Jump to content

What should I have done?


Recommended Posts

I was doing a little caching today and a easy light post find looks like it had been hit by a car or purposely muggled (the skirt was ripped in half) i found remains of the swag, a sig item and a magnet, I alerted the owner, but my question is should I have listed it as a find or not.

Link to comment

I was doing a little caching today and a easy light post find looks like it had been hit by a car or purposely muggled (the skirt was ripped in half) i found remains of the swag, a sig item and a magnet, I alerted the owner, but my question is should I have listed it as a find or not.

 

That's up to you. You definitely found and touched the remains of the cache, so that would qualify as a find to me.

Link to comment

I would think it is a find also. If someone found one of my caches in that state and let me know about it then I'd allow them a find. But I guess I also have to say that a few days ago I "found" a cache. It was a pill bottle hanging on a wire in a hole in a wall. The wire and the top of the cache were there but not the bottle itself or the log. Probably lost in the recesses of the wall. I couldn't sign the lid but I did email the owner. I wrote a note on the cache page for that one and didn't claim the find.

 

I guess that means its up to you.

Link to comment

When we find the "remains" of a cache that has obviously been muggled (which has happened to us a few times), I send a e-mail to the owner and post a note on the cache page saying what we saw and that we've notified the owner. In the absence of a log, I don't think you should log the cache as found. Also, the muggle may have taken the cache a distance away from the correct location (we saw one once where all the contents had been thrown into a creek nearby) so the cache can't be considered even to be in the correct location.

 

If you log finding a bunch of debris on the ground as a "found it," then you must really be into running up your numbers, which we are not!

Link to comment

We had a similar situation just yesterday in finding a match stick container that was on the ground and had a soaked and mushed log. We left the cache in place and attached a small faux bison micro attached to the wire already attached to the cache and signed a new small replacement log. There was no room in the matchstick container to put a new log, and even in its mushy state didn't want to remove the CO's log. Sent an email to the CO letting him know the situation. This solution may not work in every situation, but seemed to make sense in that instance.

Edited by Ohiosiouxfan
Link to comment

If you log finding a bunch of debris on the ground as a "found it," then you must really be into running up your numbers, which we are not!

I always amazes me how quickly it is assumed that if someone logs a "found it" when they found the remains of a cache or a cache where they were unable to sign the log sheet, that they must really be into running up their numbers? Perhaps they simply want to record that they found the cache. <_<

Link to comment

When I haven't been able to sign the log because the cache was destroyed or I forgot a pen, I've taken a picture of the cache and where I found it. After that I contacted the CO by PM and requested their email address to send the picture. I didn't post the picture in the cache listing to prevent it from being a spoiler. This leaves it up the to CO to decide I they think you found the cache or not. The cache belongs to the CO so if they say you found it you did and if they say you didn't, you didn't.

Link to comment

When we find the "remains" of a cache that has obviously been muggled (which has happened to us a few times), I send a e-mail to the owner and post a note on the cache page saying what we saw and that we've notified the owner. In the absence of a log, I don't think you should log the cache as found. Also, the muggle may have taken the cache a distance away from the correct location (we saw one once where all the contents had been thrown into a creek nearby) so the cache can't be considered even to be in the correct location.

 

If you log finding a bunch of debris on the ground as a "found it," then you must really be into running up your numbers, which we are not!

 

While I may not have worded it the same way, it is commonly accepted to be bad form to log a cache simply because debris found is assumed to be the cache.

 

Signing the log is an essential part of the game, however it is between you and the owner and you may get lucky and find someone like toz who believes rules and guidelines only apply when convenient. In which case, if you would be ok logging it online as a find, a note to the CO would be in order.

Link to comment

however it is between you and the owner and you may get lucky and find someone like toz who believes rules and guidelines only apply when convenient.

 

I would argue that you may get unlucky and find one of the few COs that has a control issue and wishes to enforce a non-existent "rule." If that is the case, just be aware that since you did not sign the logbook, groundspeek would uphold the deletion of your found log.

Link to comment

 

While I may not have worded it the same way, it is commonly accepted to be bad form to log a cache simply because debris found is assumed to be the cache.

