Do you care if someone logs a find on one of your caches, but doesn't sign the log?

[+AlohaBra and MaksMom]

To me this is a hobby and not a game. It's not something for me to rack up points in or win. It's something I do in my free time to get me wandering around parts of the woods I wouldn't have probably wandered around. To me it's no more of a game than hiking.

 

That being said the logs get signed when I go out. When I couldn't see ok I had my mom sign the logs for me. When my friends and I work together one of us signs the logs for all of us. All of which is seen as problematic to the people who want to be ultra literal about guidelines. Sometimes my name is completely not illegible or washed out immediately by the dampness of the log. Or in a week or two gone completely in a soaked log. I was there it got signed but does it really matter in the long run?

 

But this is something we do for fun as a hobby. I know some people take this very seriously and want people to do it all just like they do but that's not the reality. How they do this doesn't affect me and how I do it doesn't affect them.

 

You're not going to change the people who don't scribble on the log. You can determine if you're going to let it bother you excessively or if you're just going to get out there and live and let live and find some caches.

 

I like this.

[+sillygirl & jrr]

Thinking more about it, the question I should have asked is this: Do you care if someone logs a find on your cache when they didn't actually even look for it, but they were within 300 ft. of the container?

 

I am curious if the local cache owners cared enough to delete the logs.

 

We did & as you can see so did some others. The visiting cachers have re-posted 2 (of about 40) logs that were deleted. One was a cache where they left a tb but didn't sign the log and the other was a nano whose log has been reported as full by several finders both before & after our drive by loggers. They have not tried to re-"find" any caches owned by us.

 

Interestingly on their last day in the island (and after some logs had been deleted) they only found 2 caches, even though they drove by a bunch more getting there.

jrr

[+briansnat]

I'm also skeptical of the 'no pen' excuse. One of my favorite things to do is go to a geoevent and say out loud, "Anyone got a pen?" and watch every single person go reaching. Real geocachers ALWAYS carry a pen or pencil, usually more than one. I can promise you, there are pens for sale in Hawaii.

 

I usually don't carry a pen. Maybe I'm not a real geocacher? Most caches around here have pens or pencils inside. It's pretty much expected that the cache will contain one (unless it is a micro and even then they often have them) so I simply don't think to bring a pen geocaching. I've been out with groups of several geocachers and we had to search through our bags to find a single pen between us, so I don't think I'm alone. Maybe it's a regional thing?

 

So if someone says in his log that he forgot a pen I take him at his word, unless he gives me a reason that I shouldn't.

Edited July 14, 2011 by briansnat

[+Corfmania]

I'm sitting in the departure lounge of HNL right now and Found a number of caches over the last week by the locals posting here. First, Mahalo for showing me places and things I've never seen on past trips here. Epic, wonderful things. Second, don't sweat it too much. For each non-signer there are probably 10 people who do. We're the ones you placed them for. Enjoy the legit finds and logs. Delete the others, or not, then get busy thinking about more hides!

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't care. I don't even check. No time!! Anyway, what would I get for it? Maybe I'd anger someone and they'd go muggle my cache. Not good!!

[+FraenCache]

As a cache owner, you have the right to delete finds on your caches if the log is not signed.

 

I can't imagine getting so concerned over another person's logging practices that I would compile statistics on them, though. And I can't begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to "check up" on them.

 

Seriously, it's hard to imagine caring so much about how someone else plays a game when their actions have no effect on me at all.

 

I totally agree. It makes me more thinking about you guys "hunting" some weirdos, than being concerned about those weirdos, how it might be fun for them posting finds they actually didn´t even search. Comeon, it´s a game. Who cares if one out of a thousand is cheating? If it´s theyr fun to only log finds instead of going out and search caches that may only be sad to me but has no effect on me how I play the game.

 

So, just relax, let them "level up" theyr imaginary sad stats and enjoy hunting caches in nature ... There are definatly more serious things in the world to be concerned about ...

[+St.Matthew]

If someone wants to cheat at geocaching, they have much bigger problems than a deleted log.

[+SixDogTeam]

 

 

I use to think that you had to sign the log, but nowhere in the guideline does it say you HAVE to...

 

OMG, How many times do we have to refute this myth?

 

"Geocaching > Guide

Guide to the Game

 

 

 

What are the rules of geocaching?

 

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."

[+luvvinbird]

What if they logged 10 finds without signing? Would you delete the logs? Contact the cacher to ask for an explanation? Do nothing?

 

Story behind the questions: Recently a prolific cacher flew to paradise and logged what seemed to us (& a few other locals) an unrealistic number of finds over a short period of time. The logs were all generic "found on vacation" cut & paste jobs. Being curious, several of us checked on caches near our home coordinates. In this spot check of 20 caches we found one signature, (in a cache without a writing implement.) We also saw a tb they dropped in another cache, though they did not sign the paper log. Being generous, they actually have found 10% of the caches they logged. We suspect they found a few caches, but logged finds on many more that they "drove by."

 

Anyone else have similar experiences? How did you handle it? We deleted their finds on our caches.

 

jrr

I use to let it bother me, it still does to a much smaller degree. To be honest, I have never physically looked at the logs in any of my 6 active caches since I placed them almost a year ago. There are basic guidelines to geocaching and most follow the rules. Those that don't are only fooling themselves.

[Mr.Yuck]

As a cache owner, you have the right to delete finds on your caches if the log is not signed.

 

I can't imagine getting so concerned over another person's logging practices that I would compile statistics on them, though. And I can't begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to "check up" on them.

 

Seriously, it's hard to imagine caring so much about how someone else plays a game when their actions have no effect on me at all.

 

I totally agree. It makes me more thinking about you guys "hunting" some weirdos, than being concerned about those weirdos, how it might be fun for them posting finds they actually didn´t even search. Comeon, it´s a game. Who cares if one out of a thousand is cheating? If it´s theyr fun to only log finds instead of going out and search caches that may only be sad to me but has no effect on me how I play the game.

 

So, just relax, let them "level up" theyr imaginary sad stats and enjoy hunting caches in nature ... There are definatly more serious things in the world to be concerned about ...

