Jump to content

Geocaching Etiquette and FTF Logging


Followers 6

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, MrBasilisk said:
36 minutes ago, niraD said:

And I hardly think a false or questionable claim of FTF warrants deleting a log.

Agreed, my list of what the CO is responsible for was not meant as law, just as support for the CO's authority to recognize the FTF on their own cache (if they so chose).

I don't think the CO should be deciding who was FTF and who wasn't. FTFs aren't awarded by the CO, they're claimed by the finders and it's up to the finders to resolve amongst themselves any differences of opinion. If that means a toss of a coin or a fist fight, so be it, but it's not something the CO should become enbroiled in.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

If the CO recognizes the FTF, all that means is someone has been awarded the privilege of being called out by the cache owner as the "first to find" on the cache listing.  If the CO chooses the first name on the logsheet even though a group of 3 found and signed it together, even claiming the group FTF in the log history, does the CO decision mean only 1 person was FTF? Nope, it just means only 1 person got the privilege of being labeled that in the listing.

There are far too many factors to determine any sort of universal, objective "first to find".  Claim what you want; ideally describe the condition of the claim of ftf in case there's some kind of dispute by someone who has to be competitive, but let it be what it is.  I still feel that CO's 'rewarding' their pick of FTF is condoning a competitive mentality which can be harmful to a community.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
18 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Yes, CO can delete logs, but if CO deletes too many spoiler logs and images he may get banned. Deleting bogus FTF logs may be a risk.

I can see that possibility, though I've never seen that myself.   Curious about your meaning, as what I posted was a simple reply to another ...  

Link to comment

One thing is for sure, the more I am told "by those that know better" about how I should log my First to Finds, the more I am likely to wait as long as possible to actually log them. You can take your made up etiquette and sell it somewhere else. Not actually being first is part of the FTF game. If you don't like it, don't play.

I do have a smartphone but I never cache with it and I never will. Get over it.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I don't think the CO should be deciding who was FTF and who wasn't. FTFs aren't awarded by the CO, they're claimed by the finders and it's up to the finders to resolve amongst themselves any differences of opinion. If that means a toss of a coin or a fist fight, so be it, but it's not something the CO should become enbroiled in.

Next time I put out a cache, the FTF shall be determined through trial by combat.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
6 hours ago, bflentje said:

One thing is for sure, the more I am told "by those that know better" about how I should log my First to Finds, the more I am likely to wait as long as possible to actually log them. You can take your made up etiquette and sell it somewhere else.

There's nothing made up about this etiquette. You know there are people who will be less happy if you delay, so you don't delay to be nice. Naturally, like all etiquette, you don't have to be nice, but to intentionally doing the opposite is not nice. Nothing about that changes just because the FTF game isn't important to you: you want to be nice to those people because it's important to them.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, arisoft said:

In fact, there is no valid excuse not to log the FTF immediately if you own a mobile device. 

It often takes me two hours or more to drive back to an area with cell reception. That's a valid excuse in my book.  I'll write a draft log and save it until I get to an area that I can safely log my finds. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, bflentje said:

One thing is for sure, the more I am told "by those that know better" about how I should log my First to Finds, the more I am likely to wait as long as possible to actually log them. You can take your made up etiquette and sell it somewhere else. Not actually being first is part of the FTF game. If you don't like it, don't play.

You said that you don't play but if you change your normal behaviour by waiting as long as possible you are actually playing the game.

I know one local geocacher who never log on-line, not even FTF, but he marks those finds on the logbook as FTF.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, MrBasilisk said:

I stand by letting the CO make the call.  The CO is responsible for the cache listing, physical maintenance, editing the logs, and  to recognize (or not mention) the FTF.  If the ftf fails to notify the CO in a timely manner of their find, they forfeit the "award" of the FTF.

In my view (and there are quite a lot of fellow cachers who share this ;) ), an FTF is not a reward but a fact. Either I am the first who found the cache or I'm not.

This still leaves a lot of options open how to handle things like "group FTFs", "pre-publish FTFs" etc. But for these issues every cacher (or every local cacher community) has their own "common sense", and the CO shouldn't get involved, either. I play the FTF for many years now, and in all that time I have seen exactly one case, where an owner thought it's a good idea to claim in a note, that a logged FTF was "invalid" and the FTF is still up. His opinion was ignored by almost everyone, including the loggers immediately after the so-called "invalid" FTF :P.

