Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Dogmeat*

FTF Being Claimed Before Cache is Published

Recommended Posts

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

 

I've got two out there that have yet to be found. One for 9 months, the other for 5. I can't wait for a FTF on those, but I am not sitting by the inbox waiting for them.

 

Personally, my only enjoyment of FTF for anything is if I can get an FTF on a cache that has been out more than a month.

 

Most "FTF hounds" that I know focus very heavily on easy-to-find caches and easy-to-solve puzzles. Their obvious pride in the accomplishment of being the first to lift a lamp skirt does not make a lot of sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

I've got two out there that have yet to be found.

So... Are you bored? :ph34r::P:lol:

 

I couldn't quite wrap my head around why The_Incredibles would 'sit around for days', (or even minutes), waiting on someone to log their cache. Do folks really do that? When I hide a cache, and get it published, whoever happens to nab the allegedly coveted FTF will generate an email with their log. I'll see the logs the next time I'm online.

 

Yes, I sit around for days at the computer waiting for the FTF email. I've even got things rigged up so I don't have to get up to go to the toilet. It took a bit of plumbing, but it's worth it. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Nothing wrong with people signing the logbook if they were with their friend when they hid it.

 

If you were there when it was hidden, then you already know where it is located, how do you 'find' it? I'd say it's akin to finding your own cache.

 

 

In a certain state I visit often and geocache in, it's totally acceptable to bring a new cache to an event, let people sign the log, then go out and place it:

 

:D Found it

WooHoo FTF. Xxx Xxxxx was the first to ink this sweet blank log at the meeting in Xxxxxxxx. Thanks for putting out this cool idea for a cache.

 

:D Found it

Found it at the Xxxxxxxx XXX meeting. Thanks for the cache XXX. Cool idea.

 

:grin: Publish Listing

Published

 

:D Found it

First to log. Saw this at the meeting in Xxxxxxxx.

 

:D Found it

Found this one in the back of Xxxxx and Xxxxxxxxxx truck.

 

There are about a dozen similar logs.

 

Just when you think you've heard it all.

Share this post


Link to post

Around here....our geocaching group will raffle off unpublished geocaches for FTF prizes. The owner of the cache will wait until the 'winner' finds the cache and signs the log before publishing it. Generally, its a mad dash that evening to find it and sometimes - a group will go together and claim the FTF. That's something our local group has done for a long time. It's a lot of fun.

 

The cache owners will state in the description or in a log note - that the cache has already been claimed for an FTF (prior to publishing).

 

We have a pretty large group with some 50 folks that show up to our meetings. Everyone loves the FTF prizes!

Edited by Lieblweb

Share this post


Link to post

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

I've got two out there that have yet to be found.

So... Are you bored? :ph34r::P:lol:

 

I couldn't quite wrap my head around why The_Incredibles would 'sit around for days', (or even minutes), waiting on someone to log their cache. Do folks really do that? When I hide a cache, and get it published, whoever happens to nab the allegedly coveted FTF will generate an email with their log. I'll see the logs the next time I'm online.

 

Nope, not bored. I know there are minds out there trying to solve the puzzle. That's enough for me. Someone will eventually get it, I'll get the email, and they will get a hearty "congrats" from me.

Share this post


Link to post

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

 

I've got two out there that have yet to be found. One for 9 months, the other for 5. I can't wait for a FTF on those, but I am not sitting by the inbox waiting for them.

 

Personally, my only enjoyment of FTF for anything is if I can get an FTF on a cache that has been out more than a month.

 

Most "FTF hounds" that I know focus very heavily on easy-to-find caches and easy-to-solve puzzles. Their obvious pride in the accomplishment of being the first to lift a lamp skirt does not make a lot of sense to me.

 

Yep. Place one in the woods around here and it could go days or weeks before a first find. It's kinda sad.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd call this behavior beta testing, and logging "FTF" on a cache before it's published because someone gave you the logbook sounds pretty weak to me.

 

Then again, I don't really care as much about who is FTF these days. I seldom seek the status for myself, and I've stopped recognizing it on our caches.

Share this post


Link to post

in the Northwest Ohio neck of the woods, it's special to be "second-to-find"... B)

 

NWOGEO cachers gave it a very unique moniker, calling it "Cheech honors" after our illustrious Cheech_Gang...

 

keeping it simple and keeping it fun...

Share this post


Link to post

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

I've got two out there that have yet to be found.

So... Are you bored? :ph34r::P:lol:

 

I couldn't quite wrap my head around why The_Incredibles would 'sit around for days', (or even minutes), waiting on someone to log their cache. Do folks really do that? When I hide a cache, and get it published, whoever happens to nab the allegedly coveted FTF will generate an email with their log. I'll see the logs the next time I'm online.

 

Yes, I sit around for days at the computer waiting for the FTF email. I've even got things rigged up so I don't have to get up to go to the toilet. It took a bit of plumbing, but it's worth it. :P

 

How much did that plumbing cost? Probably more than a laptop and a router...:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

Well apparently (judging from the blistering e-mail) that blank logbook is more important to many FTF hounds than the fun of finding the cache.

 

It was not just once or twice when people logged my caches happily as "FTF in a brand new logbook!" despite of the fact that it was just a replaced logbook in a pretty old cache :)

Share this post


Link to post

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

I've got two out there that have yet to be found.

So... Are you bored? :ph34r::P:lol:

 

I couldn't quite wrap my head around why The_Incredibles would 'sit around for days', (or even minutes), waiting on someone to log their cache. Do folks really do that? When I hide a cache, and get it published, whoever happens to nab the allegedly coveted FTF will generate an email with their log. I'll see the logs the next time I'm online.

 

Yes, I sit around for days at the computer waiting for the FTF email. I've even got things rigged up so I don't have to get up to go to the toilet. It took a bit of plumbing, but it's worth it. :P

 

How much did that plumbing cost? Probably more than a laptop and a router...:ph34r:

 

Maybe. But it's way cooler and you get FTF emails 300% faster.

 

bizarre-apple-concepts.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post

It would be terribly boring if you published a cache and you're sitting there for days waiting for someone who 'happened to be in the area' to find it. :(

I've got two out there that have yet to be found.

So... Are you bored? :ph34r::P:lol:

 

I couldn't quite wrap my head around why The_Incredibles would 'sit around for days', (or even minutes), waiting on someone to log their cache. Do folks really do that? When I hide a cache, and get it published, whoever happens to nab the allegedly coveted FTF will generate an email with their log. I'll see the logs the next time I'm online.

 

Yes, I sit around for days at the computer waiting for the FTF email. I've even got things rigged up so I don't have to get up to go to the toilet. It took a bit of plumbing, but it's worth it. :P

 

Who needs plumbing?

 

b3efdc2b-8e16-441b-a2aa-a7c7ac375176.jpg?rnd=0.4503682

Edited by Don_J

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

 

I too like getting the occasional ftf but due to my cheapness and higher gas prices, i have slowed down quite a bit. I'll take off for one if it is close enough, otherwise i don't bother with it.

