I Didn't Have A Pen!!??!!

9k · October 17, 2017

3 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

If the log can not be signed for non-pen related reasons. Wet, missing, ect. Sorry I was not more clear.

Oh, ok. Seemed tangential to the thread topic of not having a pen. Confusion ensues! :mmraspberry:

Other unavoidable reasons why a logsheet can't be signed which are not related to strictly my own actions, then yes, possibly worth a NM.

Edited October 17, 2017 by thebruce0

5.7k · October 17, 2017

The original post was a rant about people claiming finds without signing the log and using the "I forgot my pen" excuse. I see other excuses used as well. "I saw the cache, but could not reach it but I'm logging it as found."

That kinda stuff always bothered me as well, and I agree with the OP.

2.4k · October 17, 2017

59 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

If a cache is found and you can't sign the log for whatever reason, which is correct? Claim it as a find, write a note explaining why it could not be signed, or log it as a DNF ?

I would post a not and log a NM.

Write a note. the NM would depend on why I couldn't sign the log.

2.4k · October 17, 2017

19 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Did you actually mean to say "NM" and not "DNF"? Because logging a NM for forgetting a pen is... whut?

This makes more sense:

However I would still claim the find (and send the photo, or at least have it ready if the CO asks).

I'd do just the opposite. I'd explain that I found the cache and why I couldn't sign the log and ASK the cache owner if It would be ok to claim the find. If the answers no than I'll go back and sign the log or move on.

14k · October 17, 2017

46 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

If a cache is found and you can't sign the log for whatever reason, which is correct? Claim it as a find, write a note explaining why it could not be signed, or log it as a DNF ?

I would post a not and log a NM.

If this game was all about collecting as many signatures on a log sheet (or putting your name on as many log sheets) as possible than I might consider signing the log more important than finding the container. Until then, I'm going to assume that unless a cache owner has intentionally created some sort of field puzzle which requires an extra step to remove a log sheet from a container, that their intent is for geocachers to find the container they've hidden. If someone can't sign a log sheet through no fault of their own than, as far as I'm concerned, it should be perfectly acceptable to log it as a find.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

6 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

If this game was all about collecting as many signatures on a log sheet (or putting your name on as many log sheets) as possible than I might consider signing the log more important than finding the container. Until then, I'm going to assume that unless a cache owner has intentionally created some sort of field puzzle which requires an extra step to remove a log sheet from a container, that their intent is for geocachers to find the container they've hidden. If someone can't sign a log sheet through no fault of their own than, as far as I'm concerned, it should be perfectly acceptable to log it as a find.

I'm still playing the signature required version of geocaching.

14k · October 17, 2017

12 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

31 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Did you actually mean to say "NM" and not "DNF"? Because logging a NM for forgetting a pen is... whut?

This makes more sense:

However I would still claim the find (and send the photo, or at least have it ready if the CO asks).

I'd do just the opposite. I'd explain that I found the cache and why I couldn't sign the log and ASK the cache owner if It would be ok to claim the find. If the answers no than I'll go back and sign the log or move on.

Even if the log was a pulpy mess I'd probably just poke it with a pen/pencil (or even a stick) and log it as found. If the cache owner decided to delete my log I'll just move on but will remember that CO going forward and may decide not to find any more cache by someone that is so rigid about how the game should be played. "Going back" is usually not a viable option for me. Less than 1/3 of my finds this year are on caches less than 50 miles from home and it's pretty much been the same percentage for the past 6-7 years.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

9 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

If the cache owner decided to delete my log I'll just move on but will remember that CO going forward and may decide not to find any more cache by someone that is so rigid about how the game should be played.

I thought guidelines were clear on signing a log in order to claim a find online?

2.4k · October 17, 2017

11 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Even if the log was a pulpy mess I'd probably just poke it with a pen/pencil (or even a stick) and log it as found. If the cache owner decided to delete my log I'll just move on but will remember that CO going forward and may decide not to find any more cache by someone that is so rigid about how the game should be played. "Going back" is usually not a viable option for me. Less than 1/3 of my finds this year are on caches less than 50 miles from home and it's pretty much been the same percentage for the past 6-7 years.

As a cache owner I'm not so strict but I can't see harboring bad feelings toward someone for insisting I play by the rules. In the end It's my fault for not having a pen with me. Try taking a more laid back approach and you may find you don't have to travel so far to cache.

14k · October 17, 2017

12 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

I thought guidelines were clear on signing a log in order to claim a find online?

