What would you do?

[+Roman!]

As we were driving home from our trip a scenario almost came up that I thought interesting, I'm wrapping it up in a story but you'll get the gist, what would you do?

 

Your wife, the breadwinner of the family comes home and says she's been transferred from New York to LA. You have 1 day to pack and hit the road (she insists on driving) and a very tight schedule to get there in 3 days. Although she is not a cacher and neither are any of your three kids she lets you find 1 cache per State you drive through.

 

You spend Thursday (since your wife makes all the travel and packing plans) picking out a cache that you really, really want to find in each State and Friday you and your family are on the road.

 

At 12:10 am Saturday morning you find your planned cache in western Indiana and hit the road again, 20 minutes later you are at your selected Illinois cache when you realize something is wrong, it's now 11:30 pm Friday.

 

Since your wife and kids won't wait and although divorce is the obvious option but you don't have the spine for it, what would you do?

 

1) Find the cache and log it as found Saturday keeping your chronology of finds intact.

2) Find the cache and log it as Friday keeping the integrity of the date you found each cache.

3) Not find it at all so you don't mess up either.

 

Me, I'd go with #2 as my dates are very accurate and my chronology doesn't bother me that much as it has minor errors already.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Roman!

[+steben6]

I would probably go with #1, but only because that's the order in which I logged the caches. It was already Saturday in most of the other states.

 

#2 has merit, also, if you are really interested in the time being the correct time.

[+K13]

I will log each find on the phone before I get back in the car. The dates and chronology will not matter to me.

[+terrkan78]

I'm thinking I'd like the date correct vs. the chronology, so I'd go with #2, but #1 isn't bad. #3, on the other hand, is completely unacceptable if that's my only chance for logging a cache in a new state.

[+Uncle Alaska]

Trying to figure out why time/date are that important? In this hypothetical am I (or you?) trying to keep some sort of cache a day streak alive? For me, I log the cache with my GPS and it date/time stamps immediately. So when I download my field notes it does the time/date automatically.

[+GeoBain]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

[+Roman!]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

Edited October 6, 2014 by Roman!

[+niraD]

Hypothetically speaking, in the unlikely case that I found caches in a manner similar to what you described, I'd log them on the correct dates based on the time zone each cache was in. And I'd also log them in the correct order, based on the order in which I found them. If a milestone still ended up being incorrect, then I'd correct the milestone and lock it.

 

Although I suppose it does give another tool for maintaining a streak to those who live near time zone boundaries.

[+WRASTRO]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

You are either naïve or are simply trying to stir the pot.

 

In response to your original question. I would log each cache in order as I found them. The date would not really be important since I don't log cache finds via my phone. I log them via my home computer when I have the time and opportunity to do so. Problem solved as far as I can tell.

 

 

[+Chrysalides]

Answer is irrelevant since premise in invalid. I don't have 3 kids

 

(but if faced with a time zone issue as you described, I'd choose #1 as chronological ordering is important to me - and describe the time zone issue in the log)

[4wheelin_fool]

The real question is if anyone finds this picture disturbing.

 

[+Chrysalides]

The real question is if anyone finds this picture disturbing.

Of course. The focus is off

[+wmpastor]

I try not to do major driving that late at night. Your story just pointed out another good reason not to.

 

I'd preserve the chronology and note the date / time zone issue in my log ("technically I found this yesterday"). This has a side benefit of giving accurate distances for TBs that are visiting the caches.

[+wmpastor]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

Will the real GeoBain please stand up?!

[+MartyBartfast]

When I got to my destination I would upload the field notes from my GPS and log them on the site, keeping whatever date/time the GPS had timestamped the finds. I don't know whether it would have accounted for the timezone change, and wouldn't care.

[+Gill & Tony]

I found a cache in Sydney, flew to Vancouver, crossed the date line and arrived before I left. My Vancouver cache could have been found before my Sydney cache but logging it before would have screwed up my mileage. Log them in the order you found them, date and time them as local time and make some sort of note in the log if it really matters.

 

Personally, I don't think it does.

[+lumbricus]

[team tisri]

The real question is if anyone finds this picture disturbing.

 

 

I don't like all the red things around the one blue thing.

[+ras_oscar]

Reminds me of a company I used to work for. Had an office in Georgia and a client in Alabama. they were habitually delivering things "just in time". They would drop a package off at the Delta package delivery desk at 5:45 and it would be delivered to Alabama at 5:30; 15 minutes before it was dropped off!!! Now if I can get that time machine to work on my drive to work every day.....

[+GeoBain]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

Will the real GeoBain please stand up?!

 

No. And if you knew me, you wouldn't ask me to.

[+J Grouchy]

Trying to figure out why time/date are that important? In this hypothetical am I (or you?) trying to keep some sort of cache a day streak alive? For me, I log the cache with my GPS and it date/time stamps immediately. So when I download my field notes it does the time/date automatically.

