Verifying logs

[+justintim1999]

Here's another odd one. Why do you care so much?

It's not big deal, honest. I like to set the record straight, but I don't care all that much.

 

Is it the Numbers? Is it on principal?

Accuracy.

 

Is it worth the time and effort to worry about a cacher who may be getting away with..... what..... an unearned smiley?

I'm not worried about the cacher. I could care less what they count. I care about the log: it has an error, I correct it.

 

I understand the concept. My question was how many cache owners actually do that on a regular basis?

Fortunately bogus logs are quite rare in my area, so I don't have to do it at all. I'll casually check a log I replace, and sometimes when I do a health check, I'll look at the last few signers to see if they jive with the log. But I feel no reason to take my checks very seriously since signatures are not always orderly, and sometimes people can't sign or forget to sign, which isn't something that matters to me.

 

I check more carefully if I smell something fishy, but that's only happened a couple times.

 

Thanks. The cache log accuracy, is that something that is just important to you or are there other reasons why that matters? Damaged cache? Missing Travel Bugs?

[+justintim1999]

Monitoring found it logs and removing fraudulent ones is part of general cache maintenance. If you don't feel comfortable with that, no problem, don't hide caches. Cache ownership isn't for everyone.

 

I understand the concept. My question was how many cache owners actually do that on a regular basis?

 

Your original question was followed by some rather startling commentary of your own on the subject.

 

Curious, What did I say that startled you?

[+dprovan]

Thanks. The cache log accuracy, is that something that is just important to you or are there other reasons why that matters? Damaged cache? Missing Travel Bugs?

Keeping mistakes out of the log is just another part of maintenance, no different that checking to see if the cache is in the right place and that the contents are OK.

 

Mistakes do have practical consequences that are undesirable, and I'm happy to help avoid that, but it's not my primary motivation.

[ATMouse]

Wow. "Geocaching is not about going out and having fun. Geocaching is about going out, finding caches, signing the log."

 

Forgive me father for I have sinned. I had fun caching today. That's ok my son. Do 3 terrain 4 puzzle caches and don't let it happen again.

 

Wow...that's kinda offensive and insulting, too. An' BTW, ifn's you are a Roman Catholic, you understand rules and things like that.

 

"Having fun" might be stealing caches, or leaving your Styrofoam coffee cup on the ground at GZ after you've torn all the underbush to bits. Hey! YOU had fun!

 

Part of the joy of "found it!" for me is staying within the rules. Anyone can cheat.

 

Back on topic, when I had caches out, I'd check them every month or so and more frequently if I was suspicious.

Edited August 4, 2015 by ATMouse

[+justintim1999]

Wow. "Geocaching is not about going out and having fun. Geocaching is about going out, finding caches, signing the log."

 

Forgive me father for I have sinned. I had fun caching today. That's ok my son. Do 3 terrain 4 puzzle caches and don't let it happen again.

 

Wow...that's kinda offensive and insulting, too. An' BTW, ifn's you are a Roman Catholic, you understand rules and things like that.

 

"Having fun" might be stealing caches, or leaving your Styrofoam coffee cup on the ground at GZ after you've torn all the underbush to bits. Hey! YOU had fun!

 

Part of the joy of "found it!" for me is staying within the rules. Anyone can cheat.

 

Back on topic, when I had caches out, I'd check them every month or so and more frequently if I was suspicious.

 

I am Catholic and I'm sure when I bring this up at confession my pastor will be smiling. I understand rules and follow them to the best of my ability. I guess I have a much different idea of what this activity is all about. I always thought that this game was a way to get people outside and enjoy nature all while having a little fun. Of course your definitions of fun are not the norm and would be frowned upon by just about everybody in the geocaching community. What would you do in the case listed above regarding the cacher with a physical disability?

[ATMouse]

Wow. "Geocaching is not about going out and having fun. Geocaching is about going out, finding caches, signing the log."

 

Forgive me father for I have sinned. I had fun caching today. That's ok my son. Do 3 terrain 4 puzzle caches and don't let it happen again.

 

Wow...that's kinda offensive and insulting, too. An' BTW, ifn's you are a Roman Catholic, you understand rules and things like that.

 

"Having fun" might be stealing caches, or leaving your Styrofoam coffee cup on the ground at GZ after you've torn all the underbush to bits. Hey! YOU had fun!

 

Part of the joy of "found it!" for me is staying within the rules. Anyone can cheat.

 

Back on topic, when I had caches out, I'd check them every month or so and more frequently if I was suspicious.

 

I am Catholic and I'm sure when I bring this up at confession my pastor will be smiling. I understand rules and follow them to the best of my ability. I guess I have a much different idea of what this activity is all about. I always thought that this game was a way to get people outside and enjoy nature all while having a little fun. Of course your definitions of fun are not the norm and would be frowned upon by just about everybody in the geocaching community. What would you do in the case listed above regarding the cacher with a physical disability?

