"Finding" your own cache

[+tozainamboku]

Very good points, but I just want to point out that Groundspeak seems to agree with my interpretation of a find:

It is considered "bad form" to log a find on your own cache, no matter when you do it. The same is true if you re-visit another traditional cache (for example to place or retrieve a travel bug). Use the "post a note" log option to record your visit in these circumstances.

 

In either case, you're not "finding" a cache because you already know where it is. Save the smiley face for use when you've truly discovered a hidden cache.

Groundspeak says a lot of things that make little sense (or at least require them to issue a clarification from time to time).

 

My guess is that they would like a definition that reserves the Found It and DNF logs for when you go out and hunt a cache. The Owner maintenance log is reserved for owners doing maintenance on caches. And one can also post a a note in other cases.

 

Some lackey trying to post a reason not to use the Found log on one's own cache copied a phrase that became popular on the forums first "You can't find something if you already know where it is".

Or, just maybe they used that phrase because they agreed with it?

It's quite possible the lackey believes this.

 

When Groundspeak was smaller and Jeremy reviewed all the guidelines and such, you would seldom if ever see them trying to imply there was certain way to play the game. And Jeremy's twisted knickers comments are recent enough that I have to believe it is still his intent not to have Groundspeak become the arbiter of what is a find or of when you can log your own cache. However early on the FAQ did include something about it being considered bad form.

 

In recent times, most of the work on the FAQ and the Help Center has been done by a Groundspeak employee with the title of Customer Relations Specialist or something similar. Even if the company takes time to review these posts (which I'm not sure of), they probably are going to give this person enough responsibility to let them make a claim that you can't find something you hid.

 

As an experienced geocacher, I know that cache owners often have trouble finding their own caches. I've found the original a few times where a cache owner had left a replacement when they thought their cache was missing. On my own caches, I know that I've had to search for them on occasion when doing maintenance. Sometimes it's even taken multiple trips. I also know there are team accounts, there are a few grandfathered moving caches, some people will log a find on their challenge caches, and that sometimes people adopt a cache they haven't yet found.

 

Rather than a phrase that, IMO, is clearly untrue; I'd prefer a statement that while logging your own cache is generally considered bad form, the ability to do so is there from the rare occasions when you feel it's appropriate. Will there be some people who decide that it's appropriate for every cache or even for every maintenance visit? Probably. But I can't get too fired up about it.

[+The A-Team]

I have two caches adopted, one of which I've never logged a found for. Could I "legally" log a found on my own cache? It feels a bit weird to me so I'll leave it as it is.

That's pretty much what this entire discussion is about. If you found it before you were the owner, well, that's just a regular find, even though you're now the owner. I think everyone has agreed on that. It's the matter of logging a find on a cache at the time that you're the owner that's under discussion.

 

Honestly, adopting a cache I've never found isn't something I would ever contemplate. I'd rather know what I'm getting into before taking on the responsibility. But that's a matter for another day...

[+The Leprechauns]

Very good points, but I just want to point out that Groundspeak seems to agree with my interpretation of a find:

It is considered "bad form" to log a find on your own cache, no matter when you do it. The same is true if you re-visit another traditional cache (for example to place or retrieve a travel bug). Use the "post a note" log option to record your visit in these circumstances.

 

In either case, you're not "finding" a cache because you already know where it is. Save the smiley face for use when you've truly discovered a hidden cache.

Groundspeak says a lot of things that make little sense (or at least require them to issue a clarification from time to time).

 

My guess is that they would like a definition that reserves the Found It and DNF logs for when you go out and hunt a cache. The Owner maintenance log is reserved for owners doing maintenance on caches. And one can also post a a note in other cases.

 

Some lackey trying to post a reason not to use the Found log on one's own cache copied a phrase that became popular on the forums first "You can't find something if you already know where it is".

Or, just maybe they used that phrase because they agreed with it?

It's quite possible the lackey believes this.

 

When Groundspeak was smaller and Jeremy reviewed all the guidelines and such, you would seldom if ever see them trying to imply there was certain way to play the game. And Jeremy's twisted knickers comments are recent enough that I have to believe it is still his intent not to have Groundspeak become the arbiter of what is a find or of when you can log your own cache. However early on the FAQ did include something about it being considered bad form.

