Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
dubidubno

One signature, multiple Found It logs

Recommended Posts

Currently there is a very heated discussion in a Norwegian geocaching group on Facebook. The debate is about the use of team nicks when signing and logging. One person signs the log with a "team nick" and then multiple people log the cache as found online.

 

The Logging Guidelines at https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#logging states:

 

"Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed."

 

To me this means that only people who has actually signed the log is eligible to log a cache as found. This excludes the use of team nicks.

 

Others in the group are saying that the practice is allowed by Groundspeak, but I have not found anything that confirms this. Has Groundspeak released any official information on this?

Share this post


Link to post

"Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed."

 

To me this means that only people who has actually signed the log is eligible to log a cache as found. This excludes the use of team nicks.

 

That is the way I understand it as well, but I have allowed what you describe on my cache listings. We are in a bad decline, and I don't like to delete logs. :(

Share this post


Link to post

As a owner, if a big group (like during a Mega Event) visits my caches, I prefer to have a general log, instead of hundreds that will fill the logbooks.

Share this post


Link to post

We do that all the time. Every Sunday we have a group go out caching, sometimes 4 sometimes 10. Rather than have everybody sign in and take up space (and time) we usually sign in as "Durfs5" (5 people that day) as we sometimes refer to ourselves as the "Durfs" group because we meet at that restaurant for breakfast. I'll usually say in my log "Signed in as Durfs5".

Share this post


Link to post

Seen this many, many times, and not an issue for me. After all, caching is a social game as well. Caching in groups is a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally would always sign with my own nickname, but I have zero issue with groups signing with a team name. It's such a trivial thing to be concerned with.

Share this post


Link to post
"Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed."

 

To me this means that only people who has actually signed the log is eligible to log a cache as found. This excludes the use of team nicks.

I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.

 

Others in the group are saying that the practice is allowed by Groundspeak, but I have not found anything that confirms this. Has Groundspeak released any official information on this?
I haven't seen anything official from Groundspeak (maybe this thread will call it to my attention), but informal team names are fairly common around here, and as Kelux and ChileHead indicated, it saves space in the log, and postpones the need for the CO to replace the log.

 

But different groups handle this differently. I've been in groups where the log was passed around, and everyone signed his/her own name. I've been in groups where one person signed everyone's names. I've been in groups where one person signed a team name. And I've been in groups where one person insisted on signing his/her own name, but everyone else did it some other way.

Share this post


Link to post

I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.

 

And that's not how I interpret it. I take it to mean that you, not someone else on your behalf, must sign the log in some way.

Share this post


Link to post

I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.

 

And that's not how I interpret it. I take it to mean that you, not someone else on your behalf, must sign the log in some way.

 

You can go ahead and interpret things however you'd like, but I don't think your interpretation would stand up to appeal if the issue was taken up with TPTB.

Share this post


Link to post

Some time ago a group claimed that all of them have visited a lot of (very time-consuming, if done correctly) non-traditional geocaches and signed as 'Team xxx' in a timespan that doesn't even allow visiting all finals according to local geocachers.

 

In other cases only a few of a so called team were met by other geocachers later claiming all of them had been there.

 

One owner of difficult puzzle caches deleted their online logs, but they could log online again, backed by this email from Groundspeak, which is mentioned also in one of the logs.

 

'Hello!

Thank you for contacting Geocaching HQ about this. Geocachers who go geocaching together in groups area allowed to log under one name, rather than writing all of the usernames of the players who visited a geocache. For example, players Bob, Nancy, and Sally could all log under the name "Team Geocaching" in the physical logbook, but would still be allowed to individually log the find on Geocaching.com.'

 

If you claim to have visited a multi-cache that has 20 stages spread over 30 miles no one can tell me you have to save time by not writing 5 or 10 usernames when signing the logbook. Especially in logbooks that have enough space for the next five years.

 

But it is allowed to sign with any team name and for every cacher of the team that actually was at the geocache to log online using the individual username for online logging if you want to.

