Jump to content

Logging a cache as a find that've you placed with an owner, but didn't technically "find" it.


Recommended Posts

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

There you go. It's not cheesy if you don't look. Seriously. Lots of people do what 4DD describe.

Link to comment

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

That doesn't really meet the criteria that the OP stipulated. "a cache as a find that've [sic] you placed with an owner" implies to me that you saw that owner actually place the container. Outside the context of losing ones car keys, if you saw where something was hidden, calling it a "beta find" and as a justification for posting a Found It log still sounds pretty cheesy to me.

Link to comment

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

That doesn't really meet the criteria that the OP stipulated. "a cache as a find that've [sic] you placed with an owner" implies to me that you saw that owner actually place the container. Outside the context of losing ones car keys, if you saw where something was hidden, calling it a "beta find" and as a justification for posting a Found It log still sounds pretty cheesy to me.

I wasn't trying to meet any criteria :rolleyes: , I was just saying go for it and stated how we do it around here. Why is it cheesy? You were there when the cache was hidden, so what you're never suspose to log the cache ever for a find. Man this is just a game that some people take way too serious. I dont see a beta find as cheesy, I look at it as helping out the cache owner and future cachers to come up with the best coords as possible. What I see as cheesy is worring what other people claim as a find and calling them cheesy is cheesy. Want some crackers with all the cheese. :laughing:

Link to comment

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

That doesn't really meet the criteria that the OP stipulated. "a cache as a find that've [sic] you placed with an owner" implies to me that you saw that owner actually place the container. Outside the context of losing ones car keys, if you saw where something was hidden, calling it a "beta find" and as a justification for posting a Found It log still sounds pretty cheesy to me.

I wasn't trying to meet any criteria :rolleyes: , I was just saying go for it and stated how we do it around here. Why is it cheesy? You were there when the cache was hidden, so what you're never suspose to log the cache ever for a find. Man this is just a game that some people take way too serious. I dont see a beta find as cheesy, I look at it as helping out the cache owner and future cachers to come up with the best coords as possible. What I see as cheesy is worring what other people claim as a find and calling them cheesy is cheesy. Want some crackers with all the cheese. :laughing:

 

I am going to agree with my fellow New Yawker here. I feel the classic Beta testing is much different from being present when the cache was put in it's hiding spot, while coordinates are being obtain, heck, maybe they even helped to, or choose the hiding spot themselves. The kind of thing you might expect to see helping a child, or a new cacher hide their first cache, for example. I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to Beta testing as cheesy. Now maybe if you gleefully claimed FTF, that would tick a few people off. See current thread. :P

Link to comment

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

That doesn't really meet the criteria that the OP stipulated. "a cache as a find that've [sic] you placed with an owner" implies to me that you saw that owner actually place the container. Outside the context of losing ones car keys, if you saw where something was hidden, calling it a "beta find" and as a justification for posting a Found It log still sounds pretty cheesy to me.

I wasn't trying to meet any criteria :rolleyes: , I was just saying go for it and stated how we do it around here. Why is it cheesy? You were there when the cache was hidden, so what you're never suspose to log the cache ever for a find. Man this is just a game that some people take way too serious. I dont see a beta find as cheesy, I look at it as helping out the cache owner and future cachers to come up with the best coords as possible. What I see as cheesy is worring what other people claim as a find and calling them cheesy is cheesy. Want some crackers with all the cheese. :laughing:

 

I am going to agree with my fellow New Yawker here. I feel the classic Beta testing is much different from being present when the cache was put in it's hiding spot, while coordinates are being obtain, heck, maybe they even helped to, or choose the hiding spot themselves. The kind of thing you might expect to see helping a child, or a new cacher hide their first cache, for example. I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to Beta testing as cheesy. Now maybe if you gleefully claimed FTF, that would tick a few people off. See current thread. :P

LOL at the FTF. :laughing: I guess I'm just more kick back when it comes to caching these days and I owe it all to threads like this. :laughing:

 

Besides it not about the points numbers here. ;)

Edited by the4dirtydogs
Link to comment

When I helped an owner hide his cache, I didn't log it. Instead, it went on my Ignore List.

 

YUP!

 

Now if I was out with someone and they said 'Wait here in the car while I hide a cache', and they were gone for 20-30 minutes and came back to ask me to beta test and the cache was something like 0.1 miles away I would log that one as a beta tester.

 

If I'm standing there watching him hide the cache, then logging the 'find' is not something I would consider...other than perhaps a note.

 

Of course, it's between the owner and the logger...no matter what anyone else says.

Link to comment

Besides it not about the points numbers here. ;)

 

If it's not about the numbers then in shouldn't matter if don't log a find for beta testing a hide. On the other hand, if it's really not about the numbers it shouldn't matter if you *do* log a find for beta testing a hide. I'll retract the cheesy comment, and not just because I haven't had dinner yet and it's making me hungry.

However, I will suggest that given the vast disparity in what geocachers consider to be a find, that "beta finds" are yet another example of why ones find count is meaningless.

