moving caches / logs

[+gcstraggler]

Maybe I'm too new at this - a bit over 2 years. But I don't understand the reason for the following:

 

Last year I did, with my son, part of a power run - stopping at number 300 (out of 1,000 - HMD run). We

recently went back - starting with #301. Along about #340 we started finding logs with our labels - we also

found at least one physical cache container we know we repaired several miles further along the power run (I

think around #410).

 

At least one of the relocated logs was a minimum of 12 miles from where let off last November.

 

So - moving logs from one cache to another (by several miles) - moving actual physical cache containers

(also several miles).

 

Someone doing this because?

[+Walts Hunting]

Standard procedure on a power trail is to take a group, bring 20-30 already made up caches. Arrive, one jumps out, drops the predone one, grabs the one on the ground, jump in, throw cache in back where it gets signed. Repeat for 24 hours and 1500 caches.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Power Cachers.

 

A team usually, (re)places a cache already signed, "leap-frogging" their way along the length of the power trail. Multiple people, a real "team" effort, sign and prepare an already retrieved cache for replacing the second, third or fourth one.

 

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

[+Viajero Perdido]

It's HFT all over again.

[+dprovan]

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

I'm not so sure it does make sense. If your assumption is that the cache at GZ has no relation to who visited that cache, then it makes no sense to sign any of them, since the practice insures that it's not possible to confirm a visit by looking for a signature.

[+Manville Possum]

Maybe I'm too new at this - a bit over 2 years. But I don't understand the reason for the following:

 

Last year I did, with my son, part of a power run - stopping at number 300 (out of 1,000 - HMD run). We

recently went back - starting with #301. Along about #340 we started finding logs with our labels - we also

found at least one physical cache container we know we repaired several miles further along the power run (I

think around #410).

 

At least one of the relocated logs was a minimum of 12 miles from where let off last November.

 

So - moving logs from one cache to another (by several miles) - moving actual physical cache containers

(also several miles).

 

Someone doing this because?

Explain how you "repaired" #410, then rethink how it ended up several miles away.

[+geodarts]

The container is not as important as the repetition.

[+niraD]

Actually, "leapfrogging" is a different shortcut. Leapfrogging is when the team splits up into two, one half finds the odd-numbered caches, the other finds the even-numbered caches, and everyone logs them all.

 

The practice of dropping a container with a pre-signed log, taking the existing container with you, and signing the log in that container as you travel to the next cache location goes by other names: three cache monte, cache shuffling, swap-and-drop, and so on.

[+pkohler01]

So let me ask, then: when a team starts off with 30 or so pre-signed caches, and replace other caches with them as they go through the power trail, constantly shuffling until they're done, they wind up with 30 or so caches that were at one time out in the wild and are not the same physical caches as those they started with? What do they do with those caches?

[+niraD]

So let me ask, then: when a team starts off with 30 or so pre-signed caches, and replace other caches with them as they go through the power trail, constantly shuffling until they're done, they wind up with 30 or so caches that were at one time out in the wild and are not the same physical caches as those they started with? What do they do with those caches?

Well, in some cases at least, they use those caches to begin another numbers run trail.

[+TopShelfRob]

Well, then why bother finding all 1,000 of them? Really only need to sign one cache then, it'll eventually get to all 1,000 cache locations.

 

Go ahead and log them all as found, and you'll get a 1,000 smileys. Just put in the online log "signed this cache when it was at #288" for every one. Save a lot of gas and energy.

 

That makes about as much sense as any of this.

Edited April 9, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+The_Incredibles_]

So let me ask, then: when a team starts off with 30 or so pre-signed caches, and replace other caches with them as they go through the power trail, constantly shuffling until they're done, they wind up with 30 or so caches that were at one time out in the wild and are not the same physical caches as those they started with? What do they do with those caches?

 

That's a darn good question. My thinking is they dump them at the beginning for others to use.

[+Chief301]

Yet another reason that I have no desire to do power trails.