 

Otherwise the allowed changing of usernames (only name changes, same account) wouldn't make any sense too if you 'loose' your finds because your new name isn't in the logbooks.

 

For teamsplit logs done correctly (where the geocacher leaving the team also was at the cache, the former team name is mentioned and the log has the same date as the log of the former team) also shouldn't be deleted following these arguments.

 

Teamsplit logs not mentioning the former team name, combined with arbitrary online log dates seem 'deletable' to me, nothing corresponding in the real logbook. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

If you claim to have visited a multi-cache that has 20 stages spread over 30 miles no one can tell me you have to save time by not writing 5 or 10 usernames when signing the logbook. Especially in logbooks that have enough space for the next five years.

 

No one can tell you that, but thankfully, no one needs to, either.

Share this post


Link to post

This is something i don't mind one way or another. When i go with the group, there are usually two that like to do the signing for us. They both enjoy doing it and it saves me the trouble of getting my pen out. :P

 

As far as being a way for someone that's not part of the group to falsely log, i don't imagine it happens very often. Maybe more of a chance during an event with a lot of people caching in groups,,, even then, i doubt very often.

Share this post


Link to post

Guess temp disable of all nearby caches from even some small events (much less megas) would have to be done, unless that CO is comfortable replacing the log two or three times a day. :laughing:

- This is sorta when common sense kicks in...

 

""Physical caches can be logged online as 'Found' once the physical log has been signed" (to me) means just that.

If the physical log has been signed by a Team Elmer Fudd member, and fifteen people log in online saying they were part of Team Elmer Fudd, I don't see the issue. :)

Share this post


Link to post
I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.
And that's not how I interpret it. I take it to mean that you, not someone else on your behalf, must sign the log in some way.
Which is even more strict. Consider:
  • "once the physical log has been signed"
  • "once the physical log has been signed with your geocaching account name"
  • "once the physical log has been signed with your geocaching account name by you, not by someone else on your behalf"

Share this post


Link to post

Message from the help center:

Many times when people go out as a team or in a group, they may use a team name to avoid cramming the logbook full of several signatures. And when they log the cache online, will say something like, "We were geocaching today as "Team Signal the Frog Rules" and had a great time. TFTC!"

 

From previous guidelines:

It is acceptable to use your user name, team name, stamp, or sticker which includes your user name.

 

(found in the German Speaking Forum)

Share this post


Link to post

I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.

 

And that's not how I interpret it. I take it to mean that you, not someone else on your behalf, must sign the log in some way.

 

For a scenario like Chilehead described it makes sense to use a team name. I am assuming that everyone in the group actively looks for the cache and could just have easily put their name on the log sheet as whoever in the group signed a "team name".

 

Unfortunately, it's interpretations like this that lead to abuse.

 

If I watch someone climb a tree, and they sign my (and everyone else standing around at the base of the tree) name on the log, did I really find the cache?

 

If I drive around a group of cachers and everyone else get out to look for caches, I remain in the car, and someone signs my name in the log, did I really find the caches?

 

If a groups gets together as a team, splits up into different vehicles to find a different set of caches, if someone from each car signs on the behalf of everyone in the group, did everyone find every cache.

 

If I stop on the way home to find a cache, and sign your name in the log book on your behalf, are you going to lot it as found?

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.

 

And that's not how I interpret it. I take it to mean that you, not someone else on your behalf, must sign the log in some way.

There's a popular, yearly Event in another state we used to attend.

They have a multiple cache run planned for all who'd like to join before the event.

Lots of people, usually in a few groups, so they aren't taking forever.

The first to access the log on all caches signs in for everyone else, and those people log online which group they were in.

Made sense. Otherwise, all cache logs would have been NM after the first group filled them.

Each time we were present a Reviewer attended.