 

Well, I don't expect everyone to read my post to this thread carefully, or even know about the incident I'm talking about. But there was this retired guy named Oculus Prime about 2 years ago. And it wasn't just Hawaii, this guy did drive-by's all over the U.S. and Canada. I believe he really was a full-time RV'er, he was just logging every cache he drove within a few miles of. The Frog wiped out all his finds after a couple of months.

 

So people all over the country talked about this when he hit their area. You can still Google his name and "Geocaching" and find several regional Geocaching message board threads about him. So GeeGeoBee, you can now "begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to check up on them".

 

I mean some of you are free to rant all day with "it doesn't affect me", and "there are more important things to be concerned about", but it has been shown that people notice chronic cheating, discuss it amongst themselves, and Groundspeak takes action. So if it bothers you that cache owners do this, please ignore it, it doesn't affect you.

[+Cryptosporidium-623]

Keep in mind that even if you play by the rules, others may not...The other day I had to check on a cache and saw 6 or so signatures NOT on the paper log, so I deleted them. 2-3 days later, the cache conveniently disappeared. I suppose it could have been a muggling, but I have my doubts.

 

So they went and found something that they previously didn't find but said that they did. Or it could have been one person signing them in as a team.

 

Every signature that was there (and there weren't that many because the cache was still fairly new and slightly off the beaten path) had a corresponding electronic entry. There were no team sigs. Some of the cachers I'm familiar with and they use stamps. No stamps either. No blurred ink. Nothing.

 

Regardless, even if I HAD missed something, I would expect an e-mail... Not cache theft.

Edited July 14, 2011 by daschpeeg

[+GeoGeeBee]

The visiting cachers have re-posted 2 (of about 40) logs that were deleted. One was a cache where they left a tb but didn't sign the log and the other was a nano whose log has been reported as full by several finders both before & after our drive by loggers.

 

I'm just curious... someone dropped a travel bug in a cache, and their online log was deleted because they didn't sign the physical log?

 

I know some people are really sticklers, but c'mon... they dropped the TB. They obviously found the cache. I can't imagine deleting a log under those circumstances.

[+FraenCache]

As a cache owner, you have the right to delete finds on your caches if the log is not signed.

 

I can't imagine getting so concerned over another person's logging practices that I would compile statistics on them, though. And I can't begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to "check up" on them.

 

Seriously, it's hard to imagine caring so much about how someone else plays a game when their actions have no effect on me at all.

 

I totally agree. It makes me more thinking about you guys "hunting" some weirdos, than being concerned about those weirdos, how it might be fun for them posting finds they actually didn´t even search. Comeon, it´s a game. Who cares if one out of a thousand is cheating? If it´s theyr fun to only log finds instead of going out and search caches that may only be sad to me but has no effect on me how I play the game.

 

So, just relax, let them "level up" theyr imaginary sad stats and enjoy hunting caches in nature ... There are definatly more serious things in the world to be concerned about ...

 

Well, I don't expect everyone to read my post to this thread carefully, or even know about the incident I'm talking about. But there was this retired guy named Oculus Prime about 2 years ago. And it wasn't just Hawaii, this guy did drive-by's all over the U.S. and Canada. I believe he really was a full-time RV'er, he was just logging every cache he drove within a few miles of. The Frog wiped out all his finds after a couple of months.

 

So people all over the country talked about this when he hit their area. You can still Google his name and "Geocaching" and find several regional Geocaching message board threads about him. So GeeGeoBee, you can now "begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to check up on them".

 

I mean some of you are free to rant all day with "it doesn't affect me", and "there are more important things to be concerned about", but it has been shown that people notice chronic cheating, discuss it amongst themselves, and Groundspeak takes action. So if it bothers you that cache owners do this, please ignore it, it doesn't affect you.

 

Well, as #1 cache finder in the world (!!! big ups, really), I can imagine you would be concerned about someone comin along and cheating away your precious title. Sorry, I´m cruel here but I really can´t understand why everything always must have someone who´s the best in in it and standing above each other and screaming it out in the world ...

 

When this guy has the time and money to drive across the country and log his way ... wow, he gets respect from me, too. The thing is, he wouldn´t destroy geocaching through that. I never heard of him ... well, I think he never was in Germany though ...

 

The question to me is, did the guys from Grundspeak delete him or his finds because they saw a certain threat to theyr game or because so many people startet to moan about somebody "breaking the noble rules" ... maybe he just liked the immense attention he was getting ... which means a problem was lately created by those, who wanted to "solve" it.

 

What I want to say is, one who plays unfair shouldn´t be able to upset a whole community. What is wrong here? A lag of selfconfidence? Just live and let live. And don´t be always so tight with being nuber one or getting the most or having more than the others or being the most beautifull or the most popular ... Where has it brought us jet? To paradise? Don´t think so ... If the "good ones" wouldn´t always be such a pain in the a***, the cheaters wouldn´t have half the fun ...

 

Nuff said.

[+FraenCache]

The visiting cachers have re-posted 2 (of about 40) logs that were deleted. One was a cache where they left a tb but didn't sign the log and the other was a nano whose log has been reported as full by several finders both before & after our drive by loggers.

 

I'm just curious... someone dropped a travel bug in a cache, and their online log was deleted because they didn't sign the physical log?

 

I know some people are really sticklers, but c'mon... they dropped the TB. They obviously found the cache. I can't imagine deleting a log under those circumstances.

 

Well, nevertheless someone broke "THE RULES", you know ...

[+leeroyboy]

The visiting cachers have re-posted 2 (of about 40) logs that were deleted. One was a cache where they left a tb but didn't sign the log and the other was a nano whose log has been reported as full by several finders both before & after our drive by loggers.

 

I'm just curious... someone dropped a travel bug in a cache, and their online log was deleted because they didn't sign the physical log?

 

I know some people are really sticklers, but c'mon... they dropped the TB. They obviously found the cache. I can't imagine deleting a log under those circumstances.

