Geocacher attitude

[+Darick]

What are the rules of geocaching?

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

So... if you don't "write" in the cache logbook, are you not breaking the rules?

Sure, but then if you don't log your experience at www.geocaching.com you are breaking the rules too. I just don't see that much angst over the many people who find geocaches yet don't log them online. And of course it still says nothing to tie an online find log to writing in the log book unless you decide there is some significance to the ordering of the rules. But then would it be cheating to write in the logbook first and then trade?

...

Again I don't think these can be read as formal rules, but even if they are they don't equate signing the physical log with finding the cache. Signing the physical log is just one of several things you are supposed to do when you find the cache. But sometimes the physical log ends up not being signed for one reason or another: no pen, log sheet too wet to write on, log sheet missing, log sheet full, cache container malfunction so it can't be opened, or even just forgot. The issue then becomes whether logging your experience online includes using the Found It log. Some people will log notes if they didn't sign the log. But this is a personal choice. Nowhere does it say they you cannot log a find online if you did not sign the physical log.

 

Again, interesting points... there are so very few well defined rules, one would think that these three written in very simple language would be clear, but it seems even these can be interpreted in different ways. I do take them as formal rules, but not that the numbering implies an order of events.

 

If you don't make any trades, you are following the first rule. If you do trade and leave something less valuable than you take (which would be open to wide interpretation), you are breaking the rules.

 

It seems clear by the second one, that if you don't write on the physical log, you are breaking the rules.

 

Finally, if you don't post a log to the cache page, you are breaking the rules.

 

So, OK... the OP openly admits to breaking the rules (formal or not). Now what? You are correct... there is no clear association between breaking the rules and that little smiley. Don't want to go online and log your visit, hopefully thanking the cache owner for the cache and giving him/her a little pat on the back for their efforts? So what? If you make a trade that's not equal or better value, so what? Take the smiley. Don't want to struggle like the rest of us to open that nano so you can sign, so what? Steal a geocoin, carelessly expose a cache to a muggle, leave the lid open on an ammo can or throw it in the lake... nothing specific in the rules about that.

 

Clearly you can't just play the game however you want... and there are rules we all follow, not because they are written down, but because it just makes sense. It is said, "your rights end where my nose begins". It is hard to imagine someone else's damage if I don't sign the physical log (but I'm sure someone will come up with something). If I don't take the time to write a good log online, I rob the cache owner of the enjoyment he/she gets from reading it. If I don't make an even trade or perhaps just take something and leave nothing, I rob the next person of a chance to make a trade and degrade the quality of the cache. Everyone holds themselves to a different standard. And so it goes... the endless quibbling on the forums continues...

[+EraSeek]

Listen, it is very simple. Integrity. Integrity of the game, integrity of the cache, and most of all self-integrity.

Integrity: adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.

If you prefer a stated "rule" here it is: Logging an Eraseek cache requires you make your mark on a logsheet in any of my traditional caches.

Frankly I think many of you just like to argue to argue. Do I check my logsheets? Generally no. I simply rely on your integrity.

[+GeoBain]

Date and initials are "writing about your find".

 

Not really. Writing about your find is writing about your find. A date and initials is just a date and initials. It really doesn't tell you anything, except that on a certain date someone was there. It doesn't even tell you who that someone was. I'm not the only cacher around here with the initials "GGB" for example.

 

Yes, really. It says, "I found this cache today". That is writing about the cache (or, your experience, as it says elsewhere)

 

No, a sig and date say nothing about your find.

 

All they indicate is that someone found the cache. It doesn't even indicate that the person whose signature is on the logbook is the one that found the cache. As Coldgears has pointed out anyone can sign for you. And as several recent threads have indicated, it's possible for one in a group to find and sign/sticker for everyone else in the group, even if the rest of the group is eating at a nearby restaurant.

[knowschad]

Date and initials are "writing about your find".

 

Not really. Writing about your find is writing about your find. A date and initials is just a date and initials. It really doesn't tell you anything, except that on a certain date someone was there. It doesn't even tell you who that someone was. I'm not the only cacher around here with the initials "GGB" for example.

 

Yes, really. It says, "I found this cache today". That is writing about the cache (or, your experience, as it says elsewhere)

 

No, a sig and date say nothing about your find.

 

All they indicate is that someone found the cache. It doesn't even indicate that the person whose signature is on the logbook is the one that found the cache. As Coldgears has pointed out anyone can sign for you. And as several recent threads have indicated, it's possible for one in a group to find and sign/sticker for everyone else in the group, even if the rest of the group is eating at a nearby restaurant.

 

Yup. Some of us just like to argue.

 

What you said could be equally true for a log like:

 

Sitting here in the forest on a log covered with thick, velvety moss, the sun shining down through the leaves in sunbeams, birds chirping in the trees and watching Bambi walk by as I write you my thanks in the log for your wonderful cache.

 

Signed

Coldgears

[+GeoBain]

Date and initials are "writing about your find".

 

Not really. Writing about your find is writing about your find. A date and initials is just a date and initials. It really doesn't tell you anything, except that on a certain date someone was there. It doesn't even tell you who that someone was. I'm not the only cacher around here with the initials "GGB" for example.

 

Yes, really. It says, "I found this cache today". That is writing about the cache (or, your experience, as it says elsewhere)

 

No, a sig and date say nothing about your find.

 

All they indicate is that someone found the cache. It doesn't even indicate that the person whose signature is on the logbook is the one that found the cache. As Coldgears has pointed out anyone can sign for you. And as several recent threads have indicated, it's possible for one in a group to find and sign/sticker for everyone else in the group, even if the rest of the group is eating at a nearby restaurant.

 

Yup. Some of us just like to argue.

 

What you said could be equally true for a log like:

 

Sitting here in the forest on a log covered with thick, velvety moss, the sun shining down through the leaves in sunbeams, birds chirping in the trees and watching Bambi walk by as I write you my thanks in the log for your wonderful cache.

 

Signed

Coldgears

 

If you do think it does say something about the find, then you also agree that blank logs say something about the find. While I agree both indicate the cache is findable, I don't believe either really says anything about the "experience". If anything, they are a statement of fact. (true or not)

[+Ambrosia]

Date and initials are "writing about your find".