 

Signing the log is an essential part of the game, however it is between you and the owner and you may get lucky and find someone like toz who believes rules and guidelines only apply when convenient.

I was going to agree with you till I got to this statement.

 

For the record, on three separate occasions I have found the log book as the only remaining evidence of a muggled cache. (Alright, in one incident there was some other debris scattered about than may have been swag at one time). Surely, according the alleged guideline, I could have logged the caches as found online, once I signed the log books. Heck, maybe I can still "find" those caches as all three log books are in my desk drawer right now. :unsure:

 

Instead, I posted needs maintenance and contacted the cache owners that I had the log books. (OK one of the caches was long archived by the time I found the log book - I wasn't even looking for that log book, it was just sitting there on the trail between two other caches. I simply wrote a note on the cache page in that instance.)

 

One the other hand, someone recently "found" the log sheet from one of my caches which they signed and squeezed into a hole in a street sign a short distance away. Their "find" log let me know something was amiss and when I went the next day to check, I could not find the bison tube I had hidden. I did eventually find the log the "finder" left and put that in a new bison tube and replace my hide. I don't see any reason to delete that person's log, even though I would have handled it differently.

Link to comment

I have no doubt I found the cache because I found several other caches that morning in the same area and a previous cacher leaves a sig item, and that was one of the items I found. Also I am not talking about a cache with a difficulty rating it was a light post skirt.

Link to comment

DNF. You didn't find the cache. I came across a cache that had been shredded by a lawnmower. It was quite obvious that it used to be a cache. Posted NM, not a 'find'. I'm not that desperate for numbers.

 

I enjoy your condescending tone. People like you make this world a great place

Link to comment

I would argue that you may get unlucky and find one of the few COs that has a control issue and wishes to enforce a non-existent "rule." If that is the case, just be aware that since you did not sign the logbook, groundspeek would uphold the deletion of your found log.

 

I guess that would be one way of explaining it away when your sole purpose is to keep numbers higher, however more likely is that the CO is taking the commitment they made when they placed the cache and agreed among other things, to delete "bogus" logs.

 

Since the guidelines not only explicitly call out a sign log to validate a find and further it is used to settle disputes, commonly accepted community standards dictate a signed log before logging online. As with many actual laws, just because they are ignored or overlooked does not mean they do not apply. Hence my comment about getting lucky. You could also log it and simply hope nothing happens.

 

It always seems it is the purists who insist logs should not be deleted in order to preserve the find counts. The only plausible reason would seem to be the count, as recording the "experience" could be done via a note or privately as some in my area do that do not like "the numbers game".

 

In short, to answer the orginal question. Log a DNF and needs maintenance.

Link to comment

DNF. You didn't find the cache. I came across a cache that had been shredded by a lawnmower. It was quite obvious that it used to be a cache. Posted NM, not a 'find'. I'm not that desperate for numbers.

 

I enjoy your condescending tone. People like you make this world a great place

 

Thank you. I'm always willing to be of assistance.

Link to comment

I was doing a little caching today and a easy light post find looks like it had been hit by a car or purposely muggled (the skirt was ripped in half) i found remains of the swag, a sig item and a magnet, I alerted the owner, but my question is should I have listed it as a find or not.

I think that question would be better directed at the cache owner. :unsure:

Link to comment

however more likely is that the CO is taking the commitment they made when they placed the cache and agreed among other things, to delete "bogus" logs.

 

You've been around long enough to know that it is more likely that the CO has no idea what they agreed to when they checked those boxes. :ph34r:

 

As for the original question, I would say the OP should log it however he feels most comfortable.

 

If he had asked what I would have done, then I would likely have logged a NM, placed it on my ignore list, and not updated my find records.

Link to comment

I would argue that you may get unlucky and find one of the few COs that has a control issue and wishes to enforce a non-existent "rule." If that is the case, just be aware that since you did not sign the logbook, groundspeek would uphold the deletion of your found log.

 

I guess that would be one way of explaining it away when your sole purpose is to keep numbers higher, however more likely is that the CO is taking the commitment they made when they placed the cache and agreed among other things, to delete "bogus" logs.