Link to comment

Besides it not about the points numbers here. ;)

 

If it's not about the numbers then in shouldn't matter if don't log a find for beta testing a hide. On the other hand, if it's really not about the numbers it shouldn't matter if you *do* log a find for beta testing a hide. I'll retract the cheesy comment, and not just because I haven't had dinner yet and it's making me hungry.

However, I will suggest that given the vast disparity in what geocachers consider to be a find, that "beta finds" are yet another example of why ones find count is meaningless.

That was kinda an inside joke between Mr.Yuck and I. But yeah I dont care about the number either now that I'm at 10,000 cache finds. :laughing: I'm the type that doesn't care what other consider a find or don't care how others cache anymore, just as long as they're having fun and that's all that matters. :D Have a great weekend. :)

Link to comment

I'm not so sure. You DID find it after all. I think it's like logging your own hides, you could do it but we all know it's not really in the spirit of the game. If you must do it, at least let someone claim FTF on it before you log it, or wait until you are with a group and let them find it, you sign the log and claim the smiley

Link to comment

It's fine if that's what you want to do. It doesn't hurt anyone. I see it as no different than PAFs and CO nudges. I don't play that way, but it's the way the game has gone. Not to side track, but I do think that PAFs and CO nudges alter the history of the cache to the extent that the ratio of Found to DNF is not reflective of reality. It kind of misstates the difficulty of making a find based upon the published info.

Link to comment

Thanks guys. I wasn't really sure what to think of it. I've never logged it as I see it kind of takes the fun outta it. Usually go back with someone who hasn't found it and find it again, letting them find it. Got me thinking when I was trying to reach a certain goal before the summer is over. I guess when you start looking at numbers it's all about that, but the game isn't about numbers now really, is it? To each his own.

Link to comment

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

That doesn't really meet the criteria that the OP stipulated. "a cache as a find that've [sic] you placed with an owner" implies to me that you saw that owner actually place the container. Outside the context of losing ones car keys, if you saw where something was hidden, calling it a "beta find" and as a justification for posting a Found It log still sounds pretty cheesy to me.

I wasn't trying to meet any criteria :rolleyes: , I was just saying go for it and stated how we do it around here. Why is it cheesy? You were there when the cache was hidden, so what you're never suspose to log the cache ever for a find. Man this is just a game that some people take way too serious. I dont see a beta find as cheesy, I look at it as helping out the cache owner and future cachers to come up with the best coords as possible. What I see as cheesy is worring what other people claim as a find and calling them cheesy is cheesy. Want some crackers with all the cheese. :laughing:

 

+1

Link to comment

So if the three of us help a friend put out a power trail, each hiding every fourth find, and then come back and claim 3/4's of the trail as beta finds, would that be beta rolling? :rolleyes: I don't see an issue with beta finds. You don't own the cache and even if you helped place the cache I don't care. Happens around here a lot and I don't see many people getting upset about it.

Link to comment

So if the three of us help a friend put out a power trail, each hiding every fourth find, and then come back and claim 3/4's of the trail as beta finds, would that be beta rolling? :rolleyes: I don't see an issue with beta finds. You don't own the cache and even if you helped place the cache I don't care. Happens around here a lot and I don't see many people getting upset about it.

 

That's a slightly different situation as each person was only actually involved with hiding 1 out of 4 of the caches. I think the OP was referring to caches that you were involved with hiding. It that case I'm with CanadianRockies, I put them on my ignore list.

 

 

The dead horse is back where's my stick.

 

It isn't a dead horse for someone who isn't a forum regular.

Link to comment

If you say that you can't log a cache when you saw the owner hide it, because you didn't "find" it, then you can never go group caching and log a cache that someone else found in front of you. If you start getting that literal, I think that it takes a lot of fun out geocaching.

Link to comment

So if the three of us help a friend put out a power trail, each hiding every fourth find, and then come back and claim 3/4's of the trail as beta finds, would that be beta rolling? :rolleyes: I don't see an issue with beta finds. You don't own the cache and even if you helped place the cache I don't care. Happens around here a lot and I don't see many people getting upset about it.

 

That's a slightly different situation as each person was only actually involved with hiding 1 out of 4 of the caches. I think the OP was referring to caches that you were involved with hiding. It that case I'm with CanadianRockies, I put them on my ignore list.

 

 

The dead horse is back where's my stick.

 

It isn't a dead horse for someone who isn't a forum regular.

 

Dead horses don't come back to life because someone new walks by there still dead

Link to comment

I've been debating logging a cache as found that I helped my son hide. It's been out for 6 months or so, so it's not like I'd be claiming FTF for anything. I helped him every step of the way, choosing the location, applying camo, etc. so there wasn't anything for me to 'find', but I'm annoyed by it every time I look for caches in my area that I haven't found and it's near the top of the list. I need to make that map dot go away! :)

Edited by Aurock
Link to comment

I've been debating logging a cache as found that I helped my son hide. It's been out for 6 months or so, so it's not like I'd be claiming FTF for anything. I helped him every step of the way, choosing the location, applying camo, etc. so there wasn't anything for me to 'find', but I'm annoyed by it every time I look for caches in my area that I haven't found and it's near the top of the list. I need to make that map dot go away! :)

In the top-right corner of every cache listing page is a box labeled "Navigation." Inside that box is an "Ignore Listing" link, which should solve your problem nicely.

