Find your owned caches

[+bumandworker]

Bound to have been discussed previously......but I see "event" caches hosted (owned) by the creater, then logged as "attended"....which seems to make sence.....if you are the host, you are present. This then adds to that (host) owner "finds" count. Every one seems happy with that.

So...I have seen (traditional) cache owners log a find on thier own cache. Obviously, they have been to the cache location to place the box. Then there is some grumble about that owner "finding" thier own cache. What is the difference I wonder.

Cheers

b&w

[+T.D.M.22]

For an event, if you're there, you're there, it doesn't matter if you host it or not. You can even host an event and not be there (I have)

 

For a cache, you're looking for something you don't know where it is. If you placed it, you obviously know where it is. You wouldn't get a puzzle or model that's put together already and say you did it. Same idea.

[+cerberus1]

You wouldn't get a puzzle or model that's put together already and say you did it. Same idea.

+1

[+Bear and Ragged]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

 

They now show as having Found their own cache.

[+lamoracke]

Did a statistical analysis once in my area (Washington). About 3 out of 5 folks logged their own event. So obviously the majority sees fit to log their own event. Their own caches? Often its done by newer caches who have not been told (likely) that its kind of cheesy but its not worth worrying about, unless the subject comes up at an event with them or something.

[+kunarion]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

I adopted a cache before finding it. While searching, I almost had to DNF it . It's tricky! I logged the Find, which seemed OK to me.

[JASTA 11]

Bound to have been discussed previously......but I see "event" caches hosted (owned) by the creater, then logged as "attended"....which seems to make sence.....if you are the host, you are present. This then adds to that (host) owner "finds" count. Every one seems happy with that.

Not everyone.

 

So...I have seen (traditional) cache owners log a find on thier own cache. Obviously, they have been to the cache location to place the box. Then there is some grumble about that owner "finding" thier own cache. What is the difference I wonder.

 

To us, there is no difference. We won't do either. That's what a note is for.

 

Most folks would say that logging a find on your own cache is wrong, but an attended log on your own event isn't the same.

[+Colonial Cats]

Bound to have been discussed previously......but I see "event" caches hosted (owned) by the creater, then logged as "attended"....which seems to make sence.....if you are the host, you are present. This then adds to that (host) owner "finds" count. Every one seems happy with that.

So...I have seen (traditional) cache owners log a find on thier own cache. Obviously, they have been to the cache location to place the box. Then there is some grumble about that owner "finding" thier own cache. What is the difference I wonder.

Cheers

b&w

It's always bad form to find a cache you hid.

[+Mudfrog]

Did a statistical analysis once in my area (Washington). About 3 out of 5 folks logged their own event. So obviously the majority sees fit to log their own event. Their own caches? Often its done by newer caches who have not been told (likely) that its kind of cheesy but its not worth worrying about, unless the subject comes up at an event with them or something.

 

I see this posted from time to time. Being new should have nothing to do with this. It's not a part of a game that a new person would have to ask about or learn. It's a concept that should be easy to understand by most everyone over the age of, let's say,,, three.

 

Yep, it's cheesy, but not anything worth worrying about.

[Mr.Yuck]

Locally, out of the hundreds of people who have ever hidden caches, I've seen two people knowingly log finds for their own caches. I'd describe both of them as rather eccentric, in general. That doesn't count the 3 or 4 totally clueless noobs who did it on a cache or two that I've noticed.

 

Oh, and I do log attends on my own events. The record will show I've only hosted one here under my own account in 2006 or so, but I've hosted I believe over 10 on a different website.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Mr.Yuck

[+WarNinjas]

I have not done it but it seems the norm around here to log a attended for a event you own. Caches would not be the same. I have been with cachers when they placed some caches and I have not even logged a find on those that I don't own and now maintain.