- I'd like to think that if it wasn't allowed, that Reviewer would have put the kibosh to it the first year. :)

Share this post


Link to post
If I watch someone climb a tree, and they sign my (and everyone else standing around at the base of the tree) name on the log, did I really find the cache?
If Alice climbs the tree at stage 1, Bob swims in the lake at stage 2, and Cris walks along a balance beam to retrieve the final, then did any of them really find the cache?

Share this post


Link to post
Message from the help center:

Many times when people go out as a team or in a group, they may use a team name to avoid cramming the logbook full of several signatures. And when they log the cache online, will say something like, "We were geocaching today as "Team Signal the Frog Rules" and had a great time. TFTC!"

For clarification, this text does not appear to exist in the Help Center. Rather, it seems to have been sent by someone at Groundspeak in response to someone who used the "Contact Us" form in the Help Center.

Share this post


Link to post

Best comment I've ever seen on this subject is this:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=279441&st=50&p=4802504entry4802504

 

Though it might not carry as much authority now as it did when originally posted.

Thanks for the link to great post. Geocaching is a fun way to get out and see areas/nature/beauty that we would never know existed. In short, its not my wife, its not my life. Just like the rest of life there are always differences of opinion and those who like to argue and have the need to prove they are "right". Great entertainment though.

Share this post


Link to post

Currently there is a very heated discussion in a Norwegian geocaching group on Facebook. The debate is about the use of team nicks when signing and logging. One person signs the log with a "team nick" and then multiple people log the cache as found online.

 

The Logging Guidelines at https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#logging states:

 

"Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed."

 

To me this means that only people who has actually signed the log is eligible to log a cache as found. This excludes the use of team nicks.

 

Others in the group are saying that the practice is allowed by Groundspeak, but I have not found anything that confirms this. Has Groundspeak released any official information on this?

 

I don't know the "official" policy on this, and it may vary by locale. In our area, "team nicknames" seem to be fairly normal and routine; groups go caching, and sign as a "group", individuals then log the finds on their own account. Our area also seems to sprout predomininantly micro and nano caches, so log "books" are not books, but tiny scrolls of paper. One line with a team name conserves space for more groups and people to sign before the log needs replacement ...

 

When I am caching with a group and we sign as a group, each of us has usually had some part in the find; either we all wait till each has located it on their own, or we mutually agree (after a time of searching) to announce the find to the group, sign the log and move on. In any case, we all participate in the "find" - and all log it as a find, noting the team name as signed in the log on our individual logs.

 

As I said, this is fairly routine in my home area, which is why my little group adopted a team nickname when we go out together to see caches. It seemed to be the thing to do, and makes sense given the preponderance of tiny log sheets. This may not be the norm in other areas of the country or the world.

Share this post


Link to post

As long as everyone is there and participates in the cache find, I don't see what the problem is with signing with a team name. It's a good idea to note it in your online cache log so the CO knows if they like to match up the logbook with the online log. It's just a way to be faster and take up less room in the logbook/sheet (especially if it's a micro).

 

Not that this is anything official, but I was caching with a bunch of Groundspeak Lackeys a couple weeks ago, and they signed with a group name. :):ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
If I watch someone climb a tree, and they sign my (and everyone else standing around at the base of the tree) name on the log, did I really find the cache?
If Alice climbs the tree at stage 1, Bob swims in the lake at stage 2, and Cris walks along a balance beam to retrieve the final, then did any of them really find the cache?

 

In that case, all three contributed to finding the cache, so I'd say yes. Chris wouldn't have been able to walk that balance beam without the contributions from Alice and Bob made to determine the location of the final.

Share this post


Link to post

The heated discussion in the Norwegian group started when dubidubno stated that he deletes all logs (except the first person to log) from his caches when people are signing as a group.

 

I contacted HQ and asked if he was allowed to do this. They clearly said he wasn't. He refuse to accept this, since it doesn't explicitly say so in the guidelines.

 

The old help center used to say this very clear. I've asked HQ to put it in again. Time will show if they do or not :)

 

If I were to interpret the guidelines just as literally as dubidubno, I could say that all of us can log every cache in the world, as long as there's at least one signature in the log book.. Because the log is signed. The guidelines doesn't say anything about the amount of signatures needed, or that it have to be your own.