 

 

Suppose that Travel Bug was a plush Beanie Baby and the Cache was a micro film Cannister? The Travel Bug was then retreived immediatly. Wouldn't you be suspicious?

[Mr.Yuck]

As a cache owner, you have the right to delete finds on your caches if the log is not signed.

 

I can't imagine getting so concerned over another person's logging practices that I would compile statistics on them, though. And I can't begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to "check up" on them.

 

Seriously, it's hard to imagine caring so much about how someone else plays a game when their actions have no effect on me at all.

 

I totally agree. It makes me more thinking about you guys "hunting" some weirdos, than being concerned about those weirdos, how it might be fun for them posting finds they actually didn´t even search. Comeon, it´s a game. Who cares if one out of a thousand is cheating? If it´s theyr fun to only log finds instead of going out and search caches that may only be sad to me but has no effect on me how I play the game.

 

So, just relax, let them "level up" theyr imaginary sad stats and enjoy hunting caches in nature ... There are definatly more serious things in the world to be concerned about ...

 

Well, I don't expect everyone to read my post to this thread carefully, or even know about the incident I'm talking about. But there was this retired guy named Oculus Prime about 2 years ago. And it wasn't just Hawaii, this guy did drive-by's all over the U.S. and Canada. I believe he really was a full-time RV'er, he was just logging every cache he drove within a few miles of. The Frog wiped out all his finds after a couple of months.

 

So people all over the country talked about this when he hit their area. You can still Google his name and "Geocaching" and find several regional Geocaching message board threads about him. So GeeGeoBee, you can now "begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to check up on them".

 

I mean some of you are free to rant all day with "it doesn't affect me", and "there are more important things to be concerned about", but it has been shown that people notice chronic cheating, discuss it amongst themselves, and Groundspeak takes action. So if it bothers you that cache owners do this, please ignore it, it doesn't affect you.

 

Well, as #1 cache finder in the world (!!! big ups, really), I can imagine you would be concerned about someone comin along and cheating away your precious title. Sorry, I´m cruel here but I really can´t understand why everything always must have someone who´s the best in in it and standing above each other and screaming it out in the world ...

 

When this guy has the time and money to drive across the country and log his way ... wow, he gets respect from me, too. The thing is, he wouldn´t destroy geocaching through that. I never heard of him ... well, I think he never was in Germany though ...

 

The question to me is, did the guys from Grundspeak delete him or his finds because they saw a certain threat to theyr game or because so many people startet to moan about somebody "breaking the noble rules" ... maybe he just liked the immense attention he was getting ... which means a problem was lately created by those, who wanted to "solve" it.

 

What I want to say is, one who plays unfair shouldn´t be able to upset a whole community. What is wrong here? A lag of selfconfidence? Just live and let live. And don´t be always so tight with being nuber one or getting the most or having more than the others or being the most beautifull or the most popular ... Where has it brought us jet? To paradise? Don´t think so ... If the "good ones" wouldn´t always be such a pain in the a***, the cheaters wouldn´t have half the fun ...

 

Nuff said.

 

Well, big misunderstanding there, my #1 cache finder in the world title is a complete joke. I am the # 1 cache finder in the world (with about 45 finds) on an extemely obscure alternative Geocaching website. As a matter of fact, it's more of a GPS games website (hence the name), that accepts Geocache listings just for the heck of it. That "forum title" has been there for a while, time for a new fresh one, I think.

 

I'm quite sure Groundspeak stepped in during the Oculus Prime incident because of the moaning, as you say, not the threat to the game. There have also been a few more minor armchair logging incidents where they have stepped in. In those minor cases, I'm sure it's just people looking for attention, or to see how long it takes to get caught.

 

Sorry, I guess I'll just never be a "live and let live, man" kinda guy. I was in the military for 22 years, what can I say.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Mr.Yuck

[Andronicus]

Keep in mind that even if you play by the rules, others may not...The other day I had to check on a cache and saw 6 or so signatures NOT on the paper log, so I deleted them. 2-3 days later, the cache conveniently disappeared. I suppose it could have been a muggling, but I have my doubts.

 

So they went and found something that they previously didn't find but said that they did. Or it could have been one person signing them in as a team.

 

Every signature that was there (and there weren't that many because the cache was still fairly new and slightly off the beaten path) had a corresponding electronic entry. There were no team sigs. Some of the cachers I'm familiar with and they use stamps. No stamps either. No blurred ink. Nothing.

 

Regardless, even if I HAD missed something, I would expect an e-mail... Not cache theft.

Why wouldn't you expect cache theft. You are talking about cheeters after all. Cheeters tend to be sore loosers. They lash out when they get busted, and blame everyone else. I had a cache just like yours. Deleted a boggus log, then within 2 days it went missing. I learnt my lesson. If you want to delete a log, wait for a few months.

[mresoteric]

 

One person says no way you could get 60 caches all over Oahu in a day. You had to cheat.

Another persons says cache hunters who like to cache were in a small area with over 800 caches available to find and they only got 60? They must be slackers.

 

Is either person 'wrong'?

 

It depends on where you are. Clearly. The folks around Oahu know the "trends" of their area, just as I'm sure you see find trends in yours. Apples, oranges.

 

The OP claims cheating while at the same time acknowledging evidence that this team did find caches that they did not log. The cache where they dropped a tb but didn't log proves this. So how can they assume that the cachers did not actually find all the caches they logged?

 

They can delete the logs if they want but claiming they cheated on all the caches is a bit presumptuous.

 

The trend on Oahu may be just a handful a day. Maybe most cachers visiting the area take time to enjoy the views.

 

But there are some cachers who are more concerned with numbers than they are views. If someone wants to spend their day running around the island to find 60 caches I bet it can be done and then some.

[Clan Riffster]

The visiting cachers have re-posted 2 (of about 40) logs that were deleted. One was a cache where they left a tb but didn't sign the log and the other was a nano whose log has been reported as full by several finders both before & after our drive by loggers.

 

I'm just curious... someone dropped a travel bug in a cache, and their online log was deleted because they didn't sign the physical log?

