Jump to content

Bogus logs


Followers 4

Recommended Posts

There are currently 2 cachers in the South of England who are posting bogus "find" logs.

 

Numerous examples have been documented where they claim a find on the cache page, but no record or sign of their visit appears in the cache log book.

They cannot use the excuse that they "forgot a pen", because the examples are too widespread and persistent.

 

In addition, they have the irritating habit of deliberately logging some of the caches that they have genuinely found, on false dates.

For example, they may find a ring of a dozen caches on one day, as evidenced by the same date appearing on each paper log for each cache.

However, when it comes to logging the find on the cache page, they will use a wide variety of dates, (usually in order to help them qualify for some sort of Challenge Cache).

 

The only apparent solution to curb this behaviour, seems to be to notify the affected COs, and ask them to investigate and/or delete logs.

 

While I appreciate that we all play this game by different rules, the activities of these 2 individuals are intensely irritating and frustrating to many local cachers.

 

Can anybody offer any practical or constructive advice?

Link to comment

Why on earth should it frustrate or irritate you? Especially if they are not even your caches!

 

One armchair logger could make it much harder to qualify for something like a Resuscitator cache. If you've actually done the work to resuscitate a cache you don't want to find you don't qualify for the challenge because someone claimed a find they never actually achieved.

Link to comment

Why on earth should it frustrate or irritate you? Especially if they are not even your caches!

 

One armchair logger could make it much harder to qualify for something like a Resuscitator cache. If you've actually done the work to resuscitate a cache you don't want to find you don't qualify for the challenge because someone claimed a find they never actually achieved.

 

Fair enough I guess. I have no idea what much of that meant but I guess it affects some kind of caching game :)

Link to comment

I deliberately didn't name either the cachers or any of the caches involved.

 

Perhaps some of my caches are on the list of those which have been falsely claimed?

 

I repeat, can anybody offer any practical or constructive advice?

 

If it's your own caches, and you genuinely believe the logs are bogus in some way, then delete them. Otherwise I wouldn't care (though admittedly I have no idea what the Resuscitator stuff is about either.).

Link to comment

I deliberately didn't name either the cachers or any of the caches involved.

 

Perhaps some of my caches are on the list of those which have been falsely claimed?

 

you mentioned notifying the cache owners affected so I assumed they were not yours.

 

I repeat, can anybody offer any practical or constructive advice?

 

delete the bogUs logs for your caches if you think they are fake and ignore the rest.

Link to comment

Firstly, I feel your pain. We (like most cachers) put a lot of effort into doing things correctly. The 'everyone plays it their own way' just doesn't wash with me :mad:

 

Secondly:

I deliberately didn't name either the cachers or any of the caches involved.

 

If they think that they are doing nothing wrong then they surely wouldn't mind being named here! :unsure:

 

Thirdly:

I know exactly what a 'resuscitator' cache is! B)

 

 

 

Mark

Edited by Delta68
Link to comment

This cache is an example of a Resusitator cache

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2HD75

 

Basically if you find a cache that wasn't found for a year you qualify for the challenge cache. An armchair cacher logging it could leave the cache apparently not qualifying for resuscitation.

 

I mentioned that because a cache I found that I'd been leaving until it did qualify was suddenly logged by someone who apparently forgot their pen. If I claim a find without signing it I'll leave some other proof I was there but this person appeared to have not signed the cache, not put anything in the cache to prove they were there and not taken the TB that had been there for two years.

 

In this specific case Bashful updated the rules of his challenge cache to cater for such situations, but it's a shame it had to be considered.

 

There's a lot of merit in the argument that we all play our own way because (things like the above aside) it doesn't make any difference to me whether the previous entry on the web site was someone who found it, someone who hunted but didn't find it or someone who had never been anywhere near the place but felt like logging it. I'd just counter with the question of why people bother claiming a find on a cache they never actually found.

Link to comment

I believe some one did a series at start of month who armchair logged a few DNF as found because they wanted to be seen as completing the series! I always look at the last couple of ppl to sign the logs and the same names were cropping up apart from in a few logs (these caches wernt so easy to find), there excuses were that kids were hanging around in that area which made me think "why on earth would kids stay in that area for such a long period of time..theres nothing there to interest them its just a path" Maybe im wrong but the one in the middle of the field...it wasnt in the place the clue said it was...you had to look around abit...so im thinkin they couldnt find it but logged it anyway! One word CHEATS !!! :ph34r:

 

Play the game properly or dont bother!!

Link to comment

Why on earth should it frustrate or irritate you? Especially if they are not even your caches!

 

Also if I had a couple of DNFs on one of my caches and was thinking I ought to go check it out, but then there's a bogus find logged I'll then think it must be OK; other seekers will then perhaps waste time looking for a cache that's possibly missing.

 

I suspect this activity is to qualify for some of the challenge caches out there (365 days of caching, the various DT grid challenges etc), and as such I think this is less of a problem for the caches where the bogus logs are being entered, than the challenge caches that will be claimed unjustifiably and where the owner of the challenge cache would probably care.

