Logging first when you're 2TF?

[+Harry Dolphin]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

 

So, if I can't log my FTF until 12 hours after I found it, the whole world is supposed to wait for me? That wouldn't be entitlement as well?

 

Yup. As I mentioned: Common courtesy does not exist anymore. ME. NE. ME!

[+Mudfrog]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

 

So, if I can't log my FTF until 12 hours after I found it, the whole world is supposed to wait for me? That wouldn't be entitlement as well?

 

Yup. As I mentioned: Common courtesy does not exist anymore. ME. NE. ME!

 

So now you're agreeing that a FTFer is playing the entitlement card if they expect everyone else to wait for them to log ftf first? I thought your first reply stated the opposite. I'm confused...

 

Anyway, i just don't see it as being any kind of big deal whatsoever. I'm usually pretty fast at logging any ftfs that i get but even so, my logs haven't always been first on a cache page. Did this bother me in the least? NOPE!

[+The Jester]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

 

So, if I can't log my FTF until 12 hours after I found it, the whole world is supposed to wait for me? That wouldn't be entitlement as well?

 

Yup. As I mentioned: Common courtesy does not exist anymore. ME. NE. ME!

Just how long does "common courtesy" demand you wait? Should I still be waiting for that cache I found nearly a year after it was hidden but was found three times in the first month, but none have logged it online (that would be about 6 years now...)? Last year, on vacation, I had two second to finds before a FTF. If the FTF on the first two finds delayed posting, I would have had to delay my FTF log on the third (thereby causing the 2nd to delay their posting)?

[+kunarion]

I don't think anybody here is supporting the idea of using wrong dates in their logs.

If the premise is that the logs being out of order is no big deal, then that premise can be extended to apply to any logs.

 

do we really want to worry about ensuring that all logs entered for a cache on the same day are in the exact find order?

No. My point is that when the ensuing logs are out of sequence, some note about the actual order is... in order.

 

So now things get even more silly. When I find a cache should I make a note of the last half a dozen or so finders so I can make sure I don't log it before any of the previous finders?

 

No. This is what I said.

[+Roman!]

I log a cache when I find it, if I'm first to log but not FTF I'll mention that fact. On the flipside if I am FTF on a cache and someone logs their find before me I don't give it a second thought. When you log a cache online has nothing to do with when you found it, first to find is just that.

[4wheelin_fool]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

 

So, if I can't log my FTF until 12 hours after I found it, the whole world is supposed to wait for me? That wouldn't be entitlement as well?

 

Yup. As I mentioned: Common courtesy does not exist anymore. ME. NE. ME!

 

Common courtesy is allowing others to know that the cache has been found, and the FTF is taken.

 

Who cares what order the logs are in?

[4wheelin_fool]

Technical speaking it takes 3 things to make a "Find" 1 - Locate the cache, 2 - Sign the log, 3 - Log it online. If a player does only 1 or 2 of the things it really isn't a find according the Groundspeak. So if you are the first to accomplish all 3 of the requirements you would really be the First to Find.

Logging online is optional.

From Geocaching 101

 

What are the rules of geocaching?

 

If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

Write about your find in the cache logbook.

Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

That's frankly the silliest thing that I've heard in a long time. A find is a fact, not a technicality of any rules. Groundspeak does not sanction FTF, but yet their instructions on how to play are to be used to determine FTF?

 

How about a geocache find is to be determined not valid if the placement does not have permission as stipulated in the guidelines?

 

Stamping or using stickers should be called out as an illegal play because it is not "writing about your find in the logbook".

 

A logsheet is not a logbook, so it is illegal equipment and not a valid resource with any availability to exercise the geocaching rules because nobody can "write about your find in the cache logbook".

 

If the logbook is not audited by the cache owner, then all finds should be declared null and void.

 

Geocaches not properly labeled shall be called foul.