 

On topic, i have run across this a few times and have always thought it was cheesy and silly. I just don't understand why anyone would want to claim ftf on a cache they either helped hide or that they were given coordinates ahead of time on. Tribute caches fall into this as i just don't see the point in why someone would think it's special to find a cache ahead of everyone else when they were the only ones who had coordinates. Yes the tribute is nice but if you're gonna do one, don't do me any favors by giving me coordinates before anyone else. For me, the whole point of the ftf game is the friendly competition and comraderie that comes along with it.

 

It's a shame that some people take the ftf game so seriously. Best advice is to just walk away when you come across goofy things like someone letting their buddy sign the log before the cache is published. I can't imagine even wanting to claim a find on a cache that i helped hide or witnessed being hidden. But as we see in this very thread, some people do it. Again, just walk away!

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

 

I too like getting the occasional ftf but due to my cheapness and higher gas prices, i have slowed down quite a bit. I'll take off for one if it is close enough, otherwise i don't bother with it.

 

On topic, i have run across this a few times and have always thought it was cheesy and silly. I just don't understand why anyone would want to claim ftf on a cache they either helped hide or that they were given coordinates ahead of time on. Tribute caches fall into this as i just don't see the point in why someone would think it's special to find a cache ahead of everyone else when they were the only ones who had coordinates. Yes the tribute is nice but if you're gonna do one, don't do me any favors by giving me coordinates before anyone else. For me, the whole point of the ftf game is the friendly competition and comraderie that comes along with it.

 

It's a shame that some people take the ftf game so seriously. Best advice is to just walk away when you come across goofy things like someone letting their buddy sign the log before the cache is published. I can't imagine even wanting to claim a find on a cache that i helped hide or witnessed being hidden. But as we see in this very thread, some people do it. Again, just walk away!

 

I keep seeing the "gas prices" comment, but seriously, I don't really understand the logic unless this cache is 20 or 30 miles away. If it's just a mile or two down the road, gas really isn't even a factor to fret about.

 

As for FTFs, I generally don't bother unless it's "convenient"...meaning I'm very close when it gets published and I have the time to get in my car or detour over to it. There are enough folks in my area that will jump on any newly published cache that it's not worth any serious effort to try.

 

Looking through my stats, I've actually achieved the FTF every month since July...not because of trying to do that, but it's just worked out that way. I don't have a March FTF, though...so that little streak will probably end next week.

Share this post


Link to post

In the past there have been various glitches in the matrix that allowed coordinates to be obtained prior to publication. I have heard that some people used these to go find caches days before they were published. So were these FTFs any more or less legit than the FTFs claimed by friends of the owner?

 

How about the brute force crowd? Last year we had a guy putting out a cache every day for 100 days. In many cases, he would put out 4 or 5 caches in the same area on the same trail, so many would find the published cache, then walk 0.10mi in one direction and start looking. A large percentage of the caches were found pre-publish, but that's all part of the fun. They were still FTF regardless of when the cache was published.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

 

I too like getting the occasional ftf but due to my cheapness and higher gas prices, i have slowed down quite a bit. I'll take off for one if it is close enough, otherwise i don't bother with it.

 

On topic, i have run across this a few times and have always thought it was cheesy and silly. I just don't understand why anyone would want to claim ftf on a cache they either helped hide or that they were given coordinates ahead of time on. Tribute caches fall into this as i just don't see the point in why someone would think it's special to find a cache ahead of everyone else when they were the only ones who had coordinates. Yes the tribute is nice but if you're gonna do one, don't do me any favors by giving me coordinates before anyone else. For me, the whole point of the ftf game is the friendly competition and comraderie that comes along with it.

 

It's a shame that some people take the ftf game so seriously. Best advice is to just walk away when you come across goofy things like someone letting their buddy sign the log before the cache is published. I can't imagine even wanting to claim a find on a cache that i helped hide or witnessed being hidden. But as we see in this very thread, some people do it. Again, just walk away!

 

I keep seeing the "gas prices" comment, but seriously, I don't really understand the logic unless this cache is 20 or 30 miles away. If it's just a mile or two down the road, gas really isn't even a factor to fret about.

 

As for FTFs, I generally don't bother unless it's "convenient"...meaning I'm very close when it gets published and I have the time to get in my car or detour over to it. There are enough folks in my area that will jump on any newly published cache that it's not worth any serious effort to try.

 

Looking through my stats, I've actually achieved the FTF every month since July...not because of trying to do that, but it's just worked out that way. I don't have a March FTF, though...so that little streak will probably end next week.

 

As far as saving gas, i've set my limits to around 15 miles. Many caches come out that are 15 or less miles away but this is not as the crow flies. Making a round trip on a 15 mile away cache in my 15mpg Jeep costs close to 7 dollars. No, not a whole lot of money but it's money i don't wish to spend too often on something this unimportant.

 

This has gotten me to thinking now. I'm cutting my own throat by not logging caches while they're still in the cache owner's hands. Doing this would certainly save me some gas! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

 

I too like getting the occasional ftf but due to my cheapness and higher gas prices, i have slowed down quite a bit. I'll take off for one if it is close enough, otherwise i don't bother with it.

 

On topic, i have run across this a few times and have always thought it was cheesy and silly. I just don't understand why anyone would want to claim ftf on a cache they either helped hide or that they were given coordinates ahead of time on. Tribute caches fall into this as i just don't see the point in why someone would think it's special to find a cache ahead of everyone else when they were the only ones who had coordinates. Yes the tribute is nice but if you're gonna do one, don't do me any favors by giving me coordinates before anyone else. For me, the whole point of the ftf game is the friendly competition and comraderie that comes along with it.

 

It's a shame that some people take the ftf game so seriously. Best advice is to just walk away when you come across goofy things like someone letting their buddy sign the log before the cache is published. I can't imagine even wanting to claim a find on a cache that i helped hide or witnessed being hidden. But as we see in this very thread, some people do it. Again, just walk away!

 

I keep seeing the "gas prices" comment, but seriously, I don't really understand the logic unless this cache is 20 or 30 miles away. If it's just a mile or two down the road, gas really isn't even a factor to fret about.

 

As for FTFs, I generally don't bother unless it's "convenient"...meaning I'm very close when it gets published and I have the time to get in my car or detour over to it. There are enough folks in my area that will jump on any newly published cache that it's not worth any serious effort to try.

 

Looking through my stats, I've actually achieved the FTF every month since July...not because of trying to do that, but it's just worked out that way. I don't have a March FTF, though...so that little streak will probably end next week.

 

As far as saving gas, i've set my limits to around 15 miles. Many caches come out that are 15 or less miles away but this is not as the crow flies. Making a round trip on a 15 mile away cache in my 15mpg Jeep costs close to 7 dollars. No, not a whole lot of money but it's money i don't wish to spend too often on something this unimportant.

 

This has gotten me to thinking now. I'm cutting my own throat by not logging caches while they're still in the cache owner's hands. Doing this would certainly save me some gas! :lol:

 

Assuming a 15 mile round trip drive. A recent report by The Automobile Club of Southern California, (AAA), sates that it costs the average driver in this area 92 cents per mile to drive their car. This includes fuel, insurance, and maintenance. So, rolling out of the house right as I'm getting ready for bed, then spending $13.80 to find an LPC that cost the CO 50 cents to hide, just seems silly. If it's on a mountain trail, and still available in the morning, I may make the trip.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

 

I too like getting the occasional ftf but due to my cheapness and higher gas prices, i have slowed down quite a bit. I'll take off for one if it is close enough, otherwise i don't bother with it.