Link to comment

I say go for it. We call that a beta find around here. Usually log the find after the first cachers log it. You input the coords and walk 100 feet away or so and head back to the cache to check the coords for the owner.

 

There you go. It's not cheesy if you don't look. Seriously. Lots of people do what 4DD describe.

 

First time I cached with a group in 2005 I was told that this was the way that it is done, and it's what I and pretty much every cacher I have hiked with has done since. I'm surprised to find that "most" people think that it is cheesy, as I have probably met over 100 cachers and they all do it the same way. Maybe it's a regional thing?

Link to comment

The day I have to tell anyone that numbers don't matter and it doesn't affect them , to justify logging a cache...

 

 

bd

That's the crux. You are using a different language that those who want to log these caches as found. To you the find count is, if not a score, then at least a statement that the cache was found according to the definition you have as found.

 

Most of the people I know who log finds like this do so only because the numbers don't matter. So it's not all that important what sort of definition one uses in deciding to post a find log online. Some may use the the definition that they signed the log in the in the cache. Others may use a definition that they were out geocaching and since only one person is credited with hiding a cache, the others can use the find log as a way of recording their participation. For many, the find log is more of way of checking off the caches they've "done". Since they were there when it was placed, this cache is one they've completed and won't be looking for.

 

It boggles my mind that anyone can be so sure that people who log these finds do it "for the numbers" and that if they say otherwise they are lying. It's beyond me to see how any intelligent person can believe that the numbers matter. And since they don't matter, then why care what other people people post as finds as long as they are not interfering with the game.

Link to comment

If you say that you can't log a cache when you saw the owner hide it, because you didn't "find" it, then you can never go group caching and log a cache that someone else found in front of you. If you start getting that literal, I think that it takes a lot of fun out geocaching.

 

In other words, Ambrosia has logged caches as finds that she helped hide. :laughing: I think there are some regional norms at play regarding doing this, and I'm about to give an example of another one to "refute" your statement. In my area, it is quote common, while out group caching, for people to walk away after they have spotted the cache, and wait for everyone else to see it.

 

True story, I kid you not. The world famous Alamogul cached with my party of 5 after GW one year, and he played along with us on this. We didn't ask him to, he noticed we did it, and he rolled with it. :)

Link to comment

I've been debating logging a cache as found that I helped my son hide. It's been out for 6 months or so, so it's not like I'd be claiming FTF for anything. I helped him every step of the way, choosing the location, applying camo, etc. so there wasn't anything for me to 'find', but I'm annoyed by it every time I look for caches in my area that I haven't found and it's near the top of the list. I need to make that map dot go away! :)

 

You can use the ignore list and BINGO, it's gone.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I've been debating logging a cache as found that I helped my son hide. It's been out for 6 months or so, so it's not like I'd be claiming FTF for anything. I helped him every step of the way, choosing the location, applying camo, etc. so there wasn't anything for me to 'find', but I'm annoyed by it every time I look for caches in my area that I haven't found and it's near the top of the list. I need to make that map dot go away! :)

 

You can use the ignore list and BINGO, it's gone.

 

I did not help, but rather hid myself, two caches under a sock puppet account (a real sock puppet, a Geocaching mascot puppet). I put them on my ignore list, while at the same time putting them on my watchlist. Yes, this works. You get all the emails.

 

EDIT: P.S. long since archived. I hid them in like 2006, and killed them by around 2010.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

If you say that you can't log a cache when you saw the owner hide it, because you didn't "find" it, then you can never go group caching and log a cache that someone else found in front of you. If you start getting that literal, I think that it takes a lot of fun out geocaching.

 

In other words, Ambrosia has logged caches as finds that she helped hide. :laughing: I think there are some regional norms at play regarding doing this, and I'm about to give an example of another one to "refute" your statement. In my area, it is quote common, while out group caching, for people to walk away after they have spotted the cache, and wait for everyone else to see it.

 

True story, I kid you not. The world famous Alamogul cached with my party of 5 after GW one year, and he played along with us on this. We didn't ask him to, he noticed we did it, and he rolled with it. :)

 

;)

 

We do it both ways in the NW, depending on the circumstances. When I'm caching with family and close friends we tend to forego waiting for everyone to find the cache. When caching with others, people tend to do the polite thing and wait for everyone, unless we all agree to not bother. Forget going to a cache machine, those are free for alls! :anicute:

Link to comment

It boggles my mind that anyone can be so sure that people who log these finds do it "for the numbers" and that if they say otherwise they are lying.

 

If someone just logs the occasional gimme cache I might agree. The continued practice of (ahem) finding usually spells out their intentions of logging for numbers. I find they are the most creative in giving reasons why they can and that everyone else should just mind their own bidness! Nothing boggling about it at all.

 

You know, like the time this one guy threw down a cache on a dnf and his buddies all logged it and they trashed the owner for having an issue with it? Or the time this guy tossed out a cache of his own and when it needed maintenance he told people to get a life.

 

(oh wait that was the same guy)

Edited by BlueDeuce
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...