 

A healthy dose of common sense never hurt anyone :)

Share this post


Link to post

The heated discussion in the Norwegian group started when dubidubno stated that he deletes all logs (except the first person to log) from his caches when people are signing as a group.

 

I contacted HQ and asked if he was allowed to do this. They clearly said he wasn't. He refuse to accept this, since it doesn't explicitly say so in the guidelines.

 

The old help center used to say this very clear. I've asked HQ to put it in again. Time will show if they do or not :)

 

If I were to interpret the guidelines just as literally as dubidubno, I could say that all of us can log every cache in the world, as long as there's at least one signature in the log book.. Because the log is signed. The guidelines doesn't say anything about the amount of signatures needed, or that it have to be your own.

 

A healthy dose of common sense never hurt anyone :)

Thanks for that. :)

We often don't get to hear why when a thread's started.

Share this post


Link to post

I was at an event and everybody went to a nearby park to get a FTF. There were about 90 people and the cache was a nano. The log was signed as "The name of the event' crew. Every one logged the cache with their own names.

Edited by Wacka

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind group logs. What I don't like is when someone claims to be part of the group when in reality they were not even out with the group. We have a local guy who tries to do this every once in a while.

Share this post


Link to post

I was at an event and everybody went to a nearby park to get a FTF. There were about 90 people and the cache was a nano. The log was signed as "The name of the event' crew. Every one logged the cache with their own names.

 

90 FTFs claimed! Woot!

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind group logs. What I don't like is when someone claims to be part of the group when in reality they were not even out with the group. We have a local guy who tries to do this every once in a while.

 

Yep.

Somewhere, on a least one of the Found It! logs, there needs to be a list of who was in the team that day...

Share this post


Link to post

One of my caches, a nano, has recently been found by a bunch of cachers on a cruise, they signed with a team name and frankly I'm glad they did otherwise they would have more than filled the log, and I'm not going to lose any sleep worrying about whether one or more of them didn't actually make the effort to go to the GZ.

Share this post


Link to post

One of my caches, a nano, has recently been found by a bunch of cachers on a cruise, they signed with a team name and frankly I'm glad they did otherwise they would have more than filled the log, and I'm not going to lose any sleep worrying about whether one or more of them didn't actually make the effort to go to the GZ.

Wow, that many cachers on a cruise. We've done 11 cruises since we started in 2012 and have never come across another geocacher on any of them. Only twice have we been in a port and come across another geocacher, but from a different ship in port on the same day.

Team logging is very rare where we are. I can't recall any of our caches being logged by a team.

Share this post


Link to post

Currently there is a very heated discussion in a Norwegian geocaching group on Facebook. The debate is about the use of team nicks when signing and logging. One person signs the log with a "team nick" and then multiple people log the cache as found online.

 

The Logging Guidelines at https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#logging states:

 

"Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed."

 

To me this means that only people who has actually signed the log is eligible to log a cache as found. This excludes the use of team nicks.

 

Others in the group are saying that the practice is allowed by Groundspeak, but I have not found anything that confirms this. Has Groundspeak released any official information on this?

 

Team names have been used for years. This is neither a new nor an uncommon practice, and yes, it is very much condoned by Groundspeak. But then you knew that already, as thomfre writes below that Groundspeak has already weighed in on this issue.

 

I can see how this could be interpreted as "has been signed with the individual geocaching account name", but that isn't what it says.

 

And that's not how I interpret it. I take it to mean that you, not someone else on your behalf, must sign the log in some way.

 

It would seem you interpret it incorrectly. A geocache log is not a binding legal document. It is a piece of paper used in a recreational activity.

 

If the stress of geocache ownership is too much for you, perhaps it's time to take a break and take up other less whimsical pursuits, like accounting.