 

Not really. Writing about your find is writing about your find. A date and initials is just a date and initials. It really doesn't tell you anything, except that on a certain date someone was there. It doesn't even tell you who that someone was. I'm not the only cacher around here with the initials "GGB" for example.

 

Yes, really. It says, "I found this cache today". That is writing about the cache (or, your experience, as it says elsewhere)

 

No, a sig and date say nothing about your find.

 

All they indicate is that someone found the cache. It doesn't even indicate that the person whose signature is on the logbook is the one that found the cache. As Coldgears has pointed out anyone can sign for you. And as several recent threads have indicated, it's possible for one in a group to find and sign/sticker for everyone else in the group, even if the rest of the group is eating at a nearby restaurant.

 

Yup. Some of us just like to argue.

 

What you said could be equally true for a log like:

 

Sitting here in the forest on a log covered with thick, velvety moss, the sun shining down through the leaves in sunbeams, birds chirping in the trees and watching Bambi walk by as I write you my thanks in the log for your wonderful cache.

 

Signed

Coldgears

Oooh, pretty.

[+eTom22]

i dont sign most log books i only sign if its a good cache and i never sign nano or micos or if the log book is wet i wish there was a way i could just delete some cache so i would never see them ones that i have found but dont really want to log

 

I thought that's what the "ignore this cache" function was for... so it no longer appears in searches? Might not affect PQs though.

[+Harry Dolphin]

frankly, your only way to tell if you really found it.

A picture of me at the cache doesn't prove I was there? Nor does an exact description of said cache?

 

Nope. Not unless you signed the log. That's what the log is there for.

[knowschad]

Date and initials are "writing about your find".

 

Not really. Writing about your find is writing about your find. A date and initials is just a date and initials. It really doesn't tell you anything, except that on a certain date someone was there. It doesn't even tell you who that someone was. I'm not the only cacher around here with the initials "GGB" for example.

 

Yes, really. It says, "I found this cache today". That is writing about the cache (or, your experience, as it says elsewhere)

 

No, a sig and date say nothing about your find.

 

All they indicate is that someone found the cache. It doesn't even indicate that the person whose signature is on the logbook is the one that found the cache. As Coldgears has pointed out anyone can sign for you. And as several recent threads have indicated, it's possible for one in a group to find and sign/sticker for everyone else in the group, even if the rest of the group is eating at a nearby restaurant.

 

Yup. Some of us just like to argue.

 

What you said could be equally true for a log like:

 

Sitting here in the forest on a log covered with thick, velvety moss, the sun shining down through the leaves in sunbeams, birds chirping in the trees and watching Bambi walk by as I write you my thanks in the log for your wonderful cache.

 

Signed

Coldgears

Oooh, pretty.

 

I wrote it just for you, hon.

 

Oops... I mean, Coldgear's mother wrote that just for him.

[+wimseyguy]

Our chief problem is perceived anonymity... perceived anonymity and lack of non-verbal cues... lack of non-verbal cues and perceived anonymity...

 

Our two problems are perceived anonymity and lack of non-verbal cues... and sloppy reading and writing...

 

Our three problems are perceived anonymity, lack of non-verbal cues, and sloppy reading and writing... and an almost fanatical conviction that someone is wrong on the internet...

 

Our four... no... Amongst our problems.... Amongst our problems... are such elements as perceived anonymity, lack of non-verbal cues...

 

I'll come in again...

Yes, yes, yes, now poke them with the soft cushions.

[+SirDonB]

frankly, your only way to tell if you really found it.

A picture of me at the cache doesn't prove I was there? Nor does an exact description of said cache?

 

Nope.

Neither does my name. Anyone can write "coldgears" in a cache.

 

Let me make it simple so we can stop all these wild hypothetical situations you seem to like to throw around. My cache, I require signature. You're too lazy sign, I delete, GS backs me. Don't like, don't hunt my caches.

 

The situation you mentioned about the long hike with no pen, I have been there (although rarely am without pen). I waited until I could get back to sign before logging. I do not care what the CO "would" accept, for me, no sig, no online log nor increment in count. Previous poster is correct. It is not a score, so if you or I do not log on line, no big deal however signing log is not only the accepted norm, it is the first thing GS will look at to settle a dispute.

 

Again, not trying to make it work, but without some standards, this just becomes Waymarking. No one wants that.

 

Hate to say it and have not read all posts to see if anyone else has pointed it out, but your cache count is certinly a score. It is a personal score and how you choose to measure it is up to you. You can use it as a point of referance to how many caches you found or you can use it to measure who is the #1 geocacher, or any other way you want. The point is you can not say that the cache count numbers are not a score, because the second you start keeping track, they become a means to score yourself either against yourself or others.

 

As far as the sign log/find counts, no sign log/find no count crap... I dont know were to begin. I got into this sport a few weeks ago and I am trying to play by the rules, but the rules seem to be sooooo individualized and misstrune, that I dont know what rules to play by. So I am gonna do as everyone else, adapt them to me. My finds count if I meet the requirments of that type of cache. If there is a log it will be signed, if I forgot my pen, I will still log it online, but will make every effort to go back and sign the log ASAP.

 

When I start hiding caches, I will work off the honesty system and if you say you found it then you found it. only time i will fret over it is when i do maintence and check the physical log against the online one and see that someone from out of area logged it as a find, but know signature, then I will investigate.

 

I also find that it is a bit redundant that you have a log in the cache, then a log on the website. You are double logging if you think about it. The smaller caches I can see having a log in them, but the larger ones with swag and stuff in them, are they really all that needed? Seriously, think about it for a second, you scribble you name and maybe a note in a log book at the actual cache, then you go home or get on your smartphone to log it in and type a note virtually signing the online log too. I would get conserned if I had a large cache with swag in it and it was dissapearing with no logging at all.

 

other than that, HAPPY CACHING TO ALL!!!!!!!!

Edited September 2, 2011 by Bandit1979

[+Ambrosia]

Date and initials are "writing about your find".

 

Not really. Writing about your find is writing about your find. A date and initials is just a date and initials. It really doesn't tell you anything, except that on a certain date someone was there. It doesn't even tell you who that someone was. I'm not the only cacher around here with the initials "GGB" for example.