 

I know some people are really sticklers, but c'mon... they dropped the TB. They obviously found the cache. I can't imagine deleting a log under those circumstances.

 

 

Suppose that Travel Bug was a plush Beanie Baby and the Cache was a micro film Cannister? The Travel Bug was then retreived immediatly. Wouldn't you be suspicious?

Was this the case here, or are we just spinning more fantasy?

[+sillygirl & jrr]

I'm sitting in the departure lounge of HNL right now and Found a number of caches over the last week by the locals posting here. First, Mahalo for showing me places and things I've never seen on past trips here. Epic, wonderful things. Second, don't sweat it too much. For each non-signer there are probably 10 people who do. We're the ones you placed them for. Enjoy the legit finds and logs. Delete the others, or not, then get busy thinking about more hides!

 

Glad you enjoyed them. Mahalo for your post. Hope you had a safe flight home.

jrr

[mresoteric]

 

 

I use to think that you had to sign the log, but nowhere in the guideline does it say you HAVE to...

 

OMG, How many times do we have to refute this myth?

 

"Geocaching > Guide

Guide to the Game

 

 

 

What are the rules of geocaching?

 

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."

 

Then anyone who just signs their name and/or date is not following the rules and should have their log deleted, right?

 

The "rule" says write about your find, not sign the logbook. If you're going to get technical about it then you should adhere to it fully.

[+sillygirl & jrr]

The visiting cachers have re-posted 2 (of about 40) logs that were deleted. One was a cache where they left a tb but didn't sign the log and the other was a nano whose log has been reported as full by several finders both before & after our drive by loggers.

 

I'm just curious... someone dropped a travel bug in a cache, and their online log was deleted because they didn't sign the physical log?

 

I know some people are really sticklers, but c'mon... they dropped the TB. They obviously found the cache. I can't imagine deleting a log under those circumstances.

Since you are curious, here is how that happened: the owner checked the log, no sig. But he didn't realize the metal shaped tag in the cache was a tb (it was a "naked" travel tag), so he didn't realize our drive-by cachers had left it. The found it log is now back on the cache page.

jrr

[+sillygirl & jrr]

 

One person says no way you could get 60 caches all over Oahu in a day. You had to cheat.

Another persons says cache hunters who like to cache were in a small area with over 800 caches available to find and they only got 60? They must be slackers.

 

Is either person 'wrong'?

 

It depends on where you are. Clearly. The folks around Oahu know the "trends" of their area, just as I'm sure you see find trends in yours. Apples, oranges.

 

The OP claims cheating while at the same time acknowledging evidence that this team did find caches that they did not log. The cache where they dropped a tb but didn't log proves this. So how can they assume that the cachers did not actually find all the caches they logged?

 

They can delete the logs if they want but claiming they cheated on all the caches is a bit presumptuous.

 

The trend on Oahu may be just a handful a day. Maybe most cachers visiting the area take time to enjoy the views.

t

But there are some cachers who are more concerned with numbers than they are views. If someone wants to spend their day running around the island to find 60 caches I bet it can be done and then some.

 

I never said you can't find 60 caches in a day on Oahu. In fact there are a couple places where you might get that many by lunch. I said it was highly unlikely they found all the caches they logged. As proof I offer you these tidbits...

1. They only tried to re-log 2 of the dozens of deleted finds, not all or even most of them.

2. When questioned (via email) about the lack of signatures, they told cache owners a couple different things. Some they told their gps 'erased' all their found caches and they couldn't remember which caches they found. This came with an apology if they had made any mistakes. To others they suggested they may only have placed initials (without a date) on the logbook & that they may have signed "out of order." What they never said was anything resembling, "I remember that cache it was a magnetic key holder painted green." or "your cache was a lock-n-lock hidden low by the view point." In other words, they didn't respond with anything to suggest they had actually found the caches in question. I suspect if they did, this thread wouldn't be here.

jrr

[+tozainamboku]

 

 

I use to think that you had to sign the log, but nowhere in the guideline does it say you HAVE to...

 

OMG, How many times do we have to refute this myth?

 

"Geocaching > Guide

Guide to the Game

 

 

 

What are the rules of geocaching?

 

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."

You know I haven't posted in this thread till now since the responses have all been reasonable up to this one. Even though the title seem to imply requiring a log be signed the actual discussion seemed to be more concerned about whether to delete the logs in this particular case or not. I'm not sure I want to take sides between the people who say don't bother deleting the logs and those who say bogus logs effect the game and should be deleted. The guidelines do say that the cache owners responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache page and the owner shoul delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate. If the cache owners believes these are bogus log they can delete them.

 

What bothers me is when someone quotes something from the website and say it means you have to sign the physical in order to log a find online.

 

The section you quote above does not make a connection between the online log and physical log. There is also a question as to the usage of the word rules here.

 

First of all what is in the FAQ paraphrase Dave Ulmer's instructions when he hid the first geocache. He asked people who found his cache to take something, leave something, and write about it in the log book. There was no online log at the time and Dave never imagined people keeping score. When Jeremy create the website he could do no better that Dave's original instruction to describe this new game to people. In the FAQ he had three rules:

Take something from the cache.

Leave something.

Write about it in the logbook.

 

For years there was no mention of logging online at www.geocaching.com. Later as more micro caches had no room for trade and trading became more of an optional task, Grounspeak decide to combine the trading rules, make them optional, and stress trading even or up. And since three rules sounds better than two, they added a "rule" to log your experience at www.geocaching.com. Notice they say log your experience, not log your find. The intention is that whether you actually find the cache or not you are invited to log your experience at geocaching.com

 

"Rules" here mean instructions for geocaching, not some "official" rule that that can be enforced.

 

But lets take to mean that these things you are supposed to do when you are geocaching.

 

First of all, it says you should write about the find in the logbook. Do you really do that? What about on a tiny log in a micro cache - you probably put your name or maybe even your initials. It that really writing about your find? What if you write a paragraph about your find and don't include your name? And since Grounspeak allows online logs to be blank, do you suppose the writing in logbook might be totaly optional as well?

 

Then it says to log your experience at www.geocaching.com. Geocaching.com allows blank logs. Is that logging your experience? And why aren't you up in arm with the "cheaters" who write something in the log book and then don't log their find on www.geocaching.com. Seems its just a wrong to skip rule #3 as it is to skip rule #2.

 

Rule #3 also talks about logging your experience. It doesn't say log a find online. It is clearly inviting you to share your experience even if you didn't find the cache and even it you didn't do #1 or #2. Sure if you didn't find the cache you should log a DNF or a note. But what if you found the cache but were unable to write in the log book for some reason? IMO, you have still found the cache and a Found log would still be appropriate. However, if you didn't find the cache, the Found log would be bogus and and the cache owner could delete it. It is well within a cache owners perogative to check the physical log book an use it as evidence as to whether or not you found the cache. It is nonsense to suggest that cache owner can not rely on other evidence to allow an online find.

 

Typing in big fonts and making something bold doesn't change its meaning. The "rules" you quote are the basic instruction for geocaching. Certainly most people do know that they should sign the logbook when they find a cache. The "rules" you quote don't say however that the definition of a find is signing the logbook or that logging a Found online is conditional on signing the logbook. Perhaps someday you will understand this like alohabra did.

Edited July 14, 2011 by tozainamboku

[mresoteric]

 

One person says no way you could get 60 caches all over Oahu in a day. You had to cheat.

Another persons says cache hunters who like to cache were in a small area with over 800 caches available to find and they only got 60? They must be slackers.

 

Is either person 'wrong'?

 

It depends on where you are. Clearly. The folks around Oahu know the "trends" of their area, just as I'm sure you see find trends in yours. Apples, oranges.

 

The OP claims cheating while at the same time acknowledging evidence that this team did find caches that they did not log. The cache where they dropped a tb but didn't log proves this. So how can they assume that the cachers did not actually find all the caches they logged?

 

They can delete the logs if they want but claiming they cheated on all the caches is a bit presumptuous.

 

The trend on Oahu may be just a handful a day. Maybe most cachers visiting the area take time to enjoy the views.

t

But there are some cachers who are more concerned with numbers than they are views. If someone wants to spend their day running around the island to find 60 caches I bet it can be done and then some.

 

I never said you can't find 60 caches in a day on Oahu. In fact there are a couple places where you might get that many by lunch. I said it was highly unlikely they found all the caches they logged. As proof I offer you these tidbits...

1. They only tried to re-log 2 of the dozens of deleted finds, not all or even most of them.

2. When questioned (via email) about the lack of signatures, they told cache owners a couple different things. Some they told their gps 'erased' all their found caches and they couldn't remember which caches they found. This came with an apology if they had made any mistakes. To others they suggested they may only have placed initials (without a date) on the logbook & that they may have signed "out of order." What they never said was anything resembling, "I remember that cache it was a magnetic key holder painted green." or "your cache was a lock-n-lock hidden low by the view point." In other words, they didn't respond with anything to suggest they had actually found the caches in question. I suspect if they did, this thread wouldn't be here.

jrr

I don't know. These kinds of threads seem to pop up on a regular basis. Seems to me people are much more willing to assume the worst of people rather than the best.

[+Cryptosporidium-623]

Why wouldn't you expect cache theft. You are talking about cheeters after all. Cheeters tend to be sore loosers. They lash out when they get busted, and blame everyone else. I had a cache just like yours. Deleted a boggus log, then within 2 days it went missing. I learnt my lesson. If you want to delete a log, wait for a few months.

 

That is an extremely good point.

[4wheelin_fool]

Why wouldn't you expect cache theft. You are talking about cheeters after all. Cheeters tend to be sore loosers. They lash out when they get busted, and blame everyone else. I had a cache just like yours. Deleted a boggus log, then within 2 days it went missing. I learnt my lesson. If you want to delete a log, wait for a few months.

 

That is an extremely good point.

No. Send the cache to someone's sock account on the other side of the country using the adopt feature. Then have them delete the bogus log, and wait a few months for them to cool down before sending it back.

[+fizzymagic]

It's simple for me. If I believe they found the cache (which I do unless there is some evidence to the contrary) I will not delete their find even if they for whatever reason did not sign the logbook.

 

On the other hand, I probably will not have a lot of respect for them as geocachers if they wimp out of signing the log because, for example, they don't have a pen on them. Real geocachers sign the log no matter the cost.

 

If a geocacher makes a habit of this kind of thing, then they drop to the "pathetic" category I reserve for those who are inordinately proud of their find count or their FTF count or their days in a row of finding a cache. It's my opinion that people who need that kind of external validation to feel good about themselves are to be pitied.

 

But it doesn't make me delete their logs. Or consider them "cheaters."

[+leeroyboy]

I was in Wisconsin in May and there were some caches placed in trees over a river. You either waded to the tree or used a kayak/boat to get to the tree, then had to scale up about 20 feet to get to the cache.

 

Hey, I found the cache. It was right there, in plain sight, a match container hanging from a small limb.

 

As I only had one pair of shoes I didn't wade out to the tree. No signed log. No smiley for me.

[+FraenCache]

As a cache owner, you have the right to delete finds on your caches if the log is not signed.

 

I can't imagine getting so concerned over another person's logging practices that I would compile statistics on them, though. And I can't begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to "check up" on them.

 

Seriously, it's hard to imagine caring so much about how someone else plays a game when their actions have no effect on me at all.

 

I totally agree. It makes me more thinking about you guys "hunting" some weirdos, than being concerned about those weirdos, how it might be fun for them posting finds they actually didn´t even search. Comeon, it´s a game. Who cares if one out of a thousand is cheating? If it´s theyr fun to only log finds instead of going out and search caches that may only be sad to me but has no effect on me how I play the game.

 

So, just relax, let them "level up" theyr imaginary sad stats and enjoy hunting caches in nature ... There are definatly more serious things in the world to be concerned about ...