 

Geocaches located in excess of 10 feet of the listed coordinates exceed the operating range of current GPS units and shall be called out of bounds and disqualified.

 

FTF hounds shall be tested on a regular basis for steroids, illegal stimulants, hallucinogens, depressants, and anti-psychotic medications.

 

Edited August 19, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+ChileHead]

Many people like to log their finds from the day in the order they found them, mainly to make sure their milestones are correct. If I went out and found 30 caches one day, and cache #5 I was second to find on, then when I return home I'm not going to delay logging caches #5-#30 just because the FTF hasn't logged theirs yet.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

 

+1

[+dprovan]

Apparently he wouldn't have continued his trip to find the cache if he had realized he wasn't going to be the ftf.

Not your problem. In my area, everyone tries to log FTFs as soon as possible as a courtesy, but I really have no patience for someone that feels entitled to such information. Personally, when I go out for what I think might be an FTF, I always assume someone is finding the cache just after I've set off for it, so I'm always expecting it to be found by the time I get there.

 

Now because of that reaction, I almost want to wait to do the online log because of how upset he was...

That would just make you a jerk. I'll support you if you have some reason not to log your FTF right away, but I won't support you if you intentionally try to screw someone else up just because you don't like what they're doing.

 

But what I might do is stick in a little light hearted ribbing in hopes that the FTF hound will realize how rabid he's gotten. Blaming someone else for the time he wasted in a failed attempt for an FTF is pretty silly.

[+jmbillings]

I don't worry too much. A new cache was published near me yesterday- I got to GZ within about 6 minutes, but another family were already there hunting! I found it first, but the other guy got his phone out and logged it while I was there chatting to him. He didn't claim FTF and mentioned he'd found it with me. I just mentioned in my log I happened to spot it before them...

But I don't care too much; I'm not a FTF hound though

[team tisri]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

 

So, if I can't log my FTF until 12 hours after I found it, the whole world is supposed to wait for me? That wouldn't be entitlement as well?

 

Yup. As I mentioned: Common courtesy does not exist anymore. ME. NE. ME!

 

What's courtesy got to do with anything?

 

I look for a cache, I find the cache, when I get to a computer I log the cache. Am I supposed to read the log and record all the names so I can make sure I don't post my log until every single person on that list has posted theirs?

 

This really has nothign to do with courtesy, expecting people to wait for someone else to write their logs first just leaves everybody hanging around wondering when they can move forward. But if we're playing the courtesy card I'll just say I prefer to do the cache owner the courtesy of letting them know I found their cache regardless of what anyone else is doing.

 

Expecting people to hold off on logging so unknown other people with unknown levels of internet access can post their logs first is ridiculous.

[team tisri]

I don't think anybody here is supporting the idea of using wrong dates in their logs.

If the premise is that the logs being out of order is no big deal, then that premise can be extended to apply to any logs.

 

do we really want to worry about ensuring that all logs entered for a cache on the same day are in the exact find order?

No. My point is that when the ensuing logs are out of sequence, some note about the actual order is... in order.

 

So now things get even more silly. When I find a cache should I make a note of the last half a dozen or so finders so I can make sure I don't log it before any of the previous finders?

 

No. This is what I said.

 

So log it on the date you found it. If you find it on the 8th but can't get online until the 15th you log it on the 8th. In the meantime you don't expect everybody else to wait a week so they can log it because you didn't log it yet.

 

If the logs registered on the same day are out of sequence, who cares? If there are five DNFs followed by a Find on the same day when actually the Find took place first, what of it? It will soon become clear whether the five DNFs mean the cache has gone, or just that a group of five couldn't find it. Maybe the group of five were hunting it while the one finder had left the site for a time to sign the log, or maybe tidy up the cache a bit.

 

Honestly, obsessing over who logs the cache online and in what order really does get ridiculous. Since DNFs don't have any way of knowing who found it and when, and finders have no way of knowing who might have looked but failed to find it, your example doesn't provide any useful insights into how out-of-sequence logs might be avoided, even if people did care enough to wait unknown amounts of time to write their logs.