 

On topic, i have run across this a few times and have always thought it was cheesy and silly. I just don't understand why anyone would want to claim ftf on a cache they either helped hide or that they were given coordinates ahead of time on. Tribute caches fall into this as i just don't see the point in why someone would think it's special to find a cache ahead of everyone else when they were the only ones who had coordinates. Yes the tribute is nice but if you're gonna do one, don't do me any favors by giving me coordinates before anyone else. For me, the whole point of the ftf game is the friendly competition and comraderie that comes along with it.

 

It's a shame that some people take the ftf game so seriously. Best advice is to just walk away when you come across goofy things like someone letting their buddy sign the log before the cache is published. I can't imagine even wanting to claim a find on a cache that i helped hide or witnessed being hidden. But as we see in this very thread, some people do it. Again, just walk away!

 

I keep seeing the "gas prices" comment, but seriously, I don't really understand the logic unless this cache is 20 or 30 miles away. If it's just a mile or two down the road, gas really isn't even a factor to fret about.

 

As for FTFs, I generally don't bother unless it's "convenient"...meaning I'm very close when it gets published and I have the time to get in my car or detour over to it. There are enough folks in my area that will jump on any newly published cache that it's not worth any serious effort to try.

 

Looking through my stats, I've actually achieved the FTF every month since July...not because of trying to do that, but it's just worked out that way. I don't have a March FTF, though...so that little streak will probably end next week.

 

As far as saving gas, i've set my limits to around 15 miles. Many caches come out that are 15 or less miles away but this is not as the crow flies. Making a round trip on a 15 mile away cache in my 15mpg Jeep costs close to 7 dollars. No, not a whole lot of money but it's money i don't wish to spend too often on something this unimportant.

 

This has gotten me to thinking now. I'm cutting my own throat by not logging caches while they're still in the cache owner's hands. Doing this would certainly save me some gas! :lol:

 

Assuming a 15 mile round trip drive. A recent report by The Automobile Club of Southern California, (AAA), sates that it costs the average driver in this area 92 cents per mile to drive their car. This includes fuel, insurance, and maintenance. So, rolling out of the house right as I'm getting ready for bed, then spending $13.80 to find an LPC that cost the CO 50 cents to hide, just seems silly. If it's on a mountain trail, and still available in the morning, I may make the trip.

 

Gas is still stupid expensive. I for one, am not going to "get used to it". And as I type this, oil is just under $100 a barrel, yet gas prices are still 85-90% of what they were when oil reached it's all time high during the recession of 2008. Gas should be about $2.00 a gallon in most of the U.S. right now. If I had my way, that is. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like getting FTFs, and I do list them in my profile, but around 2008 or so I decided that once my boots were off, I'm not leaving the house. I've only violated that rule once. I live in a private community and a new cache popped up across the street from the main entrance. Still didn't put my boots on. I did it in flip flops. Good fake rock cache.

 

I too like getting the occasional ftf but due to my cheapness and higher gas prices, i have slowed down quite a bit. I'll take off for one if it is close enough, otherwise i don't bother with it.

 

On topic, i have run across this a few times and have always thought it was cheesy and silly. I just don't understand why anyone would want to claim ftf on a cache they either helped hide or that they were given coordinates ahead of time on. Tribute caches fall into this as i just don't see the point in why someone would think it's special to find a cache ahead of everyone else when they were the only ones who had coordinates. Yes the tribute is nice but if you're gonna do one, don't do me any favors by giving me coordinates before anyone else. For me, the whole point of the ftf game is the friendly competition and comraderie that comes along with it.

 

It's a shame that some people take the ftf game so seriously. Best advice is to just walk away when you come across goofy things like someone letting their buddy sign the log before the cache is published. I can't imagine even wanting to claim a find on a cache that i helped hide or witnessed being hidden. But as we see in this very thread, some people do it. Again, just walk away!

 

I keep seeing the "gas prices" comment, but seriously, I don't really understand the logic unless this cache is 20 or 30 miles away. If it's just a mile or two down the road, gas really isn't even a factor to fret about.

 

As for FTFs, I generally don't bother unless it's "convenient"...meaning I'm very close when it gets published and I have the time to get in my car or detour over to it. There are enough folks in my area that will jump on any newly published cache that it's not worth any serious effort to try.

 

Looking through my stats, I've actually achieved the FTF every month since July...not because of trying to do that, but it's just worked out that way. I don't have a March FTF, though...so that little streak will probably end next week.

 

As far as saving gas, i've set my limits to around 15 miles. Many caches come out that are 15 or less miles away but this is not as the crow flies. Making a round trip on a 15 mile away cache in my 15mpg Jeep costs close to 7 dollars. No, not a whole lot of money but it's money i don't wish to spend too often on something this unimportant.

 

This has gotten me to thinking now. I'm cutting my own throat by not logging caches while they're still in the cache owner's hands. Doing this would certainly save me some gas! :lol:

 

Assuming a 15 mile round trip drive. A recent report by The Automobile Club of Southern California, (AAA), sates that it costs the average driver in this area 92 cents per mile to drive their car. This includes fuel, insurance, and maintenance. So, rolling out of the house right as I'm getting ready for bed, then spending $13.80 to find an LPC that cost the CO 50 cents to hide, just seems silly. If it's on a mountain trail, and still available in the morning, I may make the trip.

 

On a mountain trail,,, count me in, ftf or not! :)

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm certainly not condoning signing of the log before publication since i feel it's a silly and cheesy thing to do. Yes, it would bug me somewhat to find a presigned logsheet, but in this case, the enjoyment of the hike up the trail would be the main thing i was after anyway. B)

Share this post


Link to post

A couple of comments here addressed the "would you 'Find' it if..." question, as opposed to pure FTFs. But to add my little bit on that - for those who said they would only mark a cache Found if they were with the CO and they walked away and returned to search for it with the coordinates; or the CO gave them coordinates to search... what if you saw where the CO placed it, would you never log it found? Or would you hold off, then come back and "re-find" it (even though you know where it is)?

 

Personally, I'll log it found if I think that it would be a 'waste' (well, duplicated effort) to come back later just to sign it.

This covers things like group caching with friends - one person finds it, well now I know where it is; why postpone my Find until I'm the one to find it? it's already found, I know where it is, seems like a waste just to come back alone to log it.

Or 'ubercaching': if I find a cache without solving its puzzle (or a multi by searching the likely area for the final) - I'll log it found, but keep note that it was without the puzzle solve, and more often than not, the fact I didn't solve the puzzle will bug me :P I've got a bookmarklist for caches solved w/o the puzzle solution, because I like to know solutions; I can return at any time to the listing and work out the puzzle for myself. I love puzzles, and I get the spirit of the puzzle to the CO - so my way of addressing that is to keep note of that cache and the fact that it was like a pseudo-find. But why hold off signing the logsheet and posting the find, when I have indeed found the container?

For challenge caches, it's just like unsolved puzzle caches that I find, except that the Challenge cache actually has the ALR (solving a puzzle isn't an ALR), so I'll sign the logsheet and keep note of the cache (or post a note), then only log it online once the challenge is qualified. Because the cache has already been found.

