When revisiting a cache, what type of log?

[+crunchewy]

I revisited a cache I'd previously found some time ago and couldn't remember where it was. After some searching we found it. Do I log this as a "Found" or a "Note"? At first I logged it as a found, but it bumped up my cache count, and that didn't seem right. I changed it to a Note. Then again it's useful to see that I found it because the previous person did not find it. What type of log should this be?

Edited December 1, 2013 by crunchewy

[+J Grouchy]

I revisited a cache I'd previously found some time ago and couldn't remember where it was. After some searching we found it. Do I log this as a "Found" or a "Note"? At first I logged it as a found, but it bumped up my cache count, and that didn't seem right. I changed it to a Note. Then again it's useful to see that I found it because the previous person did not find it. What type of log should this be?

 

No hard and fast rules, but a NOTE is recommended to keep your find count "clean and clear" from any duplicates.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

There can be many reasons for re-visiting a cache. That is what the Note log is for.

 

The previous DNF has no bearing on whether you re-visited or not. Your Note (rather what you say in that note) indicates that the cache is still there and viable, if that is your concern.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+briansnat]

Could be a note, could be a NM, could be a NA, but I wouldn't log a second find.

[+Traditional Bill]

While not technically against the rules, logging a cache more than once as found is generally frowned upon throughout the caching community. Like others have said, the best route is to log a note, needs archive or needs maintenance depending on the situation.

[+Chief301]

You probably get the idea by now, but I'd agree with logging a Note. There are many legitimate reasons for revisiting a cache....maybe you just want to drop off or retrieve a trackable from a cache you've already found, or you bring a friend to visit a cool cache you've found previously, for example. In those cases a new Found log would not be fitting, since it's a cache you've already found and it messes with your find count, if you care about that sort of thing.

 

Have you noticed when you view your stats it will say something like "You've found 150 caches (150 distinct)"? When these numbers don't match it means you've probably double logged the same cache somewhere along the line.

 

Now, if a cache you have previously found gets archived, and someone places a new cache at that location, even if it's an identical container hidden in the exact same style at the exact same spot, THAT would count as a completely new cache and you could log a new find on that one and still keep your stats clean and intact.

 

As Gitchee pointed out, if you log a Note that you revisited the cache, and didn't indicate any problems in your log, that's essentially letting others know that the cache is still there, just as effectively as a Found log.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Chief301

[+crunchewy]

Ok, thanks. Sounds like switching it to a note was the thing to do.

[GPS-Hermit]

Writing any Note about a cache is a positive thing cause it is recent info about the cache - especially if you corrected something about the cache! Added a Pen or cleaned it up a little or hid it more correctly! It a good thing! It is fine to say you refound it - everybody has dejava!

[+BAMBOOZLE]

The only time I revisit the caches of others is when I'm giving an out of town cacher a tour.....I never log anything at all.

I would argue that its perfectly fine to log a cache dozens of times as long as you visit the cache and sign the log again ( perfectly legal but not sure why anyone would do it ). I had an employee who helped me at a cache where I work....he had an account so he could read the logs. I told him to log each visit but I don't think he did....he would have had over 300 Finds , all of the same cache.

[+WRASTRO]

Most of the time when I revisit a cache location it is because my previous log was a DNF, so I am happy if I can post a Found It!

[+DragonsWest]

I revisited a cache I'd previously found some time ago and couldn't remember where it was. After some searching we found it. Do I log this as a "Found" or a "Note"? At first I logged it as a found, but it bumped up my cache count, and that didn't seem right. I changed it to a Note. Then again it's useful to see that I found it because the previous person did not find it. What type of log should this be?

As many opinions as there are days in the year, here's mine:

 

Log as you see fit. It you are comfortable with logging a find on multiple visits, that's great and don't let anyone tell you you are wrong for doing so. The game means different things to each player and some are concerned with their numbers and purity of them. That's their game.

 

If you feel the last time was recent enough, conditions remain unchanged and a note is sufficient, that's great, too.

[+JohnCNA]

I have on occasion posted a note instead of a DNF when I saw the location was something I would not look in, like a playground or if the area is flooded.