 

Well, I don't expect everyone to read my post to this thread carefully, or even know about the incident I'm talking about. But there was this retired guy named Oculus Prime about 2 years ago. And it wasn't just Hawaii, this guy did drive-by's all over the U.S. and Canada. I believe he really was a full-time RV'er, he was just logging every cache he drove within a few miles of. The Frog wiped out all his finds after a couple of months.

 

So people all over the country talked about this when he hit their area. You can still Google his name and "Geocaching" and find several regional Geocaching message board threads about him. So GeeGeoBee, you can now "begin to imagine being so concerned as to get together with several other people to check up on them".

 

I mean some of you are free to rant all day with "it doesn't affect me", and "there are more important things to be concerned about", but it has been shown that people notice chronic cheating, discuss it amongst themselves, and Groundspeak takes action. So if it bothers you that cache owners do this, please ignore it, it doesn't affect you.

 

Well, as #1 cache finder in the world (!!! big ups, really), I can imagine you would be concerned about someone comin along and cheating away your precious title. Sorry, I´m cruel here but I really can´t understand why everything always must have someone who´s the best in in it and standing above each other and screaming it out in the world ...

 

When this guy has the time and money to drive across the country and log his way ... wow, he gets respect from me, too. The thing is, he wouldn´t destroy geocaching through that. I never heard of him ... well, I think he never was in Germany though ...

 

The question to me is, did the guys from Grundspeak delete him or his finds because they saw a certain threat to theyr game or because so many people startet to moan about somebody "breaking the noble rules" ... maybe he just liked the immense attention he was getting ... which means a problem was lately created by those, who wanted to "solve" it.

 

What I want to say is, one who plays unfair shouldn´t be able to upset a whole community. What is wrong here? A lag of selfconfidence? Just live and let live. And don´t be always so tight with being nuber one or getting the most or having more than the others or being the most beautifull or the most popular ... Where has it brought us jet? To paradise? Don´t think so ... If the "good ones" wouldn´t always be such a pain in the a***, the cheaters wouldn´t have half the fun ...

 

Nuff said.

 

Well, big misunderstanding there, my #1 cache finder in the world title is a complete joke. I am the # 1 cache finder in the world (with about 45 finds) on an extemely obscure alternative Geocaching website. As a matter of fact, it's more of a GPS games website (hence the name), that accepts Geocache listings just for the heck of it. That "forum title" has been there for a while, time for a new fresh one, I think.

 

I'm quite sure Groundspeak stepped in during the Oculus Prime incident because of the moaning, as you say, not the threat to the game. There have also been a few more minor armchair logging incidents where they have stepped in. In those minor cases, I'm sure it's just people looking for attention, or to see how long it takes to get caught.

 

Sorry, I guess I'll just never be a "live and let live, man" kinda guy. I was in the military for 22 years, what can I say.

 

(!OFF TOPIC!)

 

Hey Mr. Yuck,

 

first of all, I´d like to say SORRY for my harsh reply. Sometimes I´m able to write myself into kind of a "rage" ... Specially if I don´t get the point behind certain discussions. Like here.

 

I was really surprised about your calm reply, I appreciate that. And I learnd a new term (armchair logging), thanks for that!

 

Back to the TOPIC and to everyone else:

 

I´d like to repeat, I still don´t really get the point behind that at all. We´re placing rubbermaid or whatelse boxes in nature for no reason except providing a fun game to other people. So where´s the problem if some single persons don´t understand how to play it. There are still a majority of people doing it "right" and everything else doesn´t affect the game at all ... How can anybody be so curious about someone elses statistics???!!! Realy, thats way more sad than any cheater could ever be ...

 

I got three boxes out there as well and I couldn´t IMAGINE how I should check, if every online log matches the logbooks ... My only worrys are that they don´t get stolen by some muggles or being destroyed or so. THAT would really affect the game. .......

[+FraenCache]

It's simple for me. If I believe they found the cache (which I do unless there is some evidence to the contrary) I will not delete their find even if they for whatever reason did not sign the logbook.

 

On the other hand, I probably will not have a lot of respect for them as geocachers if they wimp out of signing the log because, for example, they don't have a pen on them. Real geocachers sign the log no matter the cost.

 

If a geocacher makes a habit of this kind of thing, then they drop to the "pathetic" category I reserve for those who are inordinately proud of their find count or their FTF count or their days in a row of finding a cache. It's my opinion that people who need that kind of external validation to feel good about themselves are to be pitied.

 

But it doesn't make me delete their logs. Or consider them "cheaters."

 

Thumbs up, totally agree ...

[+Geo.Fox]

What if they logged 10 finds without signing? Would you delete the logs? Contact the cacher to ask for an explanation? Do nothing?

 

Story behind the questions: Recently a prolific cacher flew to paradise and logged what seemed to us (& a few other locals) an unrealistic number of finds over a short period of time. The logs were all generic "found on vacation" cut & paste jobs. Being curious, several of us checked on caches near our home coordinates. In this spot check of 20 caches we found one signature, (in a cache without a writing implement.) We also saw a tb they dropped in another cache, though they did not sign the paper log. Being generous, they actually have found 10% of the caches they logged. We suspect they found a few caches, but logged finds on many more that they "drove by."

 

Anyone else have similar experiences? How did you handle it? We deleted their finds on our caches.

 

jrr

I don't think it should matter if someone writes on the cache log. Why does it matter? Maybe they just want to see how many they can find very quickly. I don't always take the time to sign the logs because i'm being eaten alive by misquitos and just want to get out of there.

[+WarNinjas]

I didn't sign the log on one of my finds because there was a muggler in a car looking right at me. When I seen the bison tube I decided it would be better left alone but I did find it. However I did say in my log the reason I didn't sign it. I think you should sign the log when possible and if for some reason you cant sign it you should give an explanation in the log. That many in a row with no reason as to why they did not sign is questionable but I don't think I would look into it that far as to delete there log. But that is just me. I guess if I knew someone didn't find it I would have to delete it but I don't know how that would come to be.

-WarNinjas

[+Vater_Araignee]

I put a log book in the cache to be signed as proof that it was found. Without proof the only logical assumption is a lie and if someone wants to lie about finding one of my caches then they can do it where I wont see it.