 

My one exception in this process really was when I was attempting to limit my finds to hit a certain number on a certain date. During that time if I 'located' caches that I didn't want to find (whether out with friends or say, alone on a trail to find one target cache and ended up locating a few), I just marked them offline as found (located, without signing the logsheet), then would return to them later to do the full effort. The only difference was the act itself of 'locating', of determining the how/where of the container.

 

To me, a cache is basically found if I've seen the final container (and signed the logsheet), with the exception being an ALR. So if I'm with the CO when it's placed, it seems redundant to not log a find only to have to return later to do so. Now I wouldn't claim FTF, since it was essentially a give; and I might hold off on the log online for a bit, or when I sign the logsheet also mention that I was with the CO so that the FTFer doesn't get confused.

Likewise, say I knew where an unpublished cache was, I wouldn't stake out gz until the moment the cache was published just to 'technically' claim FTF, because that seems like an unfair advantage too. But if by chance I'm nearby when a cache is published, I wouldn't hold off the FTF - that's just how the cookie crumbled in my favour :P.

 

There are just too many factors in deciding what constitutes a "Find" and an "FTF" for any one person. My priority is the fundamental definition of 'finding a cache' (located and signed), balanced with respect for the CO and general caching etiquette. That may change from CO to CO, or from community to community.

Geocaching is such a flexible pastime!B)

Share this post


Link to post

For many years, in my area, it was common to sign the log if we were with the CO when the cache was placed, but to do it further down the logbook or sheet. We would wait to log it online until it had been found at least three times. In some cases, it could mean a long wait. But the system worked for us. There was never any controversy about who was first.

 

Several of us, though, have stumbled upon caches before they were published and in that context I have had no problem in signing at the top and logging the cache online. In one instance, someone logged the cache after I did as being "first to find after publication." I never have "claimed" a find or used FTF in any log -- if people really care about who was first they can look at the log -- but it did not bother me if someone wanted to make that distinction.

Edited by geodarts

Share this post


Link to post

[F]or those who said they would only mark a cache Found if they were with the CO and they walked away and returned to search for it with the coordinates; or the CO gave them coordinates to search... what if you saw where the CO placed it, would you never log it found? Or would you hold off, then come back and "re-find" it (even though you know where it is)?

 

Personally, I'll log it found if I think that it would be a 'waste' (well, duplicated effort) to come back later just to sign it.

Different people have different standards for "finding" a cache. I once helped a friend hide a cache along a mountain trail. Searching for the cache at its posted location is an integral part of geocaching to me, so I added this cache to my "Ignore" list rather than log a "Found It." Chalking up another smiley just isn't that important to me.

 

This covers things like group caching with friends - one person finds it, well now I know where it is; why postpone my Find until I'm the one to find it? it's already found, I know where it is, seems like a waste just to come back alone to log it.

When I geocache with friends, I might not be the person who first spots the cache, but I help search for it. That's acceptable by my standards.

 

To me, a cache is basically found if I've seen the final container (and signed the logsheet)...

I have passed on opportunities to find "pocket" caches that were handed to me at restaurant events. It just doesn't meet my personal standards of "finding" a geocache.

 

My standards are stricter than some peoples' and not as strict as others'. While I understand many of the differences, there are points where I start to roll my eyes and not consider certain activities to be "geocaching."

Edited by CanadianRockies

Share this post


Link to post

Nothing wrong with people signing the logbook if they were with their friend when they hid it.

 

If you were there when it was hidden, then you already know where it is located, how do you 'find' it? I'd say it's akin to finding your own cache.

 

 

In a certain state I visit often and geocache in, it's totally acceptable to bring a new cache to an event, let people sign the log, then go out and place it:

 

:D Found it

WooHoo FTF. Xxx Xxxxx was the first to ink this sweet blank log at the meeting in Xxxxxxxx. Thanks for putting out this cool idea for a cache.

 

:D Found it

Found it at the Xxxxxxxx XXX meeting. Thanks for the cache XXX. Cool idea.

 

:grin: Publish Listing

Published

 

:D Found it

First to log. Saw this at the meeting in Xxxxxxxx.

 

:D Found it

Found this one in the back of Xxxxx and Xxxxxxxxxx truck.

 

There are about a dozen similar logs.

 

Just when you think you've heard it all.

 

Brian do you remember how it was done in the early days :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

I've got two out there that have yet to be found. One for 9 months, the other for 5. I can't wait for a FTF on those, but I am not sitting by the inbox waiting for them.

 

Okay dude, I'm on it.

 

(well, one of them anyway) ;)

Share this post


Link to post

Have you never been caching with someone else?

Yes, many times.

 

You're both searching, they find it and bring it to you, you sign the log.

Agreed, done it.

 

Not much different.

I totally disagree. If your friend is about to hide the cache and hands you the log to sign before they stash it, you didn't find it. It doesn't matter how close to GZ you are.

 

 

What is the difference between these 2 cases. In the first case, you didn't find it either and yet you logged your Find. In both cases, someone handed you the cache at GZ and you signed the log.

 

The difference is with who handed it to you. Was that person there with you trying to find it, or was that person there to hide it?

 

If they were searching with you, you're a co-finder.

 

If they were there placing the cache, you're a co-hider at best.

Share this post


Link to post

[F]or those who said they would only mark a cache Found if they were with the CO and they walked away and returned to search for it with the coordinates; or the CO gave them coordinates to search... what if you saw where the CO placed it, would you never log it found? Or would you hold off, then come back and "re-find" it (even though you know where it is)?

 

Personally, I'll log it found if I think that it would be a 'waste' (well, duplicated effort) to come back later just to sign it.

Different people have different standards for "finding" a cache. I once helped a friend hide a cache along a mountain trail. Searching for the cache at its posted location is an integral part of geocaching to me, so I added this cache to my "Ignore" list rather than log a "Found It." Chalking up another smiley just isn't that important to me.

 

This covers things like group caching with friends - one person finds it, well now I know where it is; why postpone my Find until I'm the one to find it? it's already found, I know where it is, seems like a waste just to come back alone to log it.

When I geocache with friends, I might not be the person who first spots the cache, but I help search for it. That's acceptable by my standards.

 

To me, a cache is basically found if I've seen the final container (and signed the logsheet)...

I have passed on opportunities to find "pocket" caches that were handed to me at restaurant events. It just doesn't meet my personal standards of "finding" a geocache.

 

My standards are stricter than some peoples' and not as strict as others'. While I understand many of the differences, there are points where I start to roll my eyes and not consider certain activities to be "geocaching."

 

Ditto, all of CanadianRockies replies.

 

A cache i see being hidden or one that i helped hide goes on my ignore list but at the same time, sometimes goes on my watchlist.

 

If i'm with a group of friends, i log the find if i'm actively helping with the search. I won't log found if i'm not within sight of the cache's hiding spot when it is found by the rest of the group.

 

Pocket caches can be fun i suppose but they aren't something i wish to log. Temporary caches won't get logged either.

Share this post


Link to post

To me, a cache is basically found if I've seen the final container (and signed the logsheet)...