 

In recent times, most of the work on the FAQ and the Help Center has been done by a Groundspeak employee with the title of Customer Relations Specialist or something similar. Even if the company takes time to review these posts (which I'm not sure of), they probably are going to give this person enough responsibility to let them make a claim that you can't find something you hid.

 

As an experienced geocacher, I know that cache owners often have trouble finding their own caches. I've found the original a few times where a cache owner had left a replacement when they thought their cache was missing. On my own caches, I know that I've had to search for them on occasion when doing maintenance. Sometimes it's even taken multiple trips. I also know there are team accounts, there are a few grandfathered moving caches, some people will log a find on their challenge caches, and that sometimes people adopt a cache they haven't yet found.

 

Rather than a phrase that, IMO, is clearly untrue; I'd prefer a statement that while logging your own cache is generally considered bad form, the ability to do so is there from the rare occasions when you feel it's appropriate. Will there be some people who decide that it's appropriate for every cache or even for every maintenance visit? Probably. But I can't get too fired up about it.

Before you unleash any more tl;dr, please take time to do your research. While it's seemingly fun for you to spin elaborate theories about Lackeys' motives and decision-making, facts can be just as fun.

 

Your research will disclose that I authored the quoted statement, on March 26, 2003, months before I became a Groundspeak volunteer. While the post has been edited as recently as 2010, the purpose of the edit was simply to point the reader to the equivalent Knowledge Book page.

 

My post captured the general sentiment at the time. I wrote it in a genuine effort to be helpful to CO's who didn't know how to use a "note" log to record maintenance visits (this was before the advent of the "Owner Maintenance" log), or how to drop a travel bug into the inventory of a newly hidden cache (this was before "visit" logs, dropoffs from a menu in a log, etc.). I think that, more than nine years later, my original words continue to capture an elegant, simple summary of commonly accepted etiquette.

[+AneMae]

It is neither "elegant" nor commonly "accepted".

[Pup Patrol]

It is neither "elegant" nor commonly "accepted".

 

Well, yeah, if you like to post "found it" logs for your own archived caches, that's kind of an expected response.

 

 

 

B.

[knowschad]

It is neither "elegant" nor commonly "accepted".

 

OhhhhhhhKAY!!

[+J the Goat]

Potentially. He's pointing out a potential positive, not supporting repetitive logging of one's own cache.

 

It's actually not a bad reason to log one's own cache. I still think it's cheesy and 99.8% of the time done either by new cachers who do it by mistake or by numbers hounds who care about nothing more than how many smilies they have. I just don't think it's quite fair to twist somebody's words around to make them sound like they support a practice.

If you go back and read his full post, I think you'll see that Toz isn't just pointing out a potential positive; he apparently thinks it's a good reason to log a find on ones own cache. He says "You can't find something if you already know where it is" is a poor reason for discouraging owners from logging their caches. He then lists what he apparently believes are several good reasons for owners to log finds on their own caches, including the one I quoted. Maybe I'm misunderstanding his explanation, but I'm certainly not twisting Toz's words.

 

You think this is "actually not a bad reason to log one's own cache." I disagree. While I believe it's helpful to inform people that your cache is okay, I don't feel you need to post "Found It" logs to do this. An Owner's Maintenance log conveys this information.

 

I'll rephrase, as I don't think there is a good reason. This is the closest I've seen to a good reason to log your own cache. I still won't do it, and find it very silly to do so.

[+hzoi]

Unsurprisingly, I see most folks in this thread saying either they never do it or that there are rare occasions when they've done it. And then there's...this.

 

Winning....Why yes I am! Thank you for asking.

 

 

AneMae, did you read the last line on that photo when you posted it?

 

Mind if I direct your attention to it again?

[+luvvinbird]

I have two caches adopted, one of which I've never logged a found for. Could I "legally" log a found on my own cache? It feels a bit weird to me so I'll leave it as it is.