18 hours ago, arisoft said:

In fact, there is no valid excuse not to log the FTF immediately if you own a mobile device.

Adding to the already mentioned and certainly valid excuse of bad cell phone coverage, I recently had the situation that the website was effectively down (so slow, that I always ran into timeouts) after a FTF'd a cache.

The bottom line is: If you go for an FTF, you must always be prepared to find a log in the logbook, even if no find has been logged online. If you are seriously and deeply disappointed (or even mad at the FTF cacher) in such a situation, you better shouldn't rush out for FTFs.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

By reading all of the above I came to the conclusion the earlier you log your FTF online the better it is and it will avoid a lot confusion.

As a result of this, from now on I will log an online FTF log as soon as the cache is published, and then, within the next couple of days I will visit the cache and sign the logbook.

Thanks a lot for your advise.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
13 hours ago, MrBasilisk said:

I stand by letting the CO make the call.  The CO is responsible for the cache listing, physical maintenance, editing the logs, and  to recognize (or not mention) the FTF.  If the ftf fails to notify the CO in a timely manner of their find, they forfeit the "award" of the FTF.

A CO can choose not to participate in the FTF game at all and there's nothing anyone can do about it.  FTF isn't something to be awarded.  It it just a simple fact that someone (or in some cases more than one)  was first to find a cache.  

There are certainly some places where the FTF game has become an important part of the game but a CO has no obligation whatsoever to recognize  who is FTF.  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

The bottom line is: If you go for an FTF, you must always be prepared to find a log in the logbook, even if no find has been logged online. If you are seriously and deeply disappointed (or even mad at the FTF cacher) in such a situation, you better shouldn't rush out for FTFs.

This is the tactics used by some FTF hunters. By delaying the logging the idea is to embarrass other hunters to stop hunting and this way get a better opportunity to get more FTFs in future.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

11 Years ago when I started geocaching, there was not such a thing like "field log" no mobile devices.  You were searching for the cache and if there was a name already, the FTF was gone, no question about this.  I really can't remember that there was ever a problem with FTF.

Today I receive a whatsapp and ten minutes later another one asking "why don't you answer?"  Excuse me, I answer when I have time and when I want to answer, same applies for online logs.  Normally I log on the same day, sometimes it takes longer.  This is up to me. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

As a result of this, from now on I will log an online FTF log as soon as the cache is published, and then, within the next couple of days I will visit the cache and sign the logbook.

I see you are very good in this game :lol:     This actually works!

Edited by arisoft
Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

By reading all of the above I came to the conclusion the earlier you log your FTF online the better it is and it will avoid a lot confusion.

As a result of this, from now on I will log an online FTF log as soon as the cache is published, and then, within the next couple of days I will visit the cache and sign the logbook.

LOL :D!

Many years ago, a local FTF hunter told that he aborts the hunt as soon as his smartphone signals the first find log on the cache. He would abort even if he had only 5 minutes to go to GZ. So your proposed tactic might have worked then ;) .

Link to comment
7 hours ago, narcissa said:

Next time I put out a cache, the FTF shall be determined through trial by combat

I challenge you to a duel...

JuDpP4r.gif

 

4 hours ago, baer2006 said:
23 hours ago, arisoft said:

In fact, there is no valid excuse not to log the FTF immediately if you own a mobile device.

Adding to the already mentioned and certainly valid excuse of bad cell phone coverage, I recently had the situation that the website was effectively down (so slow, that I always ran into timeouts) after a FTF'd a cache.

Similar to others, sometimes I'm back on the road for a long drive, and if I don't log it immediately (especially if there's no signal) then there won't be a log until I stop.

 

2 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

By reading all of the above I came to the conclusion the earlier you log your FTF online the better it is and it will avoid a lot confusion.

And animosity.  Recently had an enormous fallout with someone because a while back they traveled a great distance to FTF a cache I didn't log immediately and tore me a new one. Tables turned and I went for an FTF they didn't log immediately, made a jab about it, and that was just kicking the hornet's nest.  Point being - some people value the FTF game and invest a lot into it.

