Jump to content

Can I log this?


Mole60
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I'd like some geocaching etiquette here -- I looked for a cache and it wasn't there. CO checked a few weeks later and confirmed that it was missing. CO also wrote a note and said she would contact me to offer me the FTF prize, whatever that might be. Mighty nice of her, I say! But what I would like to do is log the cache, and I happen to be the FTF in that case. I cannot return to look for replaced cache as it is in Indonesia (and I was a tourist there). Can I log it?

 

Mole60

Link to comment

you didn't find the cache. it seems like it went missing pretty fast . but no, I wouldn't log it, as you didn't even find an empty container, missing half of container, etc etc. you can't log a find bc there was nothing to find. kinda sucks, but that's how it goes :(

Edited by oxford comma
Link to comment

Hi,

 

I'd like some geocaching etiquette here -- I looked for a cache and it wasn't there. CO checked a few weeks later and confirmed that it was missing. CO also wrote a note and said she would contact me to offer me the FTF prize, whatever that might be. Mighty nice of her, I say! But what I would like to do is log the cache, and I happen to be the FTF in that case. I cannot return to look for replaced cache as it is in Indonesia (and I was a tourist there). Can I log it?

 

Mole60

 

It's unfortunate that you didn't find another cache in Indonesia as that would probably make your decision easier. Yes, you *can* log it, and since it doesn't sound like the CO would delete your log if you do, it would remain as a found it log for a cache in Indonesia. The only real question here is whether or not you feel comfortable posting a found it log on a cache that you didn't actually find. While other may express their opinions on what *they* would do in the same situation that's all irrelevant. Do whatever feels right.

Link to comment

If you were truly at GZ and it was your only opportunity to find a cache in Indonesia, I would probably do the following..log a DNF and once the FTF has been claimed, perhaps then add a found log so you at least have one find for a country you may never go to again, especially if it was a very easy cache and should have been there and CO told you to do it. In that unique case, I would probably log a find, but only once FTF was claimed. Probably what I would do.

 

I know in Montana we logged our only cache attempts as DNF but we figured we would be back (well, we got an earth cache later) but Indonesia? For me, that is once in a lifetime.

Link to comment

If you were truly at GZ and it was your only opportunity to find a cache in Indonesia, I would probably do the following..log a DNF and once the FTF has been claimed, perhaps then add a found log so you at least have one find for a country you may never go to again, especially if it was a very easy cache and should have been there and CO told you to do it. In that unique case, I would probably log a find, but only once FTF was claimed. Probably what I would do.

 

I know in Montana we logged our only cache attempts as DNF but we figured we would be back (well, we got an earth cache later) but Indonesia? For me, that is once in a lifetime.

 

Kind words, thanks. Will think about that. If I figure I will never be going back to Indonesia, will wait till someone logs a FTF on the cache and then log a Found It (with CO's permission) as it will register that I have cached in that country, and it's not a lie.

Link to comment

If you were truly at GZ and it was your only opportunity to find a cache in Indonesia, I would probably do the following..log a DNF and once the FTF has been claimed, perhaps then add a found log so you at least have one find for a country you may never go to again, especially if it was a very easy cache and should have been there and CO told you to do it. In that unique case, I would probably log a find, but only once FTF was claimed. Probably what I would do.

 

I know in Montana we logged our only cache attempts as DNF but we figured we would be back (well, we got an earth cache later) but Indonesia? For me, that is once in a lifetime.

 

Kind words, thanks. Will think about that. If I figure I will never be going back to Indonesia, will wait till someone logs a FTF on the cache and then log a Found It (with CO's permission) as it will register that I have cached in that country, and it's not a lie.

 

I suppose. It's not like the Geocaching Police are going to come and take you away. But be advised most of the future responders after me will probably be against that. :)

 

Have they actually offered for you to log a find yet? I'm sure they would, seeing as it sounds like they want to give you an FTF prize?? Oh, and for the record, I'm against logging a find of any kind here. :D

Link to comment

If you were truly at GZ and it was your only opportunity to find a cache in Indonesia, I would probably do the following..log a DNF and once the FTF has been claimed, perhaps then add a found log so you at least have one find for a country you may never go to again, especially if it was a very easy cache and should have been there and CO told you to do it. In that unique case, I would probably log a find, but only once FTF was claimed. Probably what I would do.

 

I know in Montana we logged our only cache attempts as DNF but we figured we would be back (well, we got an earth cache later) but Indonesia? For me, that is once in a lifetime.