[+gcstraggler]

Guess some of that makes sense if just for the numbers. As to MPH's question. We didn't repair #410 - we repaired

#250 - but then found that container, 5 months later, at #410. So - the leap frogging, with prepaired caches

explains it's moving - i.e. one of the next groups after ours picks up the container at #250, drops off a

new prepaired container and then, after siging the log, drops what had been the container at #250 at maybe position

#265 - then a following cacher drops it at #282, etc. etc.

[+L0ne.R]

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

I'm not so sure it does make sense. If your assumption is that the cache at GZ has no relation to who visited that cache, then it makes no sense to sign any of them, since the practice insures that it's not possible to confirm a visit by looking for a signature.

 

Right. Doesn't make a lot of sense to bother signing a log where the CO(s) condones this practice. May as well just eyeball the cache (or not, you could just count it as a find if you walk past the spot).

[+Walts Hunting]

So let me ask, then: when a team starts off with 30 or so pre-signed caches, and replace other caches with them as they go through the power trail, constantly shuffling until they're done, they wind up with 30 or so caches that were at one time out in the wild and are not the same physical caches as those they started with? What do they do with those caches?

Refill them and use them for the next power trail or some trails have a large container at the end to drop them in.

[+TopShelfRob]

How prevalent is this? I mean is it accepted practice at most all power trails, or is it only a minority who cache this way?

[+Walts Hunting]

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

I'm not so sure it does make sense. If your assumption is that the cache at GZ has no relation to who visited that cache, then it makes no sense to sign any of them, since the practice insures that it's not possible to confirm a visit by looking for a signature.

 

Right. Doesn't make a lot of sense to bother signing a log where the CO(s) condones this practice. May as well just eyeball the cache (or not, you could just count it as a find if you walk past the spot).

I do 99% of my caching on bike or foot including some power trails in the southwest ( they are great for picking up favorite points you can then use for other caches) I have often been tempted to not bother to sign but just see it and move on. So far have resisted but that is just my moral code i guess. It actually gets annoying hopping off the bike every 528' and doing that in a motor vehicle would be outside my desire.

[+DanOCan]

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

I'm not so sure it does make sense. If your assumption is that the cache at GZ has no relation to who visited that cache, then it makes no sense to sign any of them, since the practice insures that it's not possible to confirm a visit by looking for a signature.

Right. Doesn't make a lot of sense to bother signing a log where the CO(s) condones this practice. May as well just eyeball the cache (or not, you could just count it as a find if you walk past the spot).

Why walk? Just drive by, it's faster. That will allow you to rack up thousands of more smileys which, of course, will earn you legendary cacher status and the respect of your fellow cachers who will be in awe of your amazing prowess.

[+L0ne.R]

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

I'm not so sure it does make sense. If your assumption is that the cache at GZ has no relation to who visited that cache, then it makes no sense to sign any of them, since the practice insures that it's not possible to confirm a visit by looking for a signature.

Right. Doesn't make a lot of sense to bother signing a log where the CO(s) condones this practice. May as well just eyeball the cache (or not, you could just count it as a find if you walk past the spot).

Why walk? Just drive by, it's faster. That will allow you to rack up thousands of more smileys which, of course, will earn you legendary cacher status and the respect of your fellow cachers who will be in awe of your amazing prowess.

 

Why drive? Just log them from your couch.

[+Shinook & White Juan]

We have only completed one power trail and we thought of just claiming a find for each when we only found a few but couldn't bring myself to do this. I don't know, but seems to me and this is just my opinion, these caches should be treated as all others. Sign the log and then claim as a find. But I guess some play the game in different ways, we prefer to sign each logbook, takes alot of time and is repetitious, but at least i can say we did it the way it was intended.

[+Walts Hunting]

It makes sense if you are in it for the numbers....

I'm not so sure it does make sense. If your assumption is that the cache at GZ has no relation to who visited that cache, then it makes no sense to sign any of them, since the practice insures that it's not possible to confirm a visit by looking for a signature.

Right. Doesn't make a lot of sense to bother signing a log where the CO(s) condones this practice. May as well just eyeball the cache (or not, you could just count it as a find if you walk past the spot).