On one hand, if you play the FTF game with significant investment, you have to realize the risk, that not every situation will be ideal and you could easily end up on a losing end by your own choice to take the risk. On the other hand, if we partake in this activity that affects them (ie trying for an FTF), if there are things we can do that are negligible effort in the grand scheme so that it doesn't (knowingly, intentionally) hurt other people who value it more, then there's really no reason not to.  If it takes me 2 minutes to even post a note saying FTF is gone, and I'm able to, I'm going to.  Even though in the 'old days' this sort of angsty controversy was never the case - it is now.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment
7 hours ago, narcissa said:

Next time I put out a cache, the FTF shall be determined through trial by combat.

I was going to award you best post, but then I saw this:

2 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

By reading all of the above I came to the conclusion the earlier you log your FTF online the better it is and it will avoid a lot confusion.

As a result of this, from now on I will log an online FTF log as soon as the cache is published, and then, within the next couple of days I will visit the cache and sign the logbook.

So: there will be a trial by combat to determine which of you has the best post.  The survivor should immediately post to this thread to avoid being deemed STF (and dead).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

How can such simple thing cause such confusion. First to Find is First to FIND, meaning finding the cache and signing the log. If ateam finds it, multiple people can have the FTF as they worked together.

Logging from the field isn't of course mandataory but it's seen as COURTESY towards others playing the same side game. If you don't want to log a find because you want to write a longer story, you can either post a note (other hunters will probably have notifications set on the cache so they'll get an email), or log a find, and then at home delete it and log another with a longer story. This way the CO will get the notification with the full log.

As for CO's regognising FTFs... read my first paragraph. I've seen a CO once who wrote to the finders (in cache note) that they should reconsider who got the FTF, because somebody used excel in solving a puzzle. Being stupid publicly doesn't change the fact who first got to the container...

Edited by TheVoytekBear
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, dprovan said:

There's nothing made up about this etiquette. You know there are people who will be less happy if you delay, so you don't delay to be nice.

This I can agree with. I haven't delayed any of my FTF logs.

The problem is when "don't delay" becomes "no valid excuse not to log the FTF immediately in the field".

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
38 minutes ago, TheVoytekBear said:

Logging from the field isn't of course mandataory but it's seen as COURTESY towards others playing the same side game. If you don't want to log a find because you want to write a longer story, you can either post a note (other hunters will probably have notifications set on the cache so they'll get an email), or log a find, and then at home delete it and log another with a longer story. This way the CO will get the notification with the full log.

Simply being the first to find a cache doesn't mean that one is "playing the same side game".   Suggesting that someone log the find right away, even as a note, is basically telling anyone that happens to be first to find a cache that they're part of the side game, when in fact they may have not interest in being part of that side game at all.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Simply being the first to find a cache doesn't mean that one is "playing the same side game".   Suggesting that someone log the find right away, even as a note, is basically telling anyone that happens to be first to find a cache that they're part of the side game, when in fact they may have not interest in being part of that side game at all.  

If you are first at the cache in my area you are certainly playing the FTF game ;)

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

By reading all of the above I came to the conclusion the earlier you log your FTF online the better it is and it will avoid a lot confusion.

As a result of this, from now on I will log an online FTF log as soon as the cache is published, and then, within the next couple of days I will visit the cache and sign the logbook.

:laughing:

I'm sure we're not the only ones to notice that once a FTF is placed on a lot of caches, that cache could sit for a week or two before it starts getting hit again. 

Your plan may work.  :D

Link to comment
2 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Simply being the first to find a cache doesn't mean that one is "playing the same side game".   Suggesting that someone log the find right away, even as a note, is basically telling anyone that happens to be first to find a cache that they're part of the side game, when in fact they may have not interest in being part of that side game at all.  

I agree.  Though we stopped counting our FTFs a few years ago, I'm still FTF sometimes days after publish, usually just because it's further than 50' from a parking lot.  :).  

We still see folks logging a cache we were simply first to  "congratulating" us for a FTF, when we could care less anymore.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, TheVoytekBear said:

I've seen a CO once who wrote to the finders (in cache note) that they should reconsider who got the FTF, because somebody used excel in solving a puzzle.

What?? I understand that you probably don't know that CO's rationale, but what has the use of tools to do with a "proper" FTF? Excel is useful for a lot of things, and I don't want to miss it when solving puzzle caches ;) . I have read notes by COs, who didn't like that the FTF was logged without actually solving the puzzle (e.g. by using only the spoiler photo and excellent knowledge of the local environment). But complaining about solving it with the "wrong" tool? If a CO would tell me this, I'd assume he's just joking :) .

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

What?? I understand that you probably don't know that CO's rationale, but what has the use of tools to do with a "proper" FTF? Excel is useful for a lot of things, and I don't want to miss it when solving puzzle caches ;) . I have read notes by COs, who didn't like that the FTF was logged without actually solving the puzzle (e.g. by using only the spoiler photo and excellent knowledge of the local environment). But complaining about solving it with the "wrong" tool? If a CO would tell me this, I'd assume he's just joking :) .

I had a 5/1 mystery cache.  The FTF searched an area along the trail with no caches and found it without solving the puzzle.  Definitely FTF in my book.  Many used his log to find the cache.  Though there are 24 solves for it on Geochecker (out of 36 finds)

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

I had a 5/1 mystery cache.  The FTF searched an area along the trail with no caches and found it without solving the puzzle.  Definitely FTF in my book.  Many used his log to find the cache.  Though there are 24 solves for it on Geochecker (out of 36 finds)

One of my Favorites is a D5 puzzle cache. Some have found it the way I did, by figuring out the subtle twist and then using readily available tools correctly. Some found it by writing a custom program to find the solution. Some found it by locating a 528ft hole that matched the terrain rating and the theme. They're all valid ways to find the cache.

Link to comment
18 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Simply being the first to find a cache doesn't mean that one is "playing the same side game".   Suggesting that someone log the find right away, even as a note, is basically telling anyone that happens to be first to find a cache that they're part of the side game, when in fact they may have not interest in being part of that side game at all.  

Yes, but it's possible to (1) not play the side-game, (2) be first to the cache, and (3) purely out of gratuitous courtesy log early, knowing that your prompt log will be appreciated by some who *are* playing the side game.

Edited by wmpastor
Link to comment
4 hours ago, wmpastor said:

I'm looking forward to learning about these multiple versions of the FTF game.  And I'm hoping to *not* hear that somehow there can be two or more FTFs.

The number of FTF log entries is not limited. There can be more than one and there will be more than one in many cases. In most cases finders share the FTF because there is no effect of how many cachers share the FTF. FTF-window can be open as long as it is needed. For example even 12 hours. In some rare cases there is no unanimous agreement between finders and then it is possible that cache has more than one not shared FTF due to different criteria. One may solve the coordinates and another may guess the spot.

One reason why FTFs are shared so intensively is statistics. As you can collect finds you can also collect FTFs and therefore it is important to get them more easily than expected as you can find unsolved mysteries by using spoiler coordinates.

Edited by arisoft
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, arisoft said:

 In some rare cases there is no unanimous agreement between finders and then it is possible that cache has more than one not shared FTF due to different criteria. One may solve the coordinates and another may guess the spot.

FTF might be shared if a team went for it (which sometimes consists of event attendees). Other than that the only case I can think of where FTF goes not to the person who first found the cache (fonund, not spotted) would be a challenge where the first person at the cache doesn't meet the requirements.

As simple as that.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, TheVoytekBear said:

As simple as that.

Yes! This is your criteria and you are welcome to use it for your own FTF logs. But don't be surprised if someone else is using different approach. You are playing your game and others are playing whatever they do until you make the exact agreement on the rules you are using and the prizes to be shared.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, TheVoytekBear said:

(fonund, not spotted)

But there are some who will claim ftf if they spotted the cache first. There are some who would share it if someone else retrieved it first. There are some who would share it if someone helped them get to it first. There are some who would...

Look, the debate about the definition of an FTF is age old. It won't end. As soon you state matter of factly "This is FTF, no question about it" you reignite the debate. Let someone claim it if they want, using the criteria they choose. Whatever. It is what it is. Whether it's the person who signs, touches, sees it first, helps, or if it's a group, or whatever. There is no strict definition of FTF in this game, which is universally accepted or enforced.

As simple as that.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, wmpastor said:

I'm looking forward to learning about these multiple versions of the FTF game.  And I'm hoping to *not* hear that somehow there can be two or more FTFs.

A recent event had an announcement at the beginning that since new caches were placed, and most will head to them as a group afterwards, everyone  (that is, everyone who's interested...) can claim FTF.   :)

Edited by cerberus1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, wmpastor said:

Yes, but it's possible to (1) not play the side-game, (2) be first to the cache, and (3) purely out of gratuitous courtesy log early, knowing that your prompt log will be appreciated by some who *are* playing the side game.

One shouldn't have to log early just in case someone's playing a side-game of the hobby. 

We see this thinking with people that started the hobby using phones,  and don't understand how the side-game of FTF was a luck-of-the-draw thing when apps weren't as common.   

Fortunately those attempting to change "rules" that don't exist under the guise of "courtesy"  aren't fooling anyone...

Link to comment
3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

But there are some who will claim ftf if they spotted the cache first. There are some who would share it if someone else retrieved it first. There are some who would share it if someone helped them get to it first. There are some who would...

Look, the debate about the definition of an FTF is age old. It won't end. As soon you state matter of factly "This is FTF, no question about it" you reignite the debate. Let someone claim it if they want, using the criteria they choose. Whatever. It is what it is. Whether it's the person who signs, touches, sees it first, helps, or if it's a group, or whatever. There is no strict definition of FTF in this game, which is universally accepted or enforced.

As simple as that.

I agree, and probably why the site, though recognizing that there is a side-game  (in ads for notifications/PM), won't get involved in "how to play".  :)

Link to comment
12 hours ago, wmpastor said:

I'm looking forward to learning about these multiple versions of the FTF game.  And I'm hoping to *not* hear that somehow there can be two or more FTFs.

This thread has several examples, even excluding examples of group FTFs.

Should the FTF post immediately to let other FTF hounds know? Should the FTF delay posting to maintain interest in the new cache? Should the FTF delay posting to screw with the other FTF hounds? Should the FTF post normally, as if it were any other find?

Is someone who finds the cache as part of pre-publication beta-testing FTF? Is someone who finds the cache on their own before publication FTF? Is only the first person to find the cache after publication FTF? What if they found it 10 minutes after publication, but it's a 2-hour hike in an area with no cell reception?

Is the first person who saw the cache FTF? Or is the first person to touch the cache FTF? Or is the first person to open the cache FTF? Or is the first person to put pen to paper the FTF?

Is the first person to find the cache FTF? Or is the first person to find the cache legally (e.g., no after-hours visits to parks, no illegal parking) FTF? Or is the first person to find the cache legally and to find the cache the way the CO "intended" (e.g., solving the puzzle, visiting all stages of a multi) FTF?

"Wait till I get going!"
-- Vizzini (The Princess Bride)

Link to comment
13 hours ago, wmpastor said:

I'm looking forward to learning about these multiple versions of the FTF game.  And I'm hoping to *not* hear that somehow there can be two or more FTFs.

40 minutes ago, niraD said:

This thread has several examples...

"Wait till I get going!"
-- Vizzini (The Princess Bride)

 I think I agree.   :D

Though some cachers may have an agreement with each other , there aren't any "rules"  ...  so one can play a FTF side-game whatever way they'd like. 

We've personally seen most of just your examples, and I'd bet there's even more out there we forgot about.   :)

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Though some cachers may have an agreement with each other , there aren't any "rules"  ...  so one can play a FTF side-game whatever way they'd like. 

Ah, yes.  The dumbing of America.  And perhaps the rest of the world?  "First" means "first".  Not 'second'.  Not 'out with someone who found it.'  Two people cannot be 'first'.  They are first and second.  Twenty-three cachers line up to sign the log?  The are First through Twenty-third!  They cannot all be 'first'!

I no longer go for for FTFs much.  Twelve years ago, however, my partner and I went for a FTF.  Another cacher came by, and waited whist we searched.  My partner was FTF.  I was 2nd to find.  The other (great) cacher took Third to Find.  That's the was it used to was.  First is First.  Anyone else is Second to Find or Twenty-eighth to find.  There is only one First.  Sort of the definition of the word?  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Ah, yes.  The dumbing of America.  And perhaps the rest of the world?  "First" means "first".  Not 'second'.  Not 'out with someone who found it.'  Two people cannot be 'first'.  They are first and second.  Twenty-three cachers line up to sign the log?  The are First through Twenty-third!  They cannot all be 'first'!

I no longer go for for FTFs much.  Twelve years ago, however, my partner and I went for a FTF.  Another cacher came by, and waited whist we searched.  My partner was FTF.  I was 2nd to find.  The other (great) cacher took Third to Find.  That's the was it used to was.  First is First.  Anyone else is Second to Find or Twenty-eighth to find.  There is only one First.  Sort of the definition of the word?  

Some geocachers believe in a collaborative and friendly approach to group caching wherein all members of the group "find" the cache simultaneously. When this approach is crossed with the "first to find" side game, it is not problematic to call everyone "first to find." It may be a bit quantum physical for some people to grasp, but this has nothing to do with anybody's country of origin becoming "dumb."

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment
6 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Ah, yes.  The dumbing of America.  And perhaps the rest of the world?  "First" means "first".  Not 'second'.  Not 'out with someone who found it.'  Two people cannot be 'first'.  They are first and second.  Twenty-three cachers line up to sign the log?  The are First through Twenty-third!  They cannot all be 'first'!

This is the kind of regimented thinking that makes FTF remotely controversial. It's fine that you think of "FTF" as the first individual to find, but your mind is completely closed to the fact that it's just as logical for it to be the first group to find. I think every conflict over FTF I've ever seen involved at least one person who was absolutely convinced that their entirely arbitrary position was somehow an inescapable logical conclusion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Ah, yes.  The dumbing of America.  And perhaps the rest of the world?  "First" means "first".  Not 'second'.  Not 'out with someone who found it.'  Two people cannot be 'first'.  They are first and second.  Twenty-three cachers line up to sign the log?  The are First through Twenty-third!  They cannot all be 'first'!

For the record, I wasn't considering examples of group FTFs.

Link to comment
On 10/14/2017 at 1:21 AM, wmpastor said:
On 10/13/2017 at 2:03 PM, NYPaddleCacher said:

Simply being the first to find a cache doesn't mean that one is "playing the same side game".   Suggesting that someone log the find right away, even as a note, is basically telling anyone that happens to be first to find a cache that they're part of the side game, when in fact they may have not interest in being part of that side game at all.  

Yes, but it's possible to (1) not play the side-game, (2) be first to the cache, and (3) purely out of gratuitous courtesy log early, knowing that your prompt log will be appreciated by some who *are* playing the side game.

I have no problem with extending courtesy to other geocachers that may not play the game the same way that I do, as long as those geocaches recognize that I am logging a cache quickly as a courtesy, not as an obligation or expectation of how I play the game.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
1 hour ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I have no problem with extending courtesy to other geocachers that may not play the game the same way that I do, as long as those geocaches recognize that I am logging a cache quickly as a courtesy, not as an obligation or expectation of how I play the game.  

Then we're in complete agreement.  There's no obligation to jump through hoops to accommodate the side games of others, but if it's easily-accomplished, it's a nice gesture to a subset of the community.

Link to comment
On 10/13/2017 at 2:51 AM, dprovan said:

There's nothing made up about this etiquette. You know there are people who will be less happy if you delay, so you don't delay to be nice. Naturally, like all etiquette, you don't have to be nice, but to intentionally doing the opposite is not nice. Nothing about that changes just because the FTF game isn't important to you: you want to be nice to those people because it's important to them.

Suggesting I am not nice if I don't log a find on an FTF the second it's rehidden is akin to a political debate tactic, and appalling behavior. How about.. I will log it when I am good and ready and stop the selective moralism bologna.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, bflentje said:

How about.. I will log it when I am good and ready and stop the selective moralism bologna.

The thing is, of course, theoretical, since before you can delay, you must be the first.

How about, if someone else logs the FTF online, while you are getting good and ready. Do you mind?

 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...