I have passed on opportunities to find "pocket" caches that were handed to me at restaurant events. It just doesn't meet my personal standards of "finding" a geocache.

heh, I should clarify. "If I've seen the final 'hide'" - not just the container. The how of its hiding (the whole premise of the 'find') :) If I think the find is 'ruined' in some way, I'm not so strict about the fun that I'll put a cache on ignore; to me, a find is a find. And as mentioned, if it wasn't a complete find, I'll put it on a list so I can come back to it (like unsolved puzzles, or reportedly very well made multicaches - that is, it's worth going back to do the experience, even if the cache has already been 'found')

 

And yes, there's a wide range of standards for what qualifies a 'find' for someone (above and beyond the generally accepted etiquette, and above the minimal requirement Groundspeak promotes- name in the logbook).

:)

Share this post


Link to post

[F]or those who said they would only mark a cache Found if they were with the CO and they walked away and returned to search for it with the coordinates; or the CO gave them coordinates to search... what if you saw where the CO placed it, would you never log it found? Or would you hold off, then come back and "re-find" it (even though you know where it is)?

 

Personally, I'll log it found if I think that it would be a 'waste' (well, duplicated effort) to come back later just to sign it.

Different people have different standards for "finding" a cache. I once helped a friend hide a cache along a mountain trail. Searching for the cache at its posted location is an integral part of geocaching to me, so I added this cache to my "Ignore" list rather than log a "Found It." Chalking up another smiley just isn't that important to me.

 

This covers things like group caching with friends - one person finds it, well now I know where it is; why postpone my Find until I'm the one to find it? it's already found, I know where it is, seems like a waste just to come back alone to log it.

When I geocache with friends, I might not be the person who first spots the cache, but I help search for it. That's acceptable by my standards.

 

To me, a cache is basically found if I've seen the final container (and signed the logsheet)...

I have passed on opportunities to find "pocket" caches that were handed to me at restaurant events. It just doesn't meet my personal standards of "finding" a geocache.

 

My standards are stricter than some peoples' and not as strict as others'. While I understand many of the differences, there are points where I start to roll my eyes and not consider certain activities to be "geocaching."

 

Ditto, all of CanadianRockies replies.

 

A cache i see being hidden or one that i helped hide goes on my ignore list but at the same time, sometimes goes on my watchlist.

 

If i'm with a group of friends, i log the find if i'm actively helping with the search. I won't log found if i'm not within sight of the cache's hiding spot when it is found by the rest of the group.

 

Pocket caches can be fun i suppose but they aren't something i wish to log. Temporary caches won't get logged either.

 

I was basically trained by the local group that if I'm present when a cache is hidden, then I log it as a "beta" find. This can include loading the coordinates into my GPSr, walking away and seeing if the coordinates work with my unit, if the cache cammo is working properly, etc. I've really never known any different. I've since learned that I don't have to "find" ever cache, but Like I said, it's just how it's always been done around here and no one really has an issue with it. Note that this practice came about before there was an Ignore list, so I think it was more about keeping unfound caches off of the map. I have no problem if some have higher standards, and I have no problem if some think that the practice is lame or cheesy. What our group would never do is log such a cache as a FTF, and we do not log the cache online until someone claims a FTF. All of the caches that I have logged like this are well up a mountain trail, and many, I have found again at a later date as I was hiking along and did a courtesy check for the CO.

 

I guess we all have different standards. While the "beta" find doesn't bother me, I won't even consider logging a find on a piece of Velcro, a magnet or a fence post cache that can't be retrieved. That gets a NM log and I'll go back and find it if it gets fixed.

Share this post


Link to post

[F]or those who said they would only mark a cache Found if they were with the CO and they walked away and returned to search for it with the coordinates; or the CO gave them coordinates to search... what if you saw where the CO placed it, would you never log it found? Or would you hold off, then come back and "re-find" it (even though you know where it is)?

 

Personally, I'll log it found if I think that it would be a 'waste' (well, duplicated effort) to come back later just to sign it.

Different people have different standards for "finding" a cache. I once helped a friend hide a cache along a mountain trail. Searching for the cache at its posted location is an integral part of geocaching to me, so I added this cache to my "Ignore" list rather than log a "Found It." Chalking up another smiley just isn't that important to me.

 

This covers things like group caching with friends - one person finds it, well now I know where it is; why postpone my Find until I'm the one to find it? it's already found, I know where it is, seems like a waste just to come back alone to log it.

When I geocache with friends, I might not be the person who first spots the cache, but I help search for it. That's acceptable by my standards.

 

To me, a cache is basically found if I've seen the final container (and signed the logsheet)...

I have passed on opportunities to find "pocket" caches that were handed to me at restaurant events. It just doesn't meet my personal standards of "finding" a geocache.

 

My standards are stricter than some peoples' and not as strict as others'. While I understand many of the differences, there are points where I start to roll my eyes and not consider certain activities to be "geocaching."

 

Ditto, all of CanadianRockies replies.

 

A cache i see being hidden or one that i helped hide goes on my ignore list but at the same time, sometimes goes on my watchlist.

 

If i'm with a group of friends, i log the find if i'm actively helping with the search. I won't log found if i'm not within sight of the cache's hiding spot when it is found by the rest of the group.

 

Pocket caches can be fun i suppose but they aren't something i wish to log. Temporary caches won't get logged either.

 

I was basically trained by the local group that if I'm present when a cache is hidden, then I log it as a "beta" find. This can include loading the coordinates into my GPSr, walking away and seeing if the coordinates work with my unit, if the cache cammo is working properly, etc. I've really never known any different. I've since learned that I don't have to "find" ever cache, but Like I said, it's just how it's always been done around here and no one really has an issue with it. Note that this practice came about before there was an Ignore list, so I think it was more about keeping unfound caches off of the map. I have no problem if some have higher standards, and I have no problem if some think that the practice is lame or cheesy. What our group would never do is log such a cache as a FTF, and we do not log the cache online until someone claims a FTF. All of the caches that I have logged like this are well up a mountain trail, and many, I have found again at a later date as I was hiking along and did a courtesy check for the CO.

 

I guess we all have different standards. While the "beta" find doesn't bother me, I won't even consider logging a find on a piece of Velcro, a magnet or a fence post cache that can't be retrieved. That gets a NM log and I'll go back and find it if it gets fixed.

 

I agree with you about beta finds. If you are the tester before publishing, then it would be kinda silly to make a special trip back later (after the cache is published) to sign the log. I'll admit that if i am out for the ftf, then i hope NOT to see any name in the log, even a beta tester's. A signed log means one thing to me, that i wasn't ftf. Not a big deal since i realize it's something that happens from time to time.

 

Now, a person scribbling their name on the log before the cache is hidden or while watching the hide take place is different. That's the cheesy part, imo. Anything for a smiley i guess... :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post

Point form! :laughing:

 

What I consider fair terms for my claiming an FTF are:

1) Knowledge of the cache only after its Publish

2) Discovery of the hide, the cache container itself

3) My name or group name I cached with (and confirmable) is in the log sheet

 

So it follows that

* group co-FTFs are allowed, whether I'm the first to spot the container or not (discovery of the hide post-publish)

* me having a 'beta' find wouldn't be FTFable (knowledge of the hide pre-publish)

* I wouldn't claim FTF if I had knowledge of how the cache is hidden before it's published (in full at least - if I'm still physically the first there, I'll wait to log it found and not claim FTF)

* non-empty logbook means, even if 1) I'm the first to physically be there after Publish or 2) existing names are beta finders, it's irrelevant to me - still FTFable.

