log not signed but listed found

[+hydrodis]

If a person claims to have found a cach but their name is not on the logbook within the cach.Is there any action to take? Personally I see no point in claiming finds that I have not achived. I guess some strange folks like to boost their egos.

[+firestars]

Im guessing that its your cache? If so, the final decision comes down to you. You could delete the on-line logs (which are the only ones that really matter) and insist on the cacher signing the paper log, but is it really worth it? If people want to fudge their stats, then imo, they can do exactly that.

[The Hearse]

I'm with Firestars on this one.

 

It is a shame that cache owners cannot log this type of occurrence without deleting because we celebrate local cachers acheiving milestones and we must trust their claim.

[+Fuchsiamagic]

There's nowt as weird as folks. I would just ignore it. I wouldn't even waste my time checking.

[+drsolly]

If a person claims to have found a cach but their name is not on the logbook within the cach.Is there any action to take? Personally I see no point in claiming finds that I have not achived. I guess some strange folks like to boost their egos.

 

Or it could be a mistake. I occasionally see people logging my caches and saying something like "Hunted for ages, couldn't find it" but logging it as a find; when you're doing a load of logs at a time, it's easy to make that mistake just by taking the wrong selection from the drop-down menu.

[Blue Square Thing]

People sometimes sign using slightly different names remember. Or can't sign because the log just can't be signed - I had one yesterday that would have disintegrated if I'd tried to sign it. I did take a pic though - rubber seal has disappeared.

 

If it were a really special cache then maybe it might make sense to try to confirm they did it. But otherwise maybe BOD comes into play.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Could be a 'team' caching, and the cacher logging under their own name.

Could be a family member logging under their own new account.

Could be a cacher transposing the GC code for a cache they have found, but logging one they haven't found...

 

Lots of 'legitimate' reasons why they logged as Found, but their name isn't in the log.

[+dibbler69]

If the log was full maybe they signed it on another page.

I was out caching when I met 2 other cachers. When i got to the cache they had signed 4 names when there were only 2 of them present. I got to the other half of the series and found the other part of the team. They were doing a series and had left one car half way round and had then started at both ends that way they each only had to visit 1 half of the caches to get there name one the log book.

[+hydrodis]

If the log was full maybe they signed it on another page.

I was out caching when I met 2 other cachers. When i got to the cache they had signed 4 names when there were only 2 of them present. I got to the other half of the series and found the other part of the team. They were doing a series and had left one car half way round and had then started at both ends that way they each only had to visit 1 half of the caches to get there name one the log book.

some sad sods about.

[+The Frosties!]

I've not signed damp logs, or ones I've been unable to safely extract from a micro, I'd hope most people are honest and only log real finds (cache in hand=found), it's not as though there's a prize at the end of anything.

[team tisri]

If a person claims to have found a cach but their name is not on the logbook within the cach.Is there any action to take? Personally I see no point in claiming finds that I have not achived. I guess some strange folks like to boost their egos.

 

It could be they never actually found the cache but felt like logging it from their armchair.

 

It could be they found a nearby cache, or a cache with a similar code, and logged yours by mistake.

 

It could be they found your cache and signed it somewhere where you didn't notice it (I often sign rolled-up logs on the end because otherwise it takes me ages to get them back in the cache).

 

It could be they found your cache and didn't sign it because they had no pen or their pen didn't work.

 

If you want to keep your cache "pure" you could ask them to verify their find. Technically you are entitled to delete a log unless someone signed the log book but in practise I've never had issues with cache owners when I've been unable to sign for whatever reason - if someone was really there they can describe the hide in detail (if I can't sign the log for whatever reason I take a picture of the cache to send to the owner if they want it).

 

What you do about it is up to you.

[+Gushoneybun]

If the log was full maybe they signed it on another page.

I was out caching when I met 2 other cachers. When i got to the cache they had signed 4 names when there were only 2 of them present. I got to the other half of the series and found the other part of the team. They were doing a series and had left one car half way round and had then started at both ends that way they each only had to visit 1 half of the caches to get there name one the log book.

some sad sods about.

If it is who I think it is, two of them even posted found logs on an event they never went to but the other two did attend! I think they took a lott of flak on this and the attended logs did disappear. It is well known that between 1 and 4 of them find caches but all 4 always claim the finds online, at the end of the day they only cheat themselves.

[+mellers]

This is a tricky one. It seems that lots of people play the game differently - according to their own conscience, but as far as I understand it, you have to sign the log to be able to claim the find.

 

So on the face of it, it's seems that the "finder" of your cache didn't find it. According to the rules (such as they are or aren't!) you as a CO can actually delete a log if you know that the "finder" didn't find it - but of course nothing is ever that simple, and it does rather depend an awful lot on the definition of the word "know".

 

That kind of fixed ruling doesn't take in to account that we're all human beings and make mistakes from time to time. AFAIK, I've never failed to sign a log through forgetfulness, but I HAVE signed a whole bunch and dated them the wrong day! (I had missed a day's caching and simply added +1 to the last date I remembered signing! Obviously for me, if I haven't been caching that day, then they day never even happened. lol!)