 

Yes, really. It says, "I found this cache today". That is writing about the cache (or, your experience, as it says elsewhere)

 

No, a sig and date say nothing about your find.

 

All they indicate is that someone found the cache. It doesn't even indicate that the person whose signature is on the logbook is the one that found the cache. As Coldgears has pointed out anyone can sign for you. And as several recent threads have indicated, it's possible for one in a group to find and sign/sticker for everyone else in the group, even if the rest of the group is eating at a nearby restaurant.

 

Yup. Some of us just like to argue.

 

What you said could be equally true for a log like:

 

Sitting here in the forest on a log covered with thick, velvety moss, the sun shining down through the leaves in sunbeams, birds chirping in the trees and watching Bambi walk by as I write you my thanks in the log for your wonderful cache.

 

Signed

Coldgears

Oooh, pretty.

 

I wrote it just for you, hon.

 

Oops... I mean, Coldgear's mother wrote that just for him.

[+toil&trouble]

Okay, first of all, this was not a post about sign the log vs not sign the log. But, I never said I don't sing logs, I said, if I don't why should anyone care? It's really between the cache finder and the cache owner. My own personal opinion about logs is, I own caches and have never checked a log book to make sure the signatures match the online logs. If I log a cache online, it's because I found the cache, period. I don't think it is a lie to log online without singing the physical log. That's my opinion, but I really don't care what anyone else does. Some people cheat, that's true of any activity. What I consider cheating, may not be what someone else considers cheating. If a cache description says the cache is "regular" and I find an ammo can, and log it, but the "real" cache is a nano that the ammo can gives me directions to, then the cache owner lied in the description, and I think that's cheating. But, hey, that's just me, we all play the game using our own morality.

 

Anyway, my point was that I think its a shame that so many folks seem to worry so much about how other people live their lives, and also seem to think being unpleasant and nasty to others is okay. I disagree.

[knowschad]

I never said I don't sing logs, I said, if I don't why should anyone care?

Maybe because you have such a lovely voice?

[Mr.Yuck]

Okay, first of all, this was not a post about sign the log vs not sign the log. But, I never said I don't sing logs, I said, if I don't why should anyone care? It's really between the cache finder and the cache owner. My own personal opinion about logs is, I own caches and have never checked a log book to make sure the signatures match the online logs. If I log a cache online, it's because I found the cache, period. I don't think it is a lie to log online without singing the physical log. That's my opinion, but I really don't care what anyone else does. Some people cheat, that's true of any activity. What I consider cheating, may not be what someone else considers cheating. If a cache description says the cache is "regular" and I find an ammo can, and log it, but the "real" cache is a nano that the ammo can gives me directions to, then the cache owner lied in the description, and I think that's cheating. But, hey, that's just me, we all play the game using our own morality.

 

Anyway, my point was that I think its a shame that so many folks seem to worry so much about how other people live their lives, and also seem to think being unpleasant and nasty to others is okay. I disagree.

 

Oh gosh. The last several posts are all in good fun jabs at Coldgears (A teenager from Philly) who apparently has had several offers from relatives traveling far and wide to sign Geocache logs in distant places. I'm still waiting for my first offer in that regard.

 

So I dunno, you think it's a nasty place? Or many of us need to back away from the computer and get some fresh air? The guy who posted above me has found over 5,000 caches, he's been out a few times, as have I. I don't think it's a particularly nasty place, and I think Pro and/or College Sports forums are approximately 100X nastier, from personal experience. And we have the "Getting Started" forum, moderated by BrianSnat, which I think is a very helpful and gentle place.

 

The main beef I assume is worrying about how others do this Geocaching thing? This is just a discussion forum, I don't think anyone is "worried". Just expressing opinions. This doesn't happen face to face at events? Well no one has exactly ever walked up to a group at a Geocaching event I've ever been at and said "hey guys, I just look at the containers from the trail, and don't sign the logs. Is that OK"?

[+Harry Dolphin]

Oh gosh. The last several posts are all in good fun jabs at Coldgears (A teenager from Philly) who apparently has had several offers from relatives traveling far and wide to sign Geocache logs in distant places. I'm still waiting for my first offer in that regard.

 

I've got two brothers and one sister who geocache. I could have 'my signature' in thousands of caches in tens of countries on six continents if I wished. But I wouldn't have found the caches and signed the logs. We did pull a joke on one cacher. My brother signed my name, and I posted a note (with photo of my signature) saying "I think I was here, but I'm not sure." Hey! I even have the CO's signature item!

Sign log, get smiley. Anything else is puffery.

[AZcachemeister]

To all (and more than any other, tozainamboku) I reiterate:

 

My cache MUST contain a log of some sort...why is that?

[+GeoBain]

To all (and more than any other, tozainamboku) I reiterate:

 

My cache MUST contain a log of some sort...why is that?

 

I don't remember when they made that rule, but it was not always so. I'm thinking it may have been around same time as the elimination of ALRs, so logically one would think if they're gonna give us a guaranteed way to get an online smiley, they would also want to make sure there was a log in the cache to ensure that guaranteed way to get your smiley.

[+tozainamboku]

To all (and more than any other, tozainamboku) I reiterate:

 

My cache MUST contain a log of some sort...why is that?

In post #82 above I gave several reasons why I sign the physical log.

Now I'll give you the reason why I sign the physical log whenever I am able to do so. Signing the physical log confirms to me that I found the cache and not a decoy or something else. It confirms that I met any special physical challenge that the cache owner made part of this cache; though I may have done so in a manner other than the cache owner intended (e.g., by using a tool or my trained tree climbing monkey). It allows me to see who else has visited the cache (and in fact is the only way to know if I got a FTF). And least of all (but still important), it leaves proof that I found the cache for the cache owner and other cachers that come after me.

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online. I'm not sure the reasons TPTB require physical caches to contain at a minimum a log. Perhaps they believe it's a good way to resolve disputes over whether someone found a cache or not. Or perhaps they simply didn't want to allow alternate methods like code word caches or Munzees.

 

Nevertheless, I've found caches with no log (or with the log basically reduced to pulp). If I am able to to replace the log, I put one in and sign it. If I can't replace the log (perhaps I don't have a replacement log with me), I log the cache as found and let the owner know it needs maintenance. Some other cacher might just post a Needs Maintenance and forgo the smiley. That's fine with me too.