 

On the other hand, I won't post a Find Log online at all if:

1) My name or group name I cached with (and confirmable) is not in the log sheet

2) I have not discovered the cache's hide, the container itself

3) I've not completed any ALR (will hold off until completed, but will still sign the logsheet)

4) I didn't have a critical role in the discovery process

5) I'm the owner (though I'm on the fence about signing your own challenge cache once you complete the challenge ALR, as that's a grey area I don't believe Groundspeak has spoken against)

6) I don't want to. :back:

 

So it follows that (presuming the final cache/hide is located and signed)

* I may log a puzzle cache found even if I didn't solve it (but I'll note it for later, a kind of 'incomplete' find)

* I may log a multi cache found even if I didn't locate every stage (likewise, I may make note of it)

* I won't log a challenge cache found until the challenge is complete

* I won't log an island cache found if I didn't visit the island myself; unless the person who signed me in could not have done it without me (rare case)

* I will log a traditional found if someone else climbed the tree and signed me in (rare case :P)

* I won't log a puzzle cache found if I solve it for someone, and only they (not I) find it and even sign me in (as I haven't discovered the cache hide in person)

 

These are my personal guidelines and definitions for the FTF and the Find. I'm well aware others may hold different standards :)

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I was basically trained by the local group that if I'm present when a cache is hidden, then I log it as a "beta" find. This can include loading the coordinates into my GPSr, walking away and seeing if the coordinates work with my unit, if the cache cammo is working properly, etc. I've really never known any different. I've since learned that I don't have to "find" ever cache, but Like I said, it's just how it's always been done around here and no one really has an issue with it. Note that this practice came about before there was an Ignore list, so I think it was more about keeping unfound caches off of the map. I have no problem if some have higher standards, and I have no problem if some think that the practice is lame or cheesy. What our group would never do is log such a cache as a FTF, and we do not log the cache online until someone claims a FTF. All of the caches that I have logged like this are well up a mountain trail, and many, I have found again at a later date as I was hiking along and did a courtesy check for the CO.

 

I guess we all have different standards. While the "beta" find doesn't bother me, I won't even consider logging a find on a piece of Velcro, a magnet or a fence post cache that can't be retrieved. That gets a NM log and I'll go back and find it if it gets fixed.

 

There are far more lame and cheesy things going on out there. :P I actually wouldn't do what you describe, but I'll say that's only because "Beta Testing" is almost unheard of in my area for whatever reason. You know what was heard of in my area, that I was introduced to VERY early (like by the end of 2003)? The Phone a friend network, which some consider lame and cheesy. I probably didn't look at these forums for the first two years, and had no idea some considered it wrong to call someone who wasn't the cache owner to get a spoiler hint from them. My caching has tailed off considerably over the years, and most of my Geopals know this, but I do in fact still get an occasional call from someone requesting a hint to a cache that isn't mine, as I mutter under my breath to myself, and try to give them as little of a "hint" as possible. :)

 

This is burned into my memory only because a few months later in the Spring of 2005, we had a gang of then 13 yr. old kids pepper their village with some of the worst hides you've ever seen, even to this day (which is almost hard to believe, but it happened). The ignore list was bestowed upon us with a February 2005 site update. And I'm 95% sure bookmark lists came out with the same update.

Share this post


Link to post

Point form! :laughing:

 

What I consider fair terms for my claiming an FTF are:

1) Knowledge of the cache only after its Publish

2) Discovery of the hide, the cache container itself

3) My name or group name I cached with (and confirmable) is in the log sheet

 

So it follows that

* group co-FTFs are allowed, whether I'm the first to spot the container or not (discovery of the hide post-publish)

* me having a 'beta' find wouldn't be FTFable (knowledge of the hide pre-publish)

* I wouldn't claim FTF if I had knowledge of how the cache is hidden before it's published (in full at least - if I'm still physically the first there, I'll wait to log it found and not claim FTF)

* non-empty logbook means, even if 1) I'm the first to physically be there after Publish or 2) existing names are beta finders, it's irrelevant to me - still FTFable.

 

On the other hand, I won't post a Find Log online at all if:

1) My name or group name I cached with (and confirmable) is not in the log sheet

2) I have not discovered the cache's hide, the container itself

3) I've not completed any ALR (will hold off until completed, but will still sign the logsheet)

4) I didn't have a critical role in the discovery process

5) I'm the owner (though I'm on the fence about signing your own challenge cache once you complete the challenge ALR, as that's a grey area I don't believe Groundspeak has spoken against)

6) I don't want to. :back:

 

So it follows that (presuming the final cache/hide is located and signed)

* I may log a puzzle cache found even if I didn't solve it (but I'll note it for later, a kind of 'incomplete' find)

* I may log a multi cache found even if I didn't locate every stage (likewise, I may make note of it)

* I won't log a challenge cache found until the challenge is complete

* I won't log an island cache found if I didn't visit the island myself; unless the person who signed me in could not have done it without me (rare case)

* I will log a traditional found if someone else climbed the tree and signed me in (rare case :P)

* I won't log a puzzle cache found if I solve it for someone, and only they (not I) find it and even sign me in (as I haven't discovered the cache hide in person)

 

These are my personal guidelines and definitions for the FTF and the Find. I'm well aware others may hold different standards :)

 

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

 

heh. I was just trying to form basic points from sample situations. I think if you only look at the numbered items, and not all the wordy extras (as is my wont), it makes sense, and I'd even say they're probably the most common set of personal standards. *shrug*

Share this post


Link to post

 

I was basically trained by the local group that if I'm present when a cache is hidden, then I log it as a "beta" find. This can include loading the coordinates into my GPSr, walking away and seeing if the coordinates work with my unit, if the cache cammo is working properly, etc. I've really never known any different. I've since learned that I don't have to "find" ever cache, but Like I said, it's just how it's always been done around here and no one really has an issue with it. Note that this practice came about before there was an Ignore list, so I think it was more about keeping unfound caches off of the map. I have no problem if some have higher standards, and I have no problem if some think that the practice is lame or cheesy. What our group would never do is log such a cache as a FTF, and we do not log the cache online until someone claims a FTF. All of the caches that I have logged like this are well up a mountain trail, and many, I have found again at a later date as I was hiking along and did a courtesy check for the CO.

 

I guess we all have different standards. While the "beta" find doesn't bother me, I won't even consider logging a find on a piece of Velcro, a magnet or a fence post cache that can't be retrieved. That gets a NM log and I'll go back and find it if it gets fixed.

 

There are far more lame and cheesy things going on out there. :P I actually wouldn't do what you describe, but I'll say that's only because "Beta Testing" is almost unheard of in my area for whatever reason. You know what was heard of in my area, that I was introduced to VERY early (like by the end of 2003)? The Phone a friend network, which some consider lame and cheesy. I probably didn't look at these forums for the first two years, and had no idea some considered it wrong to call someone who wasn't the cache owner to get a spoiler hint from them. My caching has tailed off considerably over the years, and most of my Geopals know this, but I do in fact still get an occasional call from someone requesting a hint to a cache that isn't mine, as I mutter under my breath to myself, and try to give them as little of a "hint" as possible. :)

 

This is burned into my memory only because a few months later in the Spring of 2005, we had a gang of then 13 yr. old kids pepper their village with some of the worst hides you've ever seen, even to this day (which is almost hard to believe, but it happened). The ignore list was bestowed upon us with a February 2005 site update. And I'm 95% sure bookmark lists came out with the same update.