 

I didn't say I thought it was fun, I merely pointed out that "fun" may have many definitions.

 

That said, I have put out many a cache that was handicapped accessible. I was a case manager for a local agency who served that target population, so I am well aware of the struggles of the disabled. I also was a co-founder of the Allegany State Park Geobash in WNYS, which also prided itself as being fun in the outdoors and welcoming everyone.

 

Back to your question, it is not my cache. If it were, and you contacted me about being at GZ and being physically unable to retrieve a cache that I had not shown on the cache page to be physically difficult, I'd open that discussion with you willingly.

 

BTW, I'm RC, too. And I don't think that "confessing" about a game is altogether on topic here.

Edited August 4, 2015 by ATMouse

[+boothie103]

I am only new to the game with at last count 150 odd finds and have placed 4 hides and one trail of 6 to mark some historical gold mining and local sites including gold mines lost to history. So that makes 10, which I intend to police with extreme prejudice. No fair logging on line without a signed Log. If I can't get to a cache due to my limitation of a bung knee, I write a note explaining why I can't get a smilie face on my map. I know the cache is there, I can see it or see the hiding place, I just can't sign the log. The note, for me is as good as signing the log. And I don't put the note on line unless I am 100% certain the cache is where it is. I also will not chase a FTF just for the sake of it!

[+justintim1999]

I am only new to the game with at last count 150 odd finds and have placed 4 hides and one trail of 6 to mark some historical gold mining and local sites including gold mines lost to history. So that makes 10, which I intend to police with extreme prejudice. No fair logging on line without a signed Log. If I can't get to a cache due to my limitation of a bung knee, I write a note explaining why I can't get a smilie face on my map. I know the cache is there, I can see it or see the hiding place, I just can't sign the log. The note, for me is as good as signing the log. And I don't put the note on line unless I am 100% certain the cache is where it is. I also will not chase a FTF just for the sake of it!

 

Yes. I like your style.

[+justintim1999]

Wow. "Geocaching is not about going out and having fun. Geocaching is about going out, finding caches, signing the log."

 

Forgive me father for I have sinned. I had fun caching today. That's ok my son. Do 3 terrain 4 puzzle caches and don't let it happen again.

 

Wow...that's kinda offensive and insulting, too. An' BTW, ifn's you are a Roman Catholic, you understand rules and things like that.

 

"Having fun" might be stealing caches, or leaving your Styrofoam coffee cup on the ground at GZ after you've torn all the underbush to bits. Hey! YOU had fun!

 

Part of the joy of "found it!" for me is staying within the rules. Anyone can cheat.

 

Back on topic, when I had caches out, I'd check them every month or so and more frequently if I was suspicious.

 

I am Catholic and I'm sure when I bring this up at confession my pastor will be smiling. I understand rules and follow them to the best of my ability. I guess I have a much different idea of what this activity is all about. I always thought that this game was a way to get people outside and enjoy nature all while having a little fun. Of course your definitions of fun are not the norm and would be frowned upon by just about everybody in the geocaching community. What would you do in the case listed above regarding the cacher with a physical disability?

 

I didn't say I thought it was fun, I merely pointed out that "fun" may have many definitions.

 

That said, I have put out many a cache that was handicapped accessible. I was a case manager for a local agency who served that target population, so I am well aware of the struggles of the disabled. I also was a co-founder of the Allegany State Park Geobash in WNYS, which also prided itself as being fun in the outdoors and welcoming everyone.

 

Back to your question, it is not my cache. If it were, and you contacted me about being at GZ and being physically unable to retrieve a cache that I had not shown on the cache page to be physically difficult, I'd open that discussion with you willingly.

 

BTW, I'm RC, too. And I don't think that "confessing" about a game is altogether on topic here.

 

I just wanted to know that, after weighing the situation, you'd put the person ahead of the "rules". Well done. I'm not quite sure if everyone would. Why, as cachers, do we become cache owners? Could it be to give back to others some of the enjoyment and fun we experienced caching ourselves?

[+hykers]

I actually have a reason why cheaters matter. It's happened to me twice, once recently. I was in Flagstaff, about 2 hours from my home. A multi caches stage two was behind construction fence and the earth totally upturned. I posted a DNF and posted a note regarding the construction. (it was DNF twice before me btw) I get home to Phoenix, and noticed somebody had found it. I PMed them, and they said there was no fence. I went back up to Flagstaff the next weekend and the fence was still up, and GZ all torn up.

 

The point is, we rely on finds to determine the viability of a cache.

 

Also, as a side note, this same person's stats show they have over 50K finds, and their best day was 1036 finds in a day. That's 43 finds an hour for 24 straight hours.

 

I would have to agree that the person you mention is fraudulent. I have a hard time believing that Groundspeak is not aware of this person. Have there been any attempts to put a stop to him/her? he/she obviously has an agenda and I could care less what it is. I won't waist one second worrying about a person like that.

[+hykers]

I could care less about the couch-cacher. My point really is that we look at logs to see if a cache is alive or dead,both as an owner or searcher, and for a cheater to interject a false find messes everyone up. In my case I spent time going back to a cache that I logged as needing repair because it was found after I visited, only to discover it was not found, just falsely logged.

 

Now since this issue, I had a find deleted by a person that stated they could find my name on the log sheet. I know I was there and found it, and I PMed them, but they haven't responded. Not a big deal, except part of me thinks I was being accused of cheating. Overall I applaud the owner for at least checking the log, even if they deleted me.

 

And to the previous poster who asked if Groundspeak was aware or doing anything. I made them aware, but their statement was they don't police cachers, it's entirely the honor system.

[+Panquish]

We're about to place our first cache and I plan on checking the logs. There's a difference between a newbie who forgot to bring a pen (happened to us the first time, attached photo log and knew it's possible CO won't accept that) and someone who attempts a T5 cache and logs it without being able to get to it. The whole point of T5 is that not everyone can do it. Or so I thought.

[+narcissa]

We're about to place our first cache and I plan on checking the logs. There's a difference between a newbie who forgot to bring a pen (happened to us the first time, attached photo log and knew it's possible CO won't accept that) and someone who attempts a T5 cache and logs it without being able to get to it. The whole point of T5 is that not everyone can do it. Or so I thought.

 

The whole point of any terrain rating is that it helps cachers decide whether or not they should attempt it, and what to expect when they do. The terrain rating is not, in and of itself, meant to be a challenge or a score.

[+3MonkeyCircus]

We do. We just recently did a pretty major maintenance run on several of our caches. As a part of that, we went through and validated all the names on the logs. The peculiar thing we saw was that there were more names on the paper log than there were online.

 

For our letterbox, that is pretty easy to explain as it is both listed on geocaching.com and atlasquest.com and the letterboxers rarely log anything online. But for the mystery cache, it was very surprising to find some extra names that had signed months ago.

[+dprovan]

We're about to place our first cache and I plan on checking the logs. There's a difference between a newbie who forgot to bring a pen (happened to us the first time, attached photo log and knew it's possible CO won't accept that) and someone who attempts a T5 cache and logs it without being able to get to it.

They are no different in that both are at the mercy of the CO. On the other hand, the cacher that logs a cache based on seeing it even though the terrain difficulty prevents them from signing the log is ignoring the spirit of the cache, so it makes more sense for the CO to reject that find.

[+narcissa]

We do. We just recently did a pretty major maintenance run on several of our caches. As a part of that, we went through and validated all the names on the logs. The peculiar thing we saw was that there were more names on the paper log than there were online.

 

For our letterbox, that is pretty easy to explain as it is both listed on geocaching.com and atlasquest.com and the letterboxers rarely log anything online. But for the mystery cache, it was very surprising to find some extra names that had signed months ago.

 

I know a few cachers who are perpetually behind on their logging.

[+niraD]

We do. We just recently did a pretty major maintenance run on several of our caches. As a part of that, we went through and validated all the names on the logs. The peculiar thing we saw was that there were more names on the paper log than there were online.

 

For our letterbox, that is pretty easy to explain as it is both listed on geocaching.com and atlasquest.com and the letterboxers rarely log anything online. But for the mystery cache, it was very surprising to find some extra names that had signed months ago.

I know a few cachers who are perpetually behind on their logging.

And I know a few people who have signed the log when they've gone geocaching with me, but who never got around to creating geocaching.com accounts.

[+cerberus1]

We do. We just recently did a pretty major maintenance run on several of our caches. As a part of that, we went through and validated all the names on the logs. The peculiar thing we saw was that there were more names on the paper log than there were online.

 

For our letterbox, that is pretty easy to explain as it is both listed on geocaching.com and atlasquest.com and the letterboxers rarely log anything online. But for the mystery cache, it was very surprising to find some extra names that had signed months ago.

I know a few cachers who are perpetually behind on their logging.

And I know a few people who have signed the log when they've gone geocaching with me, but who never got around to creating geocaching.com accounts.

+1

There's a couple of folks who'd go on a nice hike with me, and the few times there's been a cache along the way, they do sign it (usually using their real names), but aren't really interested in joining the hobby.

 

We still have a few here who are members, sign the log, but never (or rarely) log online.