Why walk? Just drive by, it's faster. That will allow you to rack up thousands of more smileys which, of course, will earn you legendary cacher status and the respect of your fellow cachers who will be in awe of your amazing prowess.

 

Why drive? Just log them from your couch.

Or you could apply teh 528' rule. If you get within that distance it is a find. I would imagine someone creative could write a little program that would do that. Load the PQ in it and it creates the geovisits file. Load it to gsak and with one click log it.

[+J Grouchy]

We have only completed one power trail and we thought of just claiming a find for each when we only found a few but couldn't bring myself to do this. I don't know, but seems to me and this is just my opinion, these caches should be treated as all others. Sign the log and then claim as a find. But I guess some play the game in different ways, we prefer to sign each logbook, takes alot of time and is repetitious, but at least i can say we did it the way it was intended.

 

Intended by who? Groundspeak or the cache owner? Somehow I suspect the latter generally wouldn't even care unless you just flat-out wrote what you did in your online log...and maybe not even then.

[+TopShelfRob]

Like many have said, let others play the game the way they want. But when it comes to messing with others enjoyment of the game, that's when there could be a problem. If this three-cache-monte type thing was being done on a power trail where the cache owner cared to audit the logs and verify some finds and invalidate logs that didn't match signatures, there could be some trouble. People like the OP who are intending on playing the game the "traditional way" (signing a log in a cache and keeping it at the same location) would be (and as this thread indicates, have been) potentially affected.

 

I suspect, however, that COs who put out these power trails are all for this type of thing. I'd like to see a CO put out a power trail like this but with specifically numbered caches that were meant to stay in the original location, and then started invalidating non-matching signatures, just to see what would happen.

 

Sure, maybe there isn't a rule to specifically address this, and assuming the caches and replacement caches are identical it does "sorta" makes sense, understanding the 'power trail mindset'. But it would seem obvious (since non-travelling caches are no longer permitted) that caches are meant to stay at one location, and that should also mean (in my opinion) that that would also preclude "travelling cache containers" and other behavior like this.

Edited April 9, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+briansnat]

We have only completed one power trail and we thought of just claiming a find for each when we only found a few but couldn't bring myself to do this. I don't know, but seems to me and this is just my opinion, these caches should be treated as all others. Sign the log and then claim as a find. But I guess some play the game in different ways, we prefer to sign each logbook, takes alot of time and is repetitious, but at least i can say we did it the way it was intended.

 

That's because you are a geocacher. I'm not sure what game these others are playing but it doesn't resemble geocaching.

[+niraD]

How prevalent is this? I mean is it accepted practice at most all power trails, or is it only a minority who cache this way?

IMHO, it is too prevalent.

 

Throwdown caches and the three cache monte appear to be fairly common on certain numbers run trails like the ET highway where the practice is encouraged by the CO. I don't consider it geocaching (I'm a stickler for finding the hidden container and returning it to its original location), but as long as these practices are confined to numbers run trails where they are approved/condoned by the CO, it really doesn't affect anyone else.

 

Unfortunately, these "shortcuts" are not confined to numbers run trails where they are approved/condoned by the CO, and that's where the real problem comes. Cache owners should not have to tell seekers not to leave throwdowns or not to swap their containers. Cache owners should not have to remove throwdowns or move all their caches back to their original locations where they belong. But it happens anyway.

[+TopShelfRob]

How prevalent is this? I mean is it accepted practice at most all power trails, or is it only a minority who cache this way?

IMHO, it is too prevalent.

 

Throwdown caches and the three cache monte appear to be fairly common on certain numbers run trails like the ET highway where the practice is encouraged by the CO. I don't consider it geocaching (I'm a stickler for finding the hidden container and returning it to its original location), but as long as these practices are confined to numbers run trails where they are approved/condoned by the CO, it really doesn't affect anyone else.

 

Unfortunately, these "shortcuts" are not confined to numbers run trails where they are approved/condoned by the CO, and that's where the real problem comes. Cache owners should not have to tell seekers not to leave throwdowns or not to swap their containers. Cache owners should not have to remove throwdowns or move all their caches back to their original locations where they belong. But it happens anyway.

