Jump to content

Logging an old archived cache


Ge0Patr0l
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

But if you enjoyed a find, wouldn't you want the CO to know that you enjoyed it soon after you found it? Positive logs will draw more people to the cache which is a good thing. If someone logged a find for one of my hides two years after the fact I'd question in my head why it took you over 700 days to log it. I think if you find someone's cache (even if it's less than stellar) it's common geocaching courtesy to log it within a reasonable amount of time...I also think that if you sign the physical log, an online log shouldn't be too far behind.

 

Oh, there's that "courtesy" word that gets trotted out every time this comes up.

 

Any good geocacher *wants* to be helpful and "courteous" to other geocachers.

 

Sometimes life gets busy and people fall behind on things.

 

You just never know when the shoe will on the other foot and you might be grateful that other geocachers were willing to cut you a break instead of saying awful things about you.

 

A back-dated log *is* unusual. Questioning that is fine. Look at the person's profile and see if you can get a sense of what's happening. It will probably be easy to tell if this fellow geocacher is just behind on logging or starting a new account, or if they're one of these spam people writing fake logs.

 

There's no need to attach harsh judgment beyond that. Investigate, make a decision move on. We all have different lives.

 

I stated a number of posts back that I didn't mean any disrespect, and I apologize if I did; it was a simple opinion not a "harsh judgment" as you keep saying. I stand by my belief that it's common courtesy in the geocaching world to log a find within a reasonable amount of time (I think within a month is a reasonable amount of time). If you take the time to find someone's cache, you should take the time to log it in a timely manner. If I ever found myself in a situation where I couldn't log caches for two years, I just wouldn't continue with the hobby.

 

Earlier you stated that two days was your expectation.

 

I'm sorry you feel that you would need to quit geocaching entirely in that circumstance. I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log and wouldn't expect you to quit over something so trivial.

Link to comment
I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log

 

Two years is beyond "a late log" especially if there seems to be plenty of time to find more caches. A little late, OK, late because there's no internet access on holiday, OK, but TWO years... I couldn't remember much about a cache after that much time except in VERY exceptional circumstances. Even after a weekend of caching I have to look at streetview/GE to remember some caches or waypoints.

Link to comment

I've posted this before, but I feel like I should post it again since there's such a heavy discussion on this topic.

 

I used to be a perfectionist about logging my caches immediately. I used to be that way in other things, like answering emails right away, etc. But then 11 years ago I succumbed to fibromyalgia. One of the worst parts about being sick is that my mind doesn't work like it should. I'm not the same person anymore, and I've had to come to terms with that. Some of that is actually good (I'm much more laid back, don't get as anxious, I'm more confident), but some of it is frustrating (I can't do things in a timely manner, I can't think clearly, my writing ability has suffered).

 

It's important to me to write logs that are more than a few words. Sure, I could just write "TFTC, more later", but that just feels wrong to me, and I'm afraid that I'd let it go and then never log more because the pressure would be off to write something. So I put my finds in a "Log" bookmark and write them when I can. Sometimes I log caches right away if I have the momentum going, but some of my oldest cache finds that I haven't logged yet are from two years ago.

 

So, that's just the way it is. I try to keep plugging away at them when I feel that I'm up to it. If I felt that it was such a terrible thing that I couldn't continue with the hobby, I'd be limiting myself. I'm not sure if I could have even gotten through my early years of fibro without geocaching - having these forums, getting out in nature and exploring when I could, reviewing, moderating, and most of all the wonderful friends that I've found through this sport. Sometimes people just have to roll with life and not get so uptight about it.

 

I know that my case might be somewhat unusual, but the point is that everyone's life and situation is different. No one is dying here if one person here and there doesn't log a cache in a timely manner. To put strong words on logging like "should" and "common courtesy" make people feel unnecessarily guilty when you just don't know what someone's personal life or personality is like. Let people enjoy geocaching in the way that they can, as long as they're not hurting anyone. And I'm sorry, logging a cache late is not hurting anyone, especially in an age of multiple "TFTC" logs that don't do a single thing for anyone except let a cache owner know that *maybe* someone found your cache.

Edited by Ambrosia
Link to comment
I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log

 

Two years is beyond "a late log" especially if there seems to be plenty of time to find more caches. A little late, OK, late because there's no internet access on holiday, OK, but TWO years... I couldn't remember much about a cache after that much time except in VERY exceptional circumstances. Even after a weekend of caching I have to look at streetview/GE to remember some caches or waypoints.