 

I have also revisited other's caches that were along the trail as I went to check on mine, and report if they were still there and in good shape or not.

[+-CJ-]

Log as you see fit. It you are comfortable with logging a find on multiple visits, that's great and don't let anyone tell you you are wrong for doing so. The game means different things to each player and some are concerned with their numbers and purity of them. That's their game

 

It's not an individual hobby but a community game. What you do might become an example for some number of people to follow, no?

[cezanne]

Could be a note, could be a NM, could be a NA, but I wouldn't log a second find.

 

I recently for the first time logged a DNF for a cache I have found previously (many years ago).

This time I was there together with a friend. It is a multi cache and the numbers at Stage 1 are now

very hard to read and we are not even sure whether we determined the coordinates correctly. I of course know that

we have been in the right area, but not whether we were at the right place. Moreover, the area has changed over the time and there

was snow. So a DNF log seemed most appropriate to me.

 

Cezanne

[+Don_J]

The only time I revisit the caches of others is when I'm giving an out of town cacher a tour.....I never log anything at all.

I would argue that its perfectly fine to log a cache dozens of times as long as you visit the cache and sign the log again ( perfectly legal but not sure why anyone would do it ). I had an employee who helped me at a cache where I work....he had an account so he could read the logs. I told him to log each visit but I don't think he did....he would have had over 300 Finds , all of the same cache.

 

That seems kind of silly. I pass about 15 caches on my normal route to work, and again on my way home. I could really rack up the numbers if I had that attitude. That said, if I see a DNF on any of them, if I have time, I'll stop and check it out and post a note so the owner gets a heads up.

[+dprovan]

I recently for the first time logged a DNF for a cache I have found previously (many years ago).

This time I was there together with a friend. It is a multi cache and the numbers at Stage 1 are now

very hard to read and we are not even sure whether we determined the coordinates correctly. I of course know that

we have been in the right area, but not whether we were at the right place. Moreover, the area has changed over the time and there

was snow. So a DNF log seemed most appropriate to me.

While I've followed that same logic when something like this has happened to me, I end up filing a Needs Maintenance log. I'm going to log an NM anyway, so logging a DNF would seem redundant, but, in reality, I don't log a DNF because, in my mind, it "cancels" my previous find even though it wouldn't actually reduce my find count or anything. If you log a DNF after a Found, does the DNF or the Found show up at the top of the listing where it shows your last log date?

[team tisri]

I revisited a cache I'd previously found some time ago and couldn't remember where it was. After some searching we found it. Do I log this as a "Found" or a "Note"? At first I logged it as a found, but it bumped up my cache count, and that didn't seem right. I changed it to a Note. Then again it's useful to see that I found it because the previous person did not find it. What type of log should this be?

 

Lots of views here.

 

If I revisit a cache to pick up or drop off a TB I just write a note because I didn't "find" it a second time. Some people claim a find each time they find it, even if they know exactly where it is because it's in the same place as the last time they found it.

 

Personally I'll only log a second find if I consider the cache to have changed sufficiently since I last found it to count as a different hide. One such example is a cache in an area I used to cache regularly where a cache was muggled and replaced with a different container, hidden in a different way, and in a very different location. Because so much had changed, finding it involved going out and looking for it based on the new coordinates - having found the previous incarnation was of no help at all - so I claimed it as another find with a clear conscience.

 

I'm sure some would disagree with my outlook.

[team tisri]

The only time I revisit the caches of others is when I'm giving an out of town cacher a tour.....I never log anything at all.

I would argue that its perfectly fine to log a cache dozens of times as long as you visit the cache and sign the log again ( perfectly legal but not sure why anyone would do it ). I had an employee who helped me at a cache where I work....he had an account so he could read the logs. I told him to log each visit but I don't think he did....he would have had over 300 Finds , all of the same cache.

 

That seems kind of silly. I pass about 15 caches on my normal route to work, and again on my way home. I could really rack up the numbers if I had that attitude. That said, if I see a DNF on any of them, if I have time, I'll stop and check it out and post a note so the owner gets a heads up.

 

Easier to wait until the end of the week and sign them all five times. Then you get 75 finds for only 15 stops.