That's pretty much what this entire discussion is about. If you found it before you were the owner, well, that's just a regular find, even though you're now the owner. I think everyone has agreed on that. It's the matter of logging a find on a cache at the time that you're the owner that's under discussion.

 

Honestly, adopting a cache I've never found isn't something I would ever contemplate. I'd rather know what I'm getting into before taking on the responsibility. But that's a matter for another day...

I guess I made it sound as though I have no idea where it is, lol. Not so, just never logged it as found.

[+The A-Team]

It is neither "elegant" nor commonly "accepted".

Funny, in all the areas I've cached, I don't recall seeing owner-finds plastered all over cache pages. I could probably count on one hand the number of caches I've seen where the CO had logged a find (before looking at yours in the course of this discussion). That doesn't say to me that this is "not commonly accepted". On the contrary, it tells me this is very nearly universally accepted.

[+tozainamboku]

Before you unleash any more tl;dr, please take time to do your research. While it's seemingly fun for you to spin elaborate theories about Lackeys' motives and decision-making, facts can be just as fun.

 

Your research will disclose that I authored the quoted statement, on March 26, 2003, months before I became a Groundspeak volunteer. While the post has been edited as recently as 2010, the purpose of the edit was simply to point the reader to the equivalent Knowledge Book page.

 

My post captured the general sentiment at the time. I wrote it in a genuine effort to be helpful to CO's who didn't know how to use a "note" log to record maintenance visits (this was before the advent of the "Owner Maintenance" log), or how to drop a travel bug into the inventory of a newly hidden cache (this was before "visit" logs, dropoffs from a menu in a log, etc.). I think that, more than nine years later, my original words continue to capture an elegant, simple summary of commonly accepted etiquette.

Actually, in the correct context the statement isn't that controversial.

 

It says "You can't find something if you already know where it is."

 

While it does depend on a particular definition of find (discover might be a better word in this case), it implies that unless you have discovered a cache, the "found it" online log is probably a bad choice. There does seem to be a majority feeling that geocaching is supposed to be about going out and finding caches others have hidden and about hiding cache for others to find. If you spent all time hiding caches for yourself to find yourself, it would become boring pretty quickly. Most people understand this even without a catchy phrase.

 

The issue that I have is when a quote from an individual (especially a highly respected member of the geocaching community) is used in conjunction with a guideline or a help center article, is that it takes on a more "official" tone, rather than representing the opinion of an individual. Both this quote and briansnat's one on choosing a location for your cache can be presented as the opinions of highly respected geocacher and with some explaination can be used to encourage a certain behavior. But unless Groundspeak really intends to make this an "official" rule they plan on enforcing, they should acknowledge that there are other opinions in the community as well. For now at least, cache owners can log their own caches if they think they have a reason to do so, and they can hide caches in strip mall parking lots under lamppost skirts, just because there is no other cache within 528 feet.

Edited August 15, 2012 by tozainamboku

[+Glenn]

If you spent all time hiding caches for yourself to find yourself, it would become boring pretty quickly. Most people understand this even without a catchy phrase.

I imagine if you were Ten Second Tom you'd never get tired of finding your own geocaches. However, remembering to log them might be a challenge.

[+Keith Watson]

Thanks for the chuckle.

 

If you spent all time hiding caches for yourself to find yourself, it would become boring pretty quickly. Most people understand this even without a catchy phrase.

I imagine if you were Ten Second Tom you'd never get tired of finding your own geocaches. However, remembering to log them might be a challenge.

[knowschad]

The issue that I have is when a quote from an individual (especially a highly respected member of the geocaching community) is used in conjunction with a guideline or a help center article, is that it takes on a more "official" tone, rather than representing the opinion of an individual.

 

link

[+tozainamboku]

The issue that I have is when a quote from an individual (especially a highly respected member of the geocaching community) is used in conjunction with a guideline or a help center article, is that it takes on a more "official" tone, rather than representing the opinion of an individual.

 

link

Fair enough. Just because Jeremy says there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist doesn't mean it is an official Groundspeak policy to not get your knickers in a twist.

