This may have been discussed before, in which case I'm sorry. I was thinking about some of the countries that I have travelled to this morning and thinking that it was a shame that I didn't know about geocaching when I visited them all. A flash of inspiration later and I realised that it is possible that I may meet the criteria for many of the Earthcaches in the countries if I have visited the specific areas and can remember (or have photographed and can look back to 'remember') the various details. What are your thoughts on me logging the caches now despite having been at the appropriate site a few years ago? Obviously I would only log one (and send the appropriate message) if I have genuinely been there and can meet the criteria.
Also, if you think that it is acceptable for me to log the Earthcache, what date should I put for the log? I am unlikely to be able to remember the precise date I was there but should be able to get it to within a particular month. In my mind that is what it should be, but what if the date I was the predates the publication of the cache?
Thanks in advance for any responses!
You guys are right in line with our thinking on this matter. I'd call logging an EarthCache that you didn't truly visit (after it was published, and after knowing about its existence) "cheesy" as well! Good descriptor. The one part that's a bit off is "even the CO can't reject your find as long as it meets the requirement" -- the CO can reject a find; it's still up to them. I just think they'd be more likely to allow the find if the cache were at least in place already, vs. a find claimed before the cache was even published. But in either case, the person didn't "really do the EarthCache", in the true sense, so the CO can use their discretion. Hopefully I'm not muddying the waters more, and I'll just step back now
Thanks for the thoughtful discussion on this. Hopefully, when it's happening out there, people are being reasonable about it, on both sides.