Of course you need to make a leap of faith to get to the point that an unsigned log = "bogus". In general most people will interpret "bogus" to meean you did not find the caches - and the biggest concern here are couch potato logs. Groundspeak would like to be able to assume that online find logs (and DNF logs too), are made by people who actually went out and looked for a cache. If you got out of the car, looked for the cache, and found enough debris to be confident you found the cache, and stating that honestly in the online log, most people would not consider that bogus. Of course, absent a picture or some other proof of what you found, a cache owner could easily claim they can't be certain of your find and may delete your log.

 

Since the guidelines not only explicitly call out a sign log to validate a find and further it is used to settle disputes, commonly accepted community standards dictate a signed log before logging online. As with many actual laws, just because they are ignored or overlooked does not mean they do not apply. Hence my comment about getting lucky. You could also log it and simply hope nothing happens.

There you go again :rolleyes: The guidelines only call out a signed log as sufficient to log a cache on line. The main point is to disallow any additional logging requirements. Since a signature in a logbook offers a relatively good verification of a find, cache owners are allowed to use it for that purpose and may delete online logs where the physical log was not signed. There is absolutely no guideline, rule, or law requiring cache owners to do. There in nothing saying an online log without a signature is bogus. A cache owner is free to accept a found log that says someone found the remains of the their cache.

 

It always seems it is the purists who insist logs should not be deleted in order to preserve the find counts. The only plausible reason would seem to be the count, as recording the "experience" could be done via a note or privately as some in my area do that do not like "the numbers game".
Nobody is arguing that cache owner can't delete the log if they want to. It's unlikely that any argument will change the mind of those that insist they are bound to delete logs where the physical log was not signed. However it seems to me that whey they impugn the motive of falsely trying to inflate find counts on those who use the find log without having signed the physical log book, they are forgetting 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."
Link to comment

I was doing a little caching today and a easy light post find looks like it had been hit by a car or purposely muggled (the skirt was ripped in half) i found remains of the swag, a sig item and a magnet, I alerted the owner, but my question is should I have listed it as a find or not.

 

By my way of thinking, since you found neither an identifiable container, nor an identifiable log, this is not a find. The SWAG & signature item might be considered proof that you'd really found the cache, hard to say since we can't see what you found. I would not log this as a find, personally - my threshold for a borderline cache like this is either an identifiable log or identifiable container, preferrably both. (Labeled, or something that was exceedingly improbable to have been left by a passer-by.) As I said, though, this is a borderline type situation - you found some stuff in a probably cache location, some of which is unlikely to have been left as random litter.

 

For sure you need to post NM or NA though, whatever you decide to do.

Link to comment

I would argue that you may get unlucky and find one of the few COs that has a control issue and wishes to enforce a non-existent "rule." If that is the case, just be aware that since you did not sign the logbook, groundspeek would uphold the deletion of your found log.

 

I guess that would be one way of explaining it away when your sole purpose is to keep numbers higher, however more likely is that the CO is taking the commitment they made when they placed the cache and agreed among other things, to delete "bogus" logs.

Of course you need to make a leap of faith to get to the point that an unsigned log = "bogus". In general most people will interpret "bogus" to meean you did not find the caches - and the biggest concern here are couch potato logs. Groundspeak would like to be able to assume that online find logs (and DNF logs too), are made by people who actually went out and looked for a cache. If you got out of the car, looked for the cache, and found enough debris to be confident you found the cache, and stating that honestly in the online log, most people would not consider that bogus. Of course, absent a picture or some other proof of what you found, a cache owner could easily claim they can't be certain of your find and may delete your log.

 

Since the guidelines not only explicitly call out a sign log to validate a find and further it is used to settle disputes, commonly accepted community standards dictate a signed log before logging online. As with many actual laws, just because they are ignored or overlooked does not mean they do not apply. Hence my comment about getting lucky. You could also log it and simply hope nothing happens.