[knowschad]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

[+GeoBain]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

 

The biggest issue I have is when people say that you absolutely cannot log an online find if you have not signed the log. They then point to that guideline as justification.

 

I understand that you are expected to sign the log. It is the general practice since the beginning of the game.

 

But as a cache owner, I am allowed to accept alternate proof or even no proof at all if the log has not been signed. However, as a cache owner if your name is in the log I am not allowed to delete your log. (exceptions being spoilers, foul language, etc. where I still have to allow the log once the offending part has been removed.)

 

In short, while the general "rule" is sign the log, the guidelines are specifically written in such a way as to allow alternate (I didn't say additional) methods of proof.

 

Having said that, I learned this week that what I think the guidelines mean and what TPTB think they mean are sometimes diametrically opposed to each other.

 

*** Edited to add a very important word in bold. I need someone to volunteer to edit my posts. Seriously.

Edited September 3, 2011 by GeoBain

[+Don_J]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

 

I think the "must have a container and a log" thing is about discouraging people from forgoing maintenance and turning their cache into a pseudo-virtual when the cache goes missing.

[knowschad]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

 

I think the "must have a container and a log" thing is about discouraging people from forgoing maintenance and turning their cache into a pseudo-virtual when the cache goes missing.

In my experience, it was more about disallowing magnetic vinyl caches that had to be signed on the back. Reviewers would not publish those after a while because they did not contain a log. They were the log.

[knowschad]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

 

The biggest issue I have is when people say that you absolutely cannot log an online find if you have not signed the log. They then point to that guideline as justification.

 

I understand that you are expected to sign the log. It is the general practice since the beginning of the game.

 

But as a cache owner, I am allowed to accept alternate proof or even no proof at all if the log has not been signed. However, as a cache owner if your name is in the log I am not allowed to delete your log. (exceptions being spoilers, foul language, etc. where I still have to allow the log once the offending part has been removed.)

 

In short, while the general "rule" is sign the log, the guidelines are specifically written in such a way as to allow alternate (I didn't say additional) methods of proof.

 

Having said that, I learned this week that what I think the guidelines mean and what TPTB think they mean are sometimes diametrically opposed to each other.

 

*** Edited to add a very important word in bold. I need someone to volunteer to edit my posts. Seriously.

 

I think that's pretty much what I said by this, isn't it?

 

we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that.

[+tozainamboku]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

I agree with everything you said except there are no rules saying the the physical log must be signed in order to log a find online. There may be some places on Geocaching.com (like the "What are the rules?" FAQ) that state you should write something in the log. I'd prefer if Groundspeak were to call this "common practice when finding a cache", or "instructions on what to do when your find a cache", rather than calling them rules. The problem is went you call them rules, people read into them a connection to the online found log that isn't there.

 

What I object to is the idea that the cache isn't found unless the physical log is signed. The truth is just the opposite; the physical cannot be signed unless the cache is found (or if Coldgear's mother signs his name for him). This makes the signed log a very good method to prove the cache was found and that the online log is not bogus. It is certainly one that every cache owner should make available and should perform maintenance if it becomes unavailable.

 

If someone doesn't want to sign a nano because they have physical difficulties writing that small or in rolling up the log and getting it back in the container, then I will argue they are under no requirement to sign the log. They have to figure out what alternative proof they can give the cache owner or accept that their online log might be deleted if the owner thinks it is bogus.

[+GeoBain]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

 

The biggest issue I have is when people say that you absolutely cannot log an online find if you have not signed the log. They then point to that guideline as justification.

 

I understand that you are expected to sign the log. It is the general practice since the beginning of the game.

 

But as a cache owner, I am allowed to accept alternate proof or even no proof at all if the log has not been signed. However, as a cache owner if your name is in the log I am not allowed to delete your log. (exceptions being spoilers, foul language, etc. where I still have to allow the log once the offending part has been removed.)

 

In short, while the general "rule" is sign the log, the guidelines are specifically written in such a way as to allow alternate (I didn't say additional) methods of proof.

 

Having said that, I learned this week that what I think the guidelines mean and what TPTB think they mean are sometimes diametrically opposed to each other.

 

*** Edited to add a very important word in bold. I need someone to volunteer to edit my posts. Seriously.

 

I think that's pretty much what I said by this, isn't it?

 

we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that.

 

Can't I put it in my own words? Why you dogging me, dawg?

[+emmett]

.

 

There are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game. Okay, so you sign every single log, and don't count a find unless you can physically sign the log, what does it matter if someone else sees the cache, has their hand on the cache, but doesn't feel the need to sign the log? I don't ever trade swag, so what difference does it make if I open the container or not?

 

When I play baseball, I take a fourth strike when I go to the plate. If I strike out, I still cliam a hit. Why should anyone else care how I play the game? At my school, we never report our teams' losses to the newspaper and we don't record losses on the website. That's the way we like it. I am a teacher and I always give an "A" to any student who tries. One of my kids missed class the other day because he was sick. I still gave him an "A" even though he missed the test because I knew he would have done well if he was here. Some of the parents and teachers complain, but I say, "What difference does it make if a kid actually took the test or not?" People are so up tight about following rules, why can't they just live and let live?

 

.

[knowschad]

I've never said you shouldn't sign the physical log, I only say there is no rule or guideline saying you must sign the physical log in order to log a find online.

I've seen you claim this so many times, sometimes with elaboration, that I believe I know what you mean, Toz, but I think that your message gets lost in your own form of Puritanism. It sounds to the uneducated ear that you are supporting what we call armchair caching... logging online when they may have never even gotten within hundreds miles of the cache. I know that you don't support that.

 

What I believe you are saying, and if I'm right, I agree with you, is that we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that. But to simply say that there are no "rules" saying that the paper log must (generally) be signed is patently bogus, and that is how you come across when you claim that there are no rules stating that it must be signed. Groundspeak doesn't make geocaching rules... we geocachers do. All Groundspeak has the power to do in this regard is to referee disputes as the arise.