 

This. I can't see how this matters for anyone other than someone who is both trying to keep a streak going and is anal-retentive enough to insist on the most accurate (to the minute) time-stamping of their logs.

[+dprovan]

This. I can't see how this matters for anyone other than someone who is both trying to keep a streak going and is anal-retentive enough to insist on the most accurate (to the minute) time-stamping of their logs.

This reminds me of the time I was reading about people that were "Alphas" back when the concept first became popular. The article gave an example of an Alpha that insisted on the toilet paper coming out from the bottom of the roll. "Well, I glad I'm not an Alpha," I told myself, "since only an idiot would think toilet paper shouldn't come out from the top." While I can't rule out that someone here is being being anal-retentive, I can't figure out whether it's more anal-retentive to insist on the caches being logged in time order or being logged with the local date.

 

Anyway, to answer the question, I probably wouldn't notice to begin with, but if I did notice, I would log the local date. I consider the date important only as a way of saying when I found the cache, and I consider the local date relevant for that purpose. I'm far less interested in the date as a means of ordering my finds.

[+Roman!]

Trying to figure out why time/date are that important? In this hypothetical am I (or you?) trying to keep some sort of cache a day streak alive? For me, I log the cache with my GPS and it date/time stamps immediately. So when I download my field notes it does the time/date automatically.

 

This. I can't see how this matters for anyone other than someone who is both trying to keep a streak going and is anal-retentive enough to insist on the most accurate (to the minute) time-stamping of their logs.

 

Personally I do not care about time stamping but I do like my dates to be correct. In my example you have 2 legitimate choices how to log the cache, neither necessarily involves being anal retentive and neither one is right or wrong, I was just curious how others would log it and if anyone would skip it.

[+narcissa]

I think I would log the local date and time, but I would not impose that preference on anybody.

[+fishgeek]

To me, the order is more important than the date. I would stick with one time zone for a continuous period of caching, regardless of which time zone that I was actually in. I don't use a phone to log, so I have some control over my on-line log. If you did it differently, it would not bother me at all.

[+narcissa]

To me, the order is more important than the date. I would stick with one time zone for a continuous period of caching, regardless of which time zone that I was actually in. I don't use a phone to log, so I have some control over my on-line log. If you did it differently, it would not bother me at all.

 

Now I've changed my mind.

[4wheelin_fool]

The real question is if anyone finds this picture disturbing.

 

 

I don't like all the red things around the one blue thing.

 

Hmmm. How about this picture?

 

 

or this one?

 

Edited October 6, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[+narcissa]

The real question is if anyone finds this picture disturbing.

 

 

I don't like all the red things around the one blue thing.

 

Hmmm. How about this picture?

 

 

All three of those condiments are gross.

 

[4wheelin_fool]

 

Just had to do it?

[+Chrysalides]

When I got to my destination I would upload the field notes from my GPS and log them on the site, keeping whatever date/time the GPS had timestamped the finds. I don't know whether it would have accounted for the timezone change, and wouldn't care.

Field notes time is in UTC. Groundspeak adjust it to the time zone you set in your personal profile. So assuming you are traveling across multiple time zones, it may not be the "correct" day - but may be exactly what you want for logging.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Chrysalides

[+J Grouchy]

I don't really know what "Field Notes" are...but I generally log via my phone immediately after finding a cache, so I let the website sort it all out.

[Andronicus]

It isn't Puritan month yet, so I would use option #1. Come November 1st, I would use option #2.

 

I changed the find date on a cache that was part of my "most finds in a day" stat. I found it at about 0020h, and I change it to the previous day in order to show what I think is the correct number of finds in a day. All the finds were from about 1700h through 0020h, so to me, that is a single day of caching. I interpred a 'day' as any 24h period.

 

By they way, how are you liking living in LA?

[+MartyBartfast]

 

Field notes time is in UTC. Groundspeak adjust it to the time zone you set in your personal profile.

 

Ah, never really looked at that but being in the UK our time zone is the same as UTC for a large part of the year, and only an hour off for the rest! I might have noticed if it was wildly different.

[+Roman!]

It isn't Puritan month yet, so I would use option #1. Come November 1st, I would use option #2.

 

I changed the find date on a cache that was part of my "most finds in a day" stat. I found it at about 0020h, and I change it to the previous day in order to show what I think is the correct number of finds in a day. All the finds were from about 1700h through 0020h, so to me, that is a single day of caching. I interpred a 'day' as any 24h period.

 

By they way, how are you liking living in LA?

 

I think a Puritan would chose option #3 as 1 and 2 both affect one stat or another, yet no one has chosen it, maybe November 1st someone will.

[+wmpastor]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

Will the real GeoBain please stand up?!

 

No. And if you knew me, you wouldn't ask me to.

Ooooooh....I see. Actually I don't. But I'll mind my own business.

[+GeoBain]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

Will the real GeoBain please stand up?!

 

No. And if you knew me, you wouldn't ask me to.

Ooooooh....I see. Actually I don't. But I'll mind my own business.

 

Didn't mean it that way. I'm just not able to stand. Wheelchair commando here.

[+NanCycle]

I'd log a note thanking the CO.

 

Of course you would, after all, in three years you have never logged a single cache, why start now?

 

How did he get the Florida and Louisiana souvenirs, then, huh?

[+Chrysalides]

How did he get the Florida and Louisiana souvenirs, then, huh?

We do not talk about platinum membership here.

[+Harry Dolphin]

This. I can't see how this matters for anyone other than someone who is both trying to keep a streak going and is anal-retentive enough to insist on the most accurate (to the minute) time-stamping of their logs.

This reminds me of the time I was reading about people that were "Alphas" back when the concept first became popular. The article gave an example of an Alpha that insisted on the toilet paper coming out from the bottom of the roll. "Well, I glad I'm not an Alpha," I told myself, "since only an idiot would think toilet paper shouldn't come out from the top." While I can't rule out that someone here is being being anal-retentive, I can't figure out whether it's more anal-retentive to insist on the caches being logged in time order or being logged with the local date.

An Landers resoled that issue when manufacturers started printing things on rolls of paper. Obviosly from the top.

Anyway, to answer the question, I probably wouldn't notice to begin with, but if I did notice, I would log the local date. I consider the date important only as a way of saying when I found the cache, and I consider the local date relevant for that purpose. I'm far less interested in the date as a means of ordering my finds.

I think the obvious answer to the OP is: Get a divorce.

[+MountainWoods]

To me, the order is more important than the date. I would stick with one time zone for a continuous period of caching, regardless of which time zone that I was actually in. I don't use a phone to log, so I have some control over my on-line log. If you did it differently, it would not bother me at all.

 

Now I've changed my mind.

Good. We hope this one works.

[+MountainWoods]

BTW, for my answer to the original question, I think it would be moot. With my luck, I'd never find the cache in Illinois, so there'd be nothing to log.

 

(I do find one now and then. And I can find Illinois, since I lived there for 46 years. But I doubt that I could put both of 'em together.)

[+Ambrosia]

I don't log by date, I log by the day I'm still awake. As in - if I'm out caching on Friday, and it passes midnight, I've not gone to sleep and woken up, so for me it's still Friday. I'm not going to find a cache at 11:59pm and log it as Friday, and then find one at 1:01am and log it as Saturday. That just feels weird to me.

[+Roman!]

Tell that to my bank when I don't have my payment in by the time the clock strike 12:00 am and just a warning, they have no sense of humor.

Edited October 7, 2014 by Roman!

[+wmpastor]

Tell that to my bank when I don't have my payment in by the time the clock strike 12:00 am and just a warning, they have no sense of humor.

Tell the bank you were in a different time zone. I guarantee they'll laugh in your face.

[+wmpastor]

I don't log by date, I log by the day I'm still awake. As in - if I'm out caching on Friday, and it passes midnight, I've not gone to sleep and woken up, so for me it's still Friday. I'm not going to find a cache at 11:59pm and log it as Friday, and then find one at 1:01am and log it as Saturday. That just feels weird to me.

Right, this "subjective" view actually corresponds to the actual personal geocaching experience - & in the case of time zones, the "objective" or "technically correct" details can go in the log. The order of finds is accurate, and so is the date -- when you take the log in its totality (posted time plus details in the log).

 

There it is - I give this approach all 10 of my votes.

[+wmpastor]

This. I can't see how this matters for anyone other than someone who is both trying to keep a streak going and is anal-retentive enough to insist on the most accurate (to the minute) time-stamping of their logs.

This reminds me of the time I was reading about people that were "Alphas" back when the concept first became popular. The article gave an example of an Alpha that insisted on the toilet paper coming out from the bottom of the roll. "Well, I glad I'm not an Alpha," I told myself, "since only an idiot would think toilet paper shouldn't come out from the top." While I can't rule out that someone here is being being anal-retentive, I can't figure out whether it's more anal-retentive to insist on the caches being logged in time order or being logged with the local date.

An Landers resoled that issue when manufacturers started printing things on rolls of paper. Obviosly from the top.

Anyway, to answer the question, I probably wouldn't notice to begin with, but if I did notice, I would log the local date. I consider the date important only as a way of saying when I found the cache, and I consider the local date relevant for that purpose. I'm far less interested in the date as a means of ordering my finds.

I think the obvious answer to the OP is: Get a divorce.

Hmmm....caches rationed out at one per hour.... I flagged two good hikes but those probably took too much time. The OP should be glad Mrs. Incredible is busy - she'd have a field day with this topic within a topic....

[+Roman!]

I don't log by date, I log by the day I'm still awake. As in - if I'm out caching on Friday, and it passes midnight, I've not gone to sleep and woken up, so for me it's still Friday. I'm not going to find a cache at 11:59pm and log it as Friday, and then find one at 1:01am and log it as Saturday. That just feels weird to me.

Right, this "subjective" view actually corresponds to the actual personal geocaching experience - & in the case of time zones, the "objective" or "technically correct" details can go in the log. The order of finds is accurate, and so is the date -- when you take the log in its totality (posted time plus details in the log).

 

There it is - I give this approach all 10 of my votes.

 

No matter how you log it either your chronology will be off or yor stats of finds per date, some geocachers I know have OCD and this dilemma might just cause a meltdown.

 

Funny thing about geocachers, a lot of them that I know have OCD, way more than is normal.

[+Ambrosia]

I don't log by date, I log by the day I'm still awake. As in - if I'm out caching on Friday, and it passes midnight, I've not gone to sleep and woken up, so for me it's still Friday. I'm not going to find a cache at 11:59pm and log it as Friday, and then find one at 1:01am and log it as Saturday. That just feels weird to me.

Right, this "subjective" view actually corresponds to the actual personal geocaching experience - & in the case of time zones, the "objective" or "technically correct" details can go in the log. The order of finds is accurate, and so is the date -- when you take the log in its totality (posted time plus details in the log).

 

There it is - I give this approach all 10 of my votes.

 

No matter how you log it either your chronology will be off or yor stats of finds per date, some geocachers I know have OCD and this dilemma might just cause a meltdown.

 

Funny thing about geocachers, a lot of them that I know have OCD, way more than is normal.

Ah, but OCD is subjective, as well. Different people focus and obsess on different things.

[+Roman!]

This. I can't see how this matters for anyone other than someone who is both trying to keep a streak going and is anal-retentive enough to insist on the most accurate (to the minute) time-stamping of their logs.

This reminds me of the time I was reading about people that were "Alphas" back when the concept first became popular. The article gave an example of an Alpha that insisted on the toilet paper coming out from the bottom of the roll. "Well, I glad I'm not an Alpha," I told myself, "since only an idiot would think toilet paper shouldn't come out from the top." While I can't rule out that someone here is being being anal-retentive, I can't figure out whether it's more anal-retentive to insist on the caches being logged in time order or being logged with the local date.

An Landers resoled that issue when manufacturers started printing things on rolls of paper. Obviosly from the top.

Anyway, to answer the question, I probably wouldn't notice to begin with, but if I did notice, I would log the local date. I consider the date important only as a way of saying when I found the cache, and I consider the local date relevant for that purpose. I'm far less interested in the date as a means of ordering my finds.

I think the obvious answer to the OP is: Get a divorce.

Hmmm....caches rationed out at one per hour.... I flagged two good hikes but those probably took too much time. The OP should be glad Mrs. Incredible is busy - she'd have a field day with this topic within a topic....

 

I have experience cramming a lot of traveling into little time, I drove to alaska with my daughter for lunch and found some 30 caches enroute and caches that involve a hike just don't work, I save those for home.

 

When driving a cache an hour is a good goal, it breaks up the drive and gets you out to stretch. This works for me very well, I have no issues driving 24 hours straight which happens to be how long it takes to get to Vegas.

 

To each his own but I prefer my weekend over one spent in front of a computer solving puzzles.

[+Roman!]

I don't log by date, I log by the day I'm still awake. As in - if I'm out caching on Friday, and it passes midnight, I've not gone to sleep and woken up, so for me it's still Friday. I'm not going to find a cache at 11:59pm and log it as Friday, and then find one at 1:01am and log it as Saturday. That just feels weird to me.

Right, this "subjective" view actually corresponds to the actual personal geocaching experience - & in the case of time zones, the "objective" or "technically correct" details can go in the log. The order of finds is accurate, and so is the date -- when you take the log in its totality (posted time plus details in the log).

 

There it is - I give this approach all 10 of my votes.

 

No matter how you log it either your chronology will be off or yor stats of finds per date, some geocachers I know have OCD and this dilemma might just cause a meltdown.

 

Funny thing about geocachers, a lot of them that I know have OCD, way more than is normal.

Ah, but OCD is subjective, as well. Different people focus and obsess on different things.

 

True, but for many with OCD stats are important. When I was driving home and pondered the scenario I found it interesting how others would handle it.

 

There is no right answer, just individual preferences and I was just curious, that's all.

 

Sorry to disappoint you if my thread doesn't have an agenda.