 

Easy to judge, isn't it.

Link to comment
I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log

 

Two years is beyond "a late log" especially if there seems to be plenty of time to find more caches. A little late, OK, late because there's no internet access on holiday, OK, but TWO years... I couldn't remember much about a cache after that much time except in VERY exceptional circumstances. Even after a weekend of caching I have to look at streetview/GE to remember some caches or waypoints.

 

Easy to judge, isn't it.

 

Yup. It is.

 

You should have read what I didn't write :ph34r:

Link to comment
I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log

 

Two years is beyond "a late log" especially if there seems to be plenty of time to find more caches. A little late, OK, late because there's no internet access on holiday, OK, but TWO years... I couldn't remember much about a cache after that much time except in VERY exceptional circumstances. Even after a weekend of caching I have to look at streetview/GE to remember some caches or waypoints.

 

Everyone is different and we all do things that are potentially annoying to other cachers. I don't like to wait more than a day to log my finds, but sometimes my cache logs come across as tersely written and cache owners don't necessarily like that either.

 

As a cache owner, I would probably glance at someone's profile if they logged two years late, but if the log appeared legitimate, I wouldn't think less of them as a person for being behind. What's the point in that?

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

But if you enjoyed a find, wouldn't you want the CO to know that you enjoyed it soon after you found it? Positive logs will draw more people to the cache which is a good thing. If someone logged a find for one of my hides two years after the fact I'd question in my head why it took you over 700 days to log it. I think if you find someone's cache (even if it's less than stellar) it's common geocaching courtesy to log it within a reasonable amount of time...I also think that if you sign the physical log, an online log shouldn't be too far behind.

 

Oh, there's that "courtesy" word that gets trotted out every time this comes up.

 

Any good geocacher *wants* to be helpful and "courteous" to other geocachers.

 

Sometimes life gets busy and people fall behind on things.

 

You just never know when the shoe will on the other foot and you might be grateful that other geocachers were willing to cut you a break instead of saying awful things about you.

 

A back-dated log *is* unusual. Questioning that is fine. Look at the person's profile and see if you can get a sense of what's happening. It will probably be easy to tell if this fellow geocacher is just behind on logging or starting a new account, or if they're one of these spam people writing fake logs.

 

There's no need to attach harsh judgment beyond that. Investigate, make a decision move on. We all have different lives.

 

I stated a number of posts back that I didn't mean any disrespect, and I apologize if I did; it was a simple opinion not a "harsh judgment" as you keep saying. I stand by my belief that it's common courtesy in the geocaching world to log a find within a reasonable amount of time (I think within a month is a reasonable amount of time). If you take the time to find someone's cache, you should take the time to log it in a timely manner. If I ever found myself in a situation where I couldn't log caches for two years, I just wouldn't continue with the hobby.

 

Earlier you stated that two days was your expectation.

 

I'm sorry you feel that you would need to quit geocaching entirely in that circumstance. I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log and wouldn't expect you to quit over something so trivial.

 

Two days is MY limit to log a cache I've found, I understand it might take longer for some people. There's no use arguing this anymore. Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time. I never said I would delete a log that's two years backlogged or I would "never forgive" a late log. It's not like I'm advocating a rule change in which cachers must log online within a certain amount of time after signing the physical log.

Link to comment

*sigh* I was trying to point out that everyone is different, we don't know anything about people who are logging our caches, and it's not that big of a deal, but it seems to be reduced to only people with medical problems have an excuse. I guess that there's no reason to argue if some people aren't going to get it.

 

 

Link to comment

*sigh* I was trying to point out that everyone is different, we don't know anything about people who are logging our caches, and it's not that big of a deal, but it seems to be reduced to only people with medical problems have an excuse. I guess that there's no reason to argue if some people aren't going to get it.

 

 

 

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

Edited by SicilianCyclops
Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

Edited by Ambrosia
Link to comment

There's no need to attach harsh judgment beyond that. Investigate, make a decision move on. We all have different lives.

I agree with you completely, although I would say there's no reason to judge anyone harshly before that, either. I always assume -- and, more importantly, write it up -- as if it was an honest mistake I fully expect to be corrected once I point it out. It doesn't matter to me how much evidence there is of malfeasance because the more likely it is the other individual is trying to cheat, the less I care whether I'm right or wrong about their motives. I make my decision based on the facts, not based on what I think they're trying to get away with. If I acknowledge their attempt to cheat, I feel like I'm confirming cheating is a legitimate part of the game and crowing about winning that round.

 

So naturally I agree with you that a CO should never consider a late log to be discourteous. But at the same time, I don't mind using the term "courtesy" in this conversation, but only in the context of someone logging caches considering their own actions, not because anyone else should be judging them on that scale.

Link to comment

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

The point was that the CO shouldn't be judging to begin with. I read SicilianCyclops as picking an obvious example from the upper end of the scale that we'd all agree with, not setting the bar.

Link to comment

though you'll occasionally see some people on the forum express really heartless comments about late logging

 

:santa:

 

Ha. So now I'm "heartless". My goodness, you are ultra-sensitive. I make one comment about possibly being a "bit selfish" and that has now morphed into me being heartless. Ok then.

 

No, I was quoting part of the thread before you joined (see the time stamp).

Link to comment

There's no need to attach harsh judgment beyond that. Investigate, make a decision move on. We all have different lives.

I agree with you completely, although I would say there's no reason to judge anyone harshly before that, either. I always assume -- and, more importantly, write it up -- as if it was an honest mistake I fully expect to be corrected once I point it out. It doesn't matter to me how much evidence there is of malfeasance because the more likely it is the other individual is trying to cheat, the less I care whether I'm right or wrong about their motives. I make my decision based on the facts, not based on what I think they're trying to get away with. If I acknowledge their attempt to cheat, I feel like I'm confirming cheating is a legitimate part of the game and crowing about winning that round.

 

So naturally I agree with you that a CO should never consider a late log to be discourteous. But at the same time, I don't mind using the term "courtesy" in this conversation, but only in the context of someone logging caches considering their own actions, not because anyone else should be judging them on that scale.

 

Again, I think all good cachers attempt to be courteous with each other and forgiving when life gets in the way of perfect behaviour. The harshness that is stated in the forum, is, in my experience, rarely exhibited by cache owners in actuality. The social consequences of being so harsh to others far outweigh any benefits, I think.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

 

It's nobody's job to decide. If you absolutely can't log for a while that's your business; there are not (nor should there be) and guidelines requiring otherwise. But if you're able to log online and you just don't because you're "too busy" then I think it goes again common courtesy a little bit. That's ALL I've been trying to say. I don't meant to be harsh or "heartless".

Link to comment

though you'll occasionally see some people on the forum express really heartless comments about late logging

 

:santa:

 

Ha. So now I'm "heartless". My goodness, you are ultra-sensitive. I make one comment about possibly being a "bit selfish" and that has now morphed into me being heartless. Ok then.

 

No, I was quoting part of the thread before you joined (see the time stamp).

 

OK. Good to know I'm not the worst guy here ;)

Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

 

It's nobody's job to decide. If you absolutely can't log for a while that's your business; there are not (nor should there be) and guidelines requiring otherwise. But if you're able to log online and you just don't because you're "too busy" then I think it goes again common courtesy a little bit. That's ALL I've been trying to say. I don't meant to be harsh or "heartless".

 

It's true, it's the cacher's business. And I think that means that it's not anyone's business that someone's "too busy" to log a cache. Busyness is real life, geocaching is leisure. If someone gets behind because of busyness, then it's not a big deal, and has nothing to do with courtesy. Maybe the owner needs to be courteous and allow the cacher to have a life.

Link to comment
I can assure you that the vast majority of cache owners are truly courteous people who would forgive a late log

 

Two years is beyond "a late log" especially if there seems to be plenty of time to find more caches. A little late, OK, late because there's no internet access on holiday, OK, but TWO years... I couldn't remember much about a cache after that much time except in VERY exceptional circumstances. Even after a weekend of caching I have to look at streetview/GE to remember some caches or waypoints.

 

As has been said before everyone is different. I never had issues to remember enough when I delayed a log.

There are many reasons why someone might decide to delay a log. I sometimes delay writing logs for special caches where I need to think what to write or expect that my log will take me a long time. I delayed a log last year (more than 6 months ago) because I found a mystery cache with my own approach but I have not yet solved the puzzle. I want to wait until I know how to solve the puzzle and I will then write a found it log for the cache with the date when i actually found the container. The cache owner knows that I have been at the cache location and he receives constant feedback on that cache from other loggers. There is absolutely no reason to have an issue with a late log and also not when it should happen that the cache gets archived in the meantime.

 

In my example case I of course will not delay all my caching and invest all my time into solving the puzzle which is not attractive to me. I might have the right idea sometime suddenly and then that's the time for my log. I'm aware of the fact that I could have logged a find right away, but there is no requirement to do so and I will certainly not do anything which is just to please some cachers who come up with their own rules and which does not even concern them (not their cache affected).

Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

 

It's nobody's job to decide. If you absolutely can't log for a while that's your business; there are not (nor should there be) and guidelines requiring otherwise. But if you're able to log online and you just don't because you're "too busy" then I think it goes again common courtesy a little bit. That's ALL I've been trying to say. I don't meant to be harsh or "heartless".

 

It's true, it's the cacher's business. And I think that means that it's not anyone's business that someone's "too busy" to log a cache. Busyness is real life, geocaching is leisure. If someone gets behind because of busyness, then it's not a big deal, and has nothing to do with courtesy. Maybe the owner needs to be courteous and allow the cacher to have a life.

 

And as I said, if I see a log two years after the fact, I will neither delete it or even bring it up. Therefore, I will never prevent anyone from having a life. Not sure how I would even do that.

Link to comment

though you'll occasionally see some people on the forum express really heartless comments about late logging

 

:santa:

 

Ha. So now I'm "heartless". My goodness, you are ultra-sensitive. I make one comment about possibly being a "bit selfish" and that has now morphed into me being heartless. Ok then.

 

No, I was quoting part of the thread before you joined (see the time stamp).

 

OK. Good to know I'm not the worst guy here ;)

 

You're now part of a long-standing forum tradition where any post about a late log devolves into a chorus of criticism about late logs and "courtesy."

Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

 

It's nobody's job to decide. If you absolutely can't log for a while that's your business; there are not (nor should there be) and guidelines requiring otherwise. But if you're able to log online and you just don't because you're "too busy" then I think it goes again common courtesy a little bit. That's ALL I've been trying to say. I don't meant to be harsh or "heartless".

 

It's true, it's the cacher's business. And I think that means that it's not anyone's business that someone's "too busy" to log a cache. Busyness is real life, geocaching is leisure. If someone gets behind because of busyness, then it's not a big deal, and has nothing to do with courtesy. Maybe the owner needs to be courteous and allow the cacher to have a life.

 

And as I said, if I see a log two years after the fact, I will neither delete it or even bring it up. Therefore, I will never prevent anyone from having a life. Not sure how I would even do that.

 

I'm not saying that you're preventing anyone from doing anything. I'm arguing with your thought process. :D

Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

I'd go with the coroner.

Link to comment

Where did I say "only people with medical problems"? Never said that, just used it as an example.

 

Unless there's an extreme circumstance, like something medical or similar, I'll always believe you should log within a reasonable amount of time.

 

Not really an example, the way you said that. Medical, extreme, who decides that? The cache owner?

I'd go with the coroner.

 

:rolleyes::laughing:

Link to comment

But if you enjoyed a find, wouldn't you want the CO to know that you enjoyed it soon after you found it? Positive logs will draw more people to the cache which is a good thing. If someone logged a find for one of my hides two years after the fact I'd question in my head why it took you over 700 days to log it. I think if you find someone's cache (even if it's less than stellar) it's common geocaching courtesy to log it within a reasonable amount of time...I also think that if you sign the physical log, an online log shouldn't be too far behind.

 

Oh, there's that "courtesy" word that gets trotted out every time this comes up.

 

Any good geocacher *wants* to be helpful and "courteous" to other geocachers.

 

Sometimes life gets busy and people fall behind on things.

 

You just never know when the shoe will on the other foot and you might be grateful that other geocachers were willing to cut you a break instead of saying awful things about you.

 

A back-dated log *is* unusual. Questioning that is fine. Look at the person's profile and see if you can get a sense of what's happening. It will probably be easy to tell if this fellow geocacher is just behind on logging or starting a new account, or if they're one of these spam people writing fake logs.

 

There's no need to attach harsh judgment beyond that. Investigate, make a decision move on. We all have different lives.

 

I stated a number of posts back that I didn't mean any disrespect, and I apologize if I did; it was a simple opinion not a "harsh judgment" as you keep saying. I stand by my belief that it's common courtesy in the geocaching world to log a find within a reasonable amount of time (I think within a month is a reasonable amount of time). If you take the time to find someone's cache, you should take the time to log it in a timely manner. If I ever found myself in a situation where I couldn't log caches for two years, I just wouldn't continue with the hobby.

 

In my way of seeing things, I also believe that deliberately delaying the online log is, at least, disrespectful to fellow geocachers. The online log is the best way to receive feedback from the health of a cache, and such a feedback is both useful for finders as well as for the CO. It is no just a question of CO likes to receive the logs soon.

I think it is important for the proper essence of the game that geocachers log Their finds as soon as possible. It is true that nobody likes TFTC logs, but there are other ways to make an early log and leave details for later.

For example you can Log your latest finds with a brief template type "Cache Ok / cache with a problem, I will detail later when I can" And then, weeks, months, years later put a write note (please do not edit the find log, in order the CO can be notified) with your awesome story. I don't think this could be a lot of extra work, but hey! I've never find more than 10 caches in a day, what can I know?

I know of a lot of people widely behind their logs. But most of them do it for selfish or competitive reasons, such as statistics hide and move up rankings. Only a few do it for logistical reasons (limited internet access, for example). And then, at the end, those who delay logs end up doing very generic logs several months after that not differ much of the TFTC logs.

 

So, in respect to fellows I'm always try to log as soon as possible. I used to do it in field (and my logs are quite long always) but given that autocorrection of the mobile played bad with me sometimes, I changed to desktop log at the end of the day. If sometime I run in a huge number of caches in a day, I'm sure i'm not going to search for more caches until the former are online logged. Logging online is an intrinsic part of this game, and a very useful one.

Link to comment

In my way of seeing things, I also believe that deliberately delaying the online log is, at least, disrespectful to fellow geocachers. The online log is the best way to receive feedback from the health of a cache, and such a feedback is both useful for finders as well as for the CO. It is no just a question of CO likes to receive the logs soon.

For example you can Log your latest finds with a brief template type "Cache Ok / cache with a problem, I will detail later when I can" And then, weeks, months, years later put a write note (please do not edit the find log, in order the CO can be notified) with your awesome story.

 

I want my found it log associated with my story (or at least part of the story - it's already unfortunate enough that one needs to split longer logs into parts and the link at the top of a cache page only links to the found it log).

 

For lonely caches where I'm the only finder in a while I write a short note that everything is ok if I do not manage to write my found it log soon.

For caches which are not lonely and get regular logs, there is no reason to write my log quickly. In case I just want to provide some feedback to the owner, an e-mail message will do as well.

 

I don't think this could be a lot of extra work, but hey! I've never find more than 10 caches in a day, what can I know?

 

It's not about the number of visited caches. I often delay the log for the only cache that I visited on that day. I see no reason to use the approach you suggested - it's your preferred way, but not mine (also not as cache owner).

 

I certainly never will refrain from going for a walk on the weekend when the weather is nice and I need a timeout and spend the time at home in front of the PC to write logs. I take the liberty to write my logs when it fits into my schedule.

Link to comment

But if you enjoyed a find, wouldn't you want the CO to know that you enjoyed it soon after you found it? Positive logs will draw more people to the cache which is a good thing. If someone logged a find for one of my hides two years after the fact I'd question in my head why it took you over 700 days to log it. I think if you find someone's cache (even if it's less than stellar) it's common geocaching courtesy to log it within a reasonable amount of time...I also think that if you sign the physical log, an online log shouldn't be too far behind.

 

Oh, there's that "courtesy" word that gets trotted out every time this comes up.

 

Any good geocacher *wants* to be helpful and "courteous" to other geocachers.

 

Sometimes life gets busy and people fall behind on things.

 

You just never know when the shoe will on the other foot and you might be grateful that other geocachers were willing to cut you a break instead of saying awful things about you.

 

A back-dated log *is* unusual. Questioning that is fine. Look at the person's profile and see if you can get a sense of what's happening. It will probably be easy to tell if this fellow geocacher is just behind on logging or starting a new account, or if they're one of these spam people writing fake logs.

 

There's no need to attach harsh judgment beyond that. Investigate, make a decision move on. We all have different lives.

 

I stated a number of posts back that I didn't mean any disrespect, and I apologize if I did; it was a simple opinion not a "harsh judgment" as you keep saying. I stand by my belief that it's common courtesy in the geocaching world to log a find within a reasonable amount of time (I think within a month is a reasonable amount of time). If you take the time to find someone's cache, you should take the time to log it in a timely manner. If I ever found myself in a situation where I couldn't log caches for two years, I just wouldn't continue with the hobby.

 

In my way of seeing things, I also believe that deliberately delaying the online log is, at least, disrespectful to fellow geocachers. The online log is the best way to receive feedback from the health of a cache, and such a feedback is both useful for finders as well as for the CO. It is no just a question of CO likes to receive the logs soon.

I think it is important for the proper essence of the game that geocachers log Their finds as soon as possible. It is true that nobody likes TFTC logs, but there are other ways to make an early log and leave details for later.

For example you can Log your latest finds with a brief template type "Cache Ok / cache with a problem, I will detail later when I can" And then, weeks, months, years later put a write note (please do not edit the find log, in order the CO can be notified) with your awesome story. I don't think this could be a lot of extra work, but hey! I've never find more than 10 caches in a day, what can I know?

I know of a lot of people widely behind their logs. But most of them do it for selfish or competitive reasons, such as statistics hide and move up rankings. Only a few do it for logistical reasons (limited internet access, for example). And then, at the end, those who delay logs end up doing very generic logs several months after that not differ much of the TFTC logs.

 

So, in respect to fellows I'm always try to log as soon as possible. I used to do it in field (and my logs are quite long always) but given that autocorrection of the mobile played bad with me sometimes, I changed to desktop log at the end of the day. If sometime I run in a huge number of caches in a day, I'm sure i'm not going to search for more caches until the former are online logged. Logging online is an intrinsic part of this game, and a very useful one.

 

You bring up more good points. Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet. He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

Edited by SicilianCyclops
Link to comment

In my way of seeing things, I also believe that deliberately delaying the online log is, at least, disrespectful to fellow geocachers.

 

When, specifically, did this discussion turn toward people "deliberately" delaying logging? I don't really know the ins-and-outs of all the shenanigans that go on, but purposefully delaying logging is not what was at issue here.

 

Everyone understands that in a perfect world, we would all have time to log our cache finds very quickly. For some people, it just doesn't happen. People aren't perfect. I sincerely doubt that late logs are frequently deliberate.

 

This is a game and I choose to think better of my fellow geocachers than that.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

You bring up more good points. Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet. He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

 

Again, this is the type of good caching behaviour that we should all aspire to (though in my observation, people rarely edit logs to make them better after the fact).

 

We should also aspire to think kindly of others and give people the benefit of the doubt when they do something that is a mild disappointment at worst.

Link to comment

Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet.

 

He cannot know that - he only noticed that the top was not where it was supposed to be.

 

He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

 

I can just as well drop the cache owner a short message in such a case and avoid ending up with tons of dummy found it logs just to keep the order right.

If the issue is so important that other cachers need to know too about it instantly, a note can be written - I do not see any reason to log a find quickly except in exceptional circumstances.

Link to comment

Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet.

 

He cannot know that - he only noticed that the top was not where it was supposed to be.

 

He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

 

I can just as well drop the cache owner a short message in such a case and avoid ending up with tons of dummy found it logs just to keep the order right.

If the issue is so important that other cachers need to know too about it instantly, a note can be written - I do not see any reason to log a find quickly except in exceptional circumstances.

 

This really underscores why it's so problematic to get up on the cache owner soapbox and dictate what others should do.

 

Preferences vary from cache owner to cache owner. Forced to choose, I'd rather get a sincere log than a prompt log. That's a simple preference. It doesn't mean that someone who logs "TFTC" from the field is being discourteous to me.

 

We can all shout into the wind about how rational and correct our preferences are, but they're still preferences. When they become expectations, we're setting ourselves up for disappointment. There's just no way for any one cacher to please everyone.

Link to comment

Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet.

 

He cannot know that - he only noticed that the top was not where it was supposed to be.

 

He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

 

I can just as well drop the cache owner a short message in such a case and avoid ending up with tons of dummy found it logs just to keep the order right.

If the issue is so important that other cachers need to know too about it instantly, a note can be written - I do not see any reason to log a find quickly except in exceptional circumstances.

 

The whole point was that he notified me of the problem quickly....Ok, then post a note. It doesn't have to be an official "Found It" log immediately. You're grasping at straws for arguments here.

Link to comment

Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet.

 

He cannot know that - he only noticed that the top was not where it was supposed to be.

 

He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

 

I can just as well drop the cache owner a short message in such a case and avoid ending up with tons of dummy found it logs just to keep the order right.

If the issue is so important that other cachers need to know too about it instantly, a note can be written - I do not see any reason to log a find quickly except in exceptional circumstances.

 

This really underscores why it's so problematic to get up on the cache owner soapbox and dictate what others should do.

 

Preferences vary from cache owner to cache owner. Forced to choose, I'd rather get a sincere log than a prompt log. That's a simple preference. It doesn't mean that someone who logs "TFTC" from the field is being discourteous to me.

 

We can all shout into the wind about how rational and correct our preferences are, but they're still preferences. When they become expectations, we're setting ourselves up for disappointment. There's just no way for any one cacher to please everyone.

 

I'm not dictating anything; I stated from the very beginning that it was my personal opinion. If we can't express our opinions on a simple forum, where can we? It's a place for open discussion. I believe people should log finds timely. I'm not telling people they have to, nor would I ever make a big deal out of it. I would never bring it up if it DID happen. But, this is a place to express opinions, so I'm doing it here. Also, I like this line from Anpefi, it's a good way to look at it: "I think it is important for the proper essence of the game that geocachers log Their finds as soon as possible."

Edited by SicilianCyclops
Link to comment

Personally, I like to know how my caches are doing out there in the wild, even though I do regular checkups. A few months ago, a fellow cacher found one of mine and he alerted me (in his log) to the fact that the last cacher had left the top off the cache and the logbook got wet.

 

He cannot know that - he only noticed that the top was not where it was supposed to be.

 

He did this the same day he found it so I was able to get out the next day and replace the log. I've also seen people write something to the effect, "Found the cache today. Everything looks good, will write more later." Responses like that take 20 seconds to write and you can still go back at a later date and write a lengthier, more specific entry.

 

I can just as well drop the cache owner a short message in such a case and avoid ending up with tons of dummy found it logs just to keep the order right.

If the issue is so important that other cachers need to know too about it instantly, a note can be written - I do not see any reason to log a find quickly except in exceptional circumstances.

 

The whole point was that he notified me of the problem quickly....Ok, then post a note. It doesn't have to be an official "Found It" log immediately. You're grasping at straws for arguments here.

 

You're conflating issues that aren't related.

 

Notifying cache owners of imminent problems isn't just a matter of timing. I see many, many prompt logs that say nothing about the condition of a cache. I would say the majority of logs are within your preferred two day time limit, but most of these say nothing about the condition of the cache or the experience of finding it.

 

Holding people to a higher standard because they didn't log within a day doesn't make any sense when the vast majority of logs provide no information anyway.

 

Good cachers, even the late ones, should recognize the importance of bringing an owner up to speed when there's something the cache owner needs to know. I know a few people who tend to be a bit tardy about their logs but any one of them would reach out to a cache owner if there was an issue of concern.

Link to comment

I'm not dictating anything; I stated from the very beginning that it was my personal opinion. If we can't express our opinions on a simple forum, where can we? It's a place for open discussion. I believe people should log finds timely. I'm not telling people they have to, nor would I ever make a big deal out of it. I would never bring it up if it DID happen. But, this is a place to express opinions, so I'm doing it here. Also, I like this line from Anpefi, it's a good way to look at it: "I think it is important for the proper essence of the game that geocachers log Their finds as soon as possible."

 

"As soon as possible" doesn't mean "according to my preferences." "As soon as possible" for some people may well be two years. You just don't have the information to know that.

 

I think the proper essence of geocaching should be sincere, thoughtful logs, but I'm not going to call people names because they logged "TFTC" from the field. We all play the game a little differently.

Link to comment

 

Fair enough. But it's my simple, PERSONAL belief that waiting two years to log a find is a bit strange. As a cache owner I would question why it took so long to log it. It's just me. I always make sure to log a find the same day. If not, by the next day at latest.

 

It isn't just your personal belief, I would say it would be the general consensus.....

 

Here! Here!

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

 

I don't understand the functional purpose of preventing people from logging caches they have legitimately found. There's never been a time limit on logging.

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

 

People can back-date their log, you know. So maybe they DID find it two years ago, then it went missing and was archived. Doesn't invalidate their find.

 

And then there are caches that were archived long ago but are still in place and someone happens along and finds it. It happened to me twice. I logged a find on both of them because they were caches, they were at the posted coordinates (once I discovered which caches they were) and they had logs inside that I signed.

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

This isn't about logging an archived cache with a date after it was archived. It's about finding a cache before it was archived, but not submitting the online log until after the cache has been archived.

 

For example, physically find a cache on Jan 1st, cache is archived Feb 1st, submit the online log on Mar 1st (using Jan 1st as the 'found date').

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

This isn't about logging an archived cache with a date after it was archived. It's about finding a cache before it was archived, but not submitting the online log until after the cache has been archived.

 

For example, physically find a cache on Jan 1st, cache is archived Feb 1st, submit the online log on Mar 1st (using Jan 1st as the 'found date').

 

Thank you. That makes a little more sense. I guess I can't wrap my head around not logging a cache for over two months.

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

 

People can back-date their log, you know. So maybe they DID find it two years ago, then it went missing and was archived. Doesn't invalidate their find.

 

And then there are caches that were archived long ago but are still in place and someone happens along and finds it. It happened to me twice. I logged a find on both of them because they were caches, they were at the posted coordinates (once I discovered which caches they were) and they had logs inside that I signed.

 

The first example is comical. Really? Did they one day wake up in a cold sweat and realize they forgot to log that cache they found in 2013?

 

The second should never happen if the cache owner did what they should have and removed the container.

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

This isn't about logging an archived cache with a date after it was archived. It's about finding a cache before it was archived, but not submitting the online log until after the cache has been archived.

 

For example, physically find a cache on Jan 1st, cache is archived Feb 1st, submit the online log on Mar 1st (using Jan 1st as the 'found date').

 

Thank you. That makes a little more sense. I guess I can't wrap my head around not logging a cache for over two months.

 

I think that's what a lot of us are saying. While I don't think there are really many truly "good" reasons for NOT logging right away (obviously physical issues such as injury or sickness...being away from internet access for an extended time...heck, even incarceration!), I wouldn't go so far as to call someone "inconsiderate" or "selfish".

Link to comment

Still don't understand why there isn't a time limit on logging archived caches? If a cache is archived is shouldn't even be there to find. Logging an archived cache months or even years after being found is ridiculous.

 

People can back-date their log, you know. So maybe they DID find it two years ago, then it went missing and was archived. Doesn't invalidate their find.

 

And then there are caches that were archived long ago but are still in place and someone happens along and finds it. It happened to me twice. I logged a find on both of them because they were caches, they were at the posted coordinates (once I discovered which caches they were) and they had logs inside that I signed.

 

The first example is comical. Really? Did they one day wake up in a cold sweat and realize they forgot to log that cache they found in 2013?

 

The second should never happen if the cache owner did what they should have and removed the container.

 

First example: Yes, it does happen. I've seen on several occasions someone backdating a log. Maybe they were part of a team or cached with their parent, then ended up getting their own profile and decided to log the caches they found under the other profile. Maybe they had finds marked in their GPSr that they lost or misplaced and a year or two later discovered and so they catch up on their finds. I doubt it's anything so dramatic as what you describe...

 

Second example: You can talk about "guidelines" and what they "should have" done until you are blue in the face. Doesn't change the fact that plenty of people archive their caches online but never bother to remove the cache itself.

Link to comment

Did they one day wake up in a cold sweat and realize they forgot to log that cache they found in 2013?

 

When I started using the field notes feature I found more than a dozen caches I hadn't logged because of discrepancies in my note-taking. Some of them went back two years.

 

Happily, none of my back-dated logs were deleted or met with name-calling or anything like that (thus validating my belief that most geocachers are actually good people who aren't just looking for reasons to be harsh and unforgiving to others).

Link to comment

Did they one day wake up in a cold sweat and realize they forgot to log that cache they found in 2013?

 

When I started using the field notes feature I found more than a dozen caches I hadn't logged because of discrepancies in my note-taking. Some of them went back two years.

 

Happily, none of my back-dated logs were deleted or met with name-calling or anything like that (thus validating my belief that most geocachers are actually good people who aren't just looking for reasons to be harsh and unforgiving to others).

I've missed logging at least a couple finds. One I realized when we were driving through a shopping center, saw the icon on the GPSr and drove over to GZ with a strong sense of deja vu. Sure enough, we had been there before. The cache had been muggled since we had first found it, and I couldn't remember what the date was for when we had found it before, so I just didn't log the find on that one. I did submit a log about the muggled status though.

 

The other was outside a restaurant. Not an exciting hide, but one of those 'might as well grab it while we're here' sort of things. Several months later, I was looking at the cache map to plan an "urban hike" route and realized I had found that one already. I was able to go through credit card statements to find what day we were there and logged the find with that correct date.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there was another cache or two out there that I've missed logging.

Edited by noncentric
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...