 

Yeah, that was what I was getting at... if it was only done on power trails where it was explictly orchestrated by COs, I'd say fine let them play however they want. But if it's being done by some on all power trails, that's not cool. I shudder to think that there may be new cachers who happen upon the game by joining some friends for a power trail who wind up thinking that's how all geocaching can be done. Obviously it doesn't make sense for a non-power trail, but if they don't learn correctly, who knows what they might think?

Edited April 9, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+Manville Possum]

Yet another reason that I have no desire to do power trails.

Amen to that. Power trails are just litter that clutter up PQ's. They are only for numbers, strewn along highways and bike trails and have nothing to do with "real" geocaching.

[+briansnat]

Yet another reason that I have no desire to do power trails.

Amen to that. Power trails are just litter that clutter up PQ's. They are only for numbers, strewn along highways and bike trails and have nothing to do with "real" geocaching.

 

As they are becoming more prevalent around here I wish there was a power trail attribute so I could filter them out. They are cluttering my PQs too.

[+Manville Possum]

Yet another reason that I have no desire to do power trails.

Amen to that. Power trails are just litter that clutter up PQ's. They are only for numbers, strewn along highways and bike trails and have nothing to do with "real" geocaching.

 

As they are becoming more prevalent around here I wish there was a power trail attribute so I could filter them out. They are cluttering my PQs too.

The PT attribute is a great idea to use as a filter, if the CO would use it. I would like to have an ignore geocaches by user feature. Not all of the clutter caches are power trails, but film cans in the wilderness with really bad coordinates.

[+Walts Hunting]

It is not that hard to do yourself if you have GSAK. You can either

 

Use the API and put the Owners name in the advanced settings in Exclude Owned By

 

or a more permanent solution

 

Use the api call to get only caches placed by that owner and load them into the database. Use the api Add to Bookmark List feature to add all of them in one fell swoop to the ignore list.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

It is not that hard to do yourself if you have GSAK. You can either

 

Use the API and put the Owners name in the advanced settings in Exclude Owned By

 

or a more permanent solution

 

Use the api call to get only caches placed by that owner and load them into the database. Use the api Add to Bookmark List feature to add all of them in one fell swoop to the ignore list.

 

That helps, but it doesn't address the issue of new PT caches appearing in instant notifications. If someone live in an area where new power trails (even shorter ones with 30-50 caches), using the API is only going to exclude caches from a download to GSAK. You're still going to get 30-50 email messages every time someone thinks the area needs another power trail.

[4wheelin_fool]

I'm not sure what game these others are playing but it doesn't resemble geocaching.

 

They see themselves as conquering the mighty beast by using 3 cache monty Geocaching, while others see a bunch of adults stopping every .1 and moving a wad of paper for no apparent reason, as nobody audits the logbook anyhow.

[RedShoesGirl]

Yet another reason that I have no desire to do power trails.

Amen to that. Power trails are just litter that clutter up PQ's. They are only for numbers, strewn along highways and bike trails and have nothing to do with "real" geocaching.

 

As they are becoming more prevalent around here I wish there was a power trail attribute so I could filter them out. They are cluttering my PQs too.

 

plus they can block a better location.

[+GrateBear]

Well, then why bother finding all 1,000 of them? Really only need to sign one cache then, it'll eventually get to all 1,000 cache locations.

 

Go ahead and log them all as found, and you'll get a 1,000 smileys. Just put in the online log "signed this cache when it was at #288" for every one. Save a lot of gas and energy.

 

That makes about as much sense as any of this.

Good one! Have to agree, it does make as much sense.

[+Roman!]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

[+TopShelfRob]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

 

Technically, CO may still audit paper logs and delete any 'found it' logs that don't correspond to a paper signature, correct? What about the previous signatures that you are now moving to a different cache?

 

Granted, most PT CO aren't going to do this as they tolerate and even encourage this behavior, but if you tried doing this to a non-PT cache, "not being well-received" I would hope would be a major understatement. When the CO owner finds a cache container from a neighboring cache at his location, I would suspect both caches would be disabled until the 2 COs figured out what happened.