 

Can't offer any solutions though, other than notify the cache owners and let them decide whether or not to delete the log.

Link to comment

I was told by a fellow cacher down near me (Chilihouse) that someone had logged an entire series of his as found with a log that read something like 'Thanks for the lovely walk, we didn't retrieve nor sign any of the logs as we were in a rush to get back for the F1'. And they thought that was ok! Next time I'm taking a flight to the west coast of the US I'm going to log every cache under my flightpath as found...

 

Seriously though, I'm sure there are lots of people that log various caches as found when they haven't (that rogue one on a series you just can't locate) and none of that bothers me. They're only cheating themselves as is said and it doesn't harm anyone else. What bothers me is whole-scale cheating and logging of entire series or groups of caches as found when they've obviously not been found, or logging caches on dates other than when they've found them to fulfill the requirements of challenge caches and the like. It makes a mockery of those people who DO make the effort to go out on Christmas Day, snow days, find the required caches etc.

 

The unsigned log book thing makes me chuckle too, I've seen that a few times and I'm sure sometimes its genuine. I have a feeling that when people who cheat to such a degree are confronted they would have some nonsensical explanation as to why that cache had no signature (no pen, pen broke, pen wouldn't work, signed with a UV pen as that's all I had, someone has obviously gone and removed my signature etc...).

 

If people want to cheat themselves, fine. Go ahead, do it, just don't bleat when people lose respect for you. However when they want to cheat other people out of challenges, records, etc then I think they should expect to incur peoples anger.

Link to comment

I've mentioned this before, but when we were doing the Way Down West series last year, the previous 'finders' NMEandPhysgog had only signed ONE log (ok, they stuck a sticker in the book)

 

They even claimed finds on ones they admitted they couldn't find.

Does it effect anyone else? Well it certainly didn't do much for our morale at the time.

 

I say Name and Shame.

Anyone who doesn't feel shame shouldn't mind being named!

If they do feel shame, then why cheat?

 

 

Mark

Link to comment

We've logged caches where we haven't signed the log (once I even forgot to sign the log in haste), but when this has been the case we've always done one of the following:

  • Taken a photo for the online log
  • Had permission to log found from the CO
  • Left a TB or GC but didn't have pen at the time
  • Made some kind of mark with whatever was to hand

Most of the time when we forget a pen, I just take a photo now with my phone.

 

I don't see this as a problem because I'm not particularly in competition with anyone. If there was some kind of competition then of course this kind of thing should be classed as cheating. Resuscitator caches - meh. If it's part of a challenge then it's between the COs of both caches to police that. If someone finds a mystery cache but did so without completing the challenge - should there log be excluded? For me, no - well done for finding a work-around, my challenge obviously wasn't foolproof enough. So I think if you set a Resuscitator challenge then they have opted to be responsible to check that the find is valid... in a way they've set themselves a challenge too.

 

So I don't mind if people log my caches and haven't signed the log book, it's my right to check the logs and delete, but I'm waiving that right since I really want to have fun with the game and not get bogged down trying to enforce rules and police other cachers. If that's how others like to spend their free time then, whatever floats your boat, but I wouldn't expect to gain as many friends through it.

Link to comment

I don't think it bothers me. I have a particularly difficult cache where a couple of times members of a party have openly described (in a Found It log) how they waited outside as emergency support. I have no idea whether the log was brought out for them to sign or not, and haven't bothered to check (partly because checking wouldn't be a trivial exercise in this example). I wouldn't log it like that myself (I'd use a Note), but it doesn't bother me (although it's obviously stuck in my memory for some reason hasn't it ;) ).

 

This isn't quite the same as Bogus armchair logging though. If ghost Finds/DNFs started to interfere with my own caches, I guess I'd soon get more bothered and do something about it. But at least I have a manageable set of caches that I can readily check and maintain, and I don't rely solely on DNFs to trigger maintenance.

 

As for Challenge caches, they don't interest me much -- arbitrary conditions, often (not always of course) based on D/T ratings that are subjective to start with. They would nearly always involve my doing something that I'm not interested in, so I don't sign up. The exception (there's always one isn't there) was a local cache that deserved to be found more frequently, which I identified thanks to a Resuscitator Challenge. I gladly used it as a Qualifier, although I'm not worried about the Resuscitator itself and may never find it.

Link to comment

I don't think it bothers me. I have a particularly difficult cache where a couple of times members of a party have openly described (in a Found It log) how they waited outside as emergency support. <snip>

 

That always makes me laugh - the old "We did this as part of group x". I've noticed many a difficult puzzle cache found by groups. I have to admit, when I'm struggling to solve a puzzle or difficult terrain that kind of irks me, but in the end I laugh.

 

There is one particular cacher (naming no names) I've noticed at events who goes around asking other cachers about the difficult puzzles, until they've picked up enough pieces to effortlessly put it all together... sure enough in a few weeks there's a "found it" logged. I notice this particular cacher enjoys using the events to team up and get the high terrains too. I just smile to myself and I know I can be self-satisfied that we've needed very little assistance in any of the puzzles or high terrains we've done (only contacting CO/teaming up on 3 or 4 of them).