 

As AZCachemiester just pointed out, Groundspeak has ruled that there must be a log, and a container to hold that log. The only possible reason for that to any reasonable person is that the log is supposed to be signed (notice that I did not say "MUST"). That is what it is there for, and to claim that it is optional under ordinary circumstances is ridiculous. There is nothing purist or Puritanical about that... it is common sense.

 

Geeze... this is starting to sound like one of your posts! You're a bad influence on me, my friend.

 

The biggest issue I have is when people say that you absolutely cannot log an online find if you have not signed the log. They then point to that guideline as justification.

 

I understand that you are expected to sign the log. It is the general practice since the beginning of the game.

 

But as a cache owner, I am allowed to accept alternate proof or even no proof at all if the log has not been signed. However, as a cache owner if your name is in the log I am not allowed to delete your log. (exceptions being spoilers, foul language, etc. where I still have to allow the log once the offending part has been removed.)

 

In short, while the general "rule" is sign the log, the guidelines are specifically written in such a way as to allow alternate (I didn't say additional) methods of proof.

 

Having said that, I learned this week that what I think the guidelines mean and what TPTB think they mean are sometimes diametrically opposed to each other.

 

*** Edited to add a very important word in bold. I need someone to volunteer to edit my posts. Seriously.

 

I think that's pretty much what I said by this, isn't it?

 

we don't need to be iron-clad about this signing thing, Honest extenuating circumstances, such as forgot pen, cache frozen in ice, etc. that prevent the physical signing of the log are absolutely fine. I think that almost all of us would agree to that.

 

Can't I put it in my own words? Why you dogging me, dawg?

 

I thought you said you wanted an editor.

[+toil&trouble]

.

 

There are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game. Okay, so you sign every single log, and don't count a find unless you can physically sign the log, what does it matter if someone else sees the cache, has their hand on the cache, but doesn't feel the need to sign the log? I don't ever trade swag, so what difference does it make if I open the container or not?

 

When I play baseball, I take a fourth strike when I go to the plate. If I strike out, I still cliam a hit. Why should anyone else care how I play the game? At my school, we never report our teams' losses to the newspaper and we don't record losses on the website. That's the way we like it. I am a teacher and I always give an "A" to any student who tries. One of my kids missed class the other day because he was sick. I still gave him an "A" even though he missed the test because I knew he would have done well if he was here. Some of the parents and teachers complain, but I say, "What difference does it make if a kid actually took the test or not?" People are so up tight about following rules, why can't they just live and let live?

 

.

 

Geocaching has no governing body, no codified rules, Groundspeak is there to deal with disputes between a cache owner and finder, if it occurs. I have never seen an appointed or elected governing body that has published a set of rules saying what constitutes a "find". The only "rules" deal with safety, "no food in caches" etc.. There is a difference between any of the examples you give and this activity. You really don't see a difference between an online, unsanctioned, amateur activity? Is there a difference between a person lying on a witness stand, under oath and telling your wife that you butt doesn't look big in those jeans? To me there is a difference between logging a cache without leaving the house, and logging a cache that one found, had in hand, maybe even opened, and didn't sing a log book.

[+emmett]

.

 

There are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game. Okay, so you sign every single log, and don't count a find unless you can physically sign the log, what does it matter if someone else sees the cache, has their hand on the cache, but doesn't feel the need to sign the log? I don't ever trade swag, so what difference does it make if I open the container or not?

 

When I play baseball, I take a fourth strike when I go to the plate. If I strike out, I still cliam a hit. Why should anyone else care how I play the game? At my school, we never report our teams' losses to the newspaper and we don't record losses on the website. That's the way we like it. I am a teacher and I always give an "A" to any student who tries. One of my kids missed class the other day because he was sick. I still gave him an "A" even though he missed the test because I knew he would have done well if he was here. Some of the parents and teachers complain, but I say, "What difference does it make if a kid actually took the test or not?" People are so up tight about following rules, why can't they just live and let live?

 

.

 

Geocaching has no governing body, no codified rules, Groundspeak is there to deal with disputes between a cache owner and finder, if it occurs. I have never seen an appointed or elected governing body that has published a set of rules saying what constitutes a "find". The only "rules" deal with safety, "no food in caches" etc.. There is a difference between any of the examples you give and this activity. You really don't see a difference between an online, unsanctioned, amateur activity? Is there a difference between a person lying on a witness stand, under oath and telling your wife that you butt doesn't look big in those jeans? To me there is a difference between logging a cache without leaving the house, and logging a cache that one found, had in hand, maybe even opened, and didn't sing a log book.

 

Well, first of all, there are very clear rules posted by GC.com

 

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

The idea that someone is a worse rule breaker than you, so therefore, your rule breaking is fine, just does not fly.

 

Yes, there may be difference between types of transgressions but that is not the discussion you started. Your point is that people should be free to do whatever they want and no one else should care. But, even if there were no the posted rules, common courtesy would dictate that people trade even or up and would post a comment online indicating that they visited a cache location and describing what happened. Unfortunately, this is a community comprised of a fairly large percentage of people who just don't care.

 

Basically, it is a matter of integrity, or the lack thereof among so many geocachers. Many of us prefer that the community as a whole valued the integrity of the game and that GC.com would make an effort to promote that basic standard. That is why this is a topic that will never die here. Interesting that there is no such problem in any other game or sport.

 

So yes, you can get away with doing whatever you want but it would be better if you showed respect for those cache owners who placed caches for you to find with the expectation that you would follow the rules. My analogies may not be perfect, few are, but they reveal the foolishness of the "why can't I play the game however I want" crowd.

 

.

Edited September 3, 2011 by emmett

[+toil&trouble]

There are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game. Okay, so you sign every single log, and don't count a find unless you can physically sign the log, what does it matter if someone else sees the cache, has their hand on the cache, but doesn't feel the need to sign the log? I don't ever trade swag, so what difference does it make if I open the container

Well, first of all, there are very clear rules posted by GC.com

 

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

The idea that someone is a worse rule breaker than you, so therefore, your rule breaking is fine, just does not fly.

 

Yes, there may be difference between types of transgressions but that is not the discussion you started. Your point is that people should be free to do whatever they want and no one else should care. But, even if there were no the posted rules, common courtesy would dictate that people trade even or up and would post a comment online indicating that they visited a cache location and describing what happened. Unfortunately, this is a community comprised of a fairly large percentage of people who just don't care.