 

If this practice ever did become accepted widescale on non-PT caches, many cache hiders would probably quit the game, I imagine.

Edited April 11, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+Roman!]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

 

Technically, CO may still audit paper logs and delete any 'found it' logs that don't correspond to a paper signature, correct? What about the previous signatures that you are now moving to a different cache?

 

Granted, most PT CO aren't going to do this as they tolerate and even encourage this behavior, but if you tried doing this to a non-PT cache, "not being well-received" I would hope would be a major understatement. When the CO owner finds a cache container from a neighboring cache at his location, I would suspect both caches would be disabled until the 2 COs figured out what happened.

 

If this practice ever did become accepted widescale on non-PT caches, many cache hiders would probably quit the game, I imagine.

 

If you find any cache and it goes missing right after you found it the CO could delete your log. I agree if this practice became acceptable on non-PT caches it would hurt geocaching but I do not think it ever will.

 

I think you'd have a very hard time finding a cacher that has done this on a PT that would actually do it on non-PT caches.

 

On a side note film canisters tend to get brittle and crack very easily so this also ensures that containers are in good shape.

[+TopShelfRob]

But seriously, though, what's to stop armchair logging of power trails if there isn't really a way to verify signatures in the correct logs?

[+Roman!]

But seriously, though, what's to stop armchair logging of power trails if there isn't really a way to verify signatures in the correct logs?

 

Nothing, same as most other caches, unless it's blatantly obvious most COs do not validate logs.

 

I have my own set of rules of what I'll log as a find and what I won't. Three cache monte, I would, leapfrogging I wouldn't, the first meets the rule of physically signing the log sheet, the latter doesn't in my opinion. Everyone has their own interpretation of what is and what isn't a find and trying to convince others you are right and they are wrong is a waste of energy.

[+niraD]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

[+Roman!]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

[+frinklabs]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

How can that be interpreted as only needing to sign the log sheet?

[+Roman!]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

How can that be interpreted as only needing to sign the log sheet?

 

That's not are rule, rules are found in 1.3.Are there rules?

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=422

 

I have a cache on a metal object, I placed it inside the hole at the bottom but cachers are continuously placing it in the hole at the top, could I delete their logs for doing this? No, they signed the log.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Roman!

[+frinklabs]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

How can that be interpreted as only needing to sign the log sheet?

 

That's not are rule, rules are found in 1.3.Are there rules?

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=422

 

This is the section linked:

 

1.3. Are there rules?

 

We like to keep things fun for everyone, so we have a few rules we encourage everyone to follow:

 

1. If you take a trinket from the geocache, leave something of equal or greater value and family-friendly.
   
2. Be mindful of non-geocaching onlookers. Curious people have been known to take or damage geocaches.
   
3. Make sure you don't accidentally venture on to someone's private property. Caches won't require you to trespass.
   
4. Leave the geocache area better than how you found it. Try not to disrupt local wildlife and pack out any trash you see.
   

 

Are you suggesting that anything that is not addressed in this section is allowed?

[+Roman!]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

How can that be interpreted as only needing to sign the log sheet?

 

That's not are rule, rules are found in 1.3.Are there rules?

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=422

 

This is the section linked:

 

1.3. Are there rules?

 

We like to keep things fun for everyone, so we have a few rules we encourage everyone to follow:

 

1. If you take a trinket from the geocache, leave something of equal or greater value and family-friendly.
   
2. Be mindful of non-geocaching onlookers. Curious people have been known to take or damage geocaches.
   
3. Make sure you don't accidentally venture on to someone's private property. Caches won't require you to trespass.
   
4. Leave the geocache area better than how you found it. Try not to disrupt local wildlife and pack out any trash you see.
   

 

Are you suggesting that anything that is not addressed in this section is allowed?

 

I'm saying if I sign the log it does not matter what I do with the cache after, return it, throw it in the garbage, move it down the line on a PT, as long as I could prove I signed the log the CO could not delete my 'found it'.

 

Granted if I did any of the first two the local community would probably have my head but that's a different story.

[+frinklabs]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

How can that be interpreted as only needing to sign the log sheet?

 

That's not are rule, rules are found in 1.3.Are there rules?

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=422

 

This is the section linked:

 

1.3. Are there rules?

 

We like to keep things fun for everyone, so we have a few rules we encourage everyone to follow:

 

1. If you take a trinket from the geocache, leave something of equal or greater value and family-friendly.
   
2. Be mindful of non-geocaching onlookers. Curious people have been known to take or damage geocaches.
   
3. Make sure you don't accidentally venture on to someone's private property. Caches won't require you to trespass.
   
4. Leave the geocache area better than how you found it. Try not to disrupt local wildlife and pack out any trash you see.
   

 

Are you suggesting that anything that is not addressed in this section is allowed?

 

I'm saying if I sign the log it does not matter what I do with the cache after, return it, throw it in the garbage, move it down the line on a PT, as long as I could prove I signed the log the CO could not delete my 'found it'.

 

Granted if I did any of the first two the local community would probably have my head but that's a different story.

 

Interesting scenario.

 

I am wondering if GS would allow the log deletion to stand if the CO could dis-prove that the log was signed? Like, by failing to locate the alleged log entry because the container was missing?

[+Roman!]

2.3. Geocache Log Types

 

Found It

 

Use if you found a geocache and physically signed the log sheet.

 

If I go to cache #1 of a PT, grab the container and drop a different one then on my way to PT #2 I sign the log drop this one off at #2 and move the one there to #3 etc. till I'm done the PT I still meet the requirements to log a find on all the caches as I have physically signed the log sheet of all of them.

 

Technically you could do this on any caches but for PTs it is an accepted practice, doing it on other caches is not and would not be received well but in either case you did full fill the requirements needed to log the cache.

Two can play at that game.

 

Geocaching 101 > The Game > How is the game played?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

So if you don't return the geocache to its original location, you are not geocaching.

 

Your turn...

 

Still says to log a found all you need to do is physically sign the log sheet. That's my interpretation and you will never convince me I'm wrong as I will never convince you you are wrong and I will geocache by my interpretation as you will by yours. Am I cheating? Are you? Are any of us?

 

"Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location."

 

How can that be interpreted as only needing to sign the log sheet?

 

That's not are rule, rules are found in 1.3.Are there rules?

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=422

 

This is the section linked:

 

1.3. Are there rules?

 

We like to keep things fun for everyone, so we have a few rules we encourage everyone to follow:

 

1. If you take a trinket from the geocache, leave something of equal or greater value and family-friendly.
   
2. Be mindful of non-geocaching onlookers. Curious people have been known to take or damage geocaches.
   
3. Make sure you don't accidentally venture on to someone's private property. Caches won't require you to trespass.
   
4. Leave the geocache area better than how you found it. Try not to disrupt local wildlife and pack out any trash you see.
   

 

Are you suggesting that anything that is not addressed in this section is allowed?

 

I'm saying if I sign the log it does not matter what I do with the cache after, return it, throw it in the garbage, move it down the line on a PT, as long as I could prove I signed the log the CO could not delete my 'found it'.

 

Granted if I did any of the first two the local community would probably have my head but that's a different story.

 

Interesting scenario.

 

I am wondering if GS would allow the log deletion to stand if the CO could dis-prove that the log was signed? Like, by failing to locate the alleged log entry because the container was missing?

 

I think they would not allow the deletion to stand unless it was blatantly obvious the log was not signed.

[+dprovan]

Wouldn't Groundspeak support deleting a log if it was a fact that the person claiming the find stole the cache? I don't think the exact wording of the rules nor whether the log was signed would be considered.

[+Roman!]

Wouldn't Groundspeak support deleting a log if it was a fact that the person claiming the find stole the cache? I don't think the exact wording of the rules nor whether the log was signed would be considered.

 

I could see them banning the person but do not think they'd delete the log as it is still a find.

 

That's what I've been trying to say, three cache monte IMHO is fair as far as earning a found it on a cache. It also is an acceptable behavior on a PT.

 

Leapfrogging IMHO would be cheating.