There you go again :rolleyes: The guidelines only call out a signed log as sufficient to log a cache on line. The main point is to disallow any additional logging requirements. Since a signature in a logbook offers a relatively good verification of a find, cache owners are allowed to use it for that purpose and may delete online logs where the physical log was not signed. There is absolutely no guideline, rule, or law requiring cache owners to do. There in nothing saying an online log without a signature is bogus. A cache owner is free to accept a found log that says someone found the remains of the their cache.

 

It always seems it is the purists who insist logs should not be deleted in order to preserve the find counts. The only plausible reason would seem to be the count, as recording the "experience" could be done via a note or privately as some in my area do that do not like "the numbers game".
Nobody is arguing that cache owner can't delete the log if they want to. It's unlikely that any argument will change the mind of those that insist they are bound to delete logs where the physical log was not signed. However it seems to me that whey they impugn the motive of falsely trying to inflate find counts on those who use the find log without having signed the physical log book, they are forgetting 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."

 

Taking this logic a step further. In this case the log has obviously been stolen and the CO cannot verify that anyone has found their cache, therefore, they must delete all of the online find logs. Correct?

 

At some point, you simply have to take it on faith that people have found your cache and not everyone is sitting at home racking up numbers by posting bogus logs.

Link to comment

I wouldn't log a find here, i'd post a needs maintenance and email the CO.

 

If you placed a cache in that state would it be ok to let everyone log as found? No i think, there was no log book and the contents are scattered. Think about it, the cache wasn't a cache, it was a bunch of stuff that used to be the cache, the cache wasn't in a findable state in my opinion.

 

Just because you found the location doesn't mean you completed a find. The cache was out of action, so you didn't find it.

 

But if that's a find to you then however you want to play the game is up to you i guess.

Edited by Z3ROIN
Link to comment

"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."

 

If this is true, why do all you purists "get your knickers in a twist" when a bogus log is deleted?

 

Example?

Link to comment

however it is between you and the owner and you may get lucky and find someone like toz who believes rules and guidelines only apply when convenient.

 

I would argue that you may get unlucky and find one of the few COs that has a control issue and wishes to enforce a non-existent "rule." If that is the case, just be aware that since you did not sign the logbook, groundspeek would uphold the deletion of your found log.

 

When did you give Mr. T your password? :lol:

 

This happened to me about a year and a half ago. I found a lock-n-lock lid, and some swag. No logbook whatsoever. I put the lid and the remaining swag neatly under the wooden pedestrian bridge where the hint said the cache should be, and logged a DNF. You know what? Had there been an intact logbook in a nice baggie, I probably would have logged that sucker. Call me a Puritan. B) Oh, a very active owner, and they replaced the cache within a day or two. I was not contacted in any manner, including the offer to log a find. This was 300 miles from home in Central Ohio, and I will most likely never pass that way again.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

I'm not "after the numbers" but I'd have logged it as a find. If the CO wants to delete the log... Eh. Whatever...

 

I'm not "after the numbers" either but I also would probably have logged it as a find. I've found the remains of a cache and logged it as a find exactly twice in five years. To presume that someone is all into the numbers because they have logged a couple of caches when they didn't sign the log book is ludicrous. I've have had several more instances when I was able to locate, and even touch the container and did *not* post a found it log.

Link to comment

Example?

 

Have you been reading the thread?

 

I've been following it and I don't recall anyone getting their knickers in a twist. I don't recall anyone getting upset due to a CO deleting a find log of someone who did not sign the logbook. In fact, I believe it's been stated over and over that the CO would be supported in that action.

 

The only disagreement (not knicker twisting) I've seen is the fact that some continue to state that signing the log is a requirement; even though the same people pointing out that it is NOT a requirement do believe in signing the logbook as a general courtesy and an accepted practice of the game.

Link to comment

 

This happened to me about a year and a half ago. I found a lock-n-lock lid, and some swag. No logbook whatsoever. I put the lid and the remaining swag neatly under the wooden pedestrian bridge where the hint said the cache should be, and logged a DNF. You know what? Had there been an intact logbook in a nice baggie, I probably would have logged that sucker. Call me a Puritan. B)

 

If the log weren't in a baggie I guess you'd have also logged DNF? So in your mind, it comes down to the baggie? Really? ;)

 

I don't think I'd have logged a find in the case you mentioned either, fwiw. Perhaps if the lid had been camo'd or labeled, but part of a container, no log of any sort (signable or not), and random stuff (possible swag) doesn't seem like compelling evidence of a find to me either, especially since what you found wasn't in the probable hiding place either, although it was nearby.