I do have a cache where I'll except a picture of retrieval in vcase they forget to bring a writing implement.

I have also considered having the same attitude as Clan Riffster when it comes to others logging my caches but I realized that it just encourages people to lie about accessing a cache that takes special knowledge to gain entry to. As petty as I try not to be, it somehow make entry seem less special.

[+Hawkins2.5]

"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." From the Knowledge Books

 

Many people here seem to be stating that we should let cache finders play the game their way and that the guidelines are there to be interpreted. The 'It doesn't affect me so why do I care?' attitude. I actually agree with that, I'm not a cache owner yet but I don't think I would delete a log even if I did suspect it was bogus, it wouldn't bother me enough to risk the potential hassle.

 

However, clearly cache owners have power of deletion for a reason and so I say, let these cache owners play it their way too. They seem to have followed the guidelines of emailing the loggers to ask for an explanation, this was not satisfactory and they couldn't prove they found it so log deleted. These cache finders have obviously relogged ones they genuinely found and could appeal to Groundspeak if they feel their log was deleted unfairly. This also doesn't affect me so I'm not going to try and tell the cache owners what they should have done.

[tomowens]

First off, I do not own any caches - so take this for what it's worth.

 

Second, I Have signed the log or otherwise played by the 'rules' for my whopping 20-some-odd finds.

 

But I fail to see how a CO is harmed in any way by a cacher falsely logging a find. If that cacher is falsely reporting problems with a cache or somehow diminishing its lure to others, then go ahead and correct that. Otherwise, why would you care?

[+E_ZIG_A]

I was sad the first time I noticed this phenomenon, but after a few days of contemplation, I realised that my game of geocaching was not affected by someone else's game...

 

I have found a few times the opposite recently, where someone signed the physical log but forgot to log online! I've sent reminder emails to them and it turns out they were on a big caching run and just forgot.

[+Vater_Araignee]

I was sad the first time I noticed this phenomenon, but after a few days of contemplation, I realised that my game of geocaching was not affected by someone else's game...

 

I have found a few times the opposite recently, where someone signed the physical log but forgot to log online! I've sent reminder emails to them and it turns out they were on a big caching run and just forgot.

You can also have someone like me who simply stopped logging online.

I keep track of all my finds in GSAK and GE and back them up online.

[+U.N.C.L.E.]

One thing I've learnt over the years is that there is incredible "regional variation" in how the game is played. In some parts of the world the convention seems to be that you must sign the log while in other parts a much more laissez-faire attitude prevails. There are probably differences in the playing of the game within different regions of the same country. I guess the key word here is "convention". What is the predominant thinking on this in your part of the world? Don't be too concerned by those who are strongly disagreeing with your opinion here- it's possible they are simply from a part of the world that plays the game a bit differently.

 

Having said that, the originator of the thread asked the question "Do you care if someone logs a find on one of your caches but doesn't sign the log?" My answer is YES. I would care. It's to do with the integrity of the game. Without getting involved in detailed, semantic discussions about the rules/guidelines etc and the loopholes that may or may not exist in them you simply need to ask "What did the originators of geocaching intend when they put the game together?" I'm guessing that they wanted people to go out in the outdoors, have an adventure and tell others about it. Part of that adventure is actually physically finding the thing (a cache) that set you on this adventure in the first place. So claiming a find should be something that is taken seriously. If you don't find the cache but had a really great time anyway then that's great and you should write about it. But don't lie about finding the cache. I doubt that the originators of the activity wanted it to degenerate into something where you could sit at home and claim "finds" or claim a "find" because you drove within a couple of miles of the cache. Signing the logbook proves you actually found the cache and maintains the integrity of the activity. When I write a "Found" log online I do so with a clear conscience, safe in the knowledge that I put in the effort and was rewarded for that effort by being able to sign the logbook and post a "Found" log . I would like to think that the game has a degree of integrity and that when others post "Found" logs then they are indicating that they also had put in the effort and achieved the goal. If the game has no integrity then why bother with it?

 

Having said that, I am unaware of anyone logging a dodgy find on one of my caches so I can't say with certainty how I would react if I suspected such a thing had happened. Probably I would delete the log.

 

It is interesting that so many of the discussions on these forums and other caching forums world-wide seem to centre on the "rules" or "guidelines" or whatever you care to call them. It seems that some people want to spend their time finding loopholes and being clever in their interpretation of the rules/guidelines. How about just taking the rules/guidelines at face value, giving the activity some integrity and getting on with the game? Or, is it time for gc.com/Groundspeak to re-write the rules/guidelines and remove the ambiguity and tell its reviewers to enforce the rules to the letter? Or, do we continue to allow different parts of the world, or different parts of a country, to interpret the game and how to play it entirely differently from one another so that you have a confused mess of a game that has no integrity? Let's have some consistency in how the game is played. And the only way we can achieve that is for gc.com/Groundspeak to take the lead.

[+Andromeda321]

*shrug*

 

I'm sure it's happened on my caches. But I always figured that cheating in geocaching is sorta like cheating in golf- why bother when you're just playing against yourself?

[+DanOCan]

Real geocachers ALWAYS carry a pen or pencil, usually more than one.

 

Wow, I'm glad to know I'm not a real geocacher.

[+Hawkins2.5]

Real geocachers ALWAYS carry a pen or pencil, usually more than one.

 

Wow, I'm glad to know I'm not a real geocacher.

 

Well I often start off carrying a pen and/or pencil but end up losing it on the way! Sometimes I find it later in the deep dark corners of my bag and other times it's gone for good. Does that mean I start my trips as a real geocacher but lose this status along with my pen/pencil?

[+TerraViators]

Personally, I don't care. Things happen. Also, who is to judge what a signature is? Is it just a mark, a squiggly line, a thumb print in mud, a person's legal signature, etc.

[+Vater_Araignee]

Real geocachers ALWAYS carry a pen or pencil, usually more than one.

 

Wow, I'm glad to know I'm not a real geocacher.

