Jump to content

Would you log this?


funkymunkyzone
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Shouldn't it say you should signed the physical logsheet at the physical location? Someone could take a logsheet home or to an event, have everyone sign it then return it to the container without the other signers being at the cache location. The rule doesn't state that one.

That concept is so basic to geocaching that you'd think everyone would simply assume you had to go to GZ. As one Groundspeak lackey once explained:

 

Common misconceptions about couch potato logs

"There's no requirement visiting the location in the cache listing".

 

Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement

Link to comment

Shouldn't it say you should signed the physical logsheet at the physical location? Someone could take a logsheet home or to an event, have everyone sign it then return it to the container without the other signers being at the cache location. The rule doesn't state that one.

That concept is so basic to geocaching that you'd think everyone would simply assume you had to go to GZ. As one Groundspeak lackey once explained:

 

Common misconceptions about couch potato logs

"There's no requirement visiting the location in the cache listing".

 

Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement

 

Pointing out an individual's logging behavior and bringing it up in multiple threads is in poor form and a bit worse than any couch potato logging IMO.

Link to comment

Shouldn't it say you should signed the physical logsheet at the physical location? Someone could take a logsheet home or to an event, have everyone sign it then return it to the container without the other signers being at the cache location. The rule doesn't state that one.

That concept is so basic to geocaching that you'd think everyone would simply assume you had to go to GZ. As one Groundspeak lackey once explained:

 

Common misconceptions about couch potato logs

"There's no requirement visiting the location in the cache listing".

 

Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement

 

Apparently not everyone got the memo.

 

I have questioned why someone driving a vehicle while someone else hops out every 528' to "find" a cache should post hundreds of found it logs? Did the driver go to GZ or did they just park close to GZ? Does being part of a "team" make it okay because someone stamped the "team" name on a log sheet?

 

Should those that are using the 3 cache monte method on a power trail be logging a find on hundreds of caches? After all, isn't a basic concept in geocaching to replace the container where you found it?

 

How about leap frogging? I would imagine thousands of found it logs have been posted using that method but it's acceptable because, after all, their team name is on every log sheet.

 

Where, exactly *is* GZ? If a half dozen people are standing at the base of the tree, and someone climbs 50' up into the tree where the cache is located did any of those people on the ground actually make it to GZ? To me, they did not, and they didn't do the cache as the CO intended, but as long as someone else puts their name on the log sheet, a lot of cachers will have no qualms about logging it as a find.

Link to comment

Shouldn't it say you should signed the physical logsheet at the physical location? Someone could take a logsheet home or to an event, have everyone sign it then return it to the container without the other signers being at the cache location. The rule doesn't state that one.

That concept is so basic to geocaching that you'd think everyone would simply assume you had to go to GZ. As one Groundspeak lackey once explained:

 

Common misconceptions about couch potato logs

"There's no requirement visiting the location in the cache listing".

 

Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement

 

Apparently not everyone got the memo.

 

I have questioned why someone driving a vehicle while someone else hops out every 528' to "find" a cache should post hundreds of found it logs? Did the driver go to GZ or did they just park close to GZ? Does being part of a "team" make it okay because someone stamped the "team" name on a log sheet?

 

Should those that are using the 3 cache monte method on a power trail be logging a find on hundreds of caches? After all, isn't a basic concept in geocaching to replace the container where you found it?

 

How about leap frogging? I would imagine thousands of found it logs have been posted using that method but it's acceptable because, after all, their team name is on every log sheet.

 

Where, exactly *is* GZ? If a half dozen people are standing at the base of the tree, and someone climbs 50' up into the tree where the cache is located did any of those people on the ground actually make it to GZ? To me, they did not, and they didn't do the cache as the CO intended, but as long as someone else puts their name on the log sheet, a lot of cachers will have no qualms about logging it as a find.

 

+1

 

Not because I would necessarily question all of those - I won't say which of those I am personally ok with and which I'm not - but it shows that how people (both finders and hiders) feel about what is a find and what isn't does sit on a sliding scale. I'd say for the most part though, finders would include being at, or very near depending on the definition, GZ when the cache is found in order to log a find (at least in the same country!)

Link to comment

I have questioned why someone driving a vehicle while someone else hops out every 528' to "find" a cache should post hundreds of found it logs? Did the driver go to GZ or did they just park close to GZ? Does being part of a "team" make it okay because someone stamped the "team" name on a log sheet?

 

Should those that are using the 3 cache monte method on a power trail be logging a find on hundreds of caches? After all, isn't a basic concept in geocaching to replace the container where you found it?

 

How about leap frogging? I would imagine thousands of found it logs have been posted using that method but it's acceptable because, after all, their team name is on every log sheet.

 

 

Most power trail owners wouldn't mind if you'd found only a single cache and logged everything online, as they usually have no intention of checking logs anyway... And as the result, the find count is useless to measure geocaching experience, at least in the areas affected by power trails. It doesn't say anything if some cacher has 10k finds... he/she may be less experience that someone with 1k finds, but none from power trails, and 500 from non-tradis.

Link to comment

And as the result, the find count is useless to measure geocaching experience, at least in the areas affected by power trails. It doesn't say anything if some cacher has 10k finds... he/she may be less experience that someone with 1k finds, but none from power trails, and 500 from non-tradis.

It's comments like this that make me feel happy about my decision to stop logging finds online. I can now go find power-trail caches or spend a day finding only multis and puzzles and not have worry that someone will tell me that one is worth more than the other.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...