Link to comment

So I don't mind if people log my caches and haven't signed the log book, it's my right to check the logs and delete, but I'm waiving that right since I really want to have fun with the game and not get bogged down trying to enforce rules and police other cachers. If that's how others like to spend their free time then, whatever floats your boat, but I wouldn't expect to gain as many friends through it.

 

....but then as a cache owner are you/we not under an obligation to monitor our cache logs, online and physical? :ph34r:

2.1. Listing Guidelines that Apply to All Geocaches

Geocache Maintenance

Owner is responsible for geocache page upkeep. As the owner of your geocache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to

be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

 

I appreciate you have chosen to waiver this guideline, but you/we did 'accept' this responsibility when you/we submitted your/our cache(s)for publication did we not :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Recently only started out caching, got addicted. To begin with I didnt log cache's especially the nano's that are so fiddly, i just said to myself, if ive had it in my hand, i will consider it a count.

 

Thats how I used to feel, and I didnt get disheartened by any DNFs, I would log a DNF on the site. I was being honest and I would only be cheating myself

 

Nowadays though I make a point to sign it, especially if its the first few logs to be done, still find the nano's a pain though

 

.. Recently got to a new cache, already seen that someone had but a "Found" on the cache as a FTF but when I got to the cache the next day, noone had signed it, who wouldnt sign a FTF???

Link to comment

Recently only started out caching, got addicted. To begin with I didnt log cache's especially the nano's that are so fiddly, i just said to myself, if ive had it in my hand, i will consider it a count.

 

Thats how I used to feel, and I didnt get disheartened by any DNFs, I would log a DNF on the site. I was being honest and I would only be cheating myself

 

Nowadays though I make a point to sign it, especially if its the first few logs to be done, still find the nano's a pain though

 

.. Recently got to a new cache, already seen that someone had but a "Found" on the cache as a FTF but when I got to the cache the next day, noone had signed it, who wouldnt sign a FTF???

 

For myself the only time I don't put some form of mark on the log is if it's impossible due to circumstances, like the time I found a cache with no pen in it only to realise I'd left my pen in the previous cache. In cases like that I usually do the same kind of thing and take a picture of the cache or do something else to prove I was there and retrieved the cache.

 

For an FTF I wouldn't claim the cache unless I was able to put some form of mark on the log. The mark might be a mud smudge or similar but it would be enough that the second to find could verify that I was there before they were.

 

But that's just me, others obviously have different views.

Link to comment

....but then as a cache owner are you/we not under an obligation to monitor our cache logs, online and physical? :ph34r:

2.1. Listing Guidelines that Apply to All Geocaches

Geocache Maintenance

Owner is responsible for geocache page upkeep. As the owner of your geocache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to

be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

 

I appreciate you have chosen to waiver this guideline, but you/we did 'accept' this responsibility when you/we submitted your/our cache(s)for publication did we not :rolleyes:

 

Ha Ha Ha - Good one!

 

So I suppose, without opening a can of worms with discussion about guidelines, I would say define the following....

  • Quality
  • Appearance of Bogus
  • Counterfeit
  • Off-Topic
  • Inappropriate

My guess is that on at least one or more of those subjective points we will have a difference of opinion. Also of note, Groundspeak have not deemed in necessary to issue a guideline on the frequency of cache maintenance (i.e. to go and check online logs against the logbook). Presumably, being a conscientious CO you visit every 109 of your geocaches every time someone logs a find, to verify that it was not bogus? signalsmile.gif

 

As long as nothing offensive is logged on the cache page, for me, that will do. I notice an increase of blank logs just lately - I have no idea on how to judge these but Groundspeak sees fit to allow them - perhaps their standards of quality are much, much lower than anyones here. Of course I am unaware if the GAGB have any further guidelines when it comes to maintaining cache logs...

 

Lets clarify my original sentence shall we?

 

It's my right to sit on each cache page repeatedly pressing F5 until someone logs a find, then immediately go out and visit my cache to check that it's valid, but I'm waiving that right since I really want to have fun with the game and not get bogged down trying to enforce rules and police other cachers.

I really don't even know why I'm responding to this topic, wasting time on the forums when I really should be watching my cache page doing something more fun and interesting.

 

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men."

Link to comment

Only time i have seen blank cache logs are when that person was with someone who posted a meaningful log.

 

Which is fair enough, my 8 year old son has his own account, and if he is with me, (when he posts his own logs) he might not put anything and just out "Found"

 

I have no intention of policing the log books/strips/scrap paper for bogus logs, unless someone makes me aware of it. Even then, apart from the odd cache that may be exempt, I wouldnt bother unless it was in the first 3 logs of a cache.

 

My son started putting "finds" on all all his backdated logs as he has been out caching with myself and my dad for a while, he posted on one that was dubious whether the cache was still there. You can see how it would look if 4-5 people posts DNFs and the owner is confused by a sudden find. Had to explain that it was found a couple of years ago, he accepted that and that was the end of that little issue.