[+pa79]

I think you shouldn't be able to find your own caches. If you found them before you adopted them, it's okay because you didn't own them at the time. As the owner you're supposed to know where the cache's hidden, so how can you find them if you know their location? And if you're logging the caches because they had been misplaced and you "found" them? Well, are you really going to log it each time someone places it somewhere else? That would be ridiculous.

[+Ma & Pa]

I know of a couple of situations where geocachers have logged their own caches.

 

* A few years ago, a group of cachers were on a caching trip and did a series of 50 or more caches down a country road. The cache owner claimed they did not handle the caches properly (not closing properly, etc) and deleted all their finds. The cachers simply logged an equivalent number of finds on one of their own archived caches, indicating in the log which cache that log represented.

 

* A few months ago I was chatting at an event with a cacher from a nearby community. He informed me that he claims a find on his own caches if he has to go and do maintenance. His reasoning is that he had to use his gps to go and find it, so he is entitled to claim it. I listened but did not comment. If that i how he wants to play, it is none of my business

 

PA

[+J the Goat]

I know of a couple of situations where geocachers have logged their own caches.

 

* A few years ago, a group of cachers were on a caching trip and did a series of 50 or more caches down a country road. The cache owner claimed they did not handle the caches properly (not closing properly, etc) and deleted all their finds. The cachers simply logged an equivalent number of finds on one of their own archived caches, indicating in the log which cache that log represented.

 

* A few months ago I was chatting at an event with a cacher from a nearby community. He informed me that he claims a find on his own caches if he has to go and do maintenance. His reasoning is that he had to use his gps to go and find it, so he is entitled to claim it. I listened but did not comment. If that i how he wants to play, it is none of my business

 

PA

 

They should have contacted Groundspeak and had the logs re-instated, that's a silly reason.

 

Of course he is, why wouldn't he be? More silliness....

[+tozainamboku]

I think you shouldn't be able to find your own caches. If you found them before you adopted them, it's okay because you didn't own them at the time. As the owner you're supposed to know where the cache's hidden, so how can you find them if you know their location? And if you're logging the caches because they had been misplaced and you "found" them? Well, are you really going to log it each time someone places it somewhere else? That would be ridiculous.

I think there have been a number of examples where the owner went to do maintenance and found the cache is a different place then where he left it. And of course even is the cache is right where you left it, you can still say the you "found it right where you left it" - particular after someone else has DNF'd it. Despite Keystone's aphorism, you can find something if you know where it is.

 

As far as someone logging their own cache each time it's misplaced, what is so ridiculous about this. Is the find count a score and logging your own cache multiple times some how messes up the score?

 

I believe that most geocachers will log a cache only once and will not log their own caches. But some do because to them it fits their definitions of "find". We each have our own definition. What I will call the "purist" definition is not a very good general definition of finding a cache. It works only as good definition for expressing a particular goal in this game, which is to find many different caches placed by other cachers. If this is your goal then of course it makes little sense to log your own cache or log a cache more than once as your find count then includes finds that are not part of that goal.

 

 

I know of a couple of situations where geocachers have logged their own caches.

 

* A few years ago, a group of cachers were on a caching trip and did a series of 50 or more caches down a country road. The cache owner claimed they did not handle the caches properly (not closing properly, etc) and deleted all their finds. The cachers simply logged an equivalent number of finds on one of their own archived caches, indicating in the log which cache that log represented.

 

* A few months ago I was chatting at an event with a cacher from a nearby community. He informed me that he claims a find on his own caches if he has to go and do maintenance. His reasoning is that he had to use his gps to go and find it, so he is entitled to claim it. I listened but did not comment. If that i how he wants to play, it is none of my business

 

PA

 

They should have contacted Groundspeak and had the logs re-instated, that's a silly reason.

 

Of course he is, why wouldn't he be? More silliness....

 

It's possible that this occurred before Groundspeak got itself in the business of re-instating logs. Prior to the silliness of saying "Physical caches can be logged online as 'Found' once the physical log has been signed," Groundspeak did not routinely re-instate logs. On the contrary, they would often suggest that you log a find on your own cache if a cache owner unjustly deleted your log and keeping your count "correct" was important to you.