[+J Grouchy]

What's the big fuss? I had an opportunity for an FTF ten days ago, got there and saw a signature already on the log even though it hadn't been logged online. No need to get upset about when others log it. Just do what I did..."first to log...second to find"...and move on with your life.

[+kunarion]

Since DNFs don't have any way of knowing who found it and when, and finders have no way of knowing who might have looked but failed to find it, your example doesn't provide any useful insights into how out-of-sequence logs might be avoided, even if people did care enough to wait unknown amounts of time to write their logs.

That's why I explained what to do when they're out of sequence, since the out-of-sequence can't be avoided. But you're working so hard to not understand what I said, you get a gold star for the effort.

Edited August 19, 2013 by kunarion

[+dprovan]

By the way, whenever I find a cache on the day it's first found, whether I'm FTF or not, I always put the time in my log so everyone, including the other finders, can sort out who got there when. I enjoy seeing how close I came to FTF, and how close the person after me came to being there when I was. Since it's somewhat rare to have multiple finds on a non-FTF day, I don't worry about it other times.

[+niraD]

Am I supposed to read the log and record all the names so I can make sure I don't post my log until every single person on that list has posted theirs?

And then someone like me comes along, with a several not-quite-muggles in tow. A few of them sign the physical log even though they don't have accounts on geocaching.com. Suddenly, online logging for that cache grinds to a screeching halt, as everyone "courteously" waits for these not-quite-muggles to post online logs.

 

Yeah, that's the ticket...

[+Sadjo]

Apparently he wouldn't have continued his trip to find the cache if he had realized he wasn't going to be the ftf.

Not your problem. In my area, everyone tries to log FTFs as soon as possible as a courtesy, but I really have no patience for someone that feels entitled to such information. Personally, when I go out for what I think might be an FTF, I always assume someone is finding the cache just after I've set off for it, so I'm always expecting it to be found by the time I get there.

 

Now because of that reaction, I almost want to wait to do the online log because of how upset he was...

That would just make you a jerk. I'll support you if you have some reason not to log your FTF right away, but I won't support you if you intentionally try to screw someone else up just because you don't like what they're doing.

 

But what I might do is stick in a little light hearted ribbing in hopes that the FTF hound will realize how rabid he's gotten. Blaming someone else for the time he wasted in a failed attempt for an FTF is pretty silly.

[+Sadjo]

One of my friends that has been caching for quite a while suggested always signing the 2nd line and leaving the ftf info open to the second cacher to sign as if they were ftf in an attempt to rib him a bit...I thought that would be more fun.

 

I try and log online as quickly as I can but in the field it is more of an issue of battery life left on my phone more so than data usage.

[team tisri]

Since DNFs don't have any way of knowing who found it and when, and finders have no way of knowing who might have looked but failed to find it, your example doesn't provide any useful insights into how out-of-sequence logs might be avoided, even if people did care enough to wait unknown amounts of time to write their logs.

That's why I explained what to do when they're out of sequence, since the out-of-sequence can't be avoided. But you're working so hard to not understand what I said, you get a gold star for the effort.

 

... or perhaps you're just not making it very clear.

 

Thanks for the gold star though. Not sure where I'll stick it just yet...

[4wheelin_fool]

Well, I agree that there is an increasing number of people that have undue entitlement issues nowadays, but someone that logs a STF before the FTF has a chance is not one of them. Most geocachers do this, and would not expect anyone to get annoyed that they do. Rather this highlights the fact that nowadays there are an increasing number of people that are overly sensitive to such minor and trivial things, that it is impossible to avoid causing offense.

Edited August 20, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[Clan Riffster]

Caching simplified:

Find 'em when you can.

Log 'em when you're able.

Don't stress over how self entitled folks feel you should play.