Link to comment

 

My son started putting "finds" on all all his backdated logs as he has been out caching with myself and my dad for a while, he posted on one that was dubious whether the cache was still there. You can see how it would look if 4-5 people posts DNFs and the owner is confused by a sudden find. Had to explain that it was found a couple of years ago, he accepted that and that was the end of that little issue.

 

When posting found logs such as this get him to select the date he found it when entering the log, it will then be added to the cache page in the correct date sequence and there would be no confusion with recent DNFs.

Link to comment

....but then as a cache owner are you/we not under an obligation to monitor our cache logs, online and physical? :ph34r:

2.1. Listing Guidelines that Apply to All Geocaches

Geocache Maintenance

Owner is responsible for geocache page upkeep. As the owner of your geocache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to

be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

 

I appreciate you have chosen to waiver this guideline, but you/we did 'accept' this responsibility when you/we submitted your/our cache(s)for publication did we not :rolleyes:

 

Ha Ha Ha - Good one!

 

So I suppose, without opening a can of worms with discussion about guidelines, I would say define the following....

  • Quality
  • Appearance of Bogus
  • Counterfeit
  • Off-Topic
  • Inappropriate

My guess is that on at least one or more of those subjective points we will have a difference of opinion. Also of note, Groundspeak have not deemed in necessary to issue a guideline on the frequency of cache maintenance (i.e. to go and check online logs against the logbook). Presumably, being a conscientious CO you visit every 109 of your geocaches every time someone logs a find, to verify that it was not bogus? signalsmile.gif

 

As long as nothing offensive is logged on the cache page, for me, that will do. I notice an increase of blank logs just lately - I have no idea on how to judge these but Groundspeak sees fit to allow them - perhaps their standards of quality are much, much lower than anyones here. Of course I am unaware if the GAGB have any further guidelines when it comes to maintaining cache logs...

 

Lets clarify my original sentence shall we?

 

It's my right to sit on each cache page repeatedly pressing F5 until someone logs a find, then immediately go out and visit my cache to check that it's valid, but I'm waiving that right since I really want to have fun with the game and not get bogged down trying to enforce rules and police other cachers.

I really don't even know why I'm responding to this topic, wasting time on the forums when I really should be watching my cache page doing something more fun and interesting.

 

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men."

 

...matey, I wasn't questioning your 'right' to roll out the "play the game" how you wish :blink: , and your correct, I do not visit my 109 caches after each online log :P , but I do check the physical log against online logs when I replace them...my choice :P ...perhaps it is because I get many genuine foreign cachers visit and log my caches, but a surprising number of our European 'friends' appear to log my caches whilst on "a day trip" without signing it, or making a smudge, or offer a photo in lieu of a writing implement :( I happen to hold the view that CHEATS shouldn't prosper in any game, but that's my "right", but feel free to take it up with my parents, that's how they raised me :D

Link to comment

...matey, I wasn't questioning your 'right' to roll out the "play the game" how you wish :blink: , and your correct, I do not visit my 109 caches after each online log :P , but I do check the physical log against online logs when I replace them...my choice :P ...perhaps it is because I get many genuine foreign cachers visit and log my caches, but a surprising number of our European 'friends' appear to log my caches whilst on "a day trip" without signing it, or making a smudge, or offer a photo in lieu of a writing implement :( I happen to hold the view that CHEATS shouldn't prosper in any game, but that's my "right", but feel free to take it up with my parents, that's how they raised me :D

 

Bloody foreigners. Flanders and Swann said it here:

 

And crossing the Channel, one cannot say much

Of French and the Spanish, the Danish or Dutch

The Germans are German, the Russians are red,

And the Greeks and Italians eat garlic in bed!

 

The English are moral, the English are good

And clever and modest and misunderstood.

 

And all the world over, each nation's the same

They've simply no notion of playing the game

They argue with umpires, they cheer when they've won

And they practice beforehand which ruins the fun!

 

The English, the English, the English are best

So up with the English and down with the rest.

Link to comment

 

Bloody foreigners. Flanders and Swann said it here:

 

 

You missed out the bits about the Welsh, Irish and Scots. Diplomacy?

 

They usually miss this bit out of the English national anthem (the most boring anthem on the planet! Why can't we have something like La Marseillaise) too:

 

Lord grant that Marshall Wade

May by thy mighty aid

Victory bring.

May he sedition hush,

And like a torrent rush,

Rebellious Scots to crush.

God save the Queen!

Link to comment

Bloody foreigners. Flanders and Swann said it here:

 

And crossing the Channel, one cannot say much

Of French and the Spanish, the Danish or Dutch

The Germans are German, the Russians are red,

And the Greeks and Italians eat garlic in bed!

 

The English are moral, the English are good

And clever and modest and misunderstood.

 

And all the world over, each nation's the same

They've simply no notion of playing the game

They argue with umpires, they cheer when they've won

And they practice beforehand which ruins the fun!

 

The English, the English, the English are best

So up with the English and down with the rest.

 

Love it!!! How very un-PC! :D

Link to comment

Going back to the OP.........

