"Special" instructions from Cache Owner

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Based on the long success of the "Found It = Didn't Find It" thread in which many have posted examples of "Found It" logs when, arguably, the person logging the cache didn't actually find it, I thought I'd start a thread for others to post examples, and discuss, examples where a CO has added "special" instructions to the description or in a log on the cache page.

 

If you've been caching awhile you've probably seen many examples of this, from asking finders to "help" maintain the cache, to allowing photos in lieu of signing the log when a cache is actually missing. Here's an example from the "Found It = Didn't Find It" thread:

 

"Since this cache is so popular, in case the nano is muggled I accept photo logs until it's physically replaced!"

 

Please don't identify specific cache owners or specific caches.

[+Ike 13]

I'm never a fan of statements like this:

 

Please remember to have respect for the cache... use stealth, replace as found, make sure you take the time to put the log back properly...and do not include any blatant spoilers of your own (if I, the CO, wanted blatant hints or directions to the cache, I would have either included them or painted the cache a bright neon color with flashing lights) in your logs as it (your log) will be swiftly deleted...these types of things go a long way in making the cache enjoyable for others.

 

1) There is NO guideline that says spoilers are not allowed in logs.

2) Why is there any need to mention replacing as found. The type of person to move a cache is the type who does not read cache pages.

[+Ike 13]

Here's one that I saw on an event

 

Please remember you need to be in the picture (smiling or not) and also have signed the log which I will have to claim a find.

 

Um no I do not need to be in the picture or sign the log to attend the event. I do both anyways, but a statemnet like this just gets under my skin.

[knowschad]

Please rehide EXACTLY as you found it!

 

Even if I found it out in the open?

[+Mike & Jess]

I'm never a fan of statements like this:

 

Please remember to have respect for the cache... use stealth, replace as found, make sure you take the time to put the log back properly...and do not include any blatant spoilers of your own (if I, the CO, wanted blatant hints or directions to the cache, I would have either included them or painted the cache a bright neon color with flashing lights) in your logs as it (your log) will be swiftly deleted...these types of things go a long way in making the cache enjoyable for others.

 

1) There is NO guideline that says spoilers are not allowed in logs.

2) Why is there any need to mention replacing as found. The type of person to move a cache is the type who does not read cache pages.

 

The fun of my Hate Mail Cache was inadvertantly killed with photos of the cache by a finder. I can't blame them for doing it, as most of the locals that had found it wanted to post pictures but held off.

As for your second point... There should be no need for this, but it does act as a reminder for some that don't do it.

 

Here's one that I saw on an event

 

Please remember you need to be in the picture (smiling or not) and also have signed the log which I will have to claim a find.

 

Um no I do not need to be in the picture or sign the log to attend the event. I do both anyways, but a statemnet like this just gets under my skin.

I don't see how that can be made a logging requirement, specially for an event. A friendly reminder to sign the log and stick around for the photo should be enough.

 

I've tried doing a photo as a logging requirement for a couple different caches in my area that I know only a few could or would actually visit. That got squashed pretty quickly.

Instead, I've had to send the fake loggers a note informing them I'm removing their online log as they didn't sign the actual log and more then likely didn't get to GZ.

[+lamoracke]

We had one where the guy said any logs from stickers or your own stamps would be deleted, pen or pencil only. Eventually that was brought up on the forums and it eventually got removed.

[+SwineFlew]

This is on a puzzle cache and they are known to change rules.

 

Disclaimer: We retain all rights to this cache. We can and will modify, adjust, tweak, disable or archive this cache at any time without prior notice. Without prior notice we can and will delete any log that does not conform to our intent of this cache hunt . We will not be liable for any direct, indirect, punitive, or consequential damages you may suffer from hunting this cache. If you attempt this geocache hunt, you do so at your own risk. Know your limits and do not attempt to exceed your abilities.

[+CanadianRockies]

1) There is NO guideline that says spoilers are not allowed in logs.