[4wheelin_fool]

It's funny how different situations elicit different responses. Logging you own event is fine, but logging your own cache is not. But wait, if it's hidden under a different account, such as would be done for a power trail, then it's fine. Logging the same cache twice is a no no, but if it gets archived and the exact identical hide gets relisted with a different GC#, then it's okay. It's not really the act that's wrong, but if the same account or GC# involved in it, then it is. Logging your own event only came about when the event logs were changed from find to attended. One reason why this was done was to encourage people to only log it once, as attending something multiple times in the place of logging temporary caches was silly. But then people had to log that they attended their own event, so then this started..

Edited November 6, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[Tyreless]

Nobody searches for and then "finds" an event - you just attend a place that isn't hidden. So kudos to the person/team who organized it and attended it. Seems to me they deserve the smilie - technically and morally.

[Mr.Yuck]

Nobody searches for and then "finds" an event - you just attend a place that isn't hidden. So kudos to the person/team who organized it and attended it. Seems to me they deserve the smilie - technically and morally.

 

I don't know about deserving a smiley, I'd never use that particular language. I just figure you went to a party, and you were there. But I suppose this whole thing is about logging caches you did out in the field as finds. Which is totally cheesy, and like I said before, I've only seen two sort of eccentric people do this. One guy would drop "just getting credit for the cache" in his find log.

[+narcissa]

There are no rules about it. It's a matter of personal preference. Your record of finds is personal - it's not a score, or a contest. If you prefer to log your own caches as found, go ahead - it has no impact on anybody else. If you feel it's incorrect, then don't do it.

[Andronicus]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

I adopted a cache before finding it. While searching, I almost had to DNF it . It's tricky! I logged the Find, which seemed OK to me.

Well, normally, I would agree, but since it is Puritan month, I must stress that this sort of thing is entirely unacceptable!

[+kunarion]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

I adopted a cache before finding it. While searching, I almost had to DNF it . It's tricky! I logged the Find, which seemed OK to me.

Well, normally, I would agree, but since it is Puritan month, I must stress that this sort of thing is entirely unacceptable!

No wonder my knickers are so bunched!

[Andronicus]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

I adopted a cache before finding it. While searching, I almost had to DNF it . It's tricky! I logged the Find, which seemed OK to me.

Well, normally, I would agree, but since it is Puritan month, I must stress that this sort of thing is entirely unacceptable!

No wonder my knickers are so bunched!

Yes, Puritan month can do that to you...

[+MountainWoods]

Bound to have been discussed previously......but I see "event" caches hosted (owned) by the creater, then logged as "attended"....which seems to make sence.....if you are the host, you are present. This then adds to that (host) owner "finds" count. Every one seems happy with that.

So...I have seen (traditional) cache owners log a find on thier own cache. Obviously, they have been to the cache location to place the box. Then there is some grumble about that owner "finding" thier own cache. What is the difference I wonder.

Cheers

b&w

It's always bad form to find a cache you hid.

Now if you hid the cache when you were 60 years old and you are now 70, .......

[+Harry Dolphin]

Bound to have been discussed previously......but I see "event" caches hosted (owned) by the creater, then logged as "attended"....which seems to make sence.....if you are the host, you are present. This then adds to that (host) owner "finds" count. Every one seems happy with that.

So...I have seen (traditional) cache owners log a find on thier own cache. Obviously, they have been to the cache location to place the box. Then there is some grumble about that owner "finding" thier own cache. What is the difference I wonder.

Cheers

b&w

It's always bad form to find a cache you hid.

Now if you hid the cache when you were 60 years old and you are now 70, .......

 

You got a problem with that???

[vagabond]

Bound to have been discussed previously......but I see "event" caches hosted (owned) by the creater, then logged as "attended"....which seems to make sence.....if you are the host, you are present. This then adds to that (host) owner "finds" count. Every one seems happy with that.

So...I have seen (traditional) cache owners log a find on thier own cache. Obviously, they have been to the cache location to place the box. Then there is some grumble about that owner "finding" thier own cache. What is the difference I wonder.

Cheers

b&w

It's always bad form to find a cache you hid.

Nowthatble if you hid the cache when you were 60 years old and you are now 70, .......

Hey I resemble that :laughing:

[DannyCaffeine]

I found one of mine but that is because I found it before I adopted it.

[+dprovan]

As with a lot of geocaching logging, I ask myself, "What's the point?" When logging attended on an event you hosted, the point is to indicate that you were there. It's not a requirement that you actually go when you set up an event, so it makes sense to say that you did even though that's normal.

 

On the other hand, if you hide a cache, everyone already knows you know where it is, so what's the point? Well, a couple points have been raised that make perfect sense to me. Obviously if you've found a cache and then adopt it later, it makes no sense to delete the history of your find. If you adopted a cache before you found it, then I think logging a find makes a good point, although I can also understand people that wouldn't dream of it. I've never considered it, but I can even see making a point of logging a find on a cache if you went to check on it, and it wasn't where it was supposed to be, so you really did have to search for it in order to return it to the correct location. Sure, most people would just explain that in an OM, but I can see someone feeling they deserved that find.

 

Generally, of course, people claiming finds on their own cache have no point. Almost all such finds are people that don't know any better or people that want to bump their numbers or people that created the cache to satisfy some challenge cache requirement that they need. I don't understand why people like that feel satisfied with the find: it would seem pointless to me.

[+narcissa]

Worrying about other people's finds seems pointless to me.

[+bflentje]

Worrying about other people's finds seems pointless to me.

 

Like.

[+joshuar9476]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

I adopted a cache before finding it. While searching, I almost had to DNF it . It's tricky! I logged the Find, which seemed OK to me.

 

Although it's unpopular around here, I went back and switched those from "Found it" to "Post Note." I can always switch it back if need be and to me the star is more important than the smiley.

[+BlackRose67]

Could be a cacher finds a cache, then in the future adopts it.

 

They now show as having Found their own cache.

I have 7 like that (4 now archived).

 

I found them all then adopted them at later dates. One of them I recently adopted to it keep from being archived due to an absent CO, as it's an older one from 2003.

[+jellis]

I have asked some COs why they log their own finds and they had some excuses.

 

It was missing so I had to find it.

 

It keeps showing up on my map.

 

Others are doing it.

 

Or I logged a find by accident.

[+humboldt flier]

Well this topic has been up before,

 

Generally considered to be cheesy to log finds on your own Trady's and Multi's.

 

Seems fine to claim "Attended" on your own event.

 

NOW FOR THE FUN:

 

Jury seems undivided on claiming a find for one's OWN Challenge Cache.

 

Generally accepted that those who place Challenge Caches should have accomplished the task required before creating the Challenge Cache.

 

I have seen an even split for CO's logging finds on their own Challenges.

 

What say the followers of this thread??

[+Bear and Ragged]

NOW FOR THE FUN:

 

Jury seems undivided on claiming a find for one's OWN Challenge Cache.

 

Generally accepted that those who place Challenge Caches should have accomplished the task required before creating the Challenge Cache.

 

I have seen an even split for CO's logging finds on their own Challenges.

 

What say the followers of this thread??

 

As the Challenge is the challenge, if you complete it, why not log the find...

(Some are put out before the cache owner has completed the challenge)

 

ETA

Thinking about it, so long as it's not a CO working out what finds they have, then hiding a challenge cache with those requirements, just so they can log another find.

Edited November 19, 2014 by Bear and Ragged

[+NeverSummer]

NOW FOR THE FUN:

 

Jury seems undivided on claiming a find for one's OWN Challenge Cache.

 

Generally accepted that those who place Challenge Caches should have accomplished the task required before creating the Challenge Cache.

 

I have seen an even split for CO's logging finds on their own Challenges.

 

What say the followers of this thread??

 

As the Challenge is the challenge, if you complete it, why not log the find...