 

It seems that one of the cachers carrying out the bogus logging could have had a change of heart.

This may, or may not, have something to do with the fact that he has been rumbled!

 

He has now deleted his Found logs from quite a few caches which he had previously claimed in support of a Challenge Cache.

He also withdrew his original registration for that cache.

 

Whilst continuing to deny that he ever committed any bogus logging, he has now re-registered a fresh start date for that same Challenge Cache.

Interestingly, he is now asking for help from COs to solve quite a few puzzle caches.

The sting is that these were the very same puzzle caches that he had previously logged as "Found" :blink:

Link to comment

There are currently 2 cachers in the South of England who are posting bogus "find" logs.

 

Numerous examples have been documented where they claim a find on the cache page, but no record or sign of their visit appears in the cache log book.

They cannot use the excuse that they "forgot a pen", because the examples are too widespread and persistent.

 

In addition, they have the irritating habit of deliberately logging some of the caches that they have genuinely found, on false dates.

For example, they may find a ring of a dozen caches on one day, as evidenced by the same date appearing on each paper log for each cache.

However, when it comes to logging the find on the cache page, they will use a wide variety of dates, (usually in order to help them qualify for some sort of Challenge Cache).

 

The only apparent solution to curb this behaviour, seems to be to notify the affected COs, and ask them to investigate and/or delete logs.

 

While I appreciate that we all play this game by different rules, the activities of these 2 individuals are intensely irritating and frustrating to many local cachers.

 

Can anybody offer any practical or constructive advice?

I can offer my advice and tell you what I do.

I go caching fairly regularly and I never log any finds. What is the point of trying to write the letters tftc and only that in a damp and musty smelling notebook (and around here the notebooks seem mainly to be ones stolen from the local education authority as they are marked as school notebooks but that subject is for another day) I also do not bother to go through the rigmarole of logging onto the site to just type a log that just consists of tftc and a smilyface emoticon as many seem to do. The same goes for travel bugs, in the early days I would move a travel bug and I would receive a grumpy email telling me off for not logging it fast enough or telling me I had not moved it in the right direction so now I never log them either which saves me from answering the nitpicking emails from what I call the whiners and criers. These whiners and criers, common in all areas of life these days, always whine and cry about other people not doing it their way, and can`t someone make them do it "right". They even whine and cry about it to Groundspeak but nothing will ever get done because once they have sold you the £5 travel bug they have made their money and don`t care if it travels 1km or 1,000,000km they only care that more cachers buy more bugs

£5 each x 1,000,000 travel bugs = a profitable business

So there is my practical advice, get over your shallow need for everyones numbers to be correct and certified and try the fun experience of finding new and interesting places through the game of geocaching and forget the urge to get all the numbers right and the need to show others how many caches you`ve visited and logged in the right and proper manner. So to sum it all up just go out and enjoy YOUR geocaching, you may even find it`s a fun game and end up less tense.

 

WALES .... The land that global warming forgot.

Link to comment

And there was me thinking that the whole point of caching was to go to new places, write a log thanking the cache setter for placing the cache (if thanks is deserved) and sharing my experiences with others.

 

How wrong I was :rolleyes:

 

Oh and logging onto the site to go through 'the rigmarole of typing a log that just consists of tftc as many seem to do' would be your choice if you only typed that log. There's nothing preventing you from writing a more detailed experience. Interesting you mention whiners and criers when you appear to be doing just that, would that be called ironic? :)

 

Happy caching :)

Link to comment

I go caching fairly regularly and I never log any finds. ........ etc.

My approach as well. I enjoy the walk and usually write in the log book for the benefit of the cache owner but I never log online these days. We all play this game our own way. I don't tell you how to play and I don't expect to get told how I should play it.

Link to comment

I go caching fairly regularly and I never log any finds. ........ etc.

My approach as well. I enjoy the walk and usually write in the log book for the benefit of the cache owner but I never log online these days. We all play this game our own way. I don't tell you how to play and I don't expect to get told how I should play it.

 

I think there's a difference between not logging caches you've found because that part of the game doesn't interest you; and falsely logging caches in order to qualify for some sort of challenge which you wouldn't be eligible if playing fairly.

Link to comment

And there was me thinking that the whole point of caching was to go to new places, write a log thanking the cache setter for placing the cache (if thanks is deserved) and sharing my experiences with others.

 

How wrong I was :rolleyes:

 

Oh and logging onto the site to go through 'the rigmarole of typing a log that just consists of tftc as many seem to do' would be your choice if you only typed that log. There's nothing preventing you from writing a more detailed experience. Interesting you mention whiners and criers when you appear to be doing just that, would that be called ironic? :)

 

Happy caching :)

Sorry you misread what I wrote earlier. I can only explain it to you unfortunately I cannot understand it for you but feel free to jump in with your interperatation of what you wanted me to be saying.

I was giving advice to thekennelat79 and telling them how I now go about this game called caching and why I do it this way because of all the whiners and criers who think it should be done their way and no other and think it is their right to tell others what to do.