 

Since i started in June of '05, I'm pretty sure that those updates came later.

 

I think that I have done the PAF twice, both were in semi remote areas. One was to the CO because my arrow was pointing into deep poison oak and I wanted to ask her that if I could get to it, should I move it. It turned out that my GPSr was pointing to the wrong spot. The other was a very old cache where the CO was long gone. I called the last finder who described where the hanging cache was supposed to be. I found it in the leaf litter below that spot and was able to restore it and it has been found many times since.

 

My favorite PAF story was when I was looking for a friends cache and having trouble locating it, when the phone rang and he told me that he was on the other end of the valley having trouble finding one of my caches. I gave him a hint, determined that his cache was missing, dropped a replacement at his direction and then met a half hour later and teamed up to find some caches.

Share this post


Link to post

Point form! :laughing:

 

What I consider fair terms for my claiming an FTF are:

1) Knowledge of the cache only after its Publish

2) Discovery of the hide, the cache container itself

3) My name or group name I cached with (and confirmable) is in the log sheet

 

So it follows that

* group co-FTFs are allowed, whether I'm the first to spot the container or not (discovery of the hide post-publish)

* me having a 'beta' find wouldn't be FTFable (knowledge of the hide pre-publish)

* I wouldn't claim FTF if I had knowledge of how the cache is hidden before it's published (in full at least - if I'm still physically the first there, I'll wait to log it found and not claim FTF)

* non-empty logbook means, even if 1) I'm the first to physically be there after Publish or 2) existing names are beta finders, it's irrelevant to me - still FTFable.

 

On the other hand, I won't post a Find Log online at all if:

1) My name or group name I cached with (and confirmable) is not in the log sheet

2) I have not discovered the cache's hide, the container itself

3) I've not completed any ALR (will hold off until completed, but will still sign the logsheet)

4) I didn't have a critical role in the discovery process

5) I'm the owner (though I'm on the fence about signing your own challenge cache once you complete the challenge ALR, as that's a grey area I don't believe Groundspeak has spoken against)

6) I don't want to. :back:

 

So it follows that (presuming the final cache/hide is located and signed)

* I may log a puzzle cache found even if I didn't solve it (but I'll note it for later, a kind of 'incomplete' find)

* I may log a multi cache found even if I didn't locate every stage (likewise, I may make note of it)

* I won't log a challenge cache found until the challenge is complete

* I won't log an island cache found if I didn't visit the island myself; unless the person who signed me in could not have done it without me (rare case)

* I will log a traditional found if someone else climbed the tree and signed me in (rare case :P)

* I won't log a puzzle cache found if I solve it for someone, and only they (not I) find it and even sign me in (as I haven't discovered the cache hide in person)

 

These are my personal guidelines and definitions for the FTF and the Find. I'm well aware others may hold different standards :)

 

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

 

Actually, it just sounds like a long list of, "does it feel right". What feels right is going to be different for most of us. As an example, if a tree is 8 feet tall and I'm certain I can climb it, but my friend does and signs my name, I really don't have any problem logging it online. If it's a 30' climb that I know I would never do, I'd ask him to not waste the space on the paper log with my name.

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

heh. I was just trying to form basic points from sample situations. I think if you only look at the numbered items, and not all the wordy extras (as is my wont), it makes sense, and I'd even say they're probably the most common set of personal standards. *shrug*

While some of your personal standards probably are shared by most of us, I suspect and/or hope that some of them are not.

 

For example, it appears you'd never claim FTFs for caches you found pre-publication. Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache.

 

I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive.

Share this post


Link to post

Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache.

I haven't actually had a pre-publication find yet, but as long as I found it without insider information, I would log it as FTF gleefully.

 

I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive.

This I've found to be about 50/50 between those that feel they have to solve and those that claim the find and may or may not solve it later. Well, that's among people that have considered the issue. I've noticed a significant class of cachers that don't do puzzles, but log finds they make while tagging along without even thinking about it. I think maybe half of all cachers are in that class, but they don't account for many puzzle finds since most of them aren't in that position very often.

 

I definitely don't care which way people want to do it. Normally I won't even sign a log unless I've solved the puzzle already, but, on the other hand, I participate in the Venona cache hunts, which almost always involve caches that I would never, ever be able to solve on my own, in some cases even after someone explain how to solve it, so I understand why some people don't worry about solving every puzzle cache they claim as a find.

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

heh. I was just trying to form basic points from sample situations. I think if you only look at the numbered items, and not all the wordy extras (as is my wont), it makes sense, and I'd even say they're probably the most common set of personal standards. *shrug*

While some of your personal standards probably are shared by most of us, I suspect and/or hope that some of them are not.

 

For example, it appears you'd never claim FTFs for caches you found pre-publication. Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache.

 

I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive.

I suspect that most people suspect that most others will share their opinions [about when to log a find online or claim FTF], but I also suspect that most of the time their suspicions are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

heh. I was just trying to form basic points from sample situations. I think if you only look at the numbered items, and not all the wordy extras (as is my wont), it makes sense, and I'd even say they're probably the most common set of personal standards. *shrug*

While some of your personal standards probably are shared by most of us, I suspect and/or hope that some of them are not.

 

For example, it appears you'd never claim FTFs for caches you found pre-publication. Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache.

 

I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive.

I suspect that most people suspect that most others will share their opinions [about when to log a find online or claim FTF], but I also suspect that most of the time their suspicions are wrong.

If people believe most others feel the same way they do on a particular issue, then wouldn't most of them, logically, be correct?

 

Anyway, as I noted, it's hard to be certain what others would do. But you can read forum threads (like this one) and talk to people and make somewhat educated guesses.

Share this post


Link to post

If people believe most others feel the same way they do on a particular issue, then wouldn't most of them, logically, be correct?

Absolutely not. Easy enough to give an example

 

50 people think A and believe most people think A.

50 people think B and believe most people think B.

50 people have no opinion and believe most people have no opinion

 

67% do not think A

67% do not think B

67% have an opinion.

 

100% were wrong about what most people think.

Share this post


Link to post

Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache.

I haven't actually had a pre-publication find yet, but as long as I found it without insider information, I would log it as FTF gleefully.

Aye, I think many people would agree. That goes back to the comments way back about different types of ftfs and whatnot :P If I were to, I'd only consider it (for myself) a pre-publish ftf, not the same as anyone who actually found it first after the fair-for-all public publishing.

 

I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive.

This I've found to be about 50/50 between those that feel they have to solve and those that claim the find and may or may not solve it later. Well, that's among people that have considered the issue. I've noticed a significant class of cachers that don't do puzzles, but log finds they make while tagging along without even thinking about it. I think maybe half of all cachers are in that class, but they don't account for many puzzle finds since most of them aren't in that position very often.