Edited August 19, 2012 by tozainamboku

[+Don_J]

 

I think there have been a number of examples where the owner went to do maintenance and found the cache is a different place then where he left it. And of course even is the cache is right where you left it, you can still say the you "found it right where you left it" - particular after someone else has DNF'd it. Despite Keystone's aphorism, you can find something if you know where it is.

 

As far as someone logging their own cache each time it's misplaced, what is so ridiculous about this. Is the find count a score and logging your own cache multiple times some how messes up the score?

 

I believe that most geocachers will log a cache only once and will not log their own caches. But some do because to them it fits their definitions of "find". We each have our own definition. What I will call the "purist" definition is not a very good general definition of finding a cache. It works only as good definition for expressing a particular goal in this game, which is to find many different caches placed by other cachers. If this is your goal then of course it makes little sense to log your own cache or log a cache more than once as your find count then includes finds that are not part of that goal.

 

 

Here is one of my recent logs:

I found my original container, with my original log, hidden in the original spot, in the original fashion. Standing over it, my GPSr was reading 3'. Don't be confused by the "rock art", trail side, 30' away. That is not GZ.

 

I also scoured the area but could not find the so called replacement cache.

 

I think this describes exactly what happened. I found my cache. It doesn't matter if I knew where to look. What matters is that I found it where I looked. Knowing where to look just made finding it easier. Of course, keeping with proper protocol, I simply enabled the cache and did not post a Found It log.

 

What amazes me is that some on this forum seem to want it both ways. They want to revert to absolute literal definitions in a discussion on this topic, then they want to divert to the opposite of literal and suggest that you can't find something if you didn't have a pen with you to sign the log.

Edited August 20, 2012 by Don_J

[+jellis]

The only ones I have logged are the adopted ones. Feel you must find it before you adopt it.

[+J the Goat]

 

I think there have been a number of examples where the owner went to do maintenance and found the cache is a different place then where he left it. And of course even is the cache is right where you left it, you can still say the you "found it right where you left it" - particular after someone else has DNF'd it. Despite Keystone's aphorism, you can find something if you know where it is.

 

As far as someone logging their own cache each time it's misplaced, what is so ridiculous about this. Is the find count a score and logging your own cache multiple times some how messes up the score?

 

I believe that most geocachers will log a cache only once and will not log their own caches. But some do because to them it fits their definitions of "find". We each have our own definition. What I will call the "purist" definition is not a very good general definition of finding a cache. It works only as good definition for expressing a particular goal in this game, which is to find many different caches placed by other cachers. If this is your goal then of course it makes little sense to log your own cache or log a cache more than once as your find count then includes finds that are not part of that goal.

 

 

Here is one of my recent logs:

I found my original container, with my original log, hidden in the original spot, in the original fashion. Standing over it, my GPSr was reading 3'. Don't be confused by the "rock art", trail side, 30' away. That is not GZ.

 

I also scoured the area but could not find the so called replacement cache.

 

I think this describes exactly what happened. I found my cache. It doesn't matter if I knew where to look. What matters is that I found it where I looked. Knowing where to look just made finding it easier. Of course, keeping with proper protocol, I simply enabled the cache and did not post a Found It log.

 

What amazes me is that some on this forum seem to want it both ways. They want to revert to absolute literal definitions in a discussion on this topic, then they want to divert to the opposite of literal and suggest that you can't find something if you didn't have a pen with you to sign the log.

 

It's two seperate issues. If you don't have a pen, you'd better have another way to prove you found the cache. False found it logs can affect the way others play the game. Negatively. I really don't care what TOZ has to say, you're supposed to sign the log if you're going to log a find. You don't have to, the system allows for anyone to log any cache any time they wish. The right way to do it, however, is to sign then log.

 

If you want to log your own caches as found, that's all on you. What it boils down to though, is that for those folks, their numbers are so important to them that they'll engage in this silly practice just to make their numbers look that much better. So what? Should they? Not as far as I'm concerned. Is there a valid reason? Nope, not other than making themselves look better in their own eyes.