Edited by Mr.Benchmark
Link to comment

Me, it depends on how much of the cache remained.

 

If I found the container and logbook, yes

 

If I found a logbook and no container, yes.

 

If I found a container and swag and no logbook, I'd contact owner and let them decide.

 

If I found just a container and nothing else, I'd still contact the owner and let them know, and wait til it is replaced before going for it again. The container could have been trash and not the real container.

 

But remember that is just my opinion.

edited after rereading OP message.

Edited by jellis
Link to comment

Me, it depends on how much of the cache remained.

 

If I found the container and logbook, yes

 

If I found a logbook and no container, yes.

 

If I found a container and swag and no logbook, I'd contact owner and let them decide.

 

If I found just a container and nothing else, I'd still contact the owner and let them know, and wait til it is replaced before going for it again. The container could have been trash and not the real container.

 

But remember that is just my opinion.

edited after rereading OP message.

 

The skirt of the light poll has been ripped almost in half but still rests upon the base, I lifted it up and found broken plastic, swag, and a sig item(breast cancer duck with her geoname) that's left in a lot of the other caches I found that day, I didn't pick anything off the ground it was all still on the base of the light pole under the open skirt. I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it, I alerted the co of the sitituation so I guess it's up to him/her.

 

Also I gotta say this is a hobby/game I get to do it rarely I have been doing this 7 months and have almost 60 finds so obviously I am not concerned with the number of finds I have, I think a log book should be used to tell the co and fellow cachers about your time and how much fun you had, a log book should NOT be used as some kind of paper work that you have to sign in front of a notary. From reading a lot of people's posts on here I wonder why you all even still geocache, it reads like this is more like a job rather then a hobby.

Link to comment

I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it, I alerted the co of the sitituation so I guess it's up to him/her.

 

That's all that really matters.

 

From reading a lot of people's posts on here I wonder why you all even still geocache, it reads like this is more like a job rather then a hobby.

 

I wonder the same thing some times. :(

Link to comment

You know ... we could always assume that the finder and the cache owner are reasonable people, who could talk with each other through the logs to come to an agreement ...

 

Here's a couple of stories from my relatively young career.

 

1) Dead of winter, I come out to work on an urban hide in a high-muggle area, so I attempt the find after midnight when there aren't muggles around. Description on the site says "you have to sign the log to get the smiley". Turns out to be a false utility plate on a lightpoll ... except that the magnets have fallen off, so I found the plate on the ground, covered in snow. It's a windy area, so the log is nowhere to be found. I posted a "Found" and a "Needs Maintenance", saying "I hope I get the smiley". The cache owner fixed it and cleared the maintenance tag, writing "yes, you definitely get the smiley".

 

2) Another urban hide a month ago. It's a challenge cache, and I qualify. It's not an area I frequent, so I made a point of coming over to find the cache. I get there, and all I find is a piece of paper stuck in a crevice with one log entry on it. Okay, that's weird, but I go ahead and sign the paper. When I get home that night to log the finds, it turns out the paper was left by a previous cacher as a throw-down earlier that day, after he spent "a lot of time" looking and not finding the cache. I went ahead and logged the find. A few days later, I get a note from the cache owner, telling me that the cache had been there all along, and I had obviously gotten discouraged from looking for it by the throw down. The cache owner asked me, nicely, to either delete my log or turn it into a note, since I hadn't really found the cache itself. But (s)he asked extremely nicely --- and, frankly, I wasn't comfortable with trying to argue for a find on a throwdown, so I was nappy to downgrade the find into a note.