But one of Groundspeak's Terms of Use does prohibit spoilers in logs. Section 4(m) reads:

 

You agree not to:... Publish, on any Groundspeak owned web property, the solutions, hints, spoilers, or any hidden coordinates for any geocache without consent from the cache owner.

Edited September 26, 2012 by CanadianRockies

[+SwineFlew]

Here another one. Really stupid.

 

You must log a find on any small, regular or large cache in the counties.(We will read ALL cache pages to verify the size of the cache. "Micro" caches mislabeled as "Small" in our opinion, will not count. We will be the final judge of size on questionable caches.)

[+The Jester]

This is on a puzzle cache and they are known to change rules.

 

Disclaimer: We retain all rights to this cache. We can and will modify, adjust, tweak, disable or archive this cache at any time without prior notice. Without prior notice we can and will delete any log that does not conform to our intent of this cache hunt . We will not be liable for any direct, indirect, punitive, or consequential damages you may suffer from hunting this cache. If you attempt this geocache hunt, you do so at your own risk. Know your limits and do not attempt to exceed your abilities.

I think that's standard boilerplate on their caches, I've seen it on more than one.

[+Straight-Cache-Homey]

This is on a puzzle cache and they are known to change rules.

 

Disclaimer: We retain all rights to this cache. We can and will modify, adjust, tweak, disable or archive this cache at any time without prior notice. Without prior notice we can and will delete any log that does not conform to our intent of this cache hunt . We will not be liable for any direct, indirect, punitive, or consequential damages you may suffer from hunting this cache. If you attempt this geocache hunt, you do so at your own risk. Know your limits and do not attempt to exceed your abilities.

I think that's standard boilerplate on their caches, I've seen it on more than one.

 

But still.. 'delete any log that does not conform to our intent of this cache hunt'?

 

So if I stumble upon their puzzle cache while wandering around and didn't solve the puzzle it gets deleted?

[Mr.Yuck]

There is a blatant, including still having the ? Icon, micro with an old ALR, that was never caught by my reviewer, or ever reported by anyone. This cache has an owner who only has 42 finds, hasn't logged a find since June, 2010, nor logged into the website since December 2011. The ALR is "you must provide a quote from The [name redacted] TV show, or your log will be deleted."

 

40 of the 41 finders since Jan. 1, 2010 have complied with the ALR, inluding 4 this month. I am totally amazed there are no "Tftc" logs, but the question mark icon obviously keeps those types away.

[+tozainamboku]

The ALR is "you must provide a quote from The [name redacted] TV show, or your log will be deleted."

No smiley for you!

[+dprovan]

2) Why is there any need to mention replacing as found. The type of person to move a cache is the type who does not read cache pages.

I know what you mean, but more often than not, the replace-as-found comment acts as a hint that the hide involves the cache being in a very specific place and orientation, and that changes the way that I look for the cache. That's helped me enough times that I think COs sometimes include that kind of comment for just that purpose.

 

Of course, some add it because they have unreasonable dreams that it will stop their arbitrarily placed hanger from wandering around in that big, fuzzy bush...

[+Straight-Cache-Homey]

There's one around me where there apparently WAS a cache container in a high muggle area, but it was muggled. Now it's a magnet that on the back states that to log your cache to list your favorite movie. No log book!

 

It doesn't bother me at all, but I know it's not exactly playing by the rules...

[+SwineFlew]

There's one around me where there apparently WAS a cache container in a high muggle area, but it was muggled. Now it's a magnet that on the back states that to log your cache to list your favorite movie. No log book!

 

It doesn't bother me at all, but I know it's not exactly playing by the rules...

Virtual cache with a twist, big big no-no. It will get archived really fast if a reviewer get a hold of it.

[+lamoracke]

Here another one. Really stupid.

 

You must log a find on any small, regular or large cache in the counties.(We will read ALL cache pages to verify the size of the cache. "Micro" caches mislabeled as "Small" in our opinion, will not count. We will be the final judge of size on questionable caches.)

 

Blech, I believe I have encountered and logged the one you speak of. I got my log in, but hopefully he/she does not really try to enforce that. I did not like that part of the description.

Edited September 26, 2012 by lamoracke

[Mr.Yuck]

The ALR is "you must provide a quote from The [name redacted] TV show, or your log will be deleted."

No smiley for you!

 

Wow, you're a real SwineFlew there, figuring that out.

 

I'd like to see it keep going, what the heck. That is until someone else decides it sounds cool, and tries to do something similar.

[+Ike 13]

2) Why is there any need to mention replacing as found. The type of person to move a cache is the type who does not read cache pages.

I know what you mean, but more often than not, the replace-as-found comment acts as a hint that the hide involves the cache being in a very specific place and orientation, and that changes the way that I look for the cache. That's helped me enough times that I think COs sometimes include that kind of comment for just that purpose.

 

Of course, some add it because they have unreasonable dreams that it will stop their arbitrarily placed hanger from wandering around in that big, fuzzy bush...

This CO puts that comment on EVERY cache they hide. It doesn't help then

[+Ike 13]

1) There is NO guideline that says spoilers are not allowed in logs.

But one of Groundspeak's Terms of Use does prohibit spoilers in logs. Section 4(m) reads:

 

You agree not to:... Publish, on any Groundspeak owned web property, the solutions, hints, spoilers, or any hidden coordinates for any geocache without consent from the cache owner.

I interpret that as a don't give spoilers for puzzles. Now if an owner asks me to change my log I probably would or if they choose to encrypt it then that is okay, but you just cannot delete a found it log if I found the cache.

[+SwineFlew]

All logs entered as single letter logs, like TNLNSL TFTC or plain found it thanks, will be deleted, post a real log is all I ask

[+Ike 13]

Speaking of old ALR puzzles that have not been modified.

 

Stage 3: Complete the DARE submitted to you and provide photographic proof that you completed the requirements of the DARE. Stage 4: Submit a satisfactory DARE for the next geocacher. Your photo and your DARE for the next cacher MUST appear with your FOUND IT log – I cannot stress that enough.

 

Yes I plan to eventually go find this cache and not do stage 3 or 4.

[+SwineFlew]

Please replace the container exactly as you found it, or risk having your log deleted.

 

REALLY!?!?!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

There's one around me where there apparently WAS a cache container in a high muggle area, but it was muggled. Now it's a magnet that on the back states that to log your cache to list your favorite movie. No log book!

 

It doesn't bother me at all, but I know it's not exactly playing by the rules...

Virtual cache with a twist, big big no-no. It will get archived really fast if a reviewer get a hold of it.

 

This thread took off in a different direction than I expected but this was "virtual cache with a twist" was more along the lines of what I was thinking. I've seen quite a few instances of caches that have gone missing where the CO effectively turned it into a virtual by allowing found it logs if someone provided an alternative logging method (take a photo, send me email an tell me what's on the nearby sign, etc.). It's interesting that a CO allowing, even temporarily, found it logs just for visiting the location is seen as a big no-no and at the same time reading all the "if someone posts a found it log when they really didn't find it, that doesn't hurt anyone" responses. Most of the traditional turned virtual caches I've seen are in locations that are primarily visited by traveling geocachers, often in locations where there are very few opportunities to find a cache in that country, and frankly, I appreciate it when reviewers tend to take a more lenient stance on caches like that. I tend to lean towards the "if it's *really* not hurting anyone, and the CO allows it, why not allow a bending of the rules". There are probably thousands of vacation caches and other caches that are being maintained by the community that "technically" violate the guidelines.

 

Here's another example (some text elided to protect the innocent:

 

"Enter ...Training Centre. The box is in the desk of the ... deputy director.

... Director's name is: Mr. ... ..., and he will always be delighted to assist."

 

Technically, that wouldn't be allowed but it's only one of 2 caches in the entire country. The other is several hundred miles away and would probably take a full day to drive on unmaintained gravel "roads".

[+SwineFlew]

OH AND MOST IMPORTANTLY I HAVE TESTED THIS PARTICULAR CONTAINER ALL WINTER>>> so if there is a log that says the cache is WET the previous finders log will be deleted for not sealing it properly!!!

 

:unsure:

[+NYPaddleCacher]

1) There is NO guideline that says spoilers are not allowed in logs.

But one of Groundspeak's Terms of Use does prohibit spoilers in logs. Section 4(m) reads:

 

You agree not to:... Publish, on any Groundspeak owned web property, the solutions, hints, spoilers, or any hidden coordinates for any geocache without consent from the cache owner.

I interpret that as a don't give spoilers for puzzles. Now if an owner asks me to change my log I probably would or if they choose to encrypt it then that is okay, but you just cannot delete a found it log if I found the cache.

 

How can you interpret that as spoilers for puzzles when that guideline states "for any geocache"?

[+hzoi]

One of the best, if not THE best, multis I ever hunted was a cache near Zweibruecken (now archived) that took you through three different World War II bunkers on the German Westwall (Siegfried Line). The final was over a half mile down a tunnel underground, you had to crawl through a hole and search in a very muddy area for a regular cache.

 

At least that's what I thought you had to do, and I was almost sick when I searched and searched (and got muddier and muddier) and couldn't find it. I took a couple pictures and left, dejectedly, prepared to write my DNF when I got home.

 

Upon retranslating the cache description, I found that the final had vanished a few times a while ago, and the cache owner changed the logging requirement to allow people to log the cache with a photo taken at the final. So it was a good thing I took the photos.

 

The bunkers are now all off limits to protect the bats that live there, so it's all part of caching history now. Too bad.

 

Here's my log, with photos. Note that I even managed to get my cigarillo muddy.

 

Not sure if I'd log this one today, knowing there was no cache. I'd have to think about it.

 

edit with disclaimer: no, I did not scratch anything onto the walls. The muddy handprints are probably mine, though.

Edited September 26, 2012 by hzoi

[+SwineFlew]

Found another one.

Your job is to tell me the name of the gorilla in the picture inside the cache. Be careful the gorilla has been known to be a wee-bit grumpy. His picture is hid inside a rubbermaid container and it is painted camo and hidden really well. Email the name so I know which gorilla is missing. The name must be accurate or your log will be deleted.

[+SwineFlew]

I can see some reviewers will be emailing us about which caches we are talking about.

[+CanadianRockies]

1) There is NO guideline that says spoilers are not allowed in logs.

But one of Groundspeak's Terms of Use does prohibit spoilers in logs. Section 4(m) reads:

 

You agree not to:... Publish, on any Groundspeak owned web property, the solutions, hints, spoilers, or any hidden coordinates for any geocache without consent from the cache owner.

I interpret that as a don't give spoilers for puzzles. Now if an owner asks me to change my log I probably would or if they choose to encrypt it then that is okay, but you just cannot delete a found it log if I found the cache.

The no spoilers provision applies to "any geocache," not just puzzle geocaches.

 

And, yes, you can delete inappropriate "Found It" logs like those containing spoilers, as long as you allow the finder to re-post their log without the spoiler information. Here's the Groundspeak guideline (2.1.2.1):

 

Owner is responsible for geocache listing maintenance. As the owner of your cache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache listing. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

Note the "any logs."

[+niraD]

Please replace the container exactly as you found it, or risk having your log deleted.

 

REALLY!?!?!

Well, I have seen a similar comment (without the threat of log deletion) in another cache:

MAKE SURE YOU CAN RETURN IT *BEFORE* YOU GET IT!

But that was a cache where the whole point was the challenge of figuring out how to retrieve and replace the cache. The CO justifiably was concerned about people retrieving the cache with no plan for how they might replace it.

[+hzoi]

p.s. Unless the photo requirement was re-approved by an EC reviewer after the 1 January 2011 guideline change, every earthcache that still requires a photo to log it would qualify for this thread. The reviewers are good about enforcing this on new caches, but apparently no one has bothered to go back through older caches and bring them up to speed.

[+SwineFlew]

This is on a EC

 

I hid a small geocache 250 feet~122 steps from the entrance (GC----). You

do not have to find this cache but if you do, give me the code on

the inside of the lid in your email.

 

If I do find it, why I have to give you the code for this EC???? To prove that I been there??????

[Andronicus]

OH AND MOST IMPORTANTLY I HAVE TESTED THIS PARTICULAR CONTAINER ALL WINTER>>> so if there is a log that says the cache is WET the previous finders log will be deleted for not sealing it properly!!!

 

:unsure:

Maybe the CO has never heard of condensation....

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I can see some reviewers will be emailing us about which caches we are talking about.

 

That's why I specifically asked that specific caches or their owners be identified.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

OH AND MOST IMPORTANTLY I HAVE TESTED THIS PARTICULAR CONTAINER ALL WINTER>>> so if there is a log that says the cache is WET the previous finders log will be deleted for not sealing it properly!!!

 

:unsure:

 

Wow. That's a good one.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

One of the best, if not THE best, multis I ever hunted was a cache near Zweibruecken (now archived) that took you through three different World War II bunkers on the German Westwall (Siegfried Line). The final was over a half mile down a tunnel underground, you had to crawl through a hole and search in a very muddy area for a regular cache.

 

At least that's what I thought you had to do, and I was almost sick when I searched and searched (and got muddier and muddier) and couldn't find it. I took a couple pictures and left, dejectedly, prepared to write my DNF when I got home.

 

Upon retranslating the cache description, I found that the final had vanished a few times a while ago, and the cache owner changed the logging requirement to allow people to log the cache with a photo taken at the final. So it was a good thing I took the photos.

 

The bunkers are now all off limits to protect the bats that live there, so it's all part of caching history now. Too bad.

 

Here's my log, with photos. Note that I even managed to get my cigarillo muddy.

 

Not sure if I'd log this one today, knowing there was no cache. I'd have to think about it.

 

I probably would. It sounds like quite an experience, and the cache was more about the journey than finding a container and writing on a piece of paper. Yes, I admit it. I have logged a find on a couple (maybe three out my 1100 something finds) on caches when I didn't actually sign the log sheet.

[+CanadianRockies]

Upon retranslating the cache description, I found that the final had vanished a few times a while ago, and the cache owner changed the logging requirement to allow people to log the cache with a photo taken at the final. So it was a good thing I took the photos....

 

Not sure if I'd log this one today, knowing there was no cache. I'd have to think about it.

I probably would. It sounds like quite an experience, and the cache was more about the journey than finding a container and writing on a piece of paper. Yes, I admit it. I have logged a find on a couple (maybe three out my 1100 something finds) on caches when I didn't actually sign the log sheet.

I'd log it as a DNF and include a great write-up. I've gone on lots of wonderful journeys that ended with a DNF. The journey has nothing to do with writing on a piece of paper or claiming a find.

Edited September 26, 2012 by CanadianRockies

[Mr.Yuck]

All logs entered as single letter logs, like TNLNSL TFTC or plain found it thanks, will be deleted, post a real log is all I ask

 

I can actually get behind this one. Can an exception be made?

[jholly]

All logs entered as single letter logs, like TNLNSL TFTC or plain found it thanks, will be deleted, post a real log is all I ask

 

I can actually get behind this one. Can an exception be made?

 

I got a winner the other day .... ; ... that was it, just a ; I guess that means the cache really sucks, a TFTC would have been nice.

[+The A-Team]

...every earthcache that still requires a photo to log it would qualify for this thread. The reviewers are good about enforcing this on new caches, but apparently no one has bothered to go back through older caches and bring them up to speed.

Are you sure about that? I've always wondered about that guideline. According to the Earthcache guidelines (bolding theirs):

Requests for photographs must be optional. Exceptions to this guideline will only be considered if the requested photograph is related to an Earth Science logging activity such as recording a phenomenon.

I read that as saying that if the photo is related to Earth Science (which ALL Earthcaches are), and it's for recording a phenomenon, then it may be acceptable to require it. It seems to me that a lot of Earthcaches could still require photos.

Edited September 27, 2012 by The A-Team

[Keystone]

I can see some reviewers will be emailing us about which caches we are talking about.

 

That's why I specifically asked that specific caches or their owners be identified.

1. Did you know that the word "not" is available for use in sentences, totally free of charge???

2. Did you know that volunteer cache reviewers are allowed to use Google?

[+GeoBain]

I can see some reviewers will be emailing us about which caches we are talking about.

 

That's why I specifically asked that specific caches or their owners be identified.

 

Might want to ask posters to change some wording around a little. I found 2 by the same owner that match that phrase in about 10 seconds.

[+briansnat]

In order to log this cache you must dance The Funky Chicken all the way from the parking lot to the cache site. To prove you've done this, either e-mail me with a clip of you doing so (AVI format only please)...OR...send me 2 notorized affidavits from witnesses attesting to the fact that you did this. Only after I received verification will allow you to post a log.

 

*****NOTE 1/17/2005!!!!!!!! Please be advised that The Funky Chicken and The Chicken Dance are not the same dance. Future logs (as of today) accompanied by videos of the finder doing The Chicken Dance (or any dance other than The Funky Chicken) WILL BE DELETED!!!!!!******

Edited September 27, 2012 by briansnat

[+RoadRoach58]

The "Please help maintain this cache" request is little more than "I'm a lazy a** that doesn't want to go maintain my caches" or "I'm too busy on the ET Highway in Nevada to be bothered with those ten pill bottles with the glop that used to be logs" or I'm too busy running up my numbers in some other way to follow the guideline that says I'm responsible to maintain my hides. Most of the time, if someone (especially a newbie) hangs a NM on one of these, he /she better get ready for a verbal colonoscopy by not only the CO, but all the CO's worshipers and fan club, too. I'm a reasonably educated person (Electrical Engineer) with a modicum of logic skills and certain amount of technical savvy, and I'm pretty certain I understood what it said when I read that I, me, and myself, are the only persons responsible for my placements.I guess I'm old school and was raised differently so that I take the word responsibility seriously. Violating a "guideline" or interpreting a direct order when I was a kid usually resulted in a few loose teeth or a lot of firewood to move (then put back where I found it). So, I learned to follow instructions, guidelines, and rules without equivocating (firewood) or quibbling (loose teeth). I'm also pretty sure I understood what the "guideline" said I should do when I find a cache in unusable condition. More than once, the rebuke has felt like a 1968 Buick Electra 225 was used as the colonoscope for doing EXACTLY what the guidelines say, and backing up my actions with quotes from the guidelines.

 

But I do like the funky chicken idea, if it were made an optional ALR for browny points. I'd give extra browny points for that AVI, but only one browny point for The Chicken Dance. The cache would certainly garner some favorite points if all of the videos were posted as "optional" requirements. Too funny.

 

One of my favorites, is a comment in the description of the cache about the proximity to a train track (about 50 feet) and even has a photo of the approaching train. How the heck did that even get published? I know reviewers are human, and on occasion make a blooper, but methinks the picture of an approaching locomotive would get one's attention. I know this line, and northbound (uphill), the train speed is about 45 mph and southbound (downhill) is nearly 60 mph at this point on the line. Ever stood within 50 feet of a 60 mph train? It's impressive.

 

As for a photo log or spoiler being acceptable or not, if it were a photo of a melted lump of plastic in which the log could clearly be seen, but not removed for signing, well, yeah, that pretty much proves the cacher was on the site and found the hide (after a control burn by the land managers). I'd log that (and did) and would also permit the log on it if it were mine, IF AND ONLY IF the cacher sent me the photo. That would also scream NEEDS MAINTENANCE very loudly, especially on a customized cache that had a theme to it, and was named according to the theme, and had an educational intent. If it were my cache, I'd use that photo to show why I was disabling it, and make all haste to replace it. Now, put a throw-down in it's place for the CO, so much for the original design and intent of not only that cache, but the essence of the whole series is ruined. The CO would be the only person that could reproduce the customized log sheet that told the story or gave the information of the theme item.

[+Roman!]

Upon retranslating the cache description, I found that the final had vanished a few times a while ago, and the cache owner changed the logging requirement to allow people to log the cache with a photo taken at the final. So it was a good thing I took the photos....

 

Not sure if I'd log this one today, knowing there was no cache. I'd have to think about it.

I probably would. It sounds like quite an experience, and the cache was more about the journey than finding a container and writing on a piece of paper. Yes, I admit it. I have logged a find on a couple (maybe three out my 1100 something finds) on caches when I didn't actually sign the log sheet.

I'd log it as a DNF and include a great write-up. I've gone on lots of wonderful journeys that ended with a DNF. The journey has nothing to do with writing on a piece of paper or claiming a find.

 

I agree, after all he Did Not Find it.

 

Aren't the memories of the experience enough or do you really need that smiley?

 

I actually recently went to find a cache and could not even though it had no DNFs. I read some logs and found the CO was allowing photos and the last 20 or so were photo logs so I left, posted DNF and NA, later I found out the cache had been replaced, just hard to find and since photos were OK no one was searching for it with any effort. Quite frankly I don't care how they justify their smilies but posting "fake" found logs can mess up future cachers as it did me and wasted my time.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Roman!

[+BlueDeuce]

I disagree with 'I guess I'm old school and was raised differently so that I take the word responsibility seriously." It implies that new school is somehow exempt. This is something up with which I will not put.

[+OZ2CPU]

if someone is honost and write in his FIND IT log something

that reveal directly or indirectly he did not find or sign the log book,

I dont personally delete his log,

I write a nice polite email to him with link to the guide line

3.1

Logging of All Physical Geocaches

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

 

I also kindly suggest he change his found it log to a NOTE or DNF

I do not want him to delete it, since DNF information is very usefull for a CO and other seekers.

 

but if I see he log in and find other caches, and dont fix this as requested,

I delete his log, since there is no way for me to change it for him.

 

----

 

if someone find alot of my caches and just write

TFTC or found or :-)

I send him a mail with a nice friendly note about I am happy he go out and find my caches

and a link to a puplic webpage with alot of good info about how to make good logs,

why they are important to him or others, and why a good log encurage CO to make better caches too.

I dont want a BIG book, just a one liner will be fine.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

In order to log this cache you must dance The Funky Chicken all the way from the parking lot to the cache site. To prove you've done this, either e-mail me with a clip of you doing so (AVI format only please)...OR...send me 2 notorized affidavits from witnesses attesting to the fact that you did this. Only after I received verification will allow you to post a log.

 

*****NOTE 1/17/2005!!!!!!!! Please be advised that The Funky Chicken and The Chicken Dance are not the same dance. Future logs (as of today) accompanied by videos of the finder doing The Chicken Dance (or any dance other than The Funky Chicken) WILL BE DELETED!!!!!!******

 

Thank goodness you don't have to wear a funny hat as well.

[+DanOCan]

This is one from a local challenge cache. I know the CO reads these forums on a regular basis so I hope he doesn't take it personally, because he is one of my favorite cache hiders.

 

In order to count towards the challenge cache, any qualifying caches require photographic proof:

 

"In addition to logging an online find, you also must log/upload photographic evidence of that find on that cache's listing web page. A picture of the cache's physical log will do nicely."

 

This has always rubbed me the wrong way. If the owner of a qualifying cache has no reason to doubt the validity of my find and has allowed my online log to stand, then that should be good enough for a third party as well. I have specifically avoided going after this challenge cache as a minor protest against the photograph requirement.