Jump to content

Cheating?


smokey_burnout
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I just went through a post by Bubba Louise concerning cheating and found it to be very interresting. Since I'm new to the sport, I have to ask... If you go out as a group, should I be loging a found cache if one of my buddies can_cooler or LoneWolf is the one to actually find it? Since we work together, I've assumed that one find, all find. Is this correct? I'd like to be true to the sport so please correct me if I'm wrong. icon_confused.gif

Link to comment

My wife and I Cache together and seperately. When we find one together we both cache cause we were both there. She has a different search technique when we get within about 100 ft from a cache. It is amusing to observe.

 

*******************************************

I am a severely patient sort of guy..

Link to comment

I think this is a personal preference. I would want to log a 'not found' even if another member of the group did because I like to have the history. I don't think it's necessary however.

 

One person could just log 'I looked for it with Able, Baker, and Charlie for half an hour, but couldn't find it. We found an old shoe. Was this the cache?'

 

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

Link to comment

I too think this is personal preference. I have logged not found when I was with my husband who made the find because I was p****d he found it first. I have gotten over that though and intend to log a find when we are together, whoever first spots the cache.

That said, if you are seeking a cache where you know there will be big goodies involved, and you log as a team, only one object should be traded, not one per team member.

Cachewidow

 

It's not difficult to meet demands; just turn around and there they are.

Link to comment

I would have one of the folks log as 'not found' instead of everyone of the group. This way the owner can determine (if there are a couple of no founds) that there might be a problem. They can then go check to see if it is gone, moved, or still there.

 

Erawan

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy & The Beast:

If you go out as a group and you don't find the cache, do you each log a not found?


Interesting . . . I was looking for a cache on NYE. I was struggling with it. Along came three other cachers. We all hunted together and all failed to find it. At least two of us logged a no find.

 

I suppose one would have been enough. But since we came as two "groups", two logs were made. When we went off together to find a couple other caches, we all logged them as finds, despite who actually found it.

 

Fro.

 

________________________________________

Geocaching . . . hiking with a purpose

Link to comment

Hmmmmm, interesting how some feel its ok for both parties to log a find, but not a no-find. Is this a double standard? I guess I go by what others have said in other posts........if you go to look for it, and you don't find it.......it's a no-find.

 

By the way Smokey_Burnout......welcome to geocaching! Glad to see new members in our neck of the woods.........

 

Children are natural mimics who act like their parents despite every effort to teach them good manners.

Link to comment

When we go out as a group we all try and find it seperately. Whe anyone spots it, they just move on as if they are still looking, and then you could kind of mention that they have found it. It gets comical when you are still looking and you look up to see the others looking at the trees instead of for the cache, and you know you are the big dummy that hasn't found it yet!! (Usually me)

If it is a really difficult cache to find, such as covered in snow, and we are about ready to quit, we just say, if one finds it, we have all found it! Then we have one of us sign the log for all with our "took this and left that".

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Geo-Johnson's:

Hmmmmm, interesting how some feel its ok for both parties to log a find, but not a no-find. Is this a double standard? I guess I go by what others have said in other posts........if you go to look for it, and you don't find it.......it's a no-find.


 

Well, it depends on what the true purpose of a Not Found log is.

 

If the purpose is to put a "bad mark" on the caching history of a user, then yes, all who didn't find it should log it as a Not Found.

 

If the purpose is to inform other cachers and the cache owner that there may be a problem with the cache, then logging multiple Not Founds is both counterproductive and possibly misinformative.

 

If anouther cacher is planning to visit, and sees that the six latest logs are all Not Founds, they might skip the cache all together. This could effectively KILL a geocache, unless the cache owner steps in and posts a 'Its still there, folks!' log (and hopes that everyone sees this, and not just all the frown faces), or deletes some of the excess Not Founds. I've found that there are a lot of people out there who are unable to read, and respond only to colorful pictures.

Link to comment

I sometimes cache in a group, sometimes I cache alone, but I always log finds. Now if the group is large I will not log not founds because it could kill a cache, but if there are only two of us, I will log a not found so that my friends who are watching the cache or who come after me and do find the cache can taunt me.

 

Geocaching is a great game/sport, some people are bringing too much baggage along, and are trying to control not only the game but the other players.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Snazz:

...If the purpose is to inform other cachers and the cache owner that there may be a problem with the cache, then logging multiple Not Founds is both counterproductive and possibly misinformative.

 

If anouther cacher is planning to visit, and sees that the six latest logs are all Not Founds, they might skip the cache all together. This could effectively KILL a geocache, unless the cache owner steps in and posts a 'Its still there, folks!' log (and hopes that everyone sees this, and not just all the frown faces), or deletes some of the excess Not Founds. I've found that there are a lot of people out there who are unable to read, and respond only to colorful pictures.


 

It's so hard to tell is you're serious, but I'll bite.

 

I log a not found for two reasons: to notify the owner of a potential problem and for my own caching history. For the second reason, I don't find it appropriate for an owner to arbitrarily delete a 'not found' log.

 

As a cacher who may go look for this cache, I would find it informitive to know that a group of six cachers couldn't find it. Certainly a group of cachers is more likely to look in every possible spot than a solo cacher. If a group of cachers couldn't find my cache, I'd check on it and post a note. I expect other cache owners to do the same.

 

For these reasons, I have no problem with each cacher posting a 'not found' log.

 

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by sbell111:

It's so hard to tell is you're serious, but I'll bite.


 

I am serious. icon_smile.gif

 

quote:

As a cacher who may go look for this cache, I would find it informitive to know that a group of six cachers couldn't find it. Certainly a group of cachers is more likely to look in every


 

I'd assume that, if only one in the group logged the Not Found, that they'd mention it having been a group effort.

 

For people who glance quickly at the recent logs, I really think that multiple Not Founds might give the wrong impression. People really don't seem to be able to read... and I'm not kidding, unfortunatly.

 

Also, the Watcher app displays the faces of the recent finds on the list view, along with some sort of averaged face, and six not founds could easily make a cache appear to those who use Watcher as not being available anymore.

Link to comment

If a non cacher while out walking came across a cache by accident and read the Geocache notice and thought that this looked intersting, wrote a note in the log and when he (or she) got home logged in and joined up, should he (or she) claim a find for that cache as the were not searching for it when they came across it?

Link to comment

Good point! Obviously I didn't consider it from the caches point of view........

 

Now how do you determine who in the group has to log the no-find..........here's how we'd probably do it in our group.........Last one to the car is a wrotten egg and has to log the no-find!!! he he he!!

 

quote:
If anouther cacher is planning to visit, and sees that the six latest logs are all Not Founds, they might skip the cache all together. This could effectively KILL a geocache, unless the cache owner steps in and posts a 'Its still there, folks!' log

 

Children are natural mimics who act like their parents despite every effort to teach them good manners.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Snazz:

 

Well, it depends on what the true purpose of a Not Found log is.

 

If the purpose is to put a "bad mark" on the caching history of a user, then yes, all who didn't find it should log it as a Not Found.

 

If the purpose is to inform other cachers and the cache owner that there may be a problem with the cache, then logging multiple Not Founds is both counterproductive and possibly misinformative.


 

Two things. First, people need to get over the idea that posting a "Not Found" gives you some sort of penalty. As has been stated before, it gives the cache owner a notice that something may be amiss, and it makes your caching history complete.

 

Second, people need to learn to read! The ability to be able to read other people's logs is there for a purpose! It's the history of the cache.

 

That said, I think everyone should post the "Not Found". One person can write a detailed report first, then everyone else can follow up with a "Ditto X's report".

 

Personally, if you're concerned that six not founds in a row could kill a cache, I'd bet that unless its a 5/5, six people not being able to find a cache is a pretty good sign that it may have gone missing.

 

- - - - -

Wisconsin Geocaching Association

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Cheesehead Dave:

Personally, if you're concerned that six not founds in a row could kill a cache, I'd bet that unless its a 5/5, six people not being able to find a cache is a pretty good sign that it may have gone missing.


 

My careful and detailed research says that you're wrong. So there!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Snazz:

My careful and detailed research says that you're _wrong_. So there!


 

Okay, I'll give you the fact that it is possible for multiple people to not be able to find a cache, but in most cases, a dozen eyes should be able to find it, and if they can't...

 

BruceS, ProStreet and I all happened on the same cache at the same time one morning. It was in an open area without too many potential hiding spots. We all looked for over half an hour before we gave up. All three of us logged no-finds. The owner went out, and sure enough, the cache was gone.

 

I'm not saying it's true in every case, but most of the time, it's probably a good indicator of trouble of there are multiple no-finds at the same time.

 

- - - - -

Wisconsin Geocaching Association

Link to comment

if you are group caching... sortof destroys the idea of hanging with friends and searching for something together. This may mean some people have to slow down while the slower folks catch up. Common courtesy. You don't want to gloat about finding a cache 5 minutes before anyone else because they were taking a breather while you sprinted off to find the cache. It's just tacky.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...