 

Basically, it is a matter of integrity, or the lack thereof among so many geocachers. Many of us prefer that the community as a whole valued the integrity of the game and that GC.com would make an effort to promote that basic standard. That is why this is a topic that will never die here. Interesting that there is no such problem in any other game or sport.

 

So yes, you can get away with doing whatever you want but it would be better if you showed respect for those cache owners who placed caches for you to find with the expectation that you would follow the rules. My analogies may not be perfect, few are, but they reveal the foolishness of the "why can't I play the game however I want" crowd.

 

.

 

I'll let this go, because it has really gone off point. My point, in the beginning was not that "people should be free to do whatever they want", it was more, lets lighten up, and let enjoy the game without being rude to each other. I strongly believe in common courtesy, I only log caches that I've actually found, I don't trade swag, but if I took something out of a cache, I would never trade down, I always thank the owner for taking the time to hide the cache. I never said that I break the rules, or that it's "okay" to break the rules, but come on, there is a difference between logging 100 caches from my coach, and logging a find on a cache that I didn't sign the logbook because my pen chose that moment to run out of ink. If you can't see that difference, I can't explain it to you. I am not the geocaching police, there are no geocaching police. I play the game, as I live my life, with integrity. Have a nice day, I'm going caching!

[+tozainamboku]

Well, first of all, there are very clear rules posted by GC.com

 

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

These "rules" have been discussed before. I tend to view them as instructions for cache finders rather than formal rules. Their ultimate origin were the instructions Dave Ulmer posted for people who found his first cache.

 

I wonder sometimes why some people make such a big deal over rule #2. Certainly there are threads complaining about swag deterioration and others complaining about blank online logs or people who don't log their finds online at all. But it seems that not writing something in the logbook gets an exaggerated level of concern. Why is this? I would venture a guess that rules #1 and #3 are each broken more often than #2. Why aren't you going after these cheaters with the zeal you have when you complain about someone who didn't sign the log?

 

There is nothing in these rules that indicate anything to do with whether you can post an online find log. By writing any online log you are complying with rule #3. Your online log can be a note, a DNF, or a Found log. To me, if you found the cache and for some reason were unable to write something in the physical log book, you still found the cache. IMO, a found log is the proper way to share you experience. But I understand that some cache owners may use the signature in the physical log to verify you found their cache and met the challenges of opening the cache and signing the log they want you to complete. Those caches owners are able to delete your online log, and in this case Groundspeak is likely to back them up.

 

The people who are really playing the game "their way" are the ones making up a rule saying you haven't found the cache unless you signed the physical log. This seems patently nonsense. You know if you found the cache or not without needing to sign the log. You might make an argument that you at least have to get the log out of the cache and look at it to know you found the cache and not a decoy or someone's letterbox. But signing the log is not finding a cache. It may serve as proof of a find - perhaps it is even the best proof we have - so it's a good idea to sign the log just in case there is a dispute as to whether you found it or not. However the vast majority of cache owners realize that this is not a competition and the point of geocaching is to have fun. Why spoil the fun of someone who is actually finding caches but may have forgot a pencil by straining to interpret "rules" or inventing rules from thin air in order to justify deleting online logs?

Edited September 3, 2011 by tozainamboku

[+baloo&bd]

 

The people who are really playing the game "their way" are the ones making up a rule saying you haven't found the cache unless you signed the physical log. This seems patently nonsense. You know if you found the cache or not without needing to sign the log. You might make an argument that you at least have to get the log out of the cache and look at it to know you found the cache and not a decoy or someone's letterbox. But signing the log is not finding a cache. It may serve as proof of a find - perhaps it is even the best proof we have - so it's a good idea to sign the log just in case there is a dispute as to whether you found it or not. However the vast majority of cache owners realize that this is not a competition and the point of geocaching is to have fun. Why spoil the fun of someone who is actually finding caches but may have forgot a pencil by straining to interpret "rules" or inventing rules from thin air in order to justify deleting online logs?

 

This was the most contradictary post is the thread so far.

 

How does not allowing an online log to stand when the physical signature is missing spoiling the finders fun? Itms not a competition so why is this online log so important to the puritans?

 

Logging online is not finding the cache. Why do rules and guidelines for allowing unsigned logs to stand as online logs necessary? Why spoil the fun like that for others?

[+Don_J]

Well, first of all, there are very clear rules posted by GC.com

 

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

These "rules" have been discussed before. I tend to view them as instructions for cache finders rather than formal rules. Their ultimate origin were the instructions Dave Ulmer posted for people who found his first cache.

 

 

That's the way I see it.

Like the instructions on my shampoo bottle:

 

1. Wet hair

2. Apply shampoo

3. Lather

4. Rinse

5. Repeat

 

If I don't repeat, does that mean that I didn't wash my hair?

[+GeoBain]

The easiest ways to avoid the confusion about log signage altogether is to either not log your finds (not as crazy as you might think) or just don't mention not signing the logbook when you log online. There is a very small percentage of CO's that actually bother reconciling the online logs to the physical logbook.

 

For all the belly aching about logbook signing, most CO's are too lazy to actually go check. And if they wanted to check, a lot of them have been too lazy on maintenance for there to be a signable logbook/logsheet left.

 

If you just keep quiet about the occasional missing pen, you will be fine.

[+SedonaTwo]

Along the lines of "to each his own" we have cacher here in the area, that carries multiple boxes etc. When he goes hunting if he can't find it, he just replaces the cache with one of his and counts it as a find. I have seen at least 10 of these, recently. Seems silly and pointless to me but all that matters is the # to these types and it makes them happy so they are.

[knowschad]

Along the lines of "to each his own" we have cacher here in the area, that carries multiple boxes etc. When he goes hunting if he can't find it, he just replaces the cache with one of his and counts it as a find. I have seen at least 10 of these, recently. Seems silly and pointless to me but all that matters is the # to these types and it makes them happy so they are.

 

We call those "throwdowns" and they are worse than pointless. In many cases, they leave two containers in the area, and the cache owner (the real cache owner), if and when they figure that out, has to go out and find both of them and remove the dummy.