 

+1

 

I'm generally against logging anything as a find if I didn't find it, but this seems like a unique case. You did cache there, the CO did confirm that you were in the right place. I might log it after a FTF, too, if I didn't think I'd ever be in Indonesia again. Write a nice full log if you do--the whole experience so that's it not just for the smiley, but for the memories, too.

Edited by Dame Deco
Link to comment

Not every caching experience requires or justifies a smiley even if the location is a once in a lifetime chance to visit. The act of caching is not a reason to claim a find.

 

Edit: Not to say that it doesn't deserve a Note or DNF to share your story.

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment

I'm glad the OP decided on keeping the dnf in place. Yeah, it's a bummer that the cache was in another country that he might not ever get to visit again but that doesn't matter. The bottom line is that the cache was not found. I disagree with a couple of other posters here, this is not a unique situation that somehow justifies claiming a find.

 

But again, it's up to the OP. The cache owner seems to be alright with it so play it the way you want. In this case, your found log wouldn't really be hurting anyone else, well,,, except for the true first to finder.

Link to comment

Wow, tough one. First of all, I claim there's no etiquette issue to worry about. Sure, some people might object, but as long as the CO has offered to allow the log since the cache turned out to missing, you could log a find without having to worry about your conscience.

 

Personally, I don't I'd be able to resist logging it as a find. It would just be too sweet to have a find in Indonesia. And although I never solicit such permission, in general, when a CO unilaterally offers to allow me to log a find on a missing cache I don't expect to be able to look for again, I typically take it. But I concede that DNF is technically the correct action.

Link to comment

The situation seems kind of bizarre to me.

 

She offered you FTF prize on a cache you didn't find?

 

I would log a DNF.

 

Yes, the CO did offer me the FTF in her post on the cache page. Rather strange, but generous. I think she felt bad about my having taken the trouble to go in search of it and it being missing.

 

Thanks to all the people who posted opinions on this matter. Really touches upon the philosophy of geocaching, why one does it. I was happy enough to log a DNF, but became tempted to get a smiley in another country when the CO suggested I could do that. Still mulling over this.

Link to comment

We've had instances where the CO emailed and said, "claim it as a find" after a DNF where the cache was missing, but didn't.

One, after an event, we were the only ones to not claim a hide not there (and it became a post on the "Found it - didn't" thread). :lol:

You didn't find it.

Sure you could claim it, but now, by posting your question for all to see, there's quite a few who know you really didn't.

I guess you'd have to ask yourself if you're okay with that.

Link to comment

I have plenty of DNFs where the cache was found to be missing and then archived.

No chance whatsoever to avenge that DNF now. :(

 

The situation here is the same, with the exception that the cache is/was in an exotic location far from home.

 

If the CO had neglected to actually place the container before you went looking, I could see the possibility of claiming a 'find' on something you didn't find.

 

The result was a DNF, but you still have Geocached in Indonesia.

Link to comment

At the time I was visiting Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo had no caches that were easily accessible. The one just out of town had warnings about land mines, I decided not to try for that one.

 

I had a backup plan there was a cache just outside of Mostar, because of a hotel mix-up we got in late for our tour of the area. We drove by the cache location but it was closed for the day. Hint suggested it was just on the other side of entrance. I never even considered logging a find on the cache. I was there but I didn’t sign the log.

 

Just gives me another reason to head back to Bosnia and Herzegovina sometime in the future to color in the country.

Edited by FunnyNose
Link to comment
The act of caching is not a reason to claim a find.

 

Pretty much sums it up.

 

I suspect that, later on, the colored-in country on the map won't really be as satisfying as originally thought.

 

I had one shot in Costa Rica 10 years ago. I could not find the cache and that is the only foreign country I've been to since 2000 and the cache turned out to be missing. I would not want that country showing red on our maps. That would feel creepy.

Link to comment
The act of caching is not a reason to claim a find.

 

Pretty much sums it up.

 

I suspect that, later on, the colored-in country on the map won't really be as satisfying as originally thought.

 

I had one shot in Costa Rica 10 years ago. I could not find the cache and that is the only foreign country I've been to since 2000 and the cache turned out to be missing. I would not want that country showing red on our maps. That would feel creepy.

 

First of all, I disagree with the assertion that this has anything to do with "the numbers". It's just one cache.

 

I think it's easy to say that "I would never log a find" on a cache like this if you've never been in a situation like the OP describes. I have, and on numerous occasions. I was in Ethiopia in 2009 and got quite close to one of only four caches in the country but not close enough to actually conduct a search. I was in Zambia in 2007 for almost a week and was driven by a virtual there close enough that I could *almost* see the object of the cache. I've been on the ground in Kenya three times, and would have had time to go after a cache, if not for a 2.5 hour flight delay. I still don't have any finds in any of those countries but I can understand the temptation. When I went to Malaysia last year I was seriously considering taking a day trip to Indonesia (I was less than 100 miles away) ust to find a cache but decided against it. I did find several caches in Malaysia though including a legitimate FTF. I doubt that I'll ever get another chance to visit Indonesia, but as it turns out I may be going back to Ethiopia in May, and if it all works out I may also be able to get one in Istantbul during a long layover on the way home.

Link to comment

I'm glad the OP decided on keeping the dnf in place. Yeah, it's a bummer that the cache was in another country that he might not ever get to visit again but that doesn't matter. The bottom line is that the cache was not found. I disagree with a couple of other posters here, this is not a unique situation that somehow justifies claiming a find.

 

But again, it's up to the OP. The cache owner seems to be alright with it so play it the way you want. In this case, your found log wouldn't really be hurting anyone else, well,,, except for the true first to finder.

 

+1

Link to comment

I can understand the temptation.

 

Me, too.

 

I didn't know about caching when I deployed to Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq in 2005. There were caches in all three locations; I didn't find 'em but could have if I had known. But what gnaws at me the most is that I was literally right on top of the first cache in Iraq. I even remember seeing rocks piled up at the base of the telephone pole where it was hidden, I just never checked them out. Hugely tempting to log a find on it, especially since it's highly unlikely I'll ever be back to Iraq. But I didn't find it, so I ain't logging it.

 

Only have one find in Mexico, and I almost couldn't find that one because I misremembered it as a small, not a micro film can. Would have been pretty tempting to log that one anyway, especially if the cache owner said it was OK.

Link to comment

If I figure I will never be going back to Indonesia, will wait till someone logs a FTF on the cache and then log a Found It (with CO's permission) as it will register that I have cached in that country, and it's not a lie.

You have cached in Indonesia, but you didn't find a cache there. Claiming a find would register that you found a cache in Indonesia. If you want to register that you cached in that country, logging a DNF will do that for you.

 

For me, having the CO's permission to claim a find doesn't necessarily make it right for me to claim that find. There are some cache owners who will allow you to "find" their caches without ever leaving your armchair. Does that make it right for you to do so?

Link to comment

Why on earth would anyone even want to log a find on a non-find? Makes no sense whatsoever, despite the lame justifications on here. Caches go missing all the time, what makes this one so special? I'm sure there were plenty of others that could have been actually found.

Link to comment

Why on earth would anyone even want to log a find on a non-find? Makes no sense whatsoever, despite the lame justifications on here. Caches go missing all the time, what makes this one so special? I'm sure there were plenty of others that could have been actually found.

 

What makes that one special? It's in Indonesia. That's quite an assumption to think that there were plenty of others that could have been found. There are only 124 caches in Indonesia. Considering Indonesia consists of over 17,000 island the probability that there were no other available caches nearby is pretty high.

Link to comment

If the cache owner said it was ok to log a find because the cache was missing, I would think logging a find would be OK. I say go for it and call it a day.

And if the cache owner said it was okay to log a "find" without ever leaving your armchair, then would logging an armchair "find" be okay, too?

 

Because obviously traveling to the other side of the world, searching for a container that might have been muggled by a monkey, and discovering an empty hiding spot, is exactly the same as logging a find on a cache from an armchair.

Link to comment

Why on earth would anyone even want to log a find on a non-find? Makes no sense whatsoever, despite the lame justifications on here. Caches go missing all the time, what makes this one so special? I'm sure there were plenty of others that could have been actually found.

What makes that one special? It's in Indonesia. That's quite an assumption to think that there were plenty of others that could have been found. There are only 124 caches in Indonesia. Considering Indonesia consists of over 17,000 island the probability that there were no other available caches nearby is pretty high.

The fact that the cache is in Indonesia might increase the temptation to log a find, but it doesn't effect whether or not it was a find.

 

If nobody was around to see one steal money from a cash register, then it might increase the temptation to steal, but it doesn't change the definition of theft.

Link to comment

If the cache owner said it was ok to log a find because the cache was missing, I would think logging a find would be OK. I say go for it and call it a day.

And if the cache owner said it was okay to log a "find" without ever leaving your armchair, then would logging an armchair "find" be okay, too?

Because obviously traveling to the other side of the world, searching for a container that might have been muggled by a monkey, and discovering an empty hiding spot, is exactly the same as logging a find on a cache from an armchair.

I didn't say it was exactly the same. I simply pointed out that the cache owner's permission doesn't make it okay for me to log a find when I didn't find the cache. It doesn't matter if I traveled across the world or across my living room; I still didn't find the cache. Using the cache owner's permission as an excuse to say I "found" it just seems silly to me.

Link to comment

If the cache owner said it was ok to log a find because the cache was missing, I would think logging a find would be OK. I say go for it and call it a day.

And if the cache owner said it was okay to log a "find" without ever leaving your armchair, then would logging an armchair "find" be okay, too?

Because obviously traveling to the other side of the world, searching for a container that might have been muggled by a monkey, and discovering an empty hiding spot, is exactly the same as logging a find on a cache from an armchair.

I didn't say it was exactly the same. I simply pointed out that the cache owner's permission doesn't make it okay for me to log a find when I didn't find the cache. It doesn't matter if I traveled across the world or across my living room; I still didn't find the cache. Using the cache owner's permission as an excuse to say I "found" it just seems silly to me.

 

Generally, if you're going to suggest that two different scenarios have the same outcome (posting a found it log) those two scenarios should probably be the same. I don't consider posting a found it log on a web site for similar to stealing money from a cash register either.

 

And as I wrote earlier, it doesn't matter what you would do. It doesn't matter what I or anyone else would. This is between that cache owner and the OP and since the CO seems okay with it the only opinion that really matters is the OP.

Link to comment

If you were truly at GZ and it was your only opportunity to find a cache in Indonesia, I would probably do the following..log a DNF and once the FTF has been claimed, perhaps then add a found log so you at least have one find for a country you may never go to again, especially if it was a very easy cache and should have been there and CO told you to do it. In that unique case, I would probably log a find, but only once FTF was claimed. Probably what I would do.

 

I know in Montana we logged our only cache attempts as DNF but we figured we would be back (well, we got an earth cache later) but Indonesia? For me, that is once in a lifetime.

 

+1

 

I'm generally against logging anything as a find if I didn't find it, but this seems like a unique case. You did cache there, the CO did confirm that you were in the right place. I might log it after a FTF, too, if I didn't think I'd ever be in Indonesia again. Write a nice full log if you do--the whole experience so that's it not just for the smiley, but for the memories, too.

 

I don't get what is unique about the situation. We all hunt caches we don't find and most of us don't lie about finding them. His situation is a DNF period. If he were to log a phony find it would certainly be all about the smiley. If it's about the numbers then logging a fraudulent find makes sense. If it's about the memories what is the difference between a found it or DNF log?

 

That said, there are a lot of geocachers who lie about finding caches. If the OP wants to join that club it's between his conscience and the cache owner.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
The act of caching is not a reason to claim a find.

 

Pretty much sums it up.

 

I suspect that, later on, the colored-in country on the map won't really be as satisfying as originally thought.

 

I had one shot in Costa Rica 10 years ago. I could not find the cache and that is the only foreign country I've been to since 2000 and the cache turned out to be missing. I would not want that country showing red on our maps. That would feel creepy.

 

First of all, I disagree with the assertion that this has anything to do with "the numbers". It's just one cache.

 

I don't quite understand this reply to my comment. :huh:

 

Neither the Blue D's or my post are talking about numbers.

 

I think it's easy to say that "I would never log a find" on a cache like this if you've never been in a situation like the OP describes.

 

My example was intended to show that I was in the exact same situation and that I didn't log it as found nor do I want to have my geomaps show Costa Rica as a country where I found a cache.

Link to comment

I sought a cache far from home on a trip. I searched thoroughly, but had to log a DNF. In the months that followed, several more DNF's were logged (& no finds). The CO inspected the site & found the cache missing. He emailed all of us & said we should log a find. We all did. I know that I thoroughly searched the 1-meter GZ between a wall & a bush where the regular-size cache was hidden. I covered every square centimeter. I hadn't thought about the cache in weeks, but the CO's action was very classy. His email was totally unexpected. I registered the find, and it was 100 percent deserved.

 

It goes without saying that my log tells the full story of what happened. And this one find won't take my low numbers up to where they cause insecurity for the professional cachers. ;)

Edited by wmpastor
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...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...