 

Both stories work, because I as the finder, and the cache owner in question, were able to talk together and come to consensus. And we didn't have to get any lawyers involved! :)

Link to comment

I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it,

Let's say you were grabbing a few caches and you returned to where you parked your car only to find it gone. You report it as stolen and a few days later the police call to let you know they've recovered your vehicle. You go to the police station and the Desk Sargeant hands you a steering wheel and a hubcap and says, "here's your car." Would you honestly feel comfortable saying the police had found your vehicle? How would you feel if your insurance company agreed?

Link to comment
From reading a lot of people's posts on here I wonder why you all even still geocache, it reads like this is more like a job rather then a hobby.

A good friend from Denmark once observed that many Americans take their hobbies very seriously and only know the meaning of the word "relax" intellectually.

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment
From reading a lot of people's posts on here I wonder why you all even still geocache, it reads like this is more like a job rather then a hobby.

A good friend from Denmark once observed that many Americans take their hobbies very seriously and only know the meaning of the word "relax" intellectually.

Danes surely have a keener sense of the Absurd than most Americans, but that does not seem to have prevented your friend from trying to seek meaning where there is none.

Link to comment

Example?

 

Have you been reading the thread?

I've been writing a lot and know that I've said several times that cache owners are allowed to delete logs if the physical log is not signed. What make you thing my knickers would be in a twist if the cache owner in this case were to delete the log?

 

I think I ought to be able to express my opinion about why I wouldn't delete the log if it were my cache.

 

I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it,

Let's say you were grabbing a few caches and you returned to where you parked your car only to find it gone. You report it as stolen and a few days later the police call to let you know they've recovered your vehicle. You go to the police station and the Desk Sargeant hands you a steering wheel and a hubcap and says, "here's your car." Would you honestly feel comfortable saying the police had found your vehicle? How would you feel if your insurance company agreed?

:blink:

 

How about someone gave you an ice cream cone, but before you ate the whole thing you dropped it? Later you posted on their ice cream page how you only took one lick before you dropped the cone, but that from what you tasted it was pretty good. Then they delete your log because you didn't eat the whole thing. The rules say "you can post an online tasted it log once you have eaten the cone" but since you didn't finish that would be cheating. :mmraspberry:

Link to comment

I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it,

Let's say you were grabbing a few caches and you returned to where you parked your car only to find it gone. You report it as stolen and a few days later the police call to let you know they've recovered your vehicle. You go to the police station and the Desk Sargeant hands you a steering wheel and a hubcap and says, "here's your car." Would you honestly feel comfortable saying the police had found your vehicle? How would you feel if your insurance company agreed?

How about someone gave you an ice cream cone, but before you ate the whole thing you dropped it? Later you posted on their ice cream page how you only took one lick before you dropped the cone, but that from what you tasted it was pretty good. Then they delete your log because you didn't eat the whole thing. The rules say "you can post an online tasted it log once you have eaten the cone" but since you didn't finish that would be cheating.

What in the Wide World of Sports does that have to do with anything? If you have to strain that hard to pass a metaphor, you should seek immediate medical attention.

 

And It's not cheating. It's smiley fraud.

Link to comment

Me, it depends on how much of the cache remained.

 

If I found the container and logbook, yes

 

If I found a logbook and no container, yes.

 

If I found a container and swag and no logbook, I'd contact owner and let them decide.

 

If I found just a container and nothing else, I'd still contact the owner and let them know, and wait til it is replaced before going for it again. The container could have been trash and not the real container.

 

But remember that is just my opinion.

edited after rereading OP message.

 

I've come across that once. I guess I'm lucky to still have it as a find. It was very well hidden just like the description. I signed a piece of paper that was on a sticker. But I also put that in my log. What if the owner had just been there and took the log with him (it was a small town far from here, so it didn't have many finds) and didn't have a new log to replace it with? So maybe he wasn't expecting for somebody to find it. Who knows....

 

In the OP's situation, I personally wouldn't have logged it as a find. I also wouldn't feel right leaving it there either. I'd take what ever was laying around (could just be trash, so CITO), and let the CO know that I may have a cache of theirs that may have been destroyed, and offer to get it to them.