[+fuzzybelly]

Ok, we've heard most all the views and I'm on the side of "write a note", so how about lets take the next step and ask the next logical question

 

What about if you as a CO notice another cacher has double logged a "found it". Do you contact that cacher, leave it as it is, or delete the log entry?

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Ok, we've heard most all the views and I'm on the side of "write a note", so how about lets take the next step and ask the next logical question

 

What about if you as a CO notice another cacher has double logged a "found it". Do you contact that cacher, leave it as it is, or delete the log entry?

 

As said, its perfectly legal to find and log a cache multiple times. As a CO if a cacher has logged one of your caches 100 times and has actually visited the cache on 100 separate occasions and signed the log each time you have no right to delete his log. Maybe its the only cache within 50 miles of his house and he takes a nice hike every two weeks. It may seem silly but GC.com allows it.

[+fuzzybelly]

Ok, we've heard most all the views and I'm on the side of "write a note", so how about lets take the next step and ask the next logical question

 

What about if you as a CO notice another cacher has double logged a "found it". Do you contact that cacher, leave it as it is, or delete the log entry?

 

As said, its perfectly legal to find and log a cache multiple times. As a CO if a cacher has logged one of your caches 100 times and has actually visited the cache on 100 separate occasions and signed the log each time you have no right to delete his log. Maybe its the only cache within 50 miles of his house and he takes a nice hike every two weeks. It may seem silly but GC.com allows it.

Good point of view Boozle. A thought I never thought of before:) Thanks for the reply

[+dprovan]

As said, its perfectly legal to find and log a cache multiple times. As a CO if a cacher has logged one of your caches 100 times and has actually visited the cache on 100 separate occasions and signed the log each time you have no right to delete his log. Maybe its the only cache within 50 miles of his house and he takes a nice hike every two weeks. It may seem silly but GC.com allows it.

Interesting. I always thought it was up to the discretion of the CO whether to allow multiple finds.

 

Of course, if the duplicates appear to be really duplicates -- same or similar text, same date -- then I delete them without thinking about it.

[+Don_J]

As said, its perfectly legal to find and log a cache multiple times. As a CO if a cacher has logged one of your caches 100 times and has actually visited the cache on 100 separate occasions and signed the log each time you have no right to delete his log. Maybe its the only cache within 50 miles of his house and he takes a nice hike every two weeks. It may seem silly but GC.com allows it.

Interesting. I always thought it was up to the discretion of the CO whether to allow multiple finds.

 

Of course, if the duplicates appear to be really duplicates -- same or similar text, same date -- then I delete them without thinking about it.

 

I am very reluctant to delete logs. In fact, I have only deleted one out of over 7000. I once notified a cacher that his Smartphone had obviously posted two logs and his response was that I should delete one of them. I told him that this was his responsibility, as the mistake was on his part.

 

I also had an occasional cacher that visited our area once a year, hiked the same trail, found my cache and logged it as found three years in a row. I had absolutely no problem with this as he was obviously not trying to pad his numbers but keep track of his caching activity and give me a report on my cache. Getting into a guideline or logging etiquette discussion with someone that has three finds in three years, all on my cache, just didn't seem proper.

 

BAMBOOZLE does bring up an interesting concept. If someone decided to visit one of my caches several day in a row, sign the log and log a find online, (say like every day in last August), I'm not sure how I would feel about it. A lot would depend on what that motivation was for doing so. More importantly, if I decided that that cacher gets one and only one log, who would Groundspeak side with? Without looking it up, I think the guidelines uses the term, "generally not accepted".

Edited December 20, 2013 by Don_J

[+dprovan]

I am very reluctant to delete logs. In fact, I have only deleted one out of over 7000. I once notified a cacher that his Smartphone had obviously posted two logs and his response was that I should delete one of them. I told him that this was his responsibility, as the mistake was on his part.

My problem is that even sending the initial note seems way more trouble than his action is worth, and certainly more effort than just deleting it. And that's before considering the possibility of ending up in a debate about who's responsibility it is to delete it. I'd only go to that much trouble if I thought this was a teachable moment.