 

I have also 'followed' a very experienced cacher round a series, only to spot that at the end of it, he hadn't signed the "bonus" log. Thinking he hadn't found it, I was surprised to see his log on line, later, but the obvious conclusion was that he had been there, but had just forgotten to sign the log in his haste to leave a swap. I even saw his signature item in the cache box, so I know it wasn't a porky.

 

Conversely I have seen a log on a high terrain cache quite rightly disputed by a CO when the "finder" said he just saw it from a distance. However, the end of that wasn't pretty when the noob cacher (who didn't really understand the rules at that time) got the hump and posted a flouncy message in reply! So the upshot of that is even when you're right it may not end happily!

 

I'm sure that there are some finders out there who would be prepared to complain to Groundspeak if they felt their "find" log was deleted unfairly. And then what happens? It gets re-instated and there's bad-feeling all round

 

I think if it bothers you (and I think there's a small part of me that would be bothered), I'd drop them a quick message to ask them if they remember the visit and can explain how it is that they didn't sign the log. If they came back with something plausible, I'd be inclined to let them have it. I really don't think anything can be gained by disputing one find (lots of finds, then, yes, but one, not really).

 

I think if you make the effort to ask the question - even if they just say - "oh it was raining and we forgot", or something, it may make them think twice about doing it again if indeed it was a deliberate falisfication. After all, it's nice to know that there are COs out there who want to protect the integrity of the game.

[+MBFace]

I've not signed <snip> or ones I've been unable to safely extract from a micro

 

What do you mean by safely?

[+thehoomer]

I've not signed <snip> or ones I've been unable to safely extract from a micro

 

What do you mean by safely?

Perhaps frosty68 means without tearing or destroying it? Some log books are very tight in the container. Just a guess, I could be wrong..... its happened twice in my life so far

[team tisri]

I've not signed <snip> or ones I've been unable to safely extract from a micro

 

What do you mean by safely?

 

I once founda micro with the log so tightly rolled inside it that I cracked part of the container while trying to extract it with tweezers. At that point I just took a picture of the cache in my hand and put the cracked container back in the outer container before replacing the cache.

[+FYI_Geocaching]

I've been geocaching since April. I've not placed any caches yet (found 800+, so I think I have the general idea of what makes a good cache, and will not place any "just for the sake of it", when I do place one or more they will hopefully be imaginative)

 

I have to say that I play by the rules, and would adopt a zero tolerance policy to any funny business that I discovered. As far as I'm concerned, if you don't sign the log, it's not a find, unless you have photographic evidence that you couldn't sign because of damage etc.

 

As for anyone who says "couldn't sign as forgot pen", how can anyone be so stupid as to go caching without anything to write with. In fact don't take one pen, take two, in case the first one runs out. Morons. Rant over (for now)

[+Haggis Hunter]

I've been geocaching since April. I've not placed any caches yet (found 800+, so I think I have the general idea of what makes a good cache, and will not place any "just for the sake of it", when I do place one or more they will hopefully be imaginative)

 

I have to say that I play by the rules, and would adopt a zero tolerance policy to any funny business that I discovered. As far as I'm concerned, if you don't sign the log, it's not a find, unless you have photographic evidence that you couldn't sign because of damage etc.

 

As for anyone who says "couldn't sign as forgot pen", how can anyone be so stupid as to go caching without anything to write with. In fact don't take one pen, take two, in case the first one runs out. Morons. Rant over (for now)

[+Us 4 and Jess]

Im guessing that its your cache? If so, the final decision comes down to you. You could delete the on-line logs (which are the only ones that really matter) and insist on the cacher signing the paper log, but is it really worth it? If people want to fudge their stats, then imo, they can do exactly that.

 

That in my humble opinion is soooo wrong, any numpty can sit on their backside in front of their computer and log 100s of caches, but if you have signed the log book in the cache then you have "proved" you have found the cache.

 

Maybe after seven years and a couple of thousand finds and a couple of hundres hides I am playing the game wrong, maybe I should read the rules

 

M

[+BlueDeuce]

If a person claims to have found a cach but their name is not on the logbook within the cach.Is there any action to take? Personally I see no point in claiming finds that I have not achived. I guess some strange folks like to boost their egos.

 

I don't typically check the log book against the online 'Found it' except for the time I got a 'Thanks from Germany".

 

This whole - what do you care? does it matter? just ignore it, supports virtual loggers.

[+The Frosties!]

I've not signed <snip> or ones I've been unable to safely extract from a micro

 

What do you mean by safely?

exactly as others suggest. I've seen tightly wound strips in little magnetic nanos and been sure I'd damage the log if I tried extracting it (I don't yet have tweezers in my bag)

[+The Chaos Crew]

The only time I was really irritated by a virtual logger was when one logged one of my caches online stating that they hadn’t been able to sign the log book as there was no pen, but they had made a mark with a stick in the book instead.

 

I duly slogged out to my cache the next day, in the pouring rain if I remember rightly, to replace the pencil, only to find it was still in there, PLUS a working gel pen that someone had left as swag, AND there was no sign of a mark made with a muddy stick. Pah.

 

I’m wondering if perhaps they got it mixed up with another cache? I was miffed at the wasted journey though.

 

In general though, I think armchair loggers are only diddling themselves. To me, the actual caching is the fun half of the activity, logging is the boring bit. So why you would want to do the dull bit without the fun bit baffles me. More fool them.