Link to comment

 

This happened to me about a year and a half ago. I found a lock-n-lock lid, and some swag. No logbook whatsoever. I put the lid and the remaining swag neatly under the wooden pedestrian bridge where the hint said the cache should be, and logged a DNF. You know what? Had there been an intact logbook in a nice baggie, I probably would have logged that sucker. Call me a Puritan. B)

 

If the log weren't in a baggie I guess you'd have also logged DNF? So in your mind, it comes down to the baggie? Really? ;)

 

I don't think I'd have logged a find in the case you mentioned either, fwiw. Perhaps if the lid had been camo'd or labeled, but part of a container, no log of any sort (signable or not), and random stuff (possible swag) doesn't seem like compelling evidence of a find to me either, especially since what you found wasn't in the probable hiding place either, although it was nearby.

 

Misunderstanding. It's not like I consider a baggie some sort of container or anything. I just threw that in there because it would have provided protection for the hypothetical still present logbook. You know, it could have been rained on, or saturated by daily overnite dew, etc.. There was no logbook, so there was no find for me.

 

Take that you Danes. You're all a bunch of slackers over there. :huh:

Link to comment

And It's not cheating. It's smiley fraud.

 

I guess logging a find on the probable remains of a lamp post cache cheapens the accomplishment of the prior finders? I guess it doesn't reward the CO's effort and cleverness at constructing and hiding the cache? Oh, right, not appicable.

 

Perhaps he didn't experience what the CO intended for the cache - oh wait, the intended experience was +1 smiley. So yeah, I guess he kinda did what was expected.

 

Hey, I know - maybe the CO will delete his log because he did not have the common courtesy to leave a throwdown... (Justified as "didn't sign the log.")

Link to comment

And It's not cheating. It's smiley fraud.

 

I guess logging a find on the probable remains of a lamp post cache cheapens the accomplishment of the prior finders? I guess it doesn't reward the CO's effort and cleverness at constructing and hiding the cache? Oh, right, not appicable.

 

Perhaps he didn't experience what the CO intended for the cache - oh wait, the intended experience was +1 smiley. So yeah, I guess he kinda did what was expected.

 

Hey, I know - maybe the CO will delete his log because he did not have the common courtesy to leave a throwdown... (Justified as "didn't sign the log.")

Why not leave the poor strawman out of it? What did he ever do to you?

 

What is expected is pretty simple, but these forums are teeming with examples of how people rationalize ways to say they found something that isn't there. Then we get to read all the reasons why DNFs are not actually DNFs. Did everyone grow up writing lies in their diaries or something?

Link to comment

I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it,

Let's say you were grabbing a few caches and you returned to where you parked your car only to find it gone. You report it as stolen and a few days later the police call to let you know they've recovered your vehicle. You go to the police station and the Desk Sargeant hands you a steering wheel and a hubcap and says, "here's your car." Would you honestly feel comfortable saying the police had found your vehicle? How would you feel if your insurance company agreed?

How about someone gave you an ice cream cone, but before you ate the whole thing you dropped it? Later you posted on their ice cream page how you only took one lick before you dropped the cone, but that from what you tasted it was pretty good. Then they delete your log because you didn't eat the whole thing. The rules say "you can post an online tasted it log once you have eaten the cone" but since you didn't finish that would be cheating.

What in the Wide World of Sports does that have to do with anything? If you have to strain that hard to pass a metaphor, you should seek immediate medical attention.

 

And It's not cheating. It's smiley fraud.

Ice cream analogies are always spot on. [;)] But the more I think about it the more your car analogy needs a serious response.

 

So let's say may car was stolen and a few days later the police call to say that they arrested some guy trying to sell a steering wheel and a hubcap. However, they are not going to press charges since they can't prove it was my car (or any other stolen car). And they won't give me the steering wheel or the hubcap either. So I ask, "How much of my car would you need to find in order for you to identify it as my stolen car?".

 

"Well", they say, "if we recovered the whole car but it didn't have your registration in it, we would not be able to identify this as your car."

 

"Nonsense" I reply.

 

"Perhaps we would know it was your car, but a good lawyer he would be able to convince a jury there was a reasonable doubt. And the law says that you need the registration to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this is your car."