 

The heated discussion in the Norwegian group started when dubidubno stated that he deletes all logs (except the first person to log) from his caches when people are signing as a group.

 

I contacted HQ and asked if he was allowed to do this. They clearly said he wasn't. He refuse to accept this, since it doesn't explicitly say so in the guidelines.

 

The old help center used to say this very clear. I've asked HQ to put it in again. Time will show if they do or not :)

 

If I were to interpret the guidelines just as literally as dubidubno, I could say that all of us can log every cache in the world, as long as there's at least one signature in the log book.. Because the log is signed. The guidelines doesn't say anything about the amount of signatures needed, or that it have to be your own.

 

A healthy dose of common sense never hurt anyone :)

So now we have the rest of the story. Thanks.

Edited by hzoi

Share this post


Link to post

I can't see what the difference would be. If it was decided no team names it would probably just be one person signing everyones name in. I have been caching with a group and went to sign it and another cacher has said they already signed me in. I have also been with a group and went to hand it to someone and they said just sign it for me. I already have the pen and log in hand.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind group logs. What I don't like is when someone claims to be part of the group when in reality they were not even out with the group. We have a local guy who tries to do this every once in a while.

Yep, we have a group or two in the region where this happens regularly. 30+ people group caching, guaranteed that not everyone visits every single cache, and we know first hand that plenty of people will claim a cache found if someone comes back from a little detour saying "you don't need to go find that one, we've already signed the group in". Group caching for many has become a team accomplishment, as opposed to individuals caching together. The fact that a team signs in is not the problem - the problem is people who use that to their personal advantage (or disadvantage, depending on your view) simply to knock smileys off the map rather than enjoy the fun of, you know, finding a geocache.

 

But team signing is merely a tool, as it were - it can be abused, or it can be beneficial (without abuse). And there is no way to tighten guidelines to allow it within reason while flustering its misuse. It has to remain a personal ethic, even if it annoys COs who have to deal with potentially false finds.

 

One group I commonly cache with uses the naming technique of making a word or title from the initials of everyone in the group. Sign that way, and it's more clear who's in the group and claiming the find.

 

Somewhere, on a least one of the Found It! logs, there needs to be a list of who was in the team that day...

Exactly, and when we cache with initials, typically someone in our group (usually all of us) will name the people we cached with in the posted log. I find this to be a good compromise, in my group caching, for identifying finders and reducing log space usage.

 

Cacher initials is obviously less practical for more than a handful of people, but personally I think if caching with that large of a group, I either won't log certain caches despite the group-find, or a few of us will sign as our own names or as a smaller group. And usually the group is fine with that - their reasoning is that the group sign in allows you to log it found if you want. Personally I think that encourages false finds, but I can only *shrug* and encourage people to enjoy actually finding caches. :)

 

One other concern with big group caching names is avoiding drama with COs who would delete logs from group cachers. Even if they can be reinstated, at least if you can prove your own name is represented (be it by name or by initial) then problems can be reduced or bypassed by doing so.

Share this post


Link to post

Currently there is a very heated discussion in a Norwegian geocaching group on Facebook. The debate is about the use of team nicks when signing and logging. One person signs the log with a "team nick" and then multiple people log the cache as found online.

 

The Logging Guidelines at https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#logging states:

 

"Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed."

 

To me this means that only people who has actually signed the log is eligible to log a cache as found. This excludes the use of team nicks.

 

Others in the group are saying that the practice is allowed by Groundspeak, but I have not found anything that confirms this. Has Groundspeak released any official information on this?

 

If somebody found the cache as part of the group they should mention that in their log. If they didn't sign the log and didn't find the cache then the CO should delete the log. Sometimes a group of a few people cache on a powertrail and sign logbooks with a teamname and save time and then put in their log who they found it with and what the team name was for that day for the group of caches they found each found.

Share this post


Link to post

We do it too. But we try to list all in the group so you can see who was there.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind group logs. What I don't like is when someone claims to be part of the group when in reality they were not even out with the group. We have a local guy who tries to do this every once in a while.