[+Mudfrog]

Caching simplified:

Find 'em when you can.

Log 'em when you're able.

Don't stress over how self entitled folks feel you should play.

 

Hey, can i use that?

[+The Jester]

Caching simplified:

Find 'em when you can.

Log 'em when you're able.

Don't stress over how self entitled folks feel you should play.

 

Hey, can i use that?

You just did!

[+flask]

i find that the logs that get written the second the cache is found are rarely worth reading. usually they're not even worth opening the email.

 

if you are waiting for me to log a first find so you can log your second or fifteenth or whatever, go right ahead. i write an actual log along with pictures for every blasted cache i find, and if i leave my house to go caching for two or three weeks and happen to make a first find somewhere while i am on the road, i simply do not care if you log it first. i also do not care if you write your log to claim that you are the first finder.

 

that's my signature in the log book and your side game matters little to me.

 

i keep seeing logs that say dumb stuff like "the first person to sign the logbook still hasn't logged in so i guess i'll claim first to find"

 

huh? whut?

 

i think i will begin claiming that i am the first to find on every cache. my rationalization will be that previous "finders" do not meet my standards and i am therefore the true first finder.

 

but seriously. if it's not worth it to you to go out unless you're the first finder, do yourself a favor and stay home. stay home and do not enter races, contests, play games, or even go shopping.

[the3gmen]

I don't play the (what I consider) silly first to find game and I see no reason to delay any log so that someone who does play that game can feed their ego.

[the3gmen]

Caching simplified:

Find 'em when you can.

Log 'em when you're able.

Don't stress over how self entitled folks feel you should play.

 

You said it much better than I did in my previous post.

 

Thank You.

[+bflentje]

Common courtesy would suggest allowing he FTF to log first. But it is quite apparent that common courtesy no longer exists. ME! ME!! I'm entitled!

Sad aspect of modern society.

Harry Dolphin is right.

No, he's not. What he claims is "common courtesy" is naught but him extending his own entitlement mentality to those who were FTF. I find cache "X". I log cache "X" when I am able. Only someone brimming with self entitlement would suggest that I should sit around, twiddling my thumbs, waiting till the FTF logs the find. Truly, the ultimate depiction of the "Me!" "Me!" society he claims to abhor. I believe introductions betwixt Mr Pot & Mrs Kettle are in order.

 

I couldn't have said it better myself. +1

[+JingleBella]

Sooooo this has branched out to many different points and other topics..

 

I think people need to realize that I wasn't complaining. I really don't care that someone logged 1 find before I did even though I was FTF. I personally will wait, so I was wondering anyone else had the same train of thought or what was the common opinion on the matter. Part of me thinks that the other FTF hounds in my area would wait at least a little bit.. If they do, cool.. If they don't, I don't care.

 

Note: I was out of my country, so in regards to the comment someone made about it only being mere kb of data... I can't remember exactly what each log runs at, but it's at least 1 MB each I believe?... so 4 logs x $5/MB of roaming data usage = $20 extra on my bill for this month. Definitely not worth it considering I was back on a WiFi connection within 30 minutes.

[+bflentje]

I really don't care that someone logged 1 find before I did even though I was FTF.

 

You cared enough to ask..

[+J Grouchy]

 

Note: I was out of my country, so in regards to the comment someone made about it only being mere kb of data... I can't remember exactly what each log runs at, but it's at least 1 MB each I believe?... so 4 logs x $5/MB of roaming data usage = $20 extra on my bill for this month. Definitely not worth it considering I was back on a WiFi connection within 30 minutes.

I sincerely doubt that...

[+JingleBella]

I really don't care that someone logged 1 find before I did even though I was FTF.

 

You cared enough to ask..

 

But I wasn't complaining...