Regarding the observation I made about poor logging I said that was not interested in adding my logs in a log book or on line where most logs seemed to be of the quality of just tftc with optional smilyface. That is the reason I was not going to put my time & effort in writing my log in something that is going to be unread, my reason only and why I do it my way. I never want to make anyone do it my way. I am sorry if I misled anyone or if I did not explain myself clearly enough.

And as in that old saying about someone who is losing an argument that their last refuge is to be right.....

I could see you were so keen to try and point out that you were so right about my comments being ironic, I can only say go back and reread my original try not twist it too far out of context. If however you still need help to understand do not hesitate to ask.

 

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.-- Mark Twain (1835-1910)

Link to comment

Eclectic_Penguin (not Eclectic Penguin, I understand the difference and didn't think you would create a sock puppet account by merely adding an underscore and thinking 'ah HA! This will fox them :D) I understand perfectly what you wrote. I wasn't trying to force anyone elses way of caching onto you either. If you choose to walk the paths, find the cache, not sign the log and not log your finding online that is entirely your right and privilege.

I think it's a collosal waste of time, but that's just my opinion. Do you actually find the boxes? If you're not going to sign the log nor log them online, then why bother? Why not just walk on past. Or maybe you do :) Again, that's your right and I wouldn't try and change that. Of course if you don't find the boxes, sign the logs, log online then you're not really geocaching either... you're just walking.

You say that this is how you do it now but according to your profile you've not logged any caches. So that's how you started caching unless you went back and deleted all your find logs (in protest about something?), or you created a new account and decided to not log anything.

 

I read all the logs on my caches and I appreciate the effort some people put into them. I try and make the same effort in my logs too. I try and write individual logs for all the caches I do although sometimes there's little to say when you go from one side of a field to another to collect a micro under a stile at either end. I understand why lots of people will log a series as 'See log at #1', especially if they're prolific cachers with lots of caches to log.

 

And I don't feel I've twisted anything out of context, you complain about whiners and criers but that seems to be all you do too. The log books are rubbish, the logs aren't read, Groundspeak are just money grabbers, people write rubbish logs etc.

 

Like Marty said, you choose to not log your finds nor sign log books. That's fine, by all means continue. But the original post was about people logging finds on caches they've not done, or falsifying find dates to qualify for challenge caches they wouldn't otherwise qualify for. If they want to, then fine, they're only really cheating themselves. However should they log a false find on one of my caches then I'll delete the log, as is my right as a cache owner. It's cheating and I don't see why I should condone it.

 

And why do people always attack someone elses intelligence when they believe themselves to be right. 'My comments are obviously far too high brow for you to understand so I'll tell you so, and quote Mark Twain'. I was surprised not to see Einstein - 'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe'. Surely that was a gimme!

Link to comment

Eclectic_Penguin (not Eclectic Penguin, I understand the difference and didn't think you would create a sock puppet account by merely adding an underscore and thinking 'ah HA! This will fox them :D) I understand perfectly what you wrote. I wasn't trying to force anyone elses way of caching onto you either. If you choose to walk the paths, find the cache, not sign the log and not log your finding online that is entirely your right and privilege.

I think it's a collosal waste of time, but that's just my opinion. Do you actually find the boxes? If you're not going to sign the log nor log them online, then why bother? Why not just walk on past. Or maybe you do :) Again, that's your right and I wouldn't try and change that. Of course if you don't find the boxes, sign the logs, log online then you're not really geocaching either... you're just walking.

You say that this is how you do it now but according to your profile you've not logged any caches. So that's how you started caching unless you went back and deleted all your find logs (in protest about something?), or you created a new account and decided to not log anything.

 

I read all the logs on my caches and I appreciate the effort some people put into them. I try and make the same effort in my logs too. I try and write individual logs for all the caches I do although sometimes there's little to say when you go from one side of a field to another to collect a micro under a stile at either end. I understand why lots of people will log a series as 'See log at #1', especially if they're prolific cachers with lots of caches to log.

 

And I don't feel I've twisted anything out of context, you complain about whiners and criers but that seems to be all you do too. The log books are rubbish, the logs aren't read, Groundspeak are just money grabbers, people write rubbish logs etc.

 

Like Marty said, you choose to not log your finds nor sign log books. That's fine, by all means continue. But the original post was about people logging finds on caches they've not done, or falsifying find dates to qualify for challenge caches they wouldn't otherwise qualify for. If they want to, then fine, they're only really cheating themselves. However should they log a false find on one of my caches then I'll delete the log, as is my right as a cache owner. It's cheating and I don't see why I should condone it.

 

And why do people always attack someone elses intelligence when they believe themselves to be right. 'My comments are obviously far too high brow for you to understand so I'll tell you so, and quote Mark Twain'. I was surprised not to see Einstein - 'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe'. Surely that was a gimme!

I will try to explain it again, please try to understand it once. I have numbered all your points below to make it for you check against the original please do.

1. I said that I did not want anyone telling me how I should be doing geocaching and I did not want to tell anyone how they should geocache.