 

There's nothing that will be done to stop the practice. I don't even feel the need to. Heck, it gives me a reason to make fun of you. It shows me which cachers I probably don't want to go out caching with.

[knowschad]

The issue that I have is when a quote from an individual (especially a highly respected member of the geocaching community) is used in conjunction with a guideline or a help center article, is that it takes on a more "official" tone, rather than representing the opinion of an individual.

 

link

Fair enough. Just because Jeremy says there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist doesn't mean it is an official Groundspeak policy to not get your knickers in a twist.

 

Did you know that Walmart sells Puritan brand "knickers"?

[+hzoi]

The issue that I have is when a quote from an individual (especially a highly respected member of the geocaching community) is used in conjunction with a guideline or a help center article, is that it takes on a more "official" tone, rather than representing the opinion of an individual.

 

link

Fair enough. Just because Jeremy says there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist doesn't mean it is an official Groundspeak policy to not get your knickers in a twist.

 

Did you know that Walmart sells Puritan brand "knickers"?

 

But will these knickers match my hat?

 

[+ScooterDawg]

Ah yes! Opinions.... they're kind of like.... well, bellybuttons. Everybody's got one.

 

We find ours on a regular basis. Seems they like to 'migrate' at times. However, we don't use the "Found It" log.

 

I also find my bellybutton on a regular basis. It has never migrated, though...

[+tozainamboku]

 

It's two seperate issues. If you don't have a pen, you'd better have another way to prove you found the cache. False found it logs can affect the way others play the game. Negatively. I really don't care what TOZ has to say, you're supposed to sign the log if you're going to log a find. You don't have to, the system allows for anyone to log any cache any time they wish. The right way to do it, however, is to sign then log.

It might surprise you, but I tend to agree with this.

 

Often when someone logs their own cache or logs a cache multiple times, they aren't thinking "How can I bump up my find count?". Maybe they chose the wrong log by mistake; maybe they didn't know about the Write note, or Owner Maintenance log; or maybe they truly felt that a Found It log was the best way to share their geocaching experience. What I mostly object to is when some people can't seem to understand why anyone might have logged a Find other than than to bump up their find count. Despite what they sometimes say, these are the people who are acting as if the find count is the "score". Since I don't view the find count as a score, I am not bothered by someone using a Found log except in a few instances where the log might really impact on others ability to find a cache (or decide whether or not they should look for it). In those cases I agree that cache owner should remove the log.

[+3Woofs]

Simple Answer: NO

[+J the Goat]

 

It's two seperate issues. If you don't have a pen, you'd better have another way to prove you found the cache. False found it logs can affect the way others play the game. Negatively. I really don't care what TOZ has to say, you're supposed to sign the log if you're going to log a find. You don't have to, the system allows for anyone to log any cache any time they wish. The right way to do it, however, is to sign then log.

It might surprise you, but I tend to agree with this.

 

Only a little. I generally understand what you're trying to say in your novel posts, but they can be tough to follow at times

 

Often when someone logs their own cache or logs a cache multiple times, they aren't thinking "How can I bump up my find count?". Maybe they chose the wrong log by mistake; maybe they didn't know about the Write note, or Owner Maintenance log; or maybe they truly felt that a Found It log was the best way to share their geocaching experience. What I mostly object to is when some people can't seem to understand why anyone might have logged a Find other than than to bump up their find count. Despite what they sometimes say, these are the people who are acting as if the find count is the "score". Since I don't view the find count as a score, I am not bothered by someone using a Found log except in a few instances where the log might really impact on others ability to find a cache (or decide whether or not they should look for it). In those cases I agree that cache owner should remove the log.

 

I can see the mistakes, and the misunderstandings. I don't buy however, the CO's who "find" all their own caches, doing anything other than trying to make their numbers look good. There's no other reasonable excuse for a CO with 50 caches hidden to have finds on them all. We have one of those. Does it matter to me? Not aside from being mildly annoying, but it also gives me something to chuckle about. It makes no difference to me, but I certainly think it's in poor taste.