Anyone can claim a find online for any cache. Whether the log remains as a find is up the cache owner. If a CO will accept evidence, other than a signed log sheet, that you've found the container who am I to insist that they delete a log on *their* cache. I wouldn't condone expecting that a CO will allow a found it log if the log sheet hasn't been signed but if I CO chooses not to be draconian about "the rules", I'm not going to make a big deal about it.

14k · October 17, 2017

12 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

As a cache owner I'm not so strict but I can't see harboring bad feelings toward someone for insisting I play by the rules. In the end It's my fault for not having a pen with me. Try taking a more laid back approach and you may find you don't have to travel so far to cache.

Is it your fault if you open the container only to find that the log sheet is a pulpy mess?

It seems to me that by not being so rigid about signing log sheets I *am* taking a more laid back approach.

I don't travel to go geocaching. I will, however, often find time to geocache when I'm traveling. I could certainly geocache more without traveling, but I take a more laid back approach in that I don't feel the need to find every cache just because it's close to home.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

16 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Anyone can claim a find online for any cache. Whether the log remains as a find is up the cache owner.

I don't support armchair logging. That is not how geocaching is played. You find a container with a log and sign it before logging it online as a find.

9k · October 17, 2017

50 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Even if the log was a pulpy mess I'd probably just poke it with a pen/pencil (or even a stick) and log it as found. If the cache owner decided to delete my log I'll just move on but will remember that CO going forward and may decide not to find any more cache by someone that is so rigid about how the game should be played. "Going back" is usually not a viable option for me. Less than 1/3 of my finds this year are on caches less than 50 miles from home and it's pretty much been the same percentage for the past 6-7 years.

Likewise, except without the ongoing rift. The CO did what they have the right to do. My opinion of their actions might change, depending on the context of the cache (if they're that tight about an easy find I might not like it as much as a very hard find especially if I could have done more to 'properly' find it). But I'm not going to ignore every cache by some owner for somethign they've done. That seems extreme; there could still be great caches and experience out there by that owner that have nothing to do with whatever they did to bug me. But that's just my opinion...

33 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

As a cache owner I'm not so strict but I can't see harboring bad feelings toward someone for insisting I play by the rules. In the end It's my fault for not having a pen with me.

This.

44 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

I thought guidelines were clear on signing a log in order to claim a find online?

No specifically - try the inverse. A signature isn't required in order log the find, rather a signed logsheet is evidence of the find so the log cannot be deleted. This together with the CO having final say in their maintaining of the cache's history, the CO certainly can choose to leave Find logs as 'valid' even if there's no signature in the logbook.

As finders our goal is to sign logsheets on finding physical caches. But it's frankly ridiculous to only allow Find logs where there is a signature.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

5 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

But it's frankly ridiculous to only allow Find logs where there is a signature.

I have no idea what game you are playing, but it's not geocaching.

14k · October 17, 2017

5 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

I don't support armchair logging. That is not how geocaching is played. You find a container with a log and sign it before logging it online as a find.

Neither do I, but we're not talking about armchair logging. I'm talking about navigation to a location where a cache is hidden, locating and retrieving the container, only to discover that the log can't be signed. In my 10 years playing the game it's probably only happened less than a handful of times. This is just a game. To me, allowing a little leniency in how it's played is much better for the game than a zero tolerance policy on signing the log sheet.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

5 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Neither do I, but we're not talking about armchair logging. I'm talking about navigation to a location where a cache is hidden, locating and retrieving the container, only to discover that the log can't be signed. In my 10 years playing the game it's probably only happened less than a handful of times. This is just a game. To me, allowing a little leniency in how it's played is much better for the game than a zero tolerance policy on signing the log sheet.

Maybe that is why there are so many neglected geocaches just tossed out.

14k · October 17, 2017

5 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

Maybe that is why there are so many neglected geocaches just tossed out.

And maybe if every cache owner had a zero tolerance policy about signing log sheets we'd see a lot more throwdowns.

13.7k · October 17, 2017

48 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Try taking a more laid back approach and you may find you don't have to travel so far to cache.

Curious what this means...

9k · October 17, 2017

13 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

16 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

But it's frankly ridiculous to only allow Find logs where there is a signature.

I have no idea what game you are playing, but it's not geocaching.

:blink: I don't think you realize the problem with the technicality of what you're espousing. And you also left out my comment on the spirit of geocaching which I'm sure is what you agree with (despite seemingly taking a hard-line that it's not a "goal" but a requirement that every single Found It log online MUST have a signature else the find is invalid, which is not what the guidelines say - and yes geocaching is described as signing the logsheet of the cache you find)

16 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

As finders our goal is to sign logsheets on finding physical caches.