[+Don_J]

Along the lines of "to each his own" we have cacher here in the area, that carries multiple boxes etc. When he goes hunting if he can't find it, he just replaces the cache with one of his and counts it as a find. I have seen at least 10 of these, recently. Seems silly and pointless to me but all that matters is the # to these types and it makes them happy so they are.

 

We call those "throwdowns" and they are worse than pointless. In many cases, they leave two containers in the area, and the cache owner (the real cache owner), if and when they figure that out, has to go out and find both of them and remove the dummy.

 

How can they remove the dummy, when he's halfway across town dropping another throw-down?

[+Team OPJim]

I find it amusing that a forum on why geocachers are so onery and nitpicky in the forums has turned into a nitpicky argument about to sign or not to sign logs.

[+JL_HSTRE]

there are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game.

 

I think it's twofold:

 

1) Many forum members are geocaching "old heads" who have been around since the pre-smartphone era, before geocaching's popularity really jumped. I think the longer a person does something the more opinionated they tend to become about it and how it should be done. Especially since many of them have seen the hobby change in a way that they may feel is not for the better.

 

2) There are alot of folks who worry about how other folks lead their lives in many ways other than just geocaching.

[Clan Riffster]

I am a teacher and I always give an "A" to any student who tries.

Hopefully, the entire student body gets to be Valedictorian too. Wouldn't want any hurt feelings...

[+Letsride94]

Okay, we've been caching for around six years, we've cached in the western states, Canada and a little in Mexico, we've met lots of geocachers in the field and at events and have almost always found them to be really nice. So why is there so much attitude on the forums?

 

+1 I read the forums a lot and learn quite a bit. But like you see a lot of attitude that makes me leary to jump in and join.... I am to point now where I can figure who will jump in and insult....

 

I don't care how you geocache...just do it!

[+Frank Broughton]

Well you know, a general anyone can do anything they want statement, many of the things listed that are outside the generally accepted Mores of the community (such as not bothering to open the cache) could itself be considered a "Geocacher Attitude".

 

Events? I dunno, they're social gatherings. I'd dare say most of the conversations I've had at them had nothing to do with Geocaching.

Good observation Mr Yuck.

 

Believe it or not things are beter than they use to be.

I believe it, Keystone and the other mods do a good job of keeping things well intended. (Even if some disagree once in a while with a decision {grin} .)

 

Oh my word....

after reading this it brings to mind a cache I recently found in Bridgnorth Shropshire,,,my pen decided it was not going to work so I took a pic of me in the cache location along with the cache container (which I had opened) and uploaded it to the site. I class this as FOUND and I would expect the owner to accept this too!

There seems to be a clique of people who seem to think that the find has to be EXACTLY as THEY decree (in terms of signing) and anything else is unacceptable..what rot!!

If I follow the gps and clues or work out the puzzles and discover the cache location and container then the spirit of Geocaching has been adhered to and the owner should accept this.

 

Just my 2p worth!!

 

Magic Phil.

Magic Phil the spirit of geocaching is, find physical cache, sign log, log the find online. I do know what you mean about the experience and the hunt that being the enjoyment of the spirit!

 

Isn't this thread supposed to be about geocacher attitude? Arguments about signing the log was simply an example of said attitude, and having this thread turn into another argument about signing the log isn't exactly helping matters, is it?

No argument - just a discussion on a discussion board

 

Okay, first of all, this was not a post about sign the log vs not sign the log. But, I never said I don't sing logs, I said, if I don't why should anyone care? It's really between the cache finder and the cache owner. My own personal opinion about logs is, I own caches and have never checked a log book to make sure the signatures match the online logs. If I log a cache online, it's because I found the cache, period. I don't think it is a lie to log online without singing the physical log. That's my opinion, but I really don't care what anyone else does. Some people cheat, that's true of any activity. What I consider cheating, may not be what someone else considers cheating. If a cache description says the cache is "regular" and I find an ammo can, and log it, but the "real" cache is a nano that the ammo can gives me directions to, then the cache owner lied in the description, and I think that's cheating. But, hey, that's just me, we all play the game using our own morality.

 

Anyway, my point was that I think its a shame that so many folks seem to worry so much about how other people live their lives, and also seem to think being unpleasant and nasty to others is okay. I disagree.

 

Oh gosh. The last several posts are all in good fun jabs at Coldgears (A teenager from Philly) who apparently has had several offers from relatives traveling far and wide to sign Geocache logs in distant places. I'm still waiting for my first offer in that regard.

 

So I dunno, you think it's a nasty place? Or many of us need to back away from the computer and get some fresh air? The guy who posted above me has found over 5,000 caches, he's been out a few times, as have I. I don't think it's a particularly nasty place, and I think Pro and/or College Sports forums are approximately 100X nastier, from personal experience. And we have the "Getting Started" forum, moderated by BrianSnat, which I think is a very helpful and gentle place.

 

The main beef I assume is worrying about how others do this Geocaching thing? This is just a discussion forum, I don't think anyone is "worried". Just expressing opinions. This doesn't happen face to face at events? Well no one has exactly ever walked up to a group at a Geocaching event I've ever been at and said "hey guys, I just look at the containers from the trail, and don't sign the logs. Is that OK"?

Another excellent observation.... and noted lack of rebuttal to the logic.

 

Your point is that people should be free to do whatever they want and no one else should care.

Oh how cute that cache container is, I think I will take it home with me - hey just playing the way I want to!

 

I am a teacher and I always give an "A" to any student who tries.

Hopefully, the entire student body gets to be Valedictorian too. Wouldn't want any hurt feelings...

Indeed, and might as well give them all a diploma too.

[+Snoogans]

Okay, we've been caching for around six years, we've cached in the western states, Canada and a little in Mexico, we've met lots of geocachers in the field and at events and have almost always found them to be really nice. So why is there so much attitude on the forums? I freely admit, that maybe it's my perspective, but it just seems that there are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game. Okay, so you sign every single log, and don't count a find unless you can physically sign the log, what does it matter if someone else sees the cache, has their hand on the cache, but doesn't feel the need to sign the log? I don't ever trade swag, so what difference does it make if I open the container or not? We cache because we enjoy it, it's not work, we equally enjoy urban caching as well as nice hikes in the woods, some days we do 2, some days we do 30. But I've read so many posts on the forums, where people seem to be judging others for caching "for the numbers", or just doing urban micros, again, who cares? Is a day spent caching in a big city hunting wicked nanos somehow less than a day spent hiking 15 miles to pick up a cache or two?