Yep, we have a group or two in the region where this happens regularly. 30+ people group caching, guaranteed that not everyone visits every single cache, and we know first hand that plenty of people will claim a cache found if someone comes back from a little detour saying "you don't need to go find that one, we've already signed the group in". Group caching for many has become a team accomplishment, as opposed to individuals caching together. The fact that a team signs in is not the problem - the problem is people who use that to their personal advantage (or disadvantage, depending on your view) simply to knock smileys off the map rather than enjoy the fun of, you know, finding a geocache.

 

30+ people caching as a group? No problems attracting the attention of muggles there. huh.gif

 

It's funny how geocachers will form an adhoc team to go geocaching but somehow the team dissolves when it comes time to log finds online.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

My daughter asked for her own account at around age 10, but we've always logged our finds together in the logbook with a single signature for "The Leprechauns" or just "Leps" on a nano log. That was true even when we found a cache earlier this month during a backpacking trip. Daughter is 23 years old now! Never once have any of her finds been questioned.

 

If HQ ever changes the "rules" to match the OP's interpretation, here is the change I'd make to our joint logs on Nano caches placed by owners who like to delete logs:

 

Current practice, signed vertically on the scroll:

 

Leps 6/27/17

 

Future state, signed horizontally on the scroll:

 

THE LEPRECHAUNS - JUNE 27, 2017

LITTLE LEPRECHAUN - JUNE 27, 2017

Share this post


Link to post
It's funny how geocachers will form an adhoc team to go geocaching but somehow the team dissolves when it comes time to log finds online.
I didn't realize that geocaching.com supported logging for adhoc teams. I knew that people had requested some sort of group logs. Has that feature been implemented? ;)

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind group logs. What I don't like is when someone claims to be part of the group when in reality they were not even out with the group. We have a local guy who tries to do this every once in a while.

Yep, we have a group or two in the region where this happens regularly. 30+ people group caching, guaranteed that not everyone visits every single cache, and we know first hand that plenty of people will claim a cache found if someone comes back from a little detour saying "you don't need to go find that one, we've already signed the group in". Group caching for many has become a team accomplishment, as opposed to individuals caching together. The fact that a team signs in is not the problem - the problem is people who use that to their personal advantage (or disadvantage, depending on your view) simply to knock smileys off the map rather than enjoy the fun of, you know, finding a geocache.

 

30+ people caching as a group? No problems attracting the attention of muggles there. huh.gif

 

It's funny how geocachers will form an adhoc team to go geocaching but somehow the team dissolves when it comes time to log finds online.

 

I can't think of any better way to ruin caching for me than to be in a group of 30 or more people. All I would ever be able to think about is how to get away from all those people to find them on my own.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yep.

 

Though many of those people now seem to be more in it either for A] numbers, or B] hanging out with friends (finding isn't as important, thus they'll log anything). So being around 30 people doesn't bother them. A lot of us stopped going, or at least stopped making an obvious attendance, for that very reason; we'd just end up splitting off anyway and finding caches on the list in a smaller, more manageable group. And we didn't really want to be a part of an enormous crowd of people trampling geotrails to nearby caches and whatnot.

 

I make it out to be a lot worse than it really is, but it's certainly a sentiment that the group caching thing, especially of that size, is love-it or hate-it. There's certainly something to be said for the social aspect, but ugh...

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

I can't think of any better way to ruin caching for me than to be in a group of 30 or more people. All I would ever be able to think about is how to get away from all those people to find them on my own.

 

Same.

 

Very first event I attended as a newcomer, with a friend who was a also a newcomer, a conveyor belt of people simply handing the cache to each other and setting off to the next - we were stunned that anybody could see this as an enjoyable experience :unsure:

 

We opted to completely ignore the collection of caches surrounding the event and leave them so that we could come back and find them ourselves, for real.

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post

I can't think of any better way to ruin caching for me than to be in a group of 30 or more people. All I would ever be able to think about is how to get away from all those people to find them on my own.

 

Same.

 

Very first event I attended as a newcomer, with a friend who was a also a newcomer, a conveyor belt of people simply handing the cache to each other and setting off to the next - we were stunned that anybody could see this as an enjoyable experience :unsure:

 

We opted to completely ignore the collection of caches surrounding the event and leave them so that we could come back and find them ourselves, for real.

 

Granted...I'm probably in the minority here when I say that I'd prefer being out all by my lonesome any day of the week and that caching with someone else just doesn't appeal to me at all. Not to say I never would, just that it is a totally different experience even when my wife and/or kids are along (when I can actually convince them to go along with me). Me being the responsible adult, that often means I have to pass up certain caches that have a degree of risk involved where I could potentially get stuck somewhere...or injured...or even killed...without anyone knowing my location.

 

So basically my statement about 30+ people actually probably could also be stated as 3+ people, because I really just want to do this stuff on my own. I'm not antisocial...I'm just not in this to be social. There's a difference.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

My daughter asked for her own account at around age 10, but we've always logged our finds together in the logbook with a single signature for "The Leprechauns" or just "Leps" on a nano log. That was true even when we found a cache earlier this month during a backpacking trip. Daughter is 23 years old now! Never once have any of her finds been questioned.

 

If HQ ever changes the "rules" to match the OP's interpretation, here is the change I'd make to our joint logs on Nano caches placed by owners who like to delete logs:

 

Current practice, signed vertically on the scroll:

 

Leps 6/27/17

 

Future state, signed horizontally on the scroll:

 

THE LEPRECHAUNS - JUNE 27, 2017

LITTLE LEPRECHAUN - JUNE 27, 2017

 

No, no, no...you're doing it wrong.

 

THE LEPRECHAUNS - TUESDAY, THE TWENTY-SEVENTH OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN, AT TWO FORTY-TWO IN THE AFTERNOON

LITTLE LEPRECHAUN - TUESDAY, THE TWENTY-SEVENTH OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN, AT TWO FORTY-TWO IN THE AFTERNOON

 

:laughing:

Edited by Ambrosia
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
It's funny how geocachers will form an adhoc team to go geocaching but somehow the team dissolves when it comes time to log finds online.
I didn't realize that geocaching.com supported logging for adhoc teams. I knew that people had requested some sort of group logs. Has that feature been implemented? ;)

 

Maybe the fact that GS doesn't support logging by adhoc teams suggests that 30 person adhoc teams shouldn't be formed to find caches either. dry.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I can't think of any better way to ruin caching for me than to be in a group of 30 or more people. All I would ever be able to think about is how to get away from all those people to find them on my own.

 

Same.

 

Very first event I attended as a newcomer, with a friend who was a also a newcomer, a conveyor belt of people simply handing the cache to each other and setting off to the next - we were stunned that anybody could see this as an enjoyable experience :unsure:

 

We opted to completely ignore the collection of caches surrounding the event and leave them so that we could come back and find them ourselves, for real.

 

Granted...I'm probably in the minority here when I say that I'd prefer being out all by my lonesome any day of the week and that caching with someone else just doesn't appeal to me at all. Not to say I never would, just that it is a totally different experience even when my wife and/or kids are along (when I can actually convince them to go along with me). Me being the responsible adult, that often means I have to pass up certain caches that have a degree of risk involved where I could potentially get stuck somewhere...or injured...or even killed...without anyone knowing my location.

 

So basically my statement about 30+ people actually probably could also be stated as 3+ people, because I really just want to do this stuff on my own. I'm not antisocial...I'm just not in this to be social. There's a difference.

 

I agree about the large group caching. I just can't see it as enjoyable with 30 people tromping around the woods...

However, I like to go with 1 or 2 buddies. It's enjoyable to have company. Sometimes it feels good to be out by myself (with geopup) too.

But I'd never feel comfortable with a platoon of cachers.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...