Find Logged, No Answered, Deleted Log, Relogged

[+JL_HSTRE]

I have a few Earthcaches. So far, there haven't been many problems with them. I've had only a few logs without sending the answers. After a few days I will send a reminder to the person through their profile. After about a week without an answers then I delete their log. The reminder usually works; I think I've only deleted 2-3 logs before and the finder never contacted me about the deletion nor tried to relog.

 

Earlier this month, someone with only about a dozen finds (and no prior Earthcaches) logged a find and posted a photo from the location. However, they failed to submit any answers and after a few days I sent the customary reminder message through their profile. After still no reply, I deleted their log. I think their original log was Dec 3 and I deleted Dec 12. Today (Dec 14) they relogged a Find, including the same photo as before.

 

I could send them a second message and delete their log a second time, but if they did it once I'd expect they will just log it a third time. What is the procedure here - do I contact my Reviewer or Groudspeak or what?

[+Bear and Ragged]

Keep deleting.

Doubt a reviewer would get involved.

If the finder contacts Groundspeak, they can see no answers have been submitted - IF the contact is via your profile... So doubtful Groundspeak would 'Re-instate' the find log.

[+kunarion]

Keep deleting.

Doubt a reviewer would get involved.

If the finder contacts Groundspeak, they can see no answers have been submitted - IF the contact is via your profile... So doubtful Groundspeak would 'Re-instate' the find log.

The OP doesn't have an email address on his profile, so it will be "PM", through the web site then via email each way. If Groundspeak can see old PMs, they may see the answers were sent by the finder. It may be a communication issue. I'd guess that if the Finder is getting log deletion notices, they also get PMs, and if so, we know mail to the Finder works. There are many reasons a PM from the Finder might not arrive.

[+Touchstone]

I have a few Earthcaches. So far, there haven't been many problems with them. I've had only a few logs without sending the answers. After a few days I will send a reminder to the person through their profile. After about a week without an answers then I delete their log. The reminder usually works; I think I've only deleted 2-3 logs before and the finder never contacted me about the deletion nor tried to relog.

 

Earlier this month, someone with only about a dozen finds (and no prior Earthcaches) logged a find and posted a photo from the location. However, they failed to submit any answers and after a few days I sent the customary reminder message through their profile. After still no reply, I deleted their log. I think their original log was Dec 3 and I deleted Dec 12. Today (Dec 14) they relogged a Find, including the same photo as before.

 

I could send them a second message and delete their log a second time, but if they did it once I'd expect they will just log it a third time. What is the procedure here - do I contact my Reviewer or Groudspeak or what?

 

It appears the User isn't getting the hint. I would probably delete, privately email, and post a Note on the Listing explaining the log deletion so it would be clearly visible on the Listing page.

 

If they don't get a clue after that, I'd probably escalate it to Groundspeak. Reviewers don't typically get involved with Logging disputes, as they don't have any administrative powers over User accounts to follow up with (i.e. locking/banning accounts).

[+Harry Dolphin]

The instance I am familiar with concerns an EarthCache hidden by a relative (with permission from the park service). Two cachers walked through he area, but did not perform the activities required. Both were given warning that the answers were required. One log was deleted by he cacher. The other was deleted by the cache owner. The second cacher relogged the EarthCache. The log was again deleted. The second cacher send an offensive and threatening e-mail to the cache owner. That e-mail was forwarded to Groundspeak. The cacher was warned not to send such e-mails, and not to try to log the EarthCache again, or the cacher's account would be locked. This, of course, is a drastic example.

I would continue to delete the logs for non-conformance. I doubt that Groundspeak would get involved. Fifteen or nineteen deletions should get the point across (And, yes, I would continue to delete the finds!) I'm not sure the software is available to ban someone from logging a particular cache.

If the cacher appeals to Groundspeak, the facts are on your side. I have had people appeal to Groundspeak on some logs that I have deleted. The deletions were upheld. I have appealed deletions to Groundspeak, and I have been upheld for preforming the required task, and/or having signed the log.

My advice: Continue to delete bogus logs. (I think I deleted nine by the same cache once.)

[+GEO WALKER]

I guess every game will have its cheaters… I noticed the philosophy of ”everybody plays by their own rules” more and more. My question is... does this problem occur less if the cache is posted for premium members only? Given the few occurrences of chasing someone down for the answers, all of my future efforts may be in this direction.

[+hzoi]

I don't see them as cheaters, often just misinformed, and confused why just posting a photo is OK for a virtual but not for an earthcache. So I take the time to try and spell things out a little.

 

That's for the initial log, mind you. If I've explained things and they're still not playing ball, they lose the benefit of the doubt.

[gpsblake]

Perhaps they are responding to your PM's through their email which would bounce to noreply@geocaching.com and not reach you.

 

Perhaps adding a real physical email address to your letter explaining what is required might help clear this up.

[+dprovan]

I don't see them as cheaters, often just misinformed, and confused why just posting a photo is OK for a virtual but not for an earthcache. So I take the time to try and spell things out a little.

 

That's for the initial log, mind you. If I've explained things and they're still not playing ball, they lose the benefit of the doubt.

I'd continue to give them the benefit of the doubt. They probably don't get e-mail, so the request explaining the need for answers was lost, as was the deletion notice. They may have thought they forgot to log it or that something else went wrong to complete the logging. True, they could be trying to cheat, but it seems like there are easier and far less obvious ways to do that.

 

Not that the makes much difference: I'd recommend giving them the benefit of the doubt even if they relog, but assuming they're nice doesn't really change the reaction: you still just delete until you get sick of it and then report the problem to GS. But always while thinking nice thoughts about them.

[+J Grouchy]

I don't see them as cheaters, often just misinformed, and confused why just posting a photo is OK for a virtual but not for an earthcache. So I take the time to try and spell things out a little.

 

That's for the initial log, mind you. If I've explained things and they're still not playing ball, they lose the benefit of the doubt.

I'd continue to give them the benefit of the doubt. They probably don't get e-mail, so the request explaining the need for answers was lost, as was the deletion notice. They may have thought they forgot to log it or that something else went wrong to complete the logging. True, they could be trying to cheat, but it seems like there are easier and far less obvious ways to do that.

 

Not that the makes much difference: I'd recommend giving them the benefit of the doubt even if they relog, but assuming they're nice doesn't really change the reaction: you still just delete until you get sick of it and then report the problem to GS. But always while thinking nice thoughts about them.

 

That right there is the bigger problem: If they "don't get email", then it means they already are missing not only important communications, but also benefits. If they are not verified, then this continues to be a real issue that Groundspeak is ultimately responsible for...letting unverified people continue playing, taking no responsibility and offering no way to be in contact with them. It just makes the whole situation - particularly when it comes to virtuals and ECs where communication is vital - messy and frustrating.

[+narcissa]

Do not ever go outside of the Groundspeak system to communicate with people you don't know. Always have them send you messages through your profile - this means you can easily show Groundspeak the proof when there is a problem.

 

If they log the cache a third time without sending you the responses, ask Groundspeak to get involved.

[+GEO WALKER]

Back to my original question... Is anyone seeing this occur w/ECs that are listed as Premium Member Caches?

[+cerberus1]

PMO Earthcaches?

Weird.

 

No container to worry about and a simple delete if answers aren't being answered...

[+hzoi]

Perhaps they are responding to your PM's through their email which would bounce to noreply@geocaching.com and not reach you.

Only an issue if you uncheck the box "I want to send my email address along with this message." I always leave it checked, so a reply would come straight to me.

[+Manville Possum]

Back to my original question... Is anyone seeing this occur w/ECs that are listed as Premium Member Caches?

 

Mine are PMO, and it solved the issue of me having to delete logs for no answers being sent.

[+GEO WALKER]

That's what I was thinking... I was just looking for some validation. Getting a little tired of chasing folks [mostly newbies] down for the answers and disappointed when there is no contact email on their page. Many Thanks...

Edited December 17, 2014 by GEO WALKER

[+cerberus1]

In Pennsylvania, 5 out of 205 Earthcaches are pmo.

Kinda telling how popular the option is...

Edited December 17, 2014 by cerberus1

[+narcissa]

Perhaps they are responding to your PM's through their email which would bounce to noreply@geocaching.com and not reach you.

Only an issue if you uncheck the box "I want to send my email address along with this message." I always leave it checked, so a reply would come straight to me.

 

I always leave the box unchecked, unless I know the person. It's best to have this communication go through the website, in case there's an issue.

Edited December 17, 2014 by narcissa

[+Manville Possum]

In Pennsylvania, 5 out of 205 Earthcaches are pmo.

Kinda telling how popular the option is...

 

Was not a popular option for me either, but when a NVM tore apart GZ and posted that they could not find my EC... I simply had enough.

[+hzoi]

In Pennsylvania, 5 out of 205 Earthcaches are pmo.

Kinda telling how popular the option is...

 

Was not a popular option for me either, but when a NVM tore apart GZ and posted that they could not find my EC... I simply had enough.

 

I haven't yet hidden a PMO cache, but this is one aspect that I got close. Since many of our earthcaches are hidden on public property, they are subject to approval by park managers. I figured it was more important to be able to show park staff that I was providing them a lesson that any member of the public could learn with the right equipment. It is part of my pitch that my proposed EC supports the park mission.

 

What I did to make sure people weren't tearing things up was to put this in all our earthcache descriptions, up front (usually in the short description):

 

There is no physical cache container to find; to log this earthcache, you will need to email us the answers to the questions below.

 

It seemed easier than limiting access. I can only recall one or two cachers who posted DNFs, and that was before I added the language. (And it also spells it out for park staff that might still think about geocaches as "buried treasure."

Edited December 19, 2014 by hzoi