 

I'm just venting, we love the sport, and now that we're retired we cache most days, and since we live in our motor home, we cache somewhere new constantly. We so appreciate all the people who take the time and effort to place caches, good and bad, because what I think is a "stupid" cache, some one else might call a favorite. Let's enjoy caching and not try to dictate how others cache. Just my two cents.

I seeth by thine avatar, that thou art a witch. Thou knowest what puritans do to witches.

 

I seeth that already the puritans have begun to judge thee. Repent witch that thee may still be saved.

 

QUICK! Somebody run and fetch a duck!!!

 

[+Snoogans]

Okay, we've been caching for around six years, we've cached in the western states, Canada and a little in Mexico, we've met lots of geocachers in the field and at events and have almost always found them to be really nice. So why is there so much attitude on the forums? I freely admit, that maybe it's my perspective, but it just seems that there are a lot of folks who worry too much about how others play the game. Okay, so you sign every single log, and don't count a find unless you can physically sign the log, what does it matter if someone else sees the cache, has their hand on the cache, but doesn't feel the need to sign the log? I don't ever trade swag, so what difference does it make if I open the container or not? We cache because we enjoy it, it's not work, we equally enjoy urban caching as well as nice hikes in the woods, some days we do 2, some days we do 30. But I've read so many posts on the forums, where people seem to be judging others for caching "for the numbers", or just doing urban micros, again, who cares? Is a day spent caching in a big city hunting wicked nanos somehow less than a day spent hiking 15 miles to pick up a cache or two?

 

I'm just venting, we love the sport, and now that we're retired we cache most days, and since we live in our motor home, we cache somewhere new constantly. We so appreciate all the people who take the time and effort to place caches, good and bad, because what I think is a "stupid" cache, some one else might call a favorite. Let's enjoy caching and not try to dictate how others cache. Just my two cents.

 

Funny where this thread has gone from here. Admittedly, I just skimmed it.

 

With the exception of your perception of "attitude" in the forums, we share pretty much the same opinion.

 

People assign meaning to written words that often doesn't exist from the person who wrote them. Other's are just too thin skinned to come here and brave the dissenting responses to their opinions or read opinions that differ from their own.

 

I personally like it when people disagree with me. I never learned much from anyone that always agreed with me.

 

Anyone is free to have a negative opinion of this forum, but they are fooling themselves if they think for one instant that these forums haven't had some affect on the direction the sport/activity has taken over the years.

 

When you opt out of this forum (and the majority do) you cast aside your vote in a very real way.

 

Those who have been around awhile (the top 100 posters or so) would see this clearly. It would not be so clear to those that haven't spent the time in the trenches here.

[+Keelmann And Cici]

Well, first of all, there are very clear rules posted by GC.com

 

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

These "rules" have been discussed before. I tend to view them as instructions for cache finders rather than formal rules. Their ultimate origin were the instructions Dave Ulmer posted for people who found his first cache.

 

You may tend to view them that way, but your base argument is there's no rule that says you have to sign the logbook. There it is, labeled "rule". You may choose to follow them, not follow them, argue against them, but I'm afraid the stance "there is no rule" is provably false.

 

But to each his own. I'm a fair new cache hider, and I don't worry about matching a log book to online finds. If I do run across someone who didn't sign for some reason, I'd email and ask for proof of find, and if there is none, I'd remove the log. I consider that my responsibility as cache owner. I also make sure a pen is in the cache on each maintenance visit. But if the finder can provide some evidence of a find, I'm ok with that.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

OMG! Jeremy and Richard are cachers too?!

Tonight on Top Gear...James finds tupperware in the woods, Richard signs a log, and Jeremy get poison Ivy.....

 

All while driving a Ferrari Enzo!

 

I'd love a sig by the Stig in one of my caches!

[+tozainamboku]

Well, first of all, there are very clear rules posted by GC.com

 

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

These "rules" have been discussed before. I tend to view them as instructions for cache finders rather than formal rules. Their ultimate origin were the instructions Dave Ulmer posted for people who found his first cache.

 

You may tend to view them that way, but your base argument is there's no rule that says you have to sign the logbook. There it is, labeled "rule". You may choose to follow them, not follow them, argue against them, but I'm afraid the stance "there is no rule" is provably false.

 

But to each his own. I'm a fair new cache hider, and I don't worry about matching a log book to online finds. If I do run across someone who didn't sign for some reason, I'd email and ask for proof of find, and if there is none, I'd remove the log. I consider that my responsibility as cache owner. I also make sure a pen is in the cache on each maintenance visit. But if the finder can provide some evidence of a find, I'm ok with that.

Generally I say "There is no rule saying you must sign the log in order to log a find online". There may be a "rule" to sign the log, though the use of the term "rule" here is, IMO, not a strict "Follow this rule or else". Clearly some people don't sign logs just as some people don't share their experience online at www.geoaching.com. Most of the time we don't worry if someone is not following the "rules", so long as they are having fun and are not interfering with other peoples ability to have fun.

 

Magic Phil the spirit of geocaching is, find physical cache, sign log, log the find online. I do know what you mean about the experience and the hunt that being the enjoyment of the spirit!

I would think the spirit of geocaching is to have fun. It was even in Dave Ulmer's rules for the first gecoache, right after "Take something, leave something, write about it in the log". Why we forget that and obsess over minutiae is the point of this thread. When you find a cache sign the log if you can. When you log your experience on www.geocaching.com, use the appropriate log type. If you found the cache you use the Found log. You don't log a Signed log to indicate you signed the physical log, though you are free to mention this in the Found log.

[Clan Riffster]

I personally like it when people disagree with me. I never learned much from anyone that always agreed with me.

I agree 100%! Er... Uh... Wait. No I don't!

[+TheBearPack]

I think it's the safety of anonymity. Sadly, it brings out humans' true colors. I've noticed it with Facebook too. People who are sweet in person are kind of snarky on FB. Perhaps they're forgetting they are going to each other in person eventually. The internet does odd things to people.