 

Also... "I was wondering anyone else had the same train of thought or what was the common opinion on the matter"

[+JingleBella]

 

Note: I was out of my country, so in regards to the comment someone made about it only being mere kb of data... I can't remember exactly what each log runs at, but it's at least 1 MB each I believe?... so 4 logs x $5/MB of roaming data usage = $20 extra on my bill for this month. Definitely not worth it considering I was back on a WiFi connection within 30 minutes.

I sincerely doubt that...

 

I don't know... now I'm curious...

 

I do know I was logging them while doing a trail one day... found around 15 I believe it was... racked up about 60 MB in data. So the logs + walking the 600 feet in between them (which is just navigation, that doesn't use much) I think 1 MB each is a safe guess. Would really depend on the length of the log too.

[+Don_J]

I really don't care that someone logged 1 find before I did even though I was FTF.

 

You cared enough to ask..

\

Perhaps they were asking if they should care?

[+niraD]

I do know I was logging them while doing a trail one day... found around 15 I believe it was... racked up about 60 MB in data. So the logs + walking the 600 feet in between them (which is just navigation, that doesn't use much) I think 1 MB each is a safe guess. Would really depend on the length of the log too.

I think the length of the log is trivial compared with the size of the map images downloaded during navigation.

[+Ma & Pa]

I really don't care that someone logged 1 find before I did even though I was FTF.

 

You cared enough to ask..

\

Perhaps they were asking if they should care?

 

Based on the original post, it seems they were simply curious about whether it affected their stats.

 

*************************************

 

In my case I usually log our caches the same day, unless there is a major impediment. I don't worry if there is a FTF who has not logged, but if applicable, I will indicate that we weren`t FTF. If we are FTF, I do not care if someone logs first.

 

I don`t know why people feel that the FTF has to be FTLog. A week or two later, after many have found and logged the cache, nobody will care about FTF and they will not be going to check the old logs.

 

.

[Clan Riffster]

Caching simplified:

Find 'em when you can.

Log 'em when you're able.

Don't stress over how self entitled folks feel you should play.

 

Hey, can i use that?

Of course!

[+briansnat]

i find that the logs that get written the second the cache is found are rarely worth reading. usually they're not even worth opening the email.

 

if you are waiting for me to log a first find so you can log your second or fifteenth or whatever, go right ahead. i write an actual log along with pictures for every blasted cache i find, and if i leave my house to go caching for two or three weeks and happen to make a first find somewhere while i am on the road, i simply do not care if you log it first. i also do not care if you write your log to claim that you are the first finder.

 

that's my signature in the log book and your side game matters little to me.

 

i keep seeing logs that say dumb stuff like "the first person to sign the logbook still hasn't logged in so i guess i'll claim first to find"

 

huh? whut?

 

i think i will begin claiming that i am the first to find on every cache. my rationalization will be that previous "finders" do not meet my standards and i am therefore the true first finder.

 

but seriously. if it's not worth it to you to go out unless you're the first finder, do yourself a favor and stay home. stay home and do not enter races, contests, play games, or even go shopping.

 

Glad to see Flask back with her pithy posts! Well stated.

[+Mudfrog]

I do know I was logging them while doing a trail one day... found around 15 I believe it was... racked up about 60 MB in data. So the logs + walking the 600 feet in between them (which is just navigation, that doesn't use much) I think 1 MB each is a safe guess. Would really depend on the length of the log too.

I think the length of the log is trivial compared with the size of the map images downloaded during navigation.

 

Not to stay off topic but yes, i would bet that the navigating was the culprit here. I know i turned navigation on just to see how it worked one day and went just a few miles down the road before turning it back off. If i remember correctly, it used around 5 megs in that five or so minutes.

[team tisri]

 

Note: I was out of my country, so in regards to the comment someone made about it only being mere kb of data... I can't remember exactly what each log runs at, but it's at least 1 MB each I believe?... so 4 logs x $5/MB of roaming data usage = $20 extra on my bill for this month. Definitely not worth it considering I was back on a WiFi connection within 30 minutes.

I sincerely doubt that...