 

"But it is my car. You can see the stain on the seat where I dropped my ice cream."

Link to comment

This happened to me about a year and a half ago. I found a lock-n-lock lid, and some swag. No logbook whatsoever. I put the lid and the remaining swag neatly under the wooden pedestrian bridge where the hint said the cache should be, and logged a DNF. You know what? Had there been an intact logbook in a nice baggie, I probably would have logged that sucker. Call me a Puritan. B)

 

If the log weren't in a baggie I guess you'd have also logged DNF? So in your mind, it comes down to the baggie? Really? ;)

 

I don't think I'd have logged a find in the case you mentioned either, fwiw. Perhaps if the lid had been camo'd or labeled, but part of a container, no log of any sort (signable or not), and random stuff (possible swag) doesn't seem like compelling evidence of a find to me either, especially since what you found wasn't in the probable hiding place either, although it was nearby.

 

Misunderstanding. It's not like I consider a baggie some sort of container or anything. I just threw that in there because it would have provided protection for the hypothetical still present logbook. You know, it could have been rained on, or saturated by daily overnite dew, etc.. There was no logbook, so there was no find for me.

 

Take that you Danes. You're all a bunch of slackers over there. :huh:

 

I knew what you meant - just giving you a hard time. I found the idea that a baggie would be the final bit of evidence that would let you log "found it" to be amusing, is all. Even if that were the case, there's nothing wrong with that - we all have to draw the line somewhere, since the rules are written in a somewhat ambiguous way.

Link to comment

I logged it as a find because I found were the co placed the cache honestly I feel comfortable saying I found it,

Let's say you were grabbing a few caches and you returned to where you parked your car only to find it gone. You report it as stolen and a few days later the police call to let you know they've recovered your vehicle. You go to the police station and the Desk Sargeant hands you a steering wheel and a hubcap and says, "here's your car." Would you honestly feel comfortable saying the police had found your vehicle? How would you feel if your insurance company agreed?

How about someone gave you an ice cream cone, but before you ate the whole thing you dropped it? Later you posted on their ice cream page how you only took one lick before you dropped the cone, but that from what you tasted it was pretty good. Then they delete your log because you didn't eat the whole thing. The rules say "you can post an online tasted it log once you have eaten the cone" but since you didn't finish that would be cheating.

What in the Wide World of Sports does that have to do with anything? If you have to strain that hard to pass a metaphor, you should seek immediate medical attention.

 

And It's not cheating. It's smiley fraud.

Ice cream analogies are always spot on. [;)] But the more I think about it the more your car analogy needs a serious response.

 

So let's say may car was stolen and a few days later the police call to say that they arrested some guy trying to sell a steering wheel and a hubcap. However, they are not going to press charges since they can't prove it was my car (or any other stolen car). And they won't give me the steering wheel or the hubcap either. So I ask, "How much of my car would you need to find in order for you to identify it as my stolen car?".

 

"Well", they say, "if we recovered the whole car but it didn't have your registration in it, we would not be able to identify this as your car."

 

"Nonsense" I reply.

 

"Perhaps we would know it was your car, but a good lawyer he would be able to convince a jury there was a reasonable doubt. And the law says that you need the registration to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this is your car."

 

"But it is my car. You can see the stain on the seat where I dropped my ice cream."

 

Actually the problem with his analogy is that a car has a VIN. The police would be highly unlikely, in my opinion, to say "we found your car" unless they found some portion of it with a VIN. There are reasons vehicles have identifying information like this - because there is a serious need for verification when crimes are commited.

 

In the case of a geocache - we have pen and paper logs that most CO's never check. There is no absolute requirement that you even label your geocache - although you are supposed to do that. But nobody will check that either. Oh yeah, that's totally comparable...

 

It is my contention that if Groundspeak really cared about verification of people's finds, then there are any number of things they could do to implement such things. (Conceivably they could make money off the deal, even.) However, since they have done no such things, and leave lots of wiggle room in the guidelines, then I have to conclude that they would prefer we all play by the rules, but not enough to force us to do so. Since they are pretty obviously not bent out of shape about this, I don't see any reason to get upset about it either.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...