 

Well I often start off carrying a pen and/or pencil but end up losing it on the way! Sometimes I find it later in the deep dark corners of my bag and other times it's gone for good. Does that mean I start my trips as a real geocacher but lose this status along with my pen/pencil?

Yes!

Fortunately there are way to regain that status.

Burnt twig

Mud and twig

Chlorophyll

Blood

I have used all but blood.

The chlorophyll came to me when I climbed a tree and dropped my pencil.

Carbon and mud I figured came naturally to everyone.

[+RocTheCacheBox]

For what its worth coming from a "newbie'

 

The question asked is. "Do you care if someone logs a find on one of your caches, but doesn't sign the log?"

As of yet I havent placed a cache but I will before long.

 

This is what I go by.

"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 log are considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional."

 

Breaking that down....

 

"Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed"

I think that in itself is pretty clear.

 

"An exception is Challenge Caches....."

I dont see any other exception.So I assume there are no other exceptions.

 

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

That statement indicates to me that "finding the geocache and signing the log " are manditory not optional.

 

Additionaly 3.2 covers the rules for non physical geocaches - no signature require.

 

Now to answer the question.

Yes I care. Will I delete your "find"? Probably not, Exceptions can and should be made. You may have a good excuse. Perhaps you startled a rabid badger as you were opening the cache and you ran.

 

But if you dont want to play by the guidelines thats on you. Have fun doing whatever your doing but your not actualy geocaching. Ive got other things to do than monitor everyone elses game play. Ive played many rounds of golf that Ive lost to guys that have taken 10 or more strokes more than I did and said "good game" as we walk off 18. Sure exceptions can be made, pens freeze or run out of ink, pencil lead breaks, people go out unprepared for the activity. My cachepack has a few pens, pencils I stole from the golf course (so ignore my opinion if you want), and spare logs. Im no better than anyone else but I am better prepared than many.

[+GeoBain]

"Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed"

I think that in itself is pretty clear.

 

That little gem there is about as clear as mud. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

[+Ash McCloud]

Here is the cool thing I saw in this. The original comment shows that they have a network that comes together. I think that is real cool. They actually checked on it and made sure people were doing what they say they were doing. I noticed they did not delete all the finders only this one after careful examination. So how do we fault them for that. I say Good job for expelling all those finds. I agree with all the post that say this is up to the CO. We know this does not matter to all cache owners but for all the owners that expect people to be honest and not log armchair or driveby finds, i think there should be applause for them that they are trying to keep some honesty in the game. I know you can play the game the way you want but one of the reason to play the game is to see places you have not been.

 

I cache in Alabama and I have yet to cache with anyone who did not have a pen( normally) I have forgotten my marker once on a journey into find a cache and I found a stick and made a mark on the paper that if you looked at right you could see my name. I told the owner and he was cool about it. Heck I assumed all cachers would have a pen at all times.

[+tozainamboku]

For what its worth coming from a "newbie'

 

The question asked is. "Do you care if someone logs a find on one of your caches, but doesn't sign the log?"

As of yet I havent placed a cache but I will before long.

 

This is what I go by.

"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 log are considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional."

 

Breaking that down....

 

"Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed"

I think that in itself is pretty clear.

Yes it is clear. It means that once you've signed the physical log, a cache owner cannot go and create some silly additional requirement in order to log a find online. This phrase was added to the guidelines as part of the change that disallowed ALRs. It was meant to indicate that any existing ALRs were now void. Cache finders should go ahead and log the cache as found once they signed the physical log. It was not meant to change the fact that cache owners could accept an online find log even when the log is not signed. A careful reading will show that this phrase does not preclude logging a find online if the physical log was not signed. It simple says that if you signed the physical log, you can log a find online despite any ALR that the cache owner might have.

"An exception is Challenge Caches....."

I dont see any other exception.So I assume there are no other exceptions.

That's right Challenge Cache are an exception to the ALR guidelines. You aren't implying that for Challenge Caches you don't have to sign the log, are you? In fact owners of challenge caches can delete your online log if they feel it is bogus. If you completed the challenge requirements then go log the find without finding the challenge cache, the owner can delete your log.

 

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

That statement indicates to me that "finding the geocache and signing the log " are manditory not optional.

I disagree that this implies signing the log is mandatory. However it does allow for cache owners to delete online logs if the physical was not signed. My guess is that there are conditions where TPTB wanted to allow cache owners the option to use the physical log as proof that the a cacher met a physical or mental challenge that was intended to be part of the experience for this cache. For example, when a cache is hiddedn in a tree, cache owners should be allowed to delete online logs that say "Saw it in the tree but didn't want to climb up to get it". For these caches, a signed log is the best proof that the finder completed the intended challenge.

 

One of the issues that I have is that newbies are unaware of the reason for the physical cache logging guidelines. It appears to them that this is talking about a requirement to sign the physical log when it was really created solely to emphasize what requirements a cache owner could have for logging a find online. The reality is that this did not give cache owners the ability to delete logs they couldn't have already deleted. In fact it did the opposite; it limited the reasons for which they could delete online found logs. What's more, is that it put no new guidelines on cache owners as to when they should delete online found logs. If they allowed a find before, they could continue to allow these finds.

Edited August 8, 2011 by tozainamboku

[+RocTheCacheBox]

So it doesn't mean that Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed? Im begining to understand now!

 

Am I missing the Super Secret Geocahing Guidline Interpretation Instructional classes again?

[+tozainamboku]

So it doesn't mean that Physical geocaches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed? Im begining to understand now!

You falling for a logical fallacy called denying the antecedent. It says that once the physical log has been signed you can log a find online. That does not mean that if the physical log is not signed you can not log a find online.

 

Again think of the reason the guideline was added. Cache owners were deleting online logs because the finder hadn't done some silly additional requirement after finding the cache. They were told to stop doing this. The only requirement they could have for logging a find online were finding the cache and signing the log. It did not tell them they had to have these requirements (although elsewhere cache owners are told to delete logs that appear to be bogus), just that anything else (with the exception of certain geocaching related challenges) was no longer allowed.