(Some are put out before the cache owner has completed the challenge)

 

ETA

Thinking about it, so long as it's not a CO working out what finds they have, then hiding a challenge cache with those requirements, just so they can log another find.

Perhaps easier to swallow if "challenge caches" get their own type.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[+Yurt]

I've seen where someone has adopted out their caches and then claimed a find on them! Legit I guess.

 

I assume there's no 'rule' against logging your own cache or logging the same cache multiple times otherwise geocaching.com would have something in place to warn you that you are logging your own cache or logging the same cache again. Of course. Therefore let the numbers flow.

[+K13]

I recently adopted 4 caches from another cacher. All four of those were found by me at least well over a year prior to the adoption. My Found It logs will remain on those 4 of "my" caches. I will never log a find on a cache I placed.

[+Mudfrog]

Well this topic has been up before,

 

Generally considered to be cheesy to log finds on your own Trady's and Multi's.

 

Seems fine to claim "Attended" on your own event.

 

NOW FOR THE FUN:

 

Jury seems undivided on claiming a find for one's OWN Challenge Cache.

 

Generally accepted that those who place Challenge Caches should have accomplished the task required before creating the Challenge Cache.

 

I have seen an even split for CO's logging finds on their own Challenges.

 

What say the followers of this thread??

 

I suppose that meeting the challenge requirement is probably the main objective for challenge caches. But, finding the cache container itself is part of the process too. Just seems too easy to me,, i would not even think about claiming a "found it" on this or any cache that i hid myself.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Mudfrog

[+WarNinjas]

Well this topic has been up before,

 

Generally considered to be cheesy to log finds on your own Trady's and Multi's.

 

Seems fine to claim "Attended" on your own event.

 

NOW FOR THE FUN:

 

Jury seems undivided on claiming a find for one's OWN Challenge Cache.

 

Generally accepted that those who place Challenge Caches should have accomplished the task required before creating the Challenge Cache.

 

I have seen an even split for CO's logging finds on their own Challenges.

 

What say the followers of this thread??

 

I wouldn't log one of my challenges as a find just as any other of my hides.

[+Gill & Tony]

I own 3 challenge caches and have qualified for all 3. I have never considered logging a find on them. It just seems wrong.

 

Like logging a find on my own traditional whenever I do maintenance.

[+DadOf6Furrballs]

We have a few caches we've logged finds on that we now own, they were found before we adopted them from someone else. We also have found and own a cache that was placed (2002) BEFORE we started caching (2009), for the same aforementioned reason.

 

Some people do log finds on their own caches, but that's their game to play, not mine to judge.

[+redsox_mark]

I've not seen any challenge cache owner claim a find on their own cache, and I would not do it.

 

(Excepting of course the adoption scenario).

[+firestronaut]

Even when I was new to the game and placed my first (probably slightly premature) cache, logging it as a find never even occured to me. Caching for me is about the search and trip there (the trip back is usually full of aches and pains).

 

On the subject of adoption, I would still log it as a find, both before and after the adoption - if that's your first time to that place and your first search for the cache...

But obviously, that's just me, and I've never adopted a cache before.

 

 

 

Slightly off topic but sorta relevant, a cache a few miles from me was archived due to the CO's ill health - he archived all of his caches, most of which I hadn't found yet and some are still in play, just archived. The cache in question was popular and the spot was taken up by a new CO who referenced the previous (TWO!) caches that have been there. I've only ever found one. I'm in a dilemma with myself over whether to go and get this one. On one hand, its a new cache, new CO. On the other, I've already found a cache there and it sorta feels like a cop-out... :unsure:

[+fbingha]

I've not seen any challenge cache owner claim a find on their own cache, and I would not do it.

 

(Excepting of course the adoption scenario).

 

I have seen it but won't mention names.

Edited November 21, 2014 by fbingha

[+Bear and Ragged]

Even when I was new to the game and placed my first (probably slightly premature) cache, logging it as a find never even occured to me. Caching for me is about the search and trip there (the trip back is usually full of aches and pains).

 

On the subject of adoption, I would still log it as a find, both before and after the adoption - if that's your first time to that place and your first search for the cache...

But obviously, that's just me, and I've never adopted a cache before.

 

 

 

Slightly off topic but sorta relevant, a cache a few miles from me was archived due to the CO's ill health - he archived all of his caches, most of which I hadn't found yet and some are still in play, just archived. The cache in question was popular and the spot was taken up by a new CO who referenced the previous (TWO!) caches that have been there. I've only ever found one. I'm in a dilemma with myself over whether to go and get this one. On one hand, its a new cache, new CO. On the other, I've already found a cache there and it sorta feels like a cop-out... :unsure:

 

Finding after adoption gets 'cheesy' if it's a Multi, or a Puzzle, that after adopting the cache, you now have the final coordinates without having to do the extra work.

 

As for new cache in old cache site. Go for it!

(Often said, "Different GC number, different cache!")

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Even when I was new to the game and placed my first (probably slightly premature) cache, logging it as a find never even occured to me. Caching for me is about the search and trip there (the trip back is usually full of aches and pains).

 

On the subject of adoption, I would still log it as a find, both before and after the adoption - if that's your first time to that place and your first search for the cache...

But obviously, that's just me, and I've never adopted a cache before.

 

 

 

Slightly off topic but sorta relevant, a cache a few miles from me was archived due to the CO's ill health - he archived all of his caches, most of which I hadn't found yet and some are still in play, just archived. The cache in question was popular and the spot was taken up by a new CO who referenced the previous (TWO!) caches that have been there. I've only ever found one. I'm in a dilemma with myself over whether to go and get this one. On one hand, its a new cache, new CO. On the other, I've already found a cache there and it sorta feels like a cop-out... :unsure:

 

Finding after adoption gets 'cheesy' if it's a Multi, or a Puzzle, that after adopting the cache, you now have the final coordinates without having to do the extra work.

 

As for new cache in old cache site. Go for it!

(Often said, "Different GC number, different cache!")

 

I don't quite understand adopting a cache one hasn't found. If you haven't found it, how do you know it's worth adopting?

[+SwineFlew]

Oh here we go again...

 

Bickering over the rules of a cache "find" was never the intent of Geocaching.com. There's no prize, no leaderboard, and no trophy, so there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist about anyone else's definition of a find.

[+redsox_mark]

 

I don't quite understand adopting a cache one hasn't found. If you haven't found it, how do you know it's worth adopting?

 

I agree that is the most usual case, to find it first.

 

I adopted one I hadn't found (and never did find!). I found a cache I loved but there was an issue with a waypoint (a virtual sign which was damaged). I contacted the owner, who said he had moved away, and couldn't fix it. He would archive it, unless I wanted to adopt it. Oh, and would I also take another cache in the area? I tried to find the second cache and could not, but it was in a nice area and I decided to adopt it anyway. I searched and searched, then a recent finder checked and confirmed the cache wasn't there (at least not where they found it). For various reasons I ended up archiving the cache. I adopted and archived, never found it.

 

The first cache (the one I wanted to adopt) is still going strong.

[+niraD]

I don't quite understand adopting a cache one hasn't found. If you haven't found it, how do you know it's worth adopting?

I can see it happening if one had found enough other caches placed by the original owner, and trusted them to place quality caches.

 

Recently, a geocaching couple moved out of the area and offered all their caches for adoption. They were fairly prolific hiders, and placed interesting caches with historic or nature themes, the kinds of caches that receive a high percentage of Favorites points. I offered to adopt a few of the caches that I hadn't found yet, just based on knowing them and their cache style, and having read the descriptions.

 

As it turned out, someone else adopted those caches. And I would have made a point of trying to find the caches before adopting them. But I didn't have to find them to know that they'd be worth adopting.