2. I said I do not go geocaching to write in logs but more to see interesting places associated with geocaching I am just not into writing in the logs Hence I have never logged any caches.

3. OK you could say that what I do is only walking which is the same as any other cacher except for the logging or not logging of caches. As I said I do not log any finds how can I explain it any simpler than that? And as for the profile with no logs, like I said I do not write logs but do have to log on to the site to get the cache coordinates. As for the "why bother" remark why bother doing anything, nothing we do actually matters (except to the individual at this moment in time), nothing is going to matter from the viewpoint of 100 years in the future.

4. I only complained about the type of whiner & crier who complains how someone else is doing caching and thinks they should be made to do it differently.

5. Good on you for making an effort in your logs. I personally like those type of logs myself where someone makes an effort.

6. I did not say log books are rubbish I said I did not want to go to the effort of writing my name in a log book that is likely to remain unread, in my opinion, as it just contains page after page of logs such as TFTC and NLNT etc.

7. I did not say Groundspeak are moneygrabbers I said that if you can sell 1,000,000 bugs for £5 that is a profitable business which is great. I did bet on Groundspeak maybe not caring what happens to them once they are sold and released and as many people complain on the forums Groungspeak do nothing to help lost or stranded bugs unless you`ve heard different.

8. Thank you for saying that I can keep doing it my way and that what you don`t like people cheating. I always think of cheating as a personal values issue ie I think a persons true value is what they actually do when they know no one is watching them, nothing more nothing less and certainly not what they tell you their values are.

9. I did not, and I did not see anyone saying you should condone cheating. Perhaps you said that for dramatic effect.

10. I`m sorry if you felt that your intelligence was being scrutinised but when I see stupid remarks on a forum I do think "ah HA there must be stupid people around.

 

Fortunately the real truth remains true whether you believe it or not. It also remains there for you to go and check against what you thought I said to what I actually said. So If you want to check points 1 through 10 above and use a little critical thinking you will discover that our thoughts are not too different and that everyone does geocaching differently. Thanks for your replies.

Link to comment

Eclectic_Penguin (not Eclectic Penguin, I understand the difference and didn't think you would create a sock puppet account by merely adding an underscore and thinking 'ah HA! This will fox them :D) I understand perfectly what you wrote. I wasn't trying to force anyone elses way of caching onto you either. If you choose to walk the paths, find the cache, not sign the log and not log your finding online that is entirely your right and privilege.

I think it's a collosal waste of time, but that's just my opinion. Do you actually find the boxes? If you're not going to sign the log nor log them online, then why bother? Why not just walk on past. Or maybe you do :) Again, that's your right and I wouldn't try and change that. Of course if you don't find the boxes, sign the logs, log online then you're not really geocaching either... you're just walking.

You say that this is how you do it now but according to your profile you've not logged any caches. So that's how you started caching unless you went back and deleted all your find logs (in protest about something?), or you created a new account and decided to not log anything.

 

I read all the logs on my caches and I appreciate the effort some people put into them. I try and make the same effort in my logs too. I try and write individual logs for all the caches I do although sometimes there's little to say when you go from one side of a field to another to collect a micro under a stile at either end. I understand why lots of people will log a series as 'See log at #1', especially if they're prolific cachers with lots of caches to log.

 

And I don't feel I've twisted anything out of context, you complain about whiners and criers but that seems to be all you do too. The log books are rubbish, the logs aren't read, Groundspeak are just money grabbers, people write rubbish logs etc.

 

Like Marty said, you choose to not log your finds nor sign log books. That's fine, by all means continue. But the original post was about people logging finds on caches they've not done, or falsifying find dates to qualify for challenge caches they wouldn't otherwise qualify for. If they want to, then fine, they're only really cheating themselves. However should they log a false find on one of my caches then I'll delete the log, as is my right as a cache owner. It's cheating and I don't see why I should condone it.

 

And why do people always attack someone elses intelligence when they believe themselves to be right. 'My comments are obviously far too high brow for you to understand so I'll tell you so, and quote Mark Twain'. I was surprised not to see Einstein - 'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe'. Surely that was a gimme!

I will try to explain it again, please try to understand it once. I have numbered all your points below to make it for you check against the original please do.

1. I said that I did not want anyone telling me how I should be doing geocaching and I did not want to tell anyone how they should geocache.

2. I said I do not go geocaching to write in logs but more to see interesting places associated with geocaching I am just not into writing in the logs Hence I have never logged any caches.

3. OK you could say that what I do is only walking which is the same as any other cacher except for the logging or not logging of caches. As I said I do not log any finds how can I explain it any simpler than that? And as for the profile with no logs, like I said I do not write logs but do have to log on to the site to get the cache coordinates. As for the "why bother" remark why bother doing anything, nothing we do actually matters (except to the individual at this moment in time), nothing is going to matter from the viewpoint of 100 years in the future.

4. I only complained about the type of whiner & crier who complains how someone else is doing caching and thinks they should be made to do it differently.

5. Good on you for making an effort in your logs. I personally like those type of logs myself where someone makes an effort.