[+DaysJourney]

The first time I noticed CO 'found it' log, I thought it was silly. Obviously, by the number of comments, similar threads, etc. others think so as well. Because it is, well... silly.

[+bflentje]

The first time I noticed CO 'found it' log, I thought it was silly. Obviously, by the number of comments, similar threads, etc. others think so as well. Because it is, well... silly.

 

Of course it's silly. But the real question is why would anyone care?

[+Sta2Key]

I just found a cache tonight where I had 3 previous DNFs plus 3 DNFs from other cachers. The CO went to verify the cache was still there and logged a find on the website - twice. This by itself, I don't have an issue with because maybe the CO doesn't know he can write a note instead of logging it as found.

 

Tonight I found the cache after the owner realized that the coordinates were off by over 300 feet and posted the corrected coordinates. I did not expect to be the FTF since another cacher helped the CO find the correct coordinates. When I went to sign the log, the FTF was signed by the CO. The CO actually wrote "FTF" in his note about finding the cache to make sure it wasn't stolen.

 

I just thought it was odd that the CO would sign log as an FTF, but to each his own.

[+BlueDeuce]

but to each his own.

 

Too bad I've never seen a discussion here that kept someone from logging their own cache. The only saving grace is how ticked off they get at me for not giving them any respect.

[+CanadianRockies]

I just thought it was odd that the CO would sign log as an FTF, but to each his own.

What I find odd are those COs who "find" their own caches but don't log an FTF. Afterall, if hiding your cache is the same as finding it, then aren't you the FTF when you hide it?

[+OZ2CPU]

sometimes a CO needs to go and perform service,

I find it hard to find some of my own caches,

maybe it was along time I hide it, or it moved a few times during a lot of visits,

meybe even some found a better location for it nearby..

sometimes I feel I deserve a :-) for finding it,

but ok it is compleetly crasy, it is my own cache, so I CAN NOT FIND IT !!

[+Kryten]

There's no reason to get all hot under the collar. If somebody wants to find all of their own caches or find the same archived cache multiple times then leave them alone.

It's no different to a bald man with an impressive comb-over, it fools nobody and sends out exactly the opposite message to that which was intended.

[+M 5]

There's no reason to get all hot under the collar. If somebody wants to find all of their own caches or find the same archived cache multiple times then leave them alone.

It's no different to a bald man with an impressive comb-over, it fools nobody and sends out exactly the opposite message to that which was intended.

 

Wait a minute!!!! Are you saying that we can't make fun of guys with comb-overs?

[Mr.Yuck]

but to each his own.

 

Too bad I've never seen a discussion here that kept someone from logging their own cache. The only saving grace is how ticked off they get at me for not giving them any respect.

 

This thread is about 6 weeks old, but was bumped after almost a month, and I'm sure it was way off page 1 at the time. The OP, although they never made a second post to the thread, has not, 6 weeks later, logged any of her own caches as finds. So there you have it.

Edited September 24, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

[+matokuwapi]

It is neither "elegant" nor commonly "accepted".

 

Then why do you do it?

[Mr.Yuck]

It is neither "elegant" nor commonly "accepted".

 

Then why do you do it?

 

Zombie thread alert. (and just in time for the season, I might add). I suppose to be funny? Funny is in the eye of the beholder, I would think.

[+PseudoHybrid]

Is it ok to 'find' your own cache? I know some people do and some don't. I am wondering what the general consensus is on this.

 

I don't know about "consensus", nor do I really care. Are there people out there somewhere getting paid for their finds? Is there a tax break somewhere for having higher log numbers? Until there's some reason for me to concern myself with number of logged finds, I don't care what others do, simply because it doesn't harm my gaming experience in any way.

 

My log count is the only one I care about. Go ahead and log your own caches if you want to, or don’t. It’s your game, play it as you wish (as long as you aren’t a detriment to the experiences of others).

[Mr.Yuck]

Is it ok to 'find' your own cache? I know some people do and some don't. I am wondering what the general consensus is on this.

 

I don't know about "consensus", nor do I really care. Are there people out there somewhere getting paid for their finds? Is there a tax break somewhere for having higher log numbers? Until there's some reason for me to concern myself with number of logged finds, I don't care what others do, simply because it doesn't harm my gaming experience in any way.