Edited October 17, 2017 by thebruce0

5.7k · October 17, 2017

25 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

And maybe if every cache owner had a zero tolerance policy about signing log sheets we'd see a lot more throwdowns.

That is the normal now, or just add a new log, but still a signature. The OP rant is about not signing logs and still wanting to claim a find.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

28 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

I don't think you realize the problem with the technicality of what you're espousing. And you also left out my comment on the spirit of geocaching which I'm sure is what you agree with (despite seemingly taking a hard-line that it's not a "goal" but a requirement that every single Found It log online MUST have a signature else the find is invalid, which is not what the guidelines say - and yes geocaching is described as signing the logsheet of the cache you find)

Can you point me to what the guidelines do say about logging requirements?

3.8k · October 17, 2017

On 10/16/2017 at 3:38 AM, MartyBartfast said:

No.

Sometimes people lose pens, or leave them in the last cache, or they run out of ink. Sometimes people don't go out geocaching, but they happen across one while doing something else and so aren't necessarily armed with a pen.

This. I always try to remember multiple pens because I always seem to lose them.

October 17, 2017

I'm always glad to find a pen/pencil in the cache. Justi this year, I've lost or left my pen at a previous cache twice and ran out of ink three times. However, I always "signed the log" using a leaf or just by scratching my nickname in with the dead pen, and I logged them as found. I've heard stories where pages were torn out of the logbook, and I hope no owner will delete my online log just because he/she can't find my signature in the logbook. If that should ever happen, I would come back to the cache, sign again, relog with the original date online and add the owner to my ignore list.

Edited October 17, 2017 by Rebore

14k · October 17, 2017

1 hour ago, Manville Possum said:

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

I don't think you realize the problem with the technicality of what you're espousing. And you also left out my comment on the spirit of geocaching which I'm sure is what you agree with (despite seemingly taking a hard-line that it's not a "goal" but a requirement that every single Found It log online MUST have a signature else the find is invalid, which is not what the guidelines say - and yes geocaching is described as signing the logsheet of the cache you find)

Can you point me to what the guidelines do say about logging requirements?

Since you are the one claiming that signing the log sheet is a requirement for an online found it log it would seem to me that the burden of proof is yours to show where in the guidelines this is stated. The guidelines *used* to say that "If you have signed the logbook, you may log the find online." (paraphrasing). That is *not* the same as you can only log a find online if you have signed the log. As often as the guidelines have been revised, GS is usually pretty careful about the language used. Considering that this topic has come up dozens of times in the past, one would assume that if they meant, "signing the log sheet is a requirement for logging a find online", that's what they would have written. I usually follow changes to guidelines closely, and don't recall *ever* seeing language in the guidelines that signing the log is required.

5.7k · October 17, 2017

1 hour ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I usually follow changes to guidelines closely, and don't recall *ever* seeing language in the guidelines that signing the log is required.

So you are saying that signing a log is no longer a requirement?

5.7k · October 17, 2017

2 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Since you are the one claiming that signing the log sheet is a requirement for an online found it log it would seem to me that the burden of proof is yours to show where in the guidelines this is stated.

Logging a find.

1.1k · October 17, 2017

On 10/16/2017 at 8:35 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

I think I've found a cache twice in 10 years when I opened it up only to discover that I didn't have a pen *and* there wasn't a pen/pencil in the cache (remember when most caches weren't micros and cache owners would put a pen/pencil in it?). In one case the cache was near a small pond so I was able to dip a stick in the mud and scrawl my geocaching initials onto the log book. The next person to find it was kind enough to trace over that almost illegible muddy "signature" with a pen.

It's happened to me a couple of times. One time I used mud, not easy to do in the desert, to sign took a pix and said what I did in my log.

The one I remember the best is long time ago I made a FTF but didn't write in or sign the log. Two caches latter miles away at another FTF, first time I got two in a day, a light went off in my head that I didn't sign the log. Went back and did so.

On my very first find ever I wrote a log but didn't sign it. 10 years latter I visited the cache again read the original log book noticed my error and signed the log from 10 years before.

Edited October 17, 2017 by captnemo

7.5k · October 17, 2017

1 hour ago, Manville Possum said:

So you are saying that signing a log is no longer a requirement?

Signing the log is a requirement if you want to win an appeal when the CO deletes your log. If the CO lets your find log stand, it doesn't matter whether you signed the physical log.