6. I did not say log books are rubbish I said I did not want to go to the effort of writing my name in a log book that is likely to remain unread, in my opinion, as it just contains page after page of logs such as TFTC and NLNT etc.

7. I did not say Groundspeak are moneygrabbers I said that if you can sell 1,000,000 bugs for £5 that is a profitable business which is great. I did bet on Groundspeak maybe not caring what happens to them once they are sold and released and as many people complain on the forums Groungspeak do nothing to help lost or stranded bugs unless you`ve heard different.

8. Thank you for saying that I can keep doing it my way and that what you don`t like people cheating. I always think of cheating as a personal values issue ie I think a persons true value is what they actually do when they know no one is watching them, nothing more nothing less and certainly not what they tell you their values are.

9. I did not, and I did not see anyone saying you should condone cheating. Perhaps you said that for dramatic effect.

10. I`m sorry if you felt that your intelligence was being scrutinised but when I see stupid remarks on a forum I do think "ah HA there must be stupid people around.

 

Fortunately the real truth remains true whether you believe it or not. It also remains there for you to go and check against what you thought I said to what I actually said. So If you want to check points 1 through 10 above and use a little critical thinking you will discover that our thoughts are not too different and that everyone does geocaching differently. Thanks for your replies.

 

 

Just posting the message so that it is obvious from the format of the original post heading that our lovely friend Eclectic Penguin did not make this comment

Edited by Write and Mane
Link to comment

Oh you know you're in trouble when someone starts using bullet points... :rolleyes:

Shall I reply in a similar format? I'll assume you're actually capable of either remembering what you wrote (like me) or can at least scroll up/down to check as necessary, and thus save wholescale copying of posts.

 

1) I never said you did (although see my little comment at the end)

2) You've never written any logs, according to your profile. I find it odd that someone would start geocaching and not log their first few caches at least before deciding that they didn't want to do so anymore, but there you go.

3) Obviously you need to log onto the site to get coordinates/cache locations etc. I didn't think you just intuitively knew where they were. I worked that one out all on my own... :ph34r:

4) We'll have to agree to differ on this point

5) Thank you, I like to give something back.

6) "write the letters tftc and only that in a damp and musty smelling notebook" - hardly glowing about the logbooks

7) "they only care that more cachers buy more bugs" - no need to say any more on that point, either.

8) As has been said, if people want to log caches as found when they've not actually done so, that's up to them. When they do it to then qualify/find caches that others have put genuine effort into then I feel that's cheating

9) I never said you did, nor did I say anyone else did. I merely stated I won't condone it by allowing finds on my caches when there's no evidence of a find being made.

10) Yes... I agree with the 'there must be stupid people around' comment.

 

As for your final point, it may be that we have similar caching values (no real desire to find poorly sited caches, poorly maintained caches and so on) but we have rather different views on caching. It would appear that you like to take from the caching world, but not give. No logs indicating whether a cache is in a good spot, should be visited, isn't worth bothering with, no indications to cache owners that maintenance is required, no placed caches, nothing. This is, of course, assuming the account is your only one and not a sock puppet account.

I get lots of enjoyment from lots of the caches I do and am happy to say so in logs. The cache owner may not read them, nor care, but other people might.

 

Anyway all this is now completely off-topic, as mildly diverting as it may be, and I have better things to do.

 

Just a last point though, you advised TK@79 - "So there is my practical advice, get over your shallow need for everyones numbers to be correct and certified and try the fun experience of finding new and interesting places through the game of geocaching and forget the urge to get all the numbers right and the need to show others how many caches you`ve visited and logged in the right and proper manner. So to sum it all up just go out and enjoy YOUR geocaching, you may even find it`s a fun game and end up less tense."

 

Aren't you telling someone how they should be caching? Surely it's up to him if he wants to log all his caches in the right and proper manner.

Link to comment

To avoid confusion... the above posts are from someone posting as Eclectic_Penguin and NOT from me, Eclectic Penguin. The opinions stated by this individual do NOT reflect my opinion.

 

Hywel Williams

(Eclectic Penguin)

Wow I didn't think that was how you thought - I am sooooo glad you cleared that up Hywel - I was most shocked for a few minutes then ;-)

Link to comment

With regards to the original topic, it has come to light that one of the cachers insist they've found all the caches they'd logged as found. When confronted with the evidence that they hadn't done so (ie, the original log books from a series with their signature missing) they insist that they have found them and the ONLY reason the log books contain no entry is that either the CO, or someone else, has physically removed their log from the page. Either with tippex, which would be blindingly obvious in the log book or (more incredibly) by falsifying an entire log book, right down to everyone elses signatures, stamps, stickers and so forth just with their name missing (not withstanding the fact they'd have to find a log book which matched the original). No doubt such a claim would be used should they be challenged again.

 

They have since deleted their find logs (why? if they insist they'd found them) but persist in their comments that log books have been falsified.

 

Perhaps whoever is capable of such forgery would like to turn their hand to artwork or money. They'd make a killing :lol:

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 4
×
×
  • Create New...