 

My log count is the only one I care about. Go ahead and log your own caches if you want to, or don’t. It’s your game, play it as you wish (as long as you aren’t a detriment to the experiences of others).

 

That's a fine summation of the principles of Libertarian thinking. If it makes you feel good to say it, go for it. But the fact remains that an extremely, extremely small percentage of Geocachers log their own caches as finds. Probably in the .1 percent range. In my opinion, giving someome thinking of becoming was of these .1 percenters the advise of "go ahead do whatever you want it doesn't affect anyone" is advising them to do something way outside of the community norms, and considered taboo by the overwhelming majority of that community.

[+PseudoHybrid]

In my opinion, giving someome thinking of becoming was of these .1 percenters the advise of "go ahead do whatever you want it doesn't affect anyone" is advising them to do something way outside of the community norms, and considered taboo by the overwhelming majority of that community.

 

I'm not "advising" anyone to do anything. I'm sure there are people who log finds that they didn't really find (armchair logging) - I don't care about people doing that either, but I'm not "advising" anyone to do it.

[Mr.Yuck]

In my opinion, giving someome thinking of becoming was of these .1 percenters the advise of "go ahead do whatever you want it doesn't affect anyone" is advising them to do something way outside of the community norms, and considered taboo by the overwhelming majority of that community.

 

I'm not "advising" anyone to do anything. I'm sure there are people who log finds that they didn't really find (armchair logging) - I don't care about people doing that either, but I'm not "advising" anyone to do it.

 

OK, I'll accept that you're not advising.

 

I actually generally agree with the "it doesn't hurt anyone" philosophy in most things Geocaching. Just not from the log your own caches as finds angle. Statistically speaking, no one does it. Or just about no one.

[+howzitboy]

how would you even know if the owner logged a find? do you look at every log to see if they did?

[+hzoi]

how would you even know if the owner logged a find? do you look at every log to see if they did?

 

That's one technique, if you've got a lot of time on your hands and are unfettered by restraining orders.

 

More often it comes to light when one is looking at a particular cache and sees the owner's name both on the top of the page and in a found it log.

[+Totem Clan]

I have found several of my caches. However I found all of them before I owned them. Just make sure you don't judge someone just because they have found logs on one of their own caches.

Same here. I have 18 'finds' on my owned caches. Some are CITOs or Events that I attended. Others are caches I adopted after finding them.

 

(But finding something you hid..... No.)

[+Team Hugs]

I've seen one other exception to the "don't log your own cache" guideline which seems to work. Some of the local cachers here have put out a number of challenge caches. Sometimes, the owner will log their own cache after (re-)qualifying for the challenge ... in part, I suspect, because it's interesting to see how other people qualify for the challenge. (In some cases, the information can help others to qualify for the challenge later.)

 

However, they only do this for challenge caches (not their regular caches), and only after quite a few other folks have already logged the cache, so as to not interfere with other's enjoyment of a new cache (e.g. FTF hunting).

 

Of course, as with all things, your mileage may vary.

[+tozainamboku]

But the fact remains that an extremely, extremely small percentage of Geocachers log their own caches as finds. Probably in the .1 percent range.

I don't know where that statistic comes from. I actually think there are substantial number of cachers who log caches they own. It may be pretty rare for someone do it on a regular basis with the intent of bumping up their find count. However, many of people have indicated that they would log their own caches under specific conditions. In fact most people will log "attended" on events they own. But there are also those who will log a cache they have adopted, one hidden by someone they share a team account with, a challenge cache, a cache they had to search for when doing maintenance, etc. Different people will have differing opinions about under which conditions they would log their own caches, but that fact is that a large number cachers would do so if they felt the circumstances merit it.

[+jellis]

Besides the ones I adopted after I found them and some I adopted out I would say NO NO NO on logging your own caches even if you had to go find them when it got a DNF.

[+Manville Possum]

Logging your own Waymark seems to be common practice for some reason, but I don't understand logging your own listing of any kind. Why?