In my area there are controversial group caching events specific designed to let people who haven't solved puzzles, or can't accomplish certain tasks, log them found because one or two people in the group do all the work. We've had people sign the group and encourage everyone in the group to log it found, even though they may not have been anywhere near the group (or person) when it was found.

 

Strictly speaking, there's nothing Groundspeak can do about it. It's just arguably unethical and many would find it highly problematic. (obviously many who participate don't find any problem with it :P)

Myself, I've stopped attending these events.

 

I suspect that most people suspect that most others will share their opinions [about when to log a find online or claim FTF], but I also suspect that most of the time their suspicions are wrong.

 

I suspect that this suspicion has a 3% chance of being suspicious, and 97% chance of being possibly accurate. I also suspect that 51% of statistics are suspiciously made up.

Share this post


Link to post

I suspect that most people suspect that most others will share their opinions [about when to log a find online or claim FTF], but I also suspect that most of the time their suspicions are wrong.

 

I suspect that this suspicion has a 3% chance of being suspicious, and 97% chance of being possibly accurate. I also suspect that 51% of statistics are suspiciously made up.

Hypothetically, you may be correct :P

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be.

heh. I was just trying to form basic points from sample situations. I think if you only look at the numbered items, and not all the wordy extras (as is my wont), it makes sense, and I'd even say they're probably the most common set of personal standards. *shrug*

While some of your personal standards probably are shared by most of us, I suspect and/or hope that some of them are not.

 

For example, it appears you'd never claim FTFs for caches you found pre-publication. Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache.

 

I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive.

 

A find on an unsolved puzzle, especially if I haven't solved it but am with cachers that have, really depends on who the CO is. Other cachers got me there and I signed one of Toz's puzzles about five years ago, yet have never logged it online because I can't solve it. He told me that I could, but I know that his puzzles are important to him, so I wont. I found another of his puzzles even though I solved it wrong, but had enough of the coordinates to get me there. I logged that one online. I have had other puzzle cache owners insist that I log their cache even though I didn't solve the puzzle, and I have done so.

Share this post


Link to post
In my area there are controversial group caching events specific designed to let people who haven't solved puzzles, or can't accomplish certain tasks, log them found because one or two people in the group do all the work.

 

This sounds like when one guy went and got a local SCUBA cache and brought it to shore so the thirty cachers standing there could claim it. Several of those later used that 5/5 find to complete the D/T grid and claim our state's Challenge cache based on it.

Share this post


Link to post

HAHAHAHHAHA!!!!

 

This is ridiculous, it´s like scoring a goal before the game even begins!!!!

 

Geocaching game starts when the cache is published because... those are the rules! Until it is published it is not active, thus, not in the game, thus lot loggable!!! Easy explanation.

 

The problem is that no one official want to get their hands dirty in situations like this because FTF is not an official recognized achievement inside the game.

 

So... just let it be! GoundSpeak doesn´t want to be very strict in the way people play this game, this is part of the game, friends helping friends, even if not in a correct manner.

Share this post


Link to post

This is ridiculous, it´s like scoring a goal before the game even begins!!!!

 

I'm thinking you must really like exclamation marks...

That being said, I believe your analogy falls well short of the mark. You may not be aware of this, but geocaching is a hobby, not a rigidly controlled sporting event. Whilst there are numeric values saved to your profile, with the possible exception of a few folks who are numbers oriented, these numbers are not a 'score', as they are not utilized in any officially sanctioned competition.

 

Geocaching game starts when the cache is published because... those are the rules!

Oh. More exclamation marks...

I'm assuming you can cite a source for this?

I've read the guidelines several times, and I can't seem to find it.

Help a brother out?

 

Until it is published it is not active, thus, not in the game, thus lot loggable!!!

More exclamation marks? Sigh...

You may be confusing a couple things. First, an unpublished cache is loggable, but only on a limited scale. The cache owner can post logs on their unpublished caches, as can Reviewers and Lackeys. Second, there is a distinct difference betwixt loggable and findable. Just because a geocache is not active on this website, does not mean it magically becomes invisible, or slips into some alternate dimension. Quite often, unpublished caches are actually out there, in the wild. If a person locates one of these, and signs the log, which log type should they utilize once the listing becomes active? I'm thinking they should use the "Found It" log type, since, well, they 'found it', but I'm open to other interpretations, so long as you can express them logically.

 

And without excess exclamation marks...

Share this post


Link to post

Geocaching game starts when the cache is published because... those are the rules!

I'm assuming you can cite a source for this?

I've read the guidelines several times, and I can't seem to find it.

Help a brother out?

In the game guidelines it is said that all caches must be approved by a reviewer, did the reviewer approved the cache? No! The cache can actually be never published because it doesn´t comply with all the guidelines, thus never loggable online. Is it clear for you now?

 

Until it is published it is not active, thus, not in the game, thus lot loggable!!!

You may be confusing a couple things. First, an unpublished cache is loggable, but only on a limited scale. The cache owner can post logs on their unpublished caches, as can Reviewers and Lackeys. Second, there is a distinct difference betwixt loggable and findable. Just because a geocache is not active on this website, does not mean it magically becomes invisible, or slips into some alternate dimension.

Cache can be physically in place but not part of the game yet. It clearly starts after the approval of a Reviewer, until then is waiting to be approved to be part of the game. If you can find it: of course yes. If you can sign it: of course yes. If you can log it when it is published: it´s up to you but, in my opinion, you shouldn´t!

Share this post


Link to post

In the game guidelines it is said that all caches must be approved by a reviewer, did the reviewer approved the cache? No! The cache can actually be never published because it doesn´t comply with all the guidelines, thus never loggable online. Is it clear for you now?

 

A cache only needs to reviewed and "approved" before it's listed on geocaching.com. I've listed caches on facebook before I've submitted them for publication here. It was found a dozen or more times by my facebook friends before being listed here.

 

Cache can be physically in place but not part of the game yet. It clearly starts after the approval of a Reviewer, until then is waiting to be approved to be part of the game. If you can find it: of course yes. If you can sign it: of course yes. If you can log it when it is published: it´s up to you but, in my opinion, you shouldn´t!

 

Last I checked, geocaching was not a competitive sport. Don't assume that your own rules apply to other cachers or cache owners. They don't.

Share this post


Link to post

In the game guidelines it is said that all caches must be approved by a reviewer, did the reviewer approved the cache? No! The cache can actually be never published because it doesn´t comply with all the guidelines, thus never loggable online. Is it clear for you now?

A cache only needs to reviewed and "approved" before it's listed on geocaching.com. I've listed caches on facebook before I've submitted them for publication here. It was found a dozen or more times by my facebook friends before being listed here.

Oh sorry, my mistake them... I thought we were in Groundspeak.com site and the rules that apply in this game were described here.

 

Facebook or other sites that have coordinates of caches do not belong to Groundspeak.com Official game called Geocaching, so until the cache is published is not part of this game.

 

By the way, I think that most games can be competitive or not, depending on how you play it, and I don´t "a55-u-me" that everybody has to play any game the same way I do. I agree with Darwin Theory that evolution comes from diversity. But if we are talking about the same game, the same rules apply.

 

The game we play here is called Geocaching and the rules of this game are managed by Groundspeak, not Facebook or any other website.

Edited by JPreto

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

×
×
  • Create New...