No feelgood BS about marking (for your own purposes) cache sites you visited and don't need to go back to.

Signing the log is a basic tenant of the game...from DAY ONE.

If you want to play Geofudging, then go ahead and try.

I'm not sure where you heard this.

When Dave Ulmert hid the first cache he did ask finders to write something in the log as well as to trade something. Interestingly we don't get upset now that people don't trade (some don't even get upset that trading is impossible in many caches today). Yet this was a basic tenet of geocaching on DAY ONE.

Also when the first caches were hidden there was no online log. When Jeremy created Geocaching.com he simply asked geocachers to share there experiences online. He didn't state rules for when to use the Found log and when not to.

For several reasons, the community decided that it was still a good idea to sign the physical log, even though there was no also an online way to report your experience. At the very least taking out the log, looking at the names, and adding your serves as a verification that what you found is the cache and lets others who later do the same, know that you were a previous finder.

However, there is no place on Geocaching.com that says you can't log a find online unless you have signed the physical log. There is a guideline that says once the physical log is signed you can log a find online, but this is there solely to prevent cache owners from creating arbitrary rules for logging caches. I grant that the way this guideline got written it allows for cache owners to create a rule under which they will delete logs if someones says they forgot a pen (and therefore didn't sign the physical log). However, I don't believe this was the intent of TPTB in adding that guideline.

Regarding my use of the p-word. If you chose to be insulted by the epithet that's up to you. It really just a way to pointing out how absurd it is to delete someone's log over a technicality even though you have a pretty good idea that they really did find your cache. I think the p-word is fitting for those who strictly enforce an unofficial rule in a game where it doesn't make any difference.

June 14, 2011

I don't reconcile my logs, but if someone actually says they didn't sign...adios smiley.

So the honest types are screwed if they find your caches but the ones that don't mind not mentioning that little tidbit of information are fine? What if they admit not having a pen but have a picture of them holding the cache and logbook?

That's what I don't understand. If you're not going to bother to check the logbook, then why get so bent out of shape if someone doesn't sign the log? It's not like the "cheaters" are going to tell you they are cheating. The only way to catch those evil doers is to review the all important physical logbook.

June 14, 2011

If it is a relatively easy cache, then I am not as diligent about it. But when it comes to a tough challenge or a very difficult hide, I would need some verification. Describe the cache container, what colour was it? How was it hidden? Any of those types of details will do, it is more often an innocent occurance than a fiendish plot. I have forgotten my pen after a long hike and had to use other verification methods for a cache, live and learn. Never lose sleep over it!

Someone was heading out to do an epic 4/4 multi and forgot their pen?

Redonkulous!

People have forgotten to bring their wedding rings to their wedding. People have forgotten to get their passports prior to epic vacation travel. Not everyone has a rock solid brain that prevents them from screwing up now and then.

19k · June 14, 2011

Naaaa... we trust one another around here.

June 14, 2011

Auditing the logs is something most owners do and then usually only on particular unique caches. Using the argument that a person who puts in their log they did not sign should not be deleted because others may not have mentioned they didn't sign is unreasonable. Try that defense in traffic court. "Yes I was speeding your honor, however I should not be fined as there were many others who did also but did not get caught".

It's more like walking into the police station and informing the officer you had been speeding. Sure, some Barney Fife types would insist on giving you the ticket. But I believe most would be more like Andy Taylor and recognize that you realize you were wrong since you turned yourself in and let you off with a warning.

June 14, 2011

Naaaa... we trust one another around here.

Apparently not so much.

19k · June 14, 2011

I don't get irritated, upset or even agitated. In fact, I don't give it a second thought as I hit the delete button.

"Forgot my pen" is really no different from "I couldn't get the log out", "There's too many muggles around", "Couldn't reach the it", "Could not find so I put down a replacement", etc., etc. All of which have been used as excused for not signing.

So, now the "puritan" description will come out as if it is an insult. That's OK, However there is no excuse for forgetting a pen and I have done it, albeit some time ago. I either came back and sign it before logging online or simply just moved on. I still had the experience so mission accomplished, however the listing service where it is listed has a simple stated process; find it, sign it and log it.