Many people, and I happen to be one of them, have a personal standard of not claiming a find unless we sign the log, but that's different. The guidelines say you should sign the log, but they leave open the possibility of a CO of making an exception and accepting your find even if you haven't signed the log.

1 hour ago, Manville Possum said:

Logging a find.

These aren't requirements. At least I assume you agree that "3. Trade SWAG or trackables." is not a requirement for logging a find.

5.7k · October 18, 2017

26 minutes ago, dprovan said:

The guidelines say you should sign the log, but they leave open the possibility of a CO of making an exception and accepting your find even if you haven't signed the log.

Oh, okay. Now I get it. Every geocacher gets a trophy kind of mentality.

9k · October 18, 2017

7 hours ago, Manville Possum said:

So you are saying that signing a log is no longer a requirement?

It has never been a requirement. The signature is evidence that the cache was found and signed, making it not possible for a CO to delete the Found it log. But the CO is certainly permitted to allow a Found It log if they feel that the cache was found. Or really, if they feel like it at all, but then that moves into whether the recent log history implies the correct state of the cache for subsequent finders.

Or to put it another way, one finder unable to sign the log because they forget a pen doesn't mean that the cache is not findable by the next person, so posting the find still implies an accurate cache condition. So if the CO allows it, it really, really does not matter that a mere scribble is not written on the logsheet.

So no, a signed log has never been an enforceable requirement to log the find online.

4 hours ago, dprovan said:

6 hours ago, Manville Possum said:

Logging a find.

These aren't requirements. At least I assume you agree that "3. Trade SWAG or trackables." is not a requirement for logging a find.

This.

Edited October 18, 2017 by thebruce0

5.7k · October 18, 2017

So now I know why I get nasty responses for deleting logs on my listings when the finder states they found my cache but didn't sign the log because they forgot their pen.

Geocachers seem to believe they are entitled to log finds and they don't have to sign the log to do so, and if the CO deletes their bogus log, then the CO is the stinker.

9k · October 18, 2017

6 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

So now I know why I get nasty responses for deleting logs on my listings when the finder states they found my cache but didn't sign the log because they forgot their pen.

It's your right to do that. If their name isn't in the logsheet, then you are permitted to delete the find log. That's not the same thing.

7 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

Geocachers seem to believe they are entitled to log finds and they don't have to sign the log to do so, and if the CO deletes their bogus log, then the CO is the stinker.

That's unfortunate. They should know that the CO is allowed to delete find logs if there is no signature in the logbook. The CO is not required to do so.

7.5k · October 18, 2017

5 hours ago, Manville Possum said:

5 hours ago, dprovan said:

The guidelines say you should sign the log, but they leave open the possibility of a CO of making an exception and accepting your find even if you haven't signed the log.

Oh, okay. Now I get it. Every geocacher gets a trophy kind of mentality.

There are no trophies here.

39 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

So now I know why I get nasty responses for deleting logs on my listings when the finder states they found my cache but didn't sign the log because they forgot their pen.

No, nothing thebruce0 or I have said explains that. In fact, we've both said explicitly that you're completely within your rights to delete those logs, so no one that believes what we said would send you a nasty response.

5.6k · October 18, 2017

8 hours ago, Manville Possum said:

Logging a find.

If those are requirements, then no nano cache (and many micros) is valid to be found as #3 can't happen...

And if a cache is out of place when I find it (such as the oldie I found many years ago a couple of hundred feet down hill from it hide site), I can't put it back in the right spot becasue that's not where I found it?!?

You can't pick and choose which "rules" you enforce.

5.7k · October 18, 2017

7 hours ago, The Jester said:

You can't pick and choose which "rules" you enforce.

Yes, I can enforce the if you don't sign my log then I delete your fake find.

5.7k · October 18, 2017

8 hours ago, dprovan said:

No, nothing thebruce0 or I have said explains that. In fact, we've both said explicitly that you're completely within your rights to delete those logs, so no one that believes what we said would send you a nasty response.

But yet it happens.

9k · October 18, 2017

11 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

Yes, I can enforce the if you don't sign my log then I delete your fake find.

Yes, we all agree with that. But that is not the same as all Find logs requiring a signature in the logbook.

One is a right of the CO that you can enforce on your caches. The other is a right of no one and an action no one can enforce universally.

Edited October 18, 2017 by thebruce0

5.7k · October 18, 2017

5 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Yes, we all agree with that. But that is not the same as all Find logs requiring a signature in the logbook.

Okay, a signature is not required to log finds online. Finding the cache is not required either, nor actually visiting the location and looking for the container. It can be logged from home.

Thanks for your encouragement.

9k · October 18, 2017

Not what's being discussed. Instead of derailing, can you not understand the difference between your right as a CO backed by guidelines to delete a Find log that is unverified without a signature in the logsheet, and the legitimacy of a CO allowing a Find to stand if they feel the cache was indeed found even if there is no signature on the logsheet? The latter is not breaking any rule or guideline, because the signature is not a requirement to log a Find online. It really is a very very simple thing to grasp.

5.7k · October 18, 2017

11 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

It really is a very very simple thing to grasp.

Well, yes it is. And so I thought the concept of geocaching was too, just a basic find it and sign it. Now you say that is not correct, that signing a log is not required.

4.6k · October 18, 2017

8 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Not what's being discussed. Instead of derailing, can you not understand the difference between your right as a CO backed by guidelines to delete a Find log that is unverified without a signature in the logsheet, and the legitimacy of a CO allowing a Find to stand if they feel the cache was indeed found even if there is no signature on the logsheet? The latter is not breaking any rule or guideline, because the signature is not a requirement to log a Find online. It really is a very very simple thing to grasp.

Since you can "log online after finding the cache and writing your name in the log" that means that you can't log online if you don't write on the physical log.

Look at it another way, you can cross the street after the light turns green. So as long as the light stays red you can't cross the street. If you cross anyway a cop may decide not to fine you although he/she can. A CO can delete your online log but can chose not to.

2.4k · October 18, 2017

21 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Is it your fault if you open the container only to find that the log sheet is a pulpy mess?

It seems to me that by not being so rigid about signing log sheets I *am* taking a more laid back approach.

I don't travel to go geocaching. I will, however, often find time to geocache when I'm traveling. I could certainly geocache more without traveling, but I take a more laid back approach in that I don't feel the need to find every cache just because it's close to home.

If someone can't sign a log in one of my caches due to some fault of my own, they're find stands no matter what the situation is. I would expect the same consideration afforded to me as a cache finder. As petty as I think deleting my on line log would be I'd accept it and move on without any ill will.

9k · October 18, 2017

19 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Since you can "log online after finding the cache and writing your name in the log" that means that you can't log online if you don't write on the physical log.

Yes you can. If the CO allows it.

19 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Look at it another way, you can cross the street after the light turns green. So as long as the light stays red you can't cross the street. If you cross anyway a cop may decide not to fine you although he/she can. A CO can delete your online log but can chose not to.

Yes, A CO can delete your online log if there is no associated signature, and choose not to. But they are not breaking any rule by choosing not to (that a signature is required to log the find online). And that is the crux of the argument.

Edited October 18, 2017 by thebruce0

9k · October 18, 2017

20 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

Well, yes it is. And so I thought the concept of geocaching was too, just a basic find it and sign it. Now you say that is not correct, that signing a log is not required.

No. The concept of geocaching is to find it and sign it. But a signature in the logsheet is not a requirement to log the find online. It is a requirement to have your find log protected from deletion by the cache owner if they think you didn't really find it. How many other ways can we express this fundamental difference?

4.6k · October 18, 2017

9 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Yes you can. If the CO allows it.

Yes, A CO can delete your online log if there is no associated signature, and choose not to. But they are not breaking any rule by choosing not to (that a signature is required to log the find online). And that is the crux of the argument.

I wonder what the discussion is then. Of course you CAN log online. You CAN do that from home for all caches on GC too. That's why I made the comparison with the traffic light. You CAN cross the street (just forget risks). Both things are the same, You logged online or got across to the other side. If you didn't sign the paper log the CO can delete your find and if you didn't wait for the green light you can get fined. I hope I made clear what I meant.

5.7k · October 18, 2017

6 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

No. The concept of geocaching is to find it and sign it.

Exactly what I said.

October 18, 2017

What in the world did I start? :0

4.6k · October 18, 2017

3 minutes ago, bigjim4life said:

What in the world did I start? :0

Worms can opened (try to make a sentence with these words) :lol:

3.7k · October 18, 2017

16 minutes ago, bigjim4life said:

What in the world did I start? :0

Some people are inexplicably passionate about the availability and use of pens.

7.5k · October 18, 2017

15 minutes ago, J Grouchy said:

Some people are inexplicably passionate about the availability and use of pens.

What I've learned from all of this is (and previous "I didn't bring a pen" topics), if you didn't bring a pen (or lost it on the way to the cache, or the ink dried out) don't say anything in the found log.

I Didn't Have A Pen!!??!!

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment