Jump to content

Found but not signed?


Recommended Posts

What about people who leave cards instead of signing the log?
The cards I've seen have been personal signature items, and have been left in addition to signing the log, rather than instead of signing the log. They're trade items, and some of us collect them.
Link to comment

I think it's up to the CO to provide something to sign the log book. I'm not a fan of caches so small a pencil won't fit and the log book gets filled up after 10 visits. If you're going to make a cache so small, accept a photo.

 

Do you, really? I sure don't. I never expect it. Pens freeze in the winter and dry out in the summer. Pencils break. They poke holes in baggies. Pencil sharpeners rust in the wild. Both pencils and pens can be stuck in the pockets of a previous finder. Photos of a find are technically not acceptable per the guidelines, although some cache owners may accept them. But they don't have to. Bring a pen. Bring three pens.

 

They are not the only ones. I could name at least two caches that we have done ... and gone back at some point to have a look at the logs .. and found them with a red spanner because:

 

"found the cache but was not able to sign because the pencil was blunt. The CO needs to replace pencil ASAP so logging a NM" or words to that effect.

 

What about people who leave cards instead of signing the log?

 

Vistaprint have a lot to answer for. No idea when this started it was happening before we started and had ebbed and flowed thereafter. Sometimes the box is so full of business cards and Vistaprint calling cards that you cannot actually close the box. Water has entered the container and the lot is all black mould and rust. We remove them if that has happened.

 

And back on topic - happened across a few logs from the same cacher who says they found but could not sign ... no pen ... muggles present ... kids about etc ... which is all plausible but then looked at lot of their other logs by them ... all the same results on nearly every log of theirs that I looked at. They have quite a few finds too. Wonder how long they will get away with that :lol:

Link to comment

If they say, Didn't have a pen, but you read the other caches they did nearby and they didn't mention not having one. Hmmm... Delete.

 

You've never lost your only pen on your way to a cache?

 

Oh, and while it has been years, I have indeed logged that I would go back and sign... and did just that.

I'll write with a twig and dirt. I will take a picture, I will find someway to sign it. But I have both a stamp and a pen on a lanyard around my neck so I don't forget it.

 

A few years ago I found a cache after a walk of about a third of a mile and discovered that I didn't have a working pen with me. Since it was near a pond I scrawled NYPC on the log with a twig and some mud and mentioned it it my online log. The next person to find the cache traced over the barely readable mud signature with a pen and mentioned it in their log. Cachers helping Cachers. That's a good thing.

Edited by NYPaddleCacher
Link to comment

I think it's up to the CO to provide something to sign the log book. I'm not a fan of caches so small a pencil won't fit and the log book gets filled up after 10 visits. If you're going to make a cache so small, accept a photo.

 

Do you, really? I sure don't. I never expect it. Pens freeze in the winter and dry out in the summer. Pencils break. They poke holes in baggies. Pencil sharpeners rust in the wild. Both pencils and pens can be stuck in the pockets of a previous finder. Photos of a find are technically not acceptable per the guidelines, although some cache owners may accept them. But they don't have to. Bring a pen. Bring three pens.

I never realized that pencils and pens were so difficult to use in geocaching. I guess I’ve just been fortunate with most of the caches I’ve found. Perhaps we need to use thicker Baggies with pencils or better yet, crayons…. Wait they might melt on a hot day! All this thinking is giving me a headache. I think I need to clear my head and go out geocaching; I hope the cache has something to sign the logbook with! :rolleyes: Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment

Personally, I enjoy geocaching as a reason to have a fun walk somewhere I haven't been before, with the added bonus of trying to find these hidden things. I'm actually not particularly interested in my total score. So even if a cache owner was to unfairly delete one of my logs, I don't really care too much. Life's too short, and I'd rather enjoy my next nice day out somewhere rather than argue over 1 digit.

 

Having said that, yesterday my pen fell out of my pocket while I was in my car, so I took photos of the logs instead.

 

As for the frustration of full logs, this is entirely the cache owner's responsibility. Really, a cache owner should know how many entries the log can contain, and should have an idea of whether it's likely to be getting full based on the amount of logs on the cache page. If it's a nano with a tiny log, they should be checking it frequently anyway. But also, it's good practice for geocachers who find it to notify when the log is nearly full.

 

Although, for geocachers who do care about their score, always carry a pen and camera with you.

 

+1 to that!!!!

 

The only issue I've noticed is that it's hard to keep track of the ones you've physically found versus the ones you found AND logged when using the app. If I don't get the online log, it doesn't show up on my app that I've found it, even if I've been there and know where it's located. So when I go to look for a new location, I get very confused!

 

But to argue over the actual number of finds...well, if that's really what matters to a person... Like I said, I'm more concerned about keeping track of locations. Gas is expensive, you know!