 

I don't know... now I'm curious...

 

I do know I was logging them while doing a trail one day... found around 15 I believe it was... racked up about 60 MB in data. So the logs + walking the 600 feet in between them (which is just navigation, that doesn't use much) I think 1 MB each is a safe guess. Would really depend on the length of the log too.

 

The length of the log is trivial unless you're writing tomes on each one.

 

What I found was that using the main site was heavy on data because of all the background images and stuff it loaded. Navigating can take a lot of data if you're constantly downloading map tiles as you move about. Using the wap site (don't know if that's even still there any more) reduced data usage to almost zero.

 

I've gone through 10MB of data while driving 90 miles with Google Maps running and nothing else going on.

[+DanOCan]

I'll also mention the first find really isn't any more special than any other find.

 

Should the second person to sign the log wait until the first has logged online?

Does that mean the third person needs to wait for the first two to log online?

etc. etc.

 

Log 'em when you can.

[+geoconsumer]

Local first!

 

Follow the conventions of your area.

 

If you don't know it, I suggest you log your find (weather FTF or not) asap. Even if it's a temp log. This is as a courtesy to other cachers who might be on the way or considering going. Gas is $.

 

As a side note:

I have to say you spent more money on gas to get to the cache then you would on data.

 

Temp Logs:

As a courtesy to the Cache Owner, I suggest posting a note with your updated log contents or delete your original log and post a new log. Notifications for owners are only sent when a log is created, not updated.

[+VegasScotty]

I enjoy getting a FTF...5 of my now 93 finds are FTFs. In my area we have a ftf hound that jumped all over me a week ago because I didn't post a ftf online asap. Apparently he wouldn't have continued his trip to find the cache if he had realized he wasn't going to be the ftf. <snip>

 

He's wrong.

 

Sounds to me like you're doing it right... continue to cache w/ the kids, continue to log when able, when it's convenient, and continue to have fun.

[team tisri]

Local first!

 

Follow the conventions of your area.

 

If you don't know it, I suggest you log your find (weather FTF or not) asap. Even if it's a temp log. This is as a courtesy to other cachers who might be on the way or considering going. Gas is $.

 

As a side note:

I have to say you spent more money on gas to get to the cache then you would on data.

 

Temp Logs:

As a courtesy to the Cache Owner, I suggest posting a note with your updated log contents or delete your original log and post a new log. Notifications for owners are only sent when a log is created, not updated.

 

If you rush out to get FTF you take the chance that someone else will beat you to it. That's the way it works. I'm not going to change my behaviour to accommodate the people who think it's a waste of their time to go out if they aren't guaranteed to be the first to find it.

 

You also assume that a trip to the cache is for that purpose only, and that the cacher finding it is local. When I'm in the US my data costs me several dollars per megabyte and I usually cache in areas I'd planned to be for other reasons anyway, so the gas isn't an issue and the data cost is significant, even assuming I can get a signal.

 

I'll log my caches when I get to a usable internet connection. If that means someone rushes out for FTF only to be thwarted that's the chance they take, just as it's the chance I take if I go out for an FTF.

[Clan Riffster]

Gas is $.

I like to think of gas as an investment toward my caching. If I find the cache first, or fifty first, or even if I DNF, it beats sitting on the couch. If my only reason for using gas is to have my moniker at the top of a piece of paper, it sounds like a risky investment. When you make risky investments, reason dictates that you will fail often. As I am big on individual accountability, I would rather not blame someone else for my poor financial decisions.

[+the4dirtydogs]

Caching simplified:

Find 'em when you can.

Log 'em when you're able.

Don't stress over how self entitled folks feel you should play.

But thats too easy and we can't have a couple pages of material to read about logging caches for FTF and laughing while reading. I like caching simplified.

Edited August 21, 2013 by the4dirtydogs

[+hzoi]

There are so many different nits being picked in this thread, I hardly know where to start,