Will I take into account if they are a newbie? Possibly, however the logs I have seen like this has always been someone with 500 + finds. If you make note of the fact that you did not sign the log, I am confident in the knowledge my decision to delete would not be reversed by GS.

While I would not call you a puritan, I see a couple flaws with your logic. For one, it's a "Found it" log, not a "signed it" log. As long as you actually opened the cache to prove that it had a log book, and was, indeed a geocache, then you should be good (This is why you can't log geocaches that you can't reach) after all, you found it.

Secondly, the rule in question that says you have to log it is not in direct regards to actually logging the online find. The rule you keep quoting seems to be more as a general, "here's what you SHOULD do if you happen to go geocaching" towards a newbie, rather then a, "Here's what you have to do to log a find".

If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.
Write about your find in the cache logbook.

Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

By your definition, if you log your experience online without signing the cache logbook, then they cheated and you will delete the "found it" log. However, I find this way of seeing these rules ridiculous. Let's say you, "Wrote about your find in the cache logbook." but didn't "log your experience online". Are they cheating too? After all, they didn't follow the rules, and the rules state you must log it online. What do you do to them? Do you rip out the page of the logbook "while not giving it a second thought"? What about if somebody states in there online log that they took a USB drive and left a yo-yo they got for $.50 at the dollar store. By your definition, if you didn't do EXACTLY what it said above, then you can't log a find online. Clearly the USB drive is worth more then $.50, do you delete there log too? Or is that different too? What you're doing is taking what is said, and twisting it around to meet your own personal agenda.

Lastly, you are saying that Groundspeak would stick by your solution. While I somehow doubt they would side with you if the cache owner took a picture of them at the cache site. There is a very easy way around this however, just don't mention it in there logs. I'm sure you don't go to your caches and compare logs on the logbook to logs online, and if you do, do you delete every single log if your logbook gets wet, or somebody replaces it and all the logs are lost? Let's say for example, said cacher finds your cache, doesn't bring a pen, but takes a picture of them at the cache. You delete it after comparing the offline logs to the online logs. I can't imagine Groundspeak siding with you, when there is no evidence his log didn't disappear with water, somebody wrote over it ECT, ESPECIALLY with a picture of them at the cache.

I know now not to mention not signing of logs on your caches now.

That was actually a very well spoken post there, Coldgears!

19k · June 14, 2011

There is always a way to sign, I once used bark and used my initials and took a pic as a back up. we have a few around here that people claim to have found, then the owner takes a pic of the log and posts it and tells people um yeah right and erases their logs, oops!

To be honest, while I have signed logs with mud and chlorophyll, I really think that those efforts are at least a bit childish. In my area, unless I have a good reason to not believe a finder, I am going to trust them. Most of these guys, I either know directly, or I know through somebody else, or I will know eventually.

19k · June 14, 2011

It probably stems from my upbringing, but no pen, no smiley. I remember guys used to show up on the job (construction) without their tools and Dad sent them home. I did it once and he sent me home. We have passed on a smiley or two because we forgot a pen. Wouldn't want to log a smiley if we didn't have our name on the physical log.

Do you run into these "no pen" guys at events? What do they say when you tell them who you are and they remember that you were the guy that deleted their log because they forgot their pen? Nawwww... unless you have a good reason to believe BS, do not be CS about it.

19k · June 14, 2011

That's not the issue, ballo & BD wished to force his morals of geocaching on everyone else, whether or not they truly found it. Some people call these people, "puritans" but that can be an insult so I would advise against using it.

First, it is spelled Baloo, it's in the spellchecker.

This is not about our imposing our morals on anyone or about anyone cheating. Geocaching has no rules. You can have a moving cache, buy a cache, hide one 50 feet from railroad tracks or whatever you want. However if you choose to list your cache with Groundspeak, we agree to abide by certain guidelines. GS chooses to be stringent about some and others they sometimes are less so.

As pointed out by the majority in this thread, signing the log is a reasonable and basic expectation. Stating openly that you did not sign the log is an open invitation to get it deleted and while you may not agree with it, the deletion would stand with GS if disputed. Even deleted, it does not affect their find or count, just the one on GC.

Auditing the logs is something most owners do and then usually only on particular unique caches. Using the argument that a person who puts in their log they did not sign should not be deleted because others may not have mentioned they didn't sign is unreasonable. Try that defense in traffic court. "Yes I was speeding your honor, however I should not be fined as there were many others who did also but did not get caught".

To address one other of your earlier points, I never stated whether or not I would accept any alternate means of verification. The comment I made was limited in scope to the OP.

If you choose to allow a log such as this to stand on a cache you listed here, terrific, but do not impose your "morals" on us by insisting we let it stand on a cache we are responsible for, "whether or not they truly found it".

Chicken dung, Baloo.

OK, well, only somewhat. I hear what you are saying about unique caches. I recently deleted, for the very first time, two logs from a team of cachers that stated that they spotted my cache 25 feet up the metal pole, but were not able to get it down to sign it. But that is a whole lot different from forgetting a pen.

3.7k · June 14, 2011

It's nice to see we're sticking to the schedule.

June -- Monday: Forgot to bring pen to GZ

This is very funny. Thanks for the laugh. :laughing:

Nearly peed myself at the bottom of September. :laughing:

Edited June 14, 2011 by The_Incredibles_

14k · June 14, 2011

I've never deleted a log. I trust that if someone posts an online log that they're being honest about finding the cache. If they're not honest, it doesn't effect me, and they'll know whether or not they actually found the cache.

However, for one of my easily found caches I recently got a couple of back-to-back DNFs. Considering how easy the find is, I disabled the cache until I could get a chance to go check it out and replace the container if necessary. About a week later someone posted a found it log so I figured the DNFs were just a fluke, the cache was still there, so I enabled the listing again. This morning I got another DNF log and a PM from the seeker telling me where he had searched. Now, I'm pretty sure that the cache *is* missing, which makes that previous found it log suspect. So, in this case, if someone actually didn't find the cache but posted a found it log anyway, it sends a message to others that might want to look for it that the cache *is* still viable. Of course, if the cache is missing now I really have no way of proving that the latest find was legitimate.

18.9k · June 14, 2011

There's gotta be SOME proof. No sig, take a pic. Scratch it in the log with a piece of bark. Send me an email with details about the cache that only a finder could possibly tell. Something. Then I'm fine with it. Otherwise, deleted!

+1

June 14, 2011

Eh...depends on the cache. If its one that is supposed to be difficult and a challenge, then I will need you to sign it. Have I forgotten a pen....sure, I will let it slide from time to time.

8.6k · June 14, 2011

Hey...... dorqie.......

Whatcha think about the can-o-worms you opened with this one?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

19k · June 14, 2011

Naaaa... we trust one another around here.

Apparently not so much.

:blink:

38.2k · June 14, 2011

I leave pens in nearly all of my caches, but if someone said the pen was missing and he forgot his, I'd take him at his word.

Now if he seemed to "forget" it at every cache I'd be suspicious.

4.2k · June 14, 2011

When all else fails I leave DNA.

Fact: tongue prints are unique.

June 14, 2011

I drop a golf pencil off at every cache I find that it'll fit in. Excuses are like rear ends...

2k · June 14, 2011

if someone blatantly puts it in their log that they forgot their pen...I will send them an email asking them to describe the cache and then edit their log to not put such obvious admissions in it.

If they refuse to edit said log, I will delete it. If I do nothing, its a blatant admission to other cache attempters that I will allow anyone to just log my finds willy nilly.

June 14, 2011

Naaaa... we trust one another around here.

Apparently not so much.

Didn't mean you in particular. But with all the talk of deleting logs it is apparent that not everyone trusts everyone else.

if someone blatantly puts it in their log that they forgot their pen...I will send them an email asking them to describe the cache and then edit their log to not put such obvious admissions in it.

If they refuse to edit said log, I will delete it. If I do nothing, its a blatant admission to other cache attempters that I will allow anyone to just log my finds willy nilly.

This sounds pretty reasonable.

If someone forgets their pen...

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment