Can you log it as a find?

May 9, 2012

I was out caching the other day and a cache that I had planned to find was in quite a high muggle area.

I got to GZ and could see the cache straight away in full view (even though it was stuffed in its hiding place), but to anyone who is not a geocacher then it wouldn't be noticeable. I have found quite a few other caches by the CO and they are all quite distinctive home made containers so I recognised this as one of them.

The problem is I couldn't retrieve the cache without anyone noticing as it was high up and I would have drawn attention to myself as there were a lot of muggles around.

My question is can I technically still log this as a find even though I was unable to sign the paper log?

11.2k · May 9, 2012

I was out caching the other day and a cache that I had planned to find was in quite a high muggle area.

I got to GZ and could see the cache straight away in full view (even though it was stuffed in its hiding place), but to anyone who is not a geocacher then it wouldn't be noticeable. I have found quite a few other caches by the CO and they are all quite distinctive home made containers so I recognised this as one of them.

The problem is I couldn't retrieve the cache without anyone noticing as it was high up and I would have drawn attention to myself as there were a lot of muggles around.

My question is can I technically still log this as a find even though I was unable to sign the paper log?

Many of us would say NO. If you don't sign the physical log, don't log a find online.

It's not uncommon to have to return to a cache site during a better time of day in order to be able to retrieve the cache and sign the log without being seen by muggles.

May 9, 2012

Before the "No signature on the log" brigade arrive.

The only person that can answer that question is the cache owner.

May 9, 2012

I'm guessing it was part of the challenge to get it without being noticed.

6k · May 9, 2012

Before the "No signature on the log" brigade arrive.

The only person that can answer that question is the cache owner.

It doesn't matter what the co says. The quidelines require a signature.

May 9, 2012

That's what I thought.

Thanks guys, I'll go back another day.

May 9, 2012

This past weekend the local cache group had their regular gathering.

I found one of the new caches in a very exposed, high traffic area.

Even though I 'found' the cache and attempted to retrieve it (fat hand + lots of traffic) I opted to come back for it another time when I go to get some night time caches.

I did not log it as found since I didn't sign the log.

If I was not alone, I would have had someone else act as a blocker while I retrieved it.

7.3k · May 9, 2012

I was out caching the other day and a cache that I had planned to find was in quite a high muggle area.

I got to GZ and could see the cache straight away in full view (even though it was stuffed in its hiding place), but to anyone who is not a geocacher then it wouldn't be noticeable. I have found quite a few other caches by the CO and they are all quite distinctive home made containers so I recognised this as one of them.

The problem is I couldn't retrieve the cache without anyone noticing as it was high up and I would have drawn attention to myself as there were a lot of muggles around.

My question is can I technically still log this as a find even though I was unable to sign the paper log?

If the cache owner lets you do it, then you can claim it as "found", even though you didn't retrieve it to sign the log, or even touch it.

If the c.o. has rated the cache as a higher difficulty because of muggle traffic, then I think the c.o. knows and intends it to be a more difficult cache to find, retrieve and sign the log.

You could always post a "write note" log instead of a "found it". This can be helpful to future seekers, if the cache description didn't mention it.

B.

1.6k · May 9, 2012

ohhhh hell no! :laughing:

Suck it up....Be a real geocacher.... Be creative in how you retrieve it, or come back another day.

Edited May 9, 2012 by Lieblweb

May 9, 2012

Nope, no signy no findy, c'mon , play the game, you find the cache, you sign the log, you report a find, simple. IMO.

See this recent Log i made. Will return for a find.

Edited May 9, 2012 by Z3ROIN

May 9, 2012

Nope, no signy no findy, c'mon , play the game, you find the cache, you sign the log, you report a find, simple. IMO.

See this recent Log i made. Will return for a find.

I am doing, thats why I didn't log it as found. I was just curious, thats why I was asking.

May 9, 2012

Nope, no signy no findy, c'mon , play the game, you find the cache, you sign the log, you report a find, simple. IMO.

See this recent Log i made. Will return for a find.

I am doing, thats why I didn't log it as found. I was just curious, thats why I was asking.

Good form

1.8k · May 9, 2012

ohhhh hell no!

Suck it up....Be a real geocacher.... Be creative in how you retrieve it, or come back another day.

+1

May 9, 2012

I have 1 cache that I have logged as a find, with out a sig on the log. I email/posted photos as proof of the find. I lost my pen on the way to the cache. I still have to go back through the area with a caching buddy to help him with a rapping cache.

Then there is this cache, which was a rapping cache, made the decent, searched and searched NO cache. My buddy made the rap, same NO cache. Reported it as a DNF, CO verified no cache, replaced it. Said we could change the DNF to a smiley. Think I did ?

11.2k · May 9, 2012

I had someone make a long trek to my cache, only to realize they had left the pen in the car. They walked ALLLL the way back to the car, allll the way back to the cache just to sign the log book. I was very proud of them!

6k · May 9, 2012

I was out caching the other day and a cache that I had planned to find was in quite a high muggle area.

I got to GZ and could see the cache straight away in full view (even though it was stuffed in its hiding place), but to anyone who is not a geocacher then it wouldn't be noticeable. I have found quite a few other caches by the CO and they are all quite distinctive home made containers so I recognised this as one of them.

The problem is I couldn't retrieve the cache without anyone noticing as it was high up and I would have drawn attention to myself as there were a lot of muggles around.

My question is can I technically still log this as a find even though I was unable to sign the paper log?

If the cache owner lets you do it, then you can claim it as "found", even though you didn't retrieve it to sign the log, or even touch it.

If the c.o. has rated the cache as a higher difficulty because of muggle traffic, then I think the c.o. knows and intends it to be a more difficult cache to find, retrieve and sign the log.

You could always post a "write note" log instead of a "found it". This can be helpful to future seekers, if the cache description didn't mention it.

B.

Of course a co who consistently does that can find that cache archived, has happened before.

May 9, 2012

OH and I must add the 1 have logged and not signed, I will be returning to sign, when I go through the area.

7.9k · May 10, 2012

Nope, no signy no findy, c'mon , play the game, you find the cache, you sign the log, you report a find, simple. IMO.

See this recent Log i made. Will return for a find.

I am doing, thats why I didn't log it as found. I was just curious, thats why I was asking.

Good form

Yup, thanks for 'getting it'.

I had someone make a long trek to my cache, only to realize they had left the pen in the car. They walked ALLLL the way back to the car, allll the way back to the cache just to sign the log book. I was very proud of them!

Cachers like that deserve two smilies, but they would never accept the extra one.

4X the distance...that'll teach me to forget my pen. :lol:

7.5k · May 10, 2012

Before the "No signature on the log" brigade arrive.

The only person that can answer that question is the cache owner.

It doesn't matter what the co says. The quidelines require a signature.

If that guideline were a rule, I could see some finders throwing caution to the wind and revealing the cache, especially if there's no chance that they'll be able to re-visit the area at a possible quieter time. Maybe that's just the risk a CO takes when hiding in a high traffic zone.

1.1k · May 10, 2012

ALWAYS, sign the log book, or cache is DNF !

no matter how much you can see or touch the container,

come on.. else where is all the fun..

the whole idea with many of them VERY puplic located caches

is the muggle activity and for you to play invisible,

The trick is NOT to act wierd or spacial, and many do this when they try not to be seen..

so just act like what you do is compleetly normal, spot it, get it down, sit near by,

sign the log, assemble container, wait for perfect moment, place it back,

I love to handle this in full day light, and no one ever get a strange idea.

some do see you, and some do look alot at you,

you can also wait them out, most people are busy with the stuff they need to do,

they dont have all day long to sit and look at you, so they go away in a few minutes,

then you move :-)

2.6k · May 10, 2012

I would not log it as a find. And I would say in most cases you should sign the log.

For me, retrieving the cache is part of the find... whether it is up in a tree or guarded by muggles.

I don't take such a strict view of signing the log. Normally If you find the cache - have it in your hands - but can't sign because (for example): Container rusted shut and can not be opened; there is no log in the cache, or you are attacked by bears and return the cache before you can sign it I personally think it is OK to log it as a find. But some cache owners may check signatures and delete your log if you don't sign.

May 10, 2012

I had someone make a long trek to my cache, only to realize they had left the pen in the car. They walked ALLLL the way back to the car, allll the way back to the cache just to sign the log book. I was very proud of them!

This is why I carry about 6 pens with me. I may be new but I am prepared a bit. :laughing:

7.5k · May 10, 2012

I had someone make a long trek to my cache, only to realize they had left the pen in the car. They walked ALLLL the way back to the car, allll the way back to the cache just to sign the log book. I was very proud of them!

This is why I carry about 6 pens with me. I may be new but I am prepared a bit.

I've used a twig and dirt or crushed leaf method.

May 10, 2012

I had someone make a long trek to my cache, only to realize they had left the pen in the car. They walked ALLLL the way back to the car, allll the way back to the cache just to sign the log book. I was very proud of them!

This is why I carry about 6 pens with me. I may be new but I am prepared a bit.

I've used a twig and dirt or crushed leaf method.

LOL. I've used the leaf method more than once. :laughing:

3.8k · May 10, 2012

If you're crazy enough to log the find anyway (and I know you aren't), at least don't brag about that fact in the log. I don't audit caches but I would always delete a log where finder admitted to not signing the log.

5k · May 11, 2012

I'm guessing it was part of the challenge to get it without being noticed.

When I run into caches like that, I either ignore them or I just go ahead and grab it regardless of who's looking. Sneaking around like you think you are James Bond draws the wrong kind of attention. If the only point of the cache being there is to be sneaky around a crowd of people, I usually just ignore it. I would not, however, log it just because I saw it.

I had a cache in hand once when about ten mountain bikers rode up and stopped to rest. I quickly put the cache back without signing the log. I logged it online as found. I saw no sense in going back. I found the cache and the CO agreed that I found the cache.

5k · May 11, 2012

Before the "No signature on the log" brigade arrive.

The only person that can answer that question is the cache owner.

It doesn't matter what the co says. The quidelines require a signature.

They do not, and you know it. It is entirely up to the cache owner's discretion.

8k · May 11, 2012

Before the "No signature on the log" brigade arrive.

The only person that can answer that question is the cache owner.

It doesn't matter what the co says. The quidelines require a signature.

They do not, and you know it. It is entirely up to the cache owner's discretion.

Thanks Don. I was about to reply to that same post.

There is no guideline that requires a signature in order to log a find online.

The Geocaching 101 guide does provide basic instruction on caching. It does say that you should write about your your find in the cache logbook. Of course hardly anyone writes more than their name and date in the cache logbook and for some micro caches it's even considered rude to take up space with more than your initials. However, one can make a case that your supposed to write something in the logbook.

But even if the intents it to sign the log when you find a cache, there nothing requiring you to do this in order to post an online Find log.

Some people like to read the guidelines for logging of physical cache online as requiring a signature. A little knowledge of why that section was added to the guidelines in the first place makes it clear that it does not. The section was added because geocaching.com did not want cache owners to make up silly rules for when you could post an online find. Prior to this guideline cache owners could create Additional Logging Requirements (ALRs) for posting a Find online. If you didn't meet these requirements the cache owner could delete your log. Foe awhile these ALEs were tolerated, and sometimes even encouraged. But some cache owners kept make them sillier and more burdensome. The decision to eliminate ALRs resulted in guideline saying that "Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed." An exception was made for certain ALRs that required you to meet a reasonable geocaching related accomplishment (challenge caches). The guideline was written to allow owners to continue to delete online logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate. One way of determining whether the cache was actually found is to check the physical log. So the guideline indicated from the start that cache owners could delete the log if the physical log was unsigned - if they choose to do so.

A recent change to this guideline says "For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the cache and signing the log are considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional." This did not change the meaning of the guideline one iota. But certainly there will be some who will read more into it than what is there.

Edited May 11, 2012 by tozainamboku

2k · May 11, 2012

A cache owner may "allow" a signature, a photo, a gps track log, etc. or nothing but your word as proof of your find. But the only thing a cache owner may "require" is a signature in the logbook. That is the reason for the guideline change, pure and simple. It was to limit what cache owners could force the finder to do in order to log a find on their caches.

May 11, 2012

There is no guideline that requires a signature in order to log a find online.

You have written thousands of words making that claim, yet somehow you never seem to quote the guldelines in context:

III. LOGGING Guidelines: Logging Guidelines cover the requirements that must be fulfilled in order to log a find.

1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

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

Must as in required by law, custom, or moral conscience. I'm sure you know what must means.

1.1k · May 11, 2012

so right B+L :-)

when will people learn to play the game right, and fair and much more fun

2.2k · May 11, 2012

when will people learn to play the game right, and fair and much more fun

So, explain to me how someone finding a cache and using some method other than signing the log to prove the find to the cache owner's satisfaction in any way impacts your fun.

I'd also like clarification on the "fair" comment. Fair to who? The seeker clearly felt he/she found the cache, if the cache owner allows the online log to stand how is that not fair?

Don't get me wrong, I sign the log in the vast majority of my finds and I certainly wouldn't claim a find if I didn't actually have the container in my hands -- I just don't understand why I should care how someone else plays the game if it doesn't impact me.

7.8k · May 11, 2012

There is no guideline that requires a signature in order to log a find online.

You have written thousands of words making that claim, yet somehow you never seem to quote the guldelines in context:

III. LOGGING Guidelines: Logging Guidelines cover the requirements that must be fulfilled in order to log a find.

1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

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

Must as in required by law, custom, or moral conscience. I'm sure you know what must means.

This guideline says that if a cacher signs the physical log, the owner must allow the cacher to log the find online. That's all it says. The case where the physical log doesn't get signed isn't covered in the guidelines. This is where the owner discretion comes in.

Edit to add: If Groundspeak wanted to require the log to be signed in every case, whether it was logged online or not, they would change the guideline to read "The physical log must be signed". They haven't done this.

Edited May 11, 2012 by The A-Team

May 11, 2012

The guidelines are clear that you are supposed to sign the log, the only problem is that it is realistically uneforcable to make CO's follow the rules, since in this day an age, everyone thinks they know better and can follow the "play as they want" mantra. Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders, just lead to a sloppier and sloppier hobby overall. Most of the issues have always been around, just getting worse. Not only by increased involvement, but I believe in greater percentages on top of it.

1.6k · May 11, 2012

I had a cacher log an NM log on a simple C&D, they mentioned specifics about the items found scattered at GZ. I checked later in the day and the cache was missing. I replaced it and emailed the cacher telling him to log a find and Thankyou for the notice.

I think that's just common courtesy from a CO standpoint. I never expect that type of courtesy from others.... I just think its the right thing to do.

Honestly, I never check my logs when I retrieve them. I look at them quick and toss 'em out. So, I don't have any idea if anyone is logging finds without signing the logs. ??? I'm not playing the game to nitpick at how others want to play and life is busy enough to chase down those who aren't playing by what I would consider the proper way to play.

So, I guess it's up to individual CO's as how they check their logs and how they want to handle the lack of signatures.

May 11, 2012

People seem to think what the word guideline means.

Guidelines aren't rules set in concrete and must be done that way.

May 11, 2012

People seem to think what the word guideline means.

Sure, guidelines are not binding or mandatory. They are intended to set common expectations or set out sound practices, in this case for the logging of caches. However, it should be noted that Groundspeak's Geocaching 101 page does have an entry for the rules of geocaching.

Are there circumstances in which it might be agreeable to both a cache owner and a finder for a cache to be logged online without first signing the log? Of course, but that is not the same thing as attempting to twist the meaning of the guidelines, which is what some people here insist on doing.

2k · May 11, 2012

The guidelines are clear that you are supposed to sign the log, the only problem is that it is realistically uneforcable to make CO's follow the rules, since in this day an age, everyone thinks they know better and can follow the "play as they want" mantra. Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders, just lead to a sloppier and sloppier hobby overall. Most of the issues have always been around, just getting worse. Not only by increased involvement, but I believe in greater percentages on top of it.

If you're upset about "Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders" then I suggest you take it up with groundspeek. They are the ones that created guidelines instead of rules. They are the ones that have intentionally left things loose rather than creating a lot of strict rules.

This is supposed to be a fun pasttime. It is NOT a regulation sport. Most geocachers do just fine enjoying the game as it was meant to be played. Most of the angst comes from visiting the forums.

2k · May 11, 2012

I had a cacher log an NM log on a simple C&D, they mentioned specifics about the items found scattered at GZ. I checked later in the day and the cache was missing. I replaced it and emailed the cacher telling him to log a find and Thankyou for the notice.

I think that's just common courtesy from a CO standpoint. I never expect that type of courtesy from others.... I just think its the right thing to do.

Honestly, I never check my logs when I retrieve them. I look at them quick and toss 'em out. So, I don't have any idea if anyone is logging finds without signing the logs. ??? I'm not playing the game to nitpick at how others want to play and life is busy enough to chase down those who aren't playing by what I would consider the proper way to play.

So, I guess it's up to individual CO's as how they check their logs and how they want to handle the lack of signatures.

+10

In all honesty, the only reason for mentioning logging at all is to keep the control freaks from forcing a bunch of needless requirements on finders and turning what was meant to be a relaxing, fun game into a contest to see how many hoops a co can make finders jump through.

2k · May 11, 2012

Of course, but that is not the same thing as attempting to twist the meaning of the guidelines, which is what some people here insist on doing.

The only twisting of the meaning of the guidelines that I have seen are the ones insisting that the guidelines require you to sign the physical log. As far as I can remember, it's always been stated that you should sign the logbook. Actually, when possible, you should not only sign the logbook, but you should write a little about your journey in the logbook. I personally will not mark a cache as found unless I have signed the logbook.

But I also know there are times when a cache has been found and it is impossible to sign the logbook. Sure, you could post a NM and wait for the CO to fix the cache and come back and sign the logbook. But I see nothing wrong with a CO allowing a found log in this situation.

If you forgot your pen and couldn't sign the logbook, but you snapped a photo of you holding the logbook I see nothing wrong with the CO allowing a found log in this situation.

I also have no problem with a CO insisting on signed logbook. It is their prerogative and is fully supported by groundspeek.

Btw, I agree with the OP deciding to go back and sign the logbook. The situation that prompted this thread is one where I would say you should not log a find unless you retrieved the cache. It has nothing to do with strict "rules", but rather one of respect for the game and the intent of the hider.

2.6k · May 11, 2012

Are there circumstances in which it might be agreeable to both a cache owner and a finder for a cache to be logged online without first signing the log? Of course, but that is not the same thing as attempting to twist the meaning of the guidelines, which is what some people here insist on doing.

There are varied opinions here. Some do not think there are any circumstances where a find should be logged unless the log (as supplied by the cache owner) is signed.

Some (including myself) think there are circumstances where it is OK. (Although in the specific example given by the OP, I would NOT log a find).

I've not seen anyone who disagrees that the "normal" case is to sign the log, that that is what should happen most of the time.

14k · May 11, 2012

Edit to add: If Groundspeak wanted to require the log to be signed in every case, whether it was logged online or not, they would change the guideline to read "The physical log must be signed". They haven't done this.

And it's even more telling that despite the fact that this is probably the most frequently topic of discussion in forum since they began, Groundspeak hasn't changed the guideline. It's almost like they chose the wording in the guideline intentionally.

May 11, 2012

The guidelines are clear that you are supposed to sign the log, the only problem is that it is realistically uneforcable to make CO's follow the rules, since in this day an age, everyone thinks they know better and can follow the "play as they want" mantra. Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders, just lead to a sloppier and sloppier hobby overall. Most of the issues have always been around, just getting worse. Not only by increased involvement, but I believe in greater percentages on top of it.

If you're upset about "Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders" then I suggest you take it up with groundspeek. They are the ones that created guidelines instead of rules. They are the ones that have intentionally left things loose rather than creating a lot of strict rules.

This is supposed to be a fun pasttime. It is NOT a regulation sport. Most geocachers do just fine enjoying the game as it was meant to be played. Most of the angst comes from visiting the forums.

bad suggestion. no thanks. I know that many rules that would make the hobby better are unrealistic, both in enforcing and business growth. Doesn't mean I have to like it, and can't whine on a public forum. "meant to be played" is where a lot of the difference of opinion comes in, but I believe my definition of "meant to be played" is probably a lot closer to the original concept than most on here. I get angsty over situations that happen while participating in the hobby, both to my caches and the ones I hunt and the others that I belieive effect my enjoyment for various reasons.

May 11, 2012

There are varied opinions here. Some do not think there are any circumstances where a find should be logged unless the log (as supplied by the cache owner) is signed.

We are actually in the former camp, but we wil replace or add to a log if necessary. Once people start rationalizing reasons for not signing a log, there is little point in signing logs at all. We once saw someone take their foot of the gas as they were driving past a cache and to them, that momentary pause was sufficient reason for them to log the cache as found.

We've climbed a mountain only to find the "cache" near the top was something else. DNF. Would anyone know or care if we logged it as found anyway? Probably not. We've had cache owners contact us to say we can go ahead and log a missing cache, but we've politely turned them down. We've traveled to a foreign country where the only way to log a cache was to throw down a replacement. We came home with zero finds. We once found the logbook from a missing cache, but did not sign it. You get the idea. No physical log, no smiley. Do we expect everyone else to play as strictly as we do, no, but we do expect people to at least try. Making excuses for not taking the basic step of signing a log is not something we find admirable and we are certainly not going to emulate it.

And as you say, the consensus opinion is the sensible one. Why else would physical caches have logbooks?

2.6k · May 11, 2012

Once people start rationalizing reasons for not signing a log, there is little point in signing logs at all.

B+L, I agree with you except for the point above. I think people can use their judgement. I've only logged a find without signing twice. Once I didn't have a pen, but I took a photo of the log. I could have signed in mud or blood, but I felt a photo was better. The other time I grabbed the cache and was attacked by wasps. I put the cache back and ran. In that case I sent the owner a private message explaining what happened and describing the cache and asking him if I could log it as a find.

I think people should log what best describes their experience in their opinion. In the 2 examples above, I felt that I found the cache, so a found log was most appropriate. But if the CO didn't agree and wanted to delete my log, then fine.

May 11, 2012

Once people start rationalizing reasons for not signing a log, there is little point in signing logs at all.

B+L, I agree with you except for the point above. I think people can use their judgement. I've only logged a find without signing twice. Once I didn't have a pen, but I took a photo of the log. I could have signed in mud or blood, but I felt a photo was better. The other time I grabbed the cache and was attacked by wasps. I put the cache back and ran. In that case I sent the owner a private message explaining what happened and describing the cache and asking him if I could log it as a find.

I think people should log what best describes their experience in their opinion. In the 2 examples above, I felt that I found the cache, so a found log was most appropriate. But if the CO didn't agree and wanted to delete my log, then fine.

Sure, in normal circumstances you follow the spirit of the guidelines. Your examples are the typical of exception I made above. You made a judgement call and it was yours to make (so long as the cache owner was amenable). We would have taken a DNF in both of your examples and either returned another time or not at all. No biggie. That's why they are guidelines, not rules.

7.7k · May 11, 2012

Edit to add: If Groundspeak wanted to require the log to be signed in every case, whether it was logged online or not, they would change the guideline to read "The physical log must be signed". They haven't done this.

And it's even more telling that despite the fact that this is probably the most frequently topic of discussion in forum since they began, Groundspeak hasn't changed the guideline. It's almost like they chose the wording in the guideline intentionally.

Sometimes I suspect the Groundspeak employees place bets on how many posts such threads generate, and when Toz will jump in.

May 11, 2012

Edit to add: If Groundspeak wanted to require the log to be signed in every case, whether it was logged online or not, they would change the guideline to read "The physical log must be signed". They haven't done this.

And it's even more telling that despite the fact that this is probably the most frequently topic of discussion in forum since they began, Groundspeak hasn't changed the guideline. It's almost like they chose the wording in the guideline intentionally.

Sometimes I suspect the Groundspeak employees place bets on how many posts such threads generate, and when Toz will jump in.

It's more like driving by a billboard you've seen a thousand times before. After awhile it becomes invisible.

May 11, 2012

Edit to add: If Groundspeak wanted to require the log to be signed in every case, whether it was logged online or not, they would change the guideline to read "The physical log must be signed". They haven't done this.

And it's even more telling that despite the fact that this is probably the most frequently topic of discussion in forum since they began, Groundspeak hasn't changed the guideline. It's almost like they chose the wording in the guideline intentionally.

Sometimes I suspect the Groundspeak employees place bets on how many posts such threads generate, and when Toz will jump in.

:laughing:

8k · May 12, 2012

There is no guideline that requires a signature in order to log a find online.

You have written thousands of words making that claim, yet somehow you never seem to quote the guldelines in context:

III. LOGGING Guidelines: Logging Guidelines cover the requirements that must be fulfilled in order to log a find.

1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches

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

Must as in required by law, custom, or moral conscience. I'm sure you know what must means.

When Groundspeak reorganized the guideline and included a section called "Logging Guidelines" I protested. I said the puritans would read into that sentence where you highlight the word "must" as proof their interpretation is correct. Groundspeak's reply was that reorganization was simply a reorganization was simply a reorganization and did not change the meaning of any guidelines. The wording of the title of the section was not part of the guideline. However, I continue to hope that in some revision of the guideline Groundspeak will reword this title. I have even suggested different reorganization (I. Placement Guidelines, II. Listing Guidelines, III. Maintenance and Ownership Guidelines) In the meantime, there is not much I can do to dissuade those who wish to parse titles to find some proof of for their peculiar beliefs.

so right B+L :-)

when will people learn to play the game right, and fair and much more fun

When people learn that "There's no prize, no leaderboard, and no trophy, so there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist about anyone else's definition of a find", they may find this game is fair and a lot more fun. If they continue to treat a online find a reward or a point, they might make up rules that the rest of us feel are unnecessary.

The guidelines are clear that you are supposed to sign the log, the only problem is that it is realistically uneforcable to make CO's follow the rules, since in this day an age, everyone thinks they know better and can follow the "play as they want" mantra. Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders, just lead to a sloppier and sloppier hobby overall. Most of the issues have always been around, just getting worse. Not only by increased involvement, but I believe in greater percentages on top of it.

While there are sections of the Geocaching.com website that discuss writing about your find in the cache logbook, there is nothing that ties the posting of an online find to doing this. In the early days of geocaching.com when Groundspeak gave cache owner the ability to delete logs, some people suggested that they should be allowed to delete online logs where the physical log was not signed. TPTB accepted this. They also accepted cache owners creating additional requirements beyond signing the log. The general consensus was that you didn't have to put the "log must be signed" on the cache page, and Groundspeak seems to have gone along with this. When the guideline was added to eliminate ALRs, it was carefully worded to continue to allow cache owners who choose to delete online finds where the physical log is not signed to do so.

Only if Groundspeak should ever decided to publish a guideline that really does require a signed physical log to log a find online will you have a situation that is unenforceable. In the meantime, it's comments like this, that make is sound as if you have some moral deficiency if you don't enforce some imaginary rule, that have me convinced more than ever that puritan is the correct term.

Can you log it as a find?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment