Did not sign log

[+Wrgwayandhobolos]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

[+T.D.M.22]

Is it on the back, or another page of the log? Was the person caching with others and signed a team name, initials, or something else to that effect (some groups do it to save space on the logbook) is it an older cache? Maybe someone replaced the log (got wet, they tire it, or whatever other reason) so previous finders wouldn't appear on there.

 

Whatever the reason, it's up to you, but if you do delete it, it'd probably be nicer to send the person a message.

[+Wrgwayandhobolos]

It was published on 5-22-2016. 2 people found it that day and 1 person today. So my wife and I walked to the lake where it is at so I just checked for the hell of it. And only log is from today. Kinda made me a little mad

[curlingfan11]

Is it on the back, or another page of the log? Was the person caching with others and signed a team name, initials, or something else to that effect (some groups do it to save space on the logbook) is it an older cache? Maybe someone replaced the log (got wet, they tire it, or whatever other reason) so previous finders wouldn't appear on there.

 

Whatever the reason, it's up to you, but if you do delete it, it'd probably be nicer to send the person a message.

 

If they replaced the log, wouldn't they say in the log that they posted?

[+Manville Possum]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

 

If they claimed FTF and did not sign the log then you should delete their log. The FTF is still up for the first finder.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

It was published on 5-22-2016. 2 people found it that day and 1 person today. So my wife and I walked to the lake where it is at so I just checked for the hell of it. And only log is from today. Kinda made me a little mad

 

I see that you added a congrats to FTF banner to the cache listing. I hope that it was for the user that signed the log. It looks like the FTF game is rampant there and the "in your face" log claiming FTF is one of the reasons I don't encourage people to add a banner recognizing FTF.

 

 

[+cerberus1]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

Isn't it kinda late, now that you announced ftf to all involved in that side-game with that banner?

[+Manville Possum]

It was published on 5-22-2016. 2 people found it that day and 1 person today. So my wife and I walked to the lake where it is at so I just checked for the hell of it. And only log is from today. Kinda made me a little mad

 

I see that you added a congrats to FTF banner to the cache listing. I hope that it was for the user that signed the log. It looks like the FTF game is rampant there and the "in your face" log claiming FTF is one of the reasons I don't encourage people to add a banner recognizing FTF.

 

I don't play the FTF game or recognize it on my listings either, and I sure would not have to ask here in the forum if I should delete some cheaters fake FTF log.

[+T.D.M.22]

Is it on the back, or another page of the log? Was the person caching with others and signed a team name, initials, or something else to that effect (some groups do it to save space on the logbook) is it an older cache? Maybe someone replaced the log (got wet, they tire it, or whatever other reason) so previous finders wouldn't appear on there.

 

Whatever the reason, it's up to you, but if you do delete it, it'd probably be nicer to send the person a message.

 

If they replaced the log, wouldn't they say in the log that they posted?

 

People aren't smart, who knows what the would or wouldn't say?

[+Pontiac_CZ]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

 

1. delete the cheaters' logs

2. write a note to the cachepage describing that you deleted the logs and why, add photos of the logbook so everyone can check

3. change the FTF banner

[+lee737]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

 

1. delete the cheaters' logs

2. write a note to the cachepage describing that you deleted the logs and why, add photos of the logbook so everyone can check

3. change the FTF banner

 

+1

This is what I would do.

[+fuzziebear3]

Perhaps they found a different cache? I would contact them privately and ask them what they found, mention that you didn't see their name on the log.

 

I would not recognize anyone on the cache page about the FTF since there seems to be some contention.

[+NanCycle]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

 

It appears that HM1USNRET and Ravenlost2366 might be caching together and signing the log as Team Shawnuff. If the first sig in the log is Team Shawnuff, I wouldn't delete HM1USNRET's FTF log, but you might just send a message to them asking for clarification.

[+dprovan]

1. delete the cheaters' logs

Well, no, you should not assume the FTF was cheating. Just to focus on one possibility (which, in my experience, is quite likely): he got so excited about being FTF, he forgot to sign the log. I would still favor deleting the log because he failed to complete the process, but that doesn't make him a cheater. It just makes him forgetful.

 

Furthermore, keeping yourself from saying "cheater! cheater!" will prevent a lot of embarrassment when it turns out he did sign the log, but you just missed where he signed it. It's easy to let him repost a find you mistakenly deleted, but not so easy to stop a feud once you've started one.

[+GC Parrotheads]

I know HM1USNRET. Stand up guy. They do indeed sign as team shawnuf most of the time.

[+justintim1999]

I know HM1USNRET. Stand up guy. They do indeed sign as team shawnuf most of the time.

 

I'd send an e-mail asking for clarification. Seems like a simple mistake. I'm sure they never imagined the cache owner would verify the log. If this is the case I'm glad you didn't jump the gun and delete the log.

 

If the physical log isn't signed you, as the cache owner, can decide whether or not to delete it. Make an honest effort to try to figure it out.

[+The Leprechauns]

Maybe the "FTFs" actually found an archived cache that went missing nearby?

[+TheAuthorityFigures]

Ok I placed a cache close to my house. 334 ft to be exact so I can check it often. Well I went there today and checked on it and the person that logged the ftf did not sign log. Should I let it be or say something?

 

1. delete the cheaters' logs

2. write a note to the cachepage describing that you deleted the logs and why, add photos of the logbook so everyone can check

3. change the FTF banner

Agreed.

[+lee737]

If there isn't a mark in the logbook that can identify the 2 finders claiming FTF, then the online logs should be deleted, and FTF can be claimed by the first to sign. If they have found it and not signed it, tough luck, experienced cachers should know better. I doubt they have found an old archived one, because it surely wouldn't have a blank log.....

[+lee737]

Maybe the "FTFs" actually found an archived cache that went missing nearby?

 

Surely guys with >1000 finds wouldn't confuse a new cache with one archived in 2008??

[+barefootjeff]

Maybe the "FTFs" actually found an archived cache that went missing nearby?

 

Surely guys with >1000 finds wouldn't confuse a new cache with one archived in 2008??

 

Don't bet on it. Just two weeks ago I was checking on one of my caches and noticed the most recent finder, someone with over 3000 finds and a good reputation, hadn't signed the log. After rereading his on-line log, something didn't quite gel and it turned out he'd actually found an old cache about 15 metres from mine that had been archived in 2008. The CO of that cache is still active and thought it had gone missing back then, but everything was intact including a TB that had been sitting there all that time. The old cache is now reunited with its owner, the TB is back in the game, and everyone is happy except the unfortunate cacher who'll now have to come back and refind mine (I did offer to let his find stand but he decided to change his log to a note and come back again).

[+colleda]

Perhaps their logs could have have been a little clearer that they signed as a team.

One of the logs could be interpreted that only one member of the team was present but both claimed a find. Anyone else see that?

[+lee737]

Maybe the "FTFs" actually found an archived cache that went missing nearby?

 

Surely guys with >1000 finds wouldn't confuse a new cache with one archived in 2008??

 

Don't bet on it. Just two weeks ago I was checking on one of my caches and noticed the most recent finder, someone with over 3000 finds and a good reputation, hadn't signed the log. After rereading his on-line log, something didn't quite gel and it turned out he'd actually found an old cache about 15 metres from mine that had been archived in 2008. The CO of that cache is still active and thought it had gone missing back then, but everything was intact including a TB that had been sitting there all that time. The old cache is now reunited with its owner, the TB is back in the game, and everyone is happy except the unfortunate cacher who'll now have to come back and refind mine (I did offer to let his find stand but he decided to change his log to a note and come back again).

 

I saw your TB rescue story - very cool......

I still think a brand new cache and an archived for 8yr one should be easily differentiated.

[+dprovan]

Don't bet on it. Just two weeks ago I was checking on one of my caches and noticed the most recent finder, someone with over 3000 finds and a good reputation, hadn't signed the log. After rereading his on-line log, something didn't quite gel and it turned out he'd actually found an old cache about 15 metres from mine that had been archived in 2008. The CO of that cache is still active and thought it had gone missing back then, but everything was intact including a TB that had been sitting there all that time. The old cache is now reunited with its owner, the TB is back in the game, and everyone is happy except the unfortunate cacher who'll now have to come back and refind mine (I did offer to let his find stand but he decided to change his log to a note and come back again).

"Unfortunate cacher"? He found an archived cache and gets to claim the find on that. I think that's way better than finding an existing cache. Besides, he gets to come back and find yours, not "has to". I think he made out like a bandit! I love happy endings like that.