Link to comment

I keep feeling like there should be an alternative to signing a log with a pen, in this day and age. But I've already been informed by people here that it wouldn't work to have a code like with a TB, because the code could be leaked.

 

But I don't know, for some reason, in 2015, in an age of "paperless goecaching", I can't help but feel that relying on paper and pen is somehow behind the times. Not quite sure what a valid alternative would be. Unless we one day get to a point where it could be purely digital, where the cache is a USB port that can be plugged into the GPS and it instantly registers the find.

 

But I suppose that would ruin it for people who enjoy actually seeing the other log entries.

Link to comment

But I don't know, for some reason, in 2015, in an age of "paperless goecaching", I can't help but feel that relying on paper and pen is somehow behind the times.

I don't mean to minimize your opinion, but this strikes me like saying that because there's the Wii, playing tennis with real tennis balls is somehow behind the times.

 

But I suppose that would ruin it for people who enjoy actually seeing the other log entries.

While it's true that I do sometimes enjoying looking over the physical log, I think the main reason people like the paper log is that there's no real downside compared to the alternatives.

Link to comment

But I don't know, for some reason, in 2015, in an age of "paperless goecaching", I can't help but feel that relying on paper and pen is somehow behind the times.

I don't mean to minimize your opinion, but this strikes me like saying that because there's the Wii, playing tennis with real tennis balls is somehow behind the times.

 

That's like comparing apples to oranges. With that logic, we should be ditching our GPS receivers and geocaching with a map and compass. In this digital age it seems kind of redundant to sign both the physical and online logbook to prove you visited the cache. Seems like most everybody these days has access to a digital camera to verify their visit. I enjoy online logs accompanied with photos. Makes the logs more real and interesting to place faces with the geocacher and see photos of folks visiting your cache. I compare logging caches like signing a peak register which goes way back to the days before the Web. Having said all that, I still enjoy signing and reading logs at the geocache site, I just think it would be nice to have another option when you don't have a pencil and have to worry about your find being deleted by an over zealous CO.

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment

Logging a find with a camera for every cache ... interesting ... Will never happen in the UK. Data charges are rediculous ... signal strength is poor to ok to sometimes great ... sunspots and slautering a goat helps on a Wednesday. Orange Wednesday.

 

Alternate method to a pencil and a bit of mouldy paper. Barcode scanner? ... We certainly need more kit to cart around. Any more and we could get a utility belt like Batman. Go out looking like Dog the Bounty Hunter.

 

Either way everyone would need a smartphone of sorts with apps for this and that. Or another bit of kit.

Link to comment

But I don't know, for some reason, in 2015, in an age of "paperless goecaching", I can't help but feel that relying on paper and pen is somehow behind the times.

I don't mean to minimize your opinion, but this strikes me like saying that because there's the Wii, playing tennis with real tennis balls is somehow behind the times.

 

In this digital age it seems kind of redundant to sign both the physical and online logbook to prove you visited the cache. Seems like most everybody these days has access to a digital camera to verify their visit. I enjoy online logs accompanied with photos. Makes the logs more real and interesting to place faces with the geocacher and see photos of folks visiting your cache. I compare logging caches like signing a peak register which goes way back to the days before the Web. Having said all that, I still enjoy signing and reading logs at the geocache site, I just think it would be nice to have another option when you don't have a pencil and have to worry about your find being deleted by an over zealous CO.

The only other alternative is QR codes.Photographing the site wouldn't prove you were there now that there is Google Earth street view or copying someone elses photo. And if Earthcaches don't require photos of the cachers as proof I can't see it being done on other caches. So we are back to just signing the logsheet.

Link to comment

That's like comparing apples to oranges. With that logic, we should be ditching our GPS receivers and geocaching with a map and compass.

Not quite. What you're doing is going into a meeting of an orienteering club and announcing they should stop using maps and compasses because there are GPSrs. If you want to leave signing the log behind, go ahead and play that other game where you use your smartphone to confirm that you were at the location.

 

Seems like most everybody these days has access to a digital camera to verify their visit.

I don't know what you're proposing I do with my camera, but I'm having a hard time imagining what it will be that will be easier than signing my name to the physical log.

 

Personally, I don't even think that far because to me, the point is to sign the physical log, the point isn't just to be there so I can take a picture.

 

I enjoy online logs accompanied with photos. Makes the logs more real and interesting to place faces with the geocacher and see photos of folks visiting your cache.

I'm trying to see why you think this comment is relevant. Are you suggesting a different method because it will force people to post pictures to the logs?

Link to comment

When we cache, we always have pens cause MA has a bunch in her bag. A few weeks ago I dropped MA off for an appointment and went to get a couple of caches. Well no MA and no bag so no pen. I placed a dime in the caches and noted the date. My log asks the next person to check the date of the dime and to add our name to the log. If not, we will go back later to sign.

 

PAul

 

.

Edited by Ma & Pa
Link to comment

That's like comparing apples to oranges. With that logic, we should be ditching our GPS receivers and geocaching with a map and compass.

Not quite. What you're doing is going into a meeting of an orienteering club and announcing they should stop using maps and compasses because there are GPSrs. If you want to leave signing the log behind, go ahead and play that other game where you use your smartphone to confirm that you were at the location.

 

Seems like most everybody these days has access to a digital camera to verify their visit.

I don't know what you're proposing I do with my camera, but I'm having a hard time imagining what it will be that will be easier than signing my name to the physical log.

 

Personally, I don't even think that far because to me, the point is to sign the physical log, the point isn't just to be there so I can take a picture.

 

I enjoy online logs accompanied with photos. Makes the logs more real and interesting to place faces with the geocacher and see photos of folks visiting your cache.

I'm trying to see why you think this comment is relevant. Are you suggesting a different method because it will force people to post pictures to the logs?

Just my opinion, you don't have to agree with it, my post was saying it would be nice to have an alternative to logging a cache without a logbook or pencil. I'm not suggesting forcing digital photos uploaded to the logs, I just happen to enjoy looking at them.

Link to comment

But I don't know, for some reason, in 2015, in an age of "paperless goecaching", I can't help but feel that relying on paper and pen is somehow behind the times.

I don't mean to minimize your opinion, but this strikes me like saying that because there's the Wii, playing tennis with real tennis balls is somehow behind the times.

 

In this digital age it seems kind of redundant to sign both the physical and online logbook to prove you visited the cache. Seems like most everybody these days has access to a digital camera to verify their visit. I enjoy online logs accompanied with photos. Makes the logs more real and interesting to place faces with the geocacher and see photos of folks visiting your cache. I compare logging caches like signing a peak register which goes way back to the days before the Web. Having said all that, I still enjoy signing and reading logs at the geocache site, I just think it would be nice to have another option when you don't have a pencil and have to worry about your find being deleted by an over zealous CO.

The only other alternative is QR codes.Photographing the site wouldn't prove you were there now that there is Google Earth street view or copying someone elses photo. And if Earthcaches don't require photos of the cachers as proof I can't see it being done on other caches. So we are back to just signing the logsheet.

QR codes would be a great idea for people with digital cameras or even just having a verification code written somewhere on the cache. I favor the idea of just trusting that someone visited your cache. I don't play for numbers so stats are not that important to me.

Link to comment

But I don't know, for some reason, in 2015, in an age of "paperless goecaching", I can't help but feel that relying on paper and pen is somehow behind the times.

I don't mean to minimize your opinion, but this strikes me like saying that because there's the Wii, playing tennis with real tennis balls is somehow behind the times.

 

Oh, I see what you mean. That's indeed a valid point, if you consider log signing to be a key part of the fun of geocaching. But I don't personally consider signing the log as being a key part of geocaching. For me, being outside and looking for a hidden object is the key thing, not the act of writing on a piece of paper. I didn't realise some people actually enjoy the log signing part of it so much.

 

Your comparison with Wii versus playing real tennis is more like saying that if someone invented virtual geocaching we should do that rather than get out in the fresh air. That's the geocaching equivalent of Wii tennis.

 

Actually, I think people have now already come up with the answer. Some kind of QR code or barcode, which a new generation of GPS devices are able to read. Somebody already said here that they've never lost their GPS but they are often losing pens. Seems like a perfect solution to me.

 

By the way, you guys really like to argue, don't you? I mean, you actually really enjoy it don't you! It's your 2nd favourite hobby, after geocaching. :lol:

Link to comment

Your comparison with Wii versus playing real tennis is more like saying that if someone invented virtual geocaching we should do that rather than get out in the fresh air. That's the geocaching equivalent of Wii tennis.

I wasn't comparing geocaching to Wii, I was comparing the idea of rejecting tennis because of Wii to your idea of rejecting a physical log because of cameras.

 

Actually, I think people have now already come up with the answer. Some kind of QR code or barcode, which a new generation of GPS devices are able to read. Somebody already said here that they've never lost their GPS but they are often losing pens. Seems like a perfect solution to me.

I fail to see how that's an improvement. I do consider signing the log part of geocaching, but not because of any particular enjoyment of it, but just because it's the current standard. If you want to suggest adding a new standard, you need to make a case why it's better. I don't see how it adds anything at all: taking a picture is no easier than signing a log, yet once I sign the log, I'm done. If I took a picture, I'd then have to do additional work to get the picture to the right place. I'm not seeing the advantage.

 

(By the way, there is a way to use technology to make this process simpler. It's called munzee, and it requires a smartphone: a camera alone is not good enough. I don't have any interest in munzee, but you might want to see if that's what you're looking for.)

 

By the way, you guys really like to argue, don't you? I mean, you actually really enjoy it don't you! It's your 2nd favourite hobby, after geocaching. :lol:

No, sorry, I'm disagreeing with you because I really disagree with you, not because of some perverse joy of disagreeing.

Link to comment

QR codes would not be the answer. Another well known game *cough* uses them. Of course you can photograph them and pass the codes around. They stopped that because you use their app and they geofenced the QR code location. Initially it was 100 feet or so. Now it's increased because of lack of steady enough phone signals. And you can now scan and submit later. So ... I suppose it's open to abuse. Removal of the log negates the need for a physical container.

 

This means TB's would have no purpose. Or geocoins original purpose. Soooo I can't see it happening any time soon because I would imagine that would leave a rather large hole in the coffas.

Link to comment

Oh, I see what you mean. That's indeed a valid point, if you consider log signing to be a key part of the fun of geocaching. But I don't personally consider signing the log as being a key part of geocaching. For me, being outside and looking for a hidden object is the key thing, not the act of writing on a piece of paper. I didn't realise some people actually enjoy the log signing part of it so much.

Signing the log has always been part of 'geocaching'. Finding the cache and then signing the log. Changing it to something else would seem like changing it to something that's not 'geocaching'. It would be 'munzee'. There are people that enjoy this other game, but for me I'd prefer to stick with geocaching and the minimal requirement of signing a paper log before logging online. The way I see it, most hobbies require some equipment and so carrying a pen/pencil seems like a pretty minimal ask.

 

Actually, I think people have now already come up with the answer. Some kind of QR code or barcode, which a new generation of GPS devices are able to read. Somebody already said here that they've never lost their GPS but they are often losing pens. Seems like a perfect solution to me.

Problem with QR codes or barcodes...then everyone that plays the game would have to have a code scanner or buy a new-model GPSr that can scan codes (assuming that GPSr manufacturers would actually create a productto support this). Requiring more technical equipment to participate in this hobby would be a hobby-killer alone. Pencil/pen and a desktop computer to log online are relatively low barriers to entry right now. Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on a battery-powered device to 'log' my find. I wouldn't mind if it was strictly an 'alternative', but if that's the case then I don't see it becoming a worthwhile development effort.

Link to comment

Signing the log has always been part of 'geocaching'. Finding the cache and then signing the log. Changing it to something else would seem like changing it to something that's not 'geocaching'. It would be 'munzee'. There are people that enjoy this other game, but for me I'd prefer to stick with geocaching and the minimal requirement of signing a paper log before logging online. The way I see it, most hobbies require some equipment and so carrying a pen/pencil seems like a pretty minimal ask.

If you go back 13 years ago to the early days of geocaching when I started, virtual caches were very popular and required no signatures. Granted there was no actual physical cache, but virtual caches were very much a part of geocaching (and still are). I have several virtual caches still going. My James Dean Virtual Cache is very popular with 58 favorites and 676 visits since it's creation in 2002. I require a photo for proof of visit and this has been in place since 2002 and has worked out well. My other virtual caches are also still going strong. To me geocaching has always been about the journey, not signing a piece of paper to prove that I was there. I like to reflect on my experience and post my adventure on the online log.

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment
No, sorry, I'm disagreeing with you because I really disagree with you, not because of some perverse joy of disagreeing.

Okay, fair enough. My comment was a general one, not aimed at you specifically. I was just commenting on how the threads I've been involved in recently, people seem to be all set to argue with each other, not just me. It seems very easy to cause a stir here. But perhaps that just means you people are passionate about geocaching and have strong opinions on it that don't always match with each other.

 

Anyway, they were just suggestions. It's really no big deal.

 

By the way, munzee does look fun. I don't have a smartphone though. But something to consider for the future maybe...

Link to comment

I think it's up to the CO to provide something to sign the log book. I'm not a fan of caches so small a pencil won't fit and the log book gets filled up after 10 visits. If you're going to make a cache so small, accept a photo.

 

Do you, really? I sure don't. I never expect it. Pens freeze in the winter and dry out in the summer. Pencils break. They poke holes in baggies. Pencil sharpeners rust in the wild. Both pencils and pens can be stuck in the pockets of a previous finder. Photos of a find are technically not acceptable per the guidelines, although some cache owners may accept them. But they don't have to. Bring a pen. Bring three pens.

 

Used to be expected that the cache would have a writing tool inside. People would even note in the logs if a pencil/pen were missing from the cache.

Once micros and nanos became popular, along with notes in the physical log, and logbooks instead of logsheets, pencils went the way of the dodo.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...