Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
SuperKrypto

if you can see a cache but can't reach it, is it a DNF?

Recommended Posts

we saw a cache in a tree that was higher than we were able to climb so we called it a dnf - when we started geocaching years ago we thought the rule was that you can only consider it a find if you have the cache in your hands and sign (or attempt to sign) the log book - we can't find the answer on the official geocache faq pages

Share this post


Link to post

The answer is in the help pages. "You can log a cache online when you found it and wrote your name in the logbook" (you can look up the exact wording). So, log not signed = not a "found it". I logged a few DNFs where I couldn't get to the cache but saw the container.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SuperKrypto said:

we saw a cache in a tree that was higher than we were able to climb so we called it a dnf - when we started geocaching years ago we thought the rule was that you can only consider it a find if you have the cache in your hands and sign (or attempt to sign) the log book - we can't find the answer on the official geocache faq pages

 

 

DNF is correct. Have you tried a painters extend-a-pole? 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, SuperKrypto said:

we saw a cache in a tree that was higher than we were able to climb so we called it a dnf

Sounds good to me.

 

Once, I could tell from the description that the cache was elevated, and I thought I had the right retrieval tool at home. I stopped by to verify that my tool would do the job, and verified that the cache would be retrievable with said tool. I logged that visit as a Note, and called it a reconnaissance visit. I did not call it a DNF because I was not expecting to be able to retrieve the cache and sign the log. Later, when I came back with the necessary tool, I was able to log the Find.

 

So there may be situations where a Note is more appropriate than a DNF. But it is definitely not a Find.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, SuperKrypto said:

we saw a cache in a tree that was higher than we were able to climb so we called it a dnf

 

My favorites are higher terrain caches.    :)

 If I can see the container and just can't get to it, I use a Write Note. 

 

It's not a DNF, as you could see the cache in a tree.   You simply couldn't access it to sign the log.

When/if you're able to access it and sign the log, you can claim it as a find.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GEO COWBOYS said:

Grabbers are great for high placed caches.

 

I see a lot of people say that.

Odd thing is, I've yet to see a "up a tree" container that wasn't attached.  Maybe it's a regional thing...

A multi-day multi couldn't be completed because someone pried the attached containers (that they could see from the ground) from a couple trees.

The CO archived it, rather that have to do repeats of that kind of maintenance  in a 4+ multi.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

thanks everyone - we have been logging them as dnf so we'll keep doing that - it's more fun to get our hands on the actual cache so a dnf spurs us to try again

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

My favorites are higher terrain caches.    :)

 If I can see the container and just can't get to it, I use a Write Note. 

 

It's not a DNF, as you could see the cache in a tree.   You simply couldn't access it to sign the log.

When/if you're able to access it and sign the log, you can claim it as a find.

 

I did not find it.  DNF.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

we seen others use fold out ladders - a grabber is a great idea too - once we got lucky a found a long stick with a hook end to take the bison off the tree and return it - the area where we are in at the moment has an increasing amount of tree climbs because it keeps things more muggle proof i think

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

I did not find it.  DNF.

 

My Write Note would say something like, "Got to GZ and easily saw the cache.  All the lower branches broken, will have to stop back when I have gear to access".     :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SuperKrypto said:

we seen others use fold out ladders - a grabber is a great idea too - once we got lucky a found a long stick with a hook end to take the bison off the tree and return it

I've also used a fruit-picker tool on an extension pole.

 

Some of the caches I've found in trees (whether a climb was required or not) have been wired or zip-tied in place. Others have used hangers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

 

When/if you're able to access it and sign the log, you can claim it as a find.

 

 

I agree. To expand on the rule... When you or a geocaching partner are able to access it and you or your geocaching partner sign the log with your trailname or a group trailname, you can claim it as a find. 

Edited by L0ne.R
grammar

Share this post


Link to post

I've seen caches you need a ladder and a painter's pole. I always keep both stocked in the geomobile for just such a occasion.

 

It should be kept in mind, that signing the log doesn't allow you to log it found, but it does generally put HQ on your side to restore your log if the CO decides for whatever reason to delete your find. A minor distinction.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Don't know if this will be appropriate here or should start a new thread or if anyone can point me in the right direction.

Got to a cache and could obviously see where it was supposed to be (coordinates were also spot on) and how it was hid but no container. A bit of looking and found the top of the container (yellow cap with camo tape on top) a few feet away but nothing else. Since there was no log to sign then is this to be considered a dnf? I made up a new container and replaced it the next day with paper in a baggie and did sign this.

Dnf? Contact person who set it? Leave it as a found cache?

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, iroquoisarcher said:

Don't know if this will be appropriate here or should start a new thread or if anyone can point me in the right direction.

Got to a cache and could obviously see where it was supposed to be (coordinates were also spot on) and how it was hid but no container. A bit of looking and found the top of the container (yellow cap with camo tape on top) a few feet away but nothing else. Since there was no log to sign then is this to be considered a dnf? I made up a new container and replaced it the next day with paper in a baggie and did sign this.

Dnf? Contact person who set it? Leave it as a found cache?

 

Log both DNF AND NM.  Since it's not your cache you shouldn't have placed a throwdown either.

 

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, on4bam said:

 

Log both DNF AND NM.  Since it's not your cache you shouldn't have placed a throwdown either.

 

 

10-4, will remove it. Did just message owner and informed what did and asked if he'd like it kept with this or not.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, iroquoisarcher said:

10-4, will remove it. Did just message owner and informed what did and asked if he'd like it kept with this or not.

 

People "found parts" of my cache once, "just the lid".  They added a slip of signed paper to the plastic coke bottle cap, and hid it where they thought it should go.  They hadn't in fact found any part of my cache, it was just fine.  But they did find a plastic coke bottle cap. :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

If been to find caches that was a metal can with a screw top lid. The can was rusted and the lid was rusted shut so we could not open it. Even though we had the container in hand, we couldn't sign a log. We considered it as a DNF. 

I messaged the CO who hasn't logged on since 2014. We haven't heard back.

 

I have maybe a dozen metal film containers that could be used as micro cashes, but I don't put out Micros. Part of the CO's maintenance  on  metal containers should keep the screw lids lubricated with something like DW-40 

 

We recently found a micro (Large Hide-a-key) with a disenagrated (sp?) log. We were helpful by replacing a new log without removing the old one. Lucky for us, we had a new one on hand. Otherwise it just may had been a DNF. We let the CO know. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

I see a lot of people say that.

Odd thing is, I've yet to see a "up a tree" container that wasn't attached.  Maybe it's a regional thing...

A multi-day multi couldn't be completed because someone pried the attached containers (that they could see from the ground) from a couple trees.

The CO archived it, rather that have to do repeats of that kind of maintenance  in a 4+ multi.

 

 

That is a good point. Today I bought a heavy duty folding step to keep in my truck for such occasions. It folds flat. Might fit on or in my back pack. I'll have to check to find out.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, iroquoisarcher said:

Got to a cache and could obviously see where it was supposed to be (coordinates were also spot on) and how it was hid but no container.

I've done that. I posted NM log, then the owner visited, found the cache just where it was supposed to be, and posted an OM log (or maybe a Note). I went back and found the cache just a few feet from "where it was supposed to be". Oops.

 

5 hours ago, iroquoisarcher said:

A bit of looking and found the top of the container (yellow cap with camo tape on top) a few feet away but nothing else.

Yeah, I've seen that situation a time or two. Sometimes a lid is just a piece of trash. Or maybe it's the remains of an older cache that used to be hidden in the same area. Sometimes it really is part of the cache you're looking for. It's hard to say without input from the CO.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, GEO COWBOYS said:

Today I bought a heavy duty folding step to keep in my truck for such occasions. It folds flat. Might fit on or in my back pack. I'll have to check to find out.

 

When we first started we'd lug in ladders (for a "hand-climb a tree" cache).   

Sometimes we'd have each end of an extension ladder.  Bushwhacking gets interesting...  :D

 

But the last couple years I've simply carried an etrier and some rope.  Nice n light.

 - It's often the first few branches that either get broken (old pines mostly... why do people place caches up in old pines?), or these old bones don't wanna start at 6', and it gives me those extra couple feet needed for a comfy climb.   :)

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

When we first started we'd lug in ladders (for a "hand-climb a tree" cache).   

Sometimes we'd have each end of an extension ladder.  Bushwhacking gets interesting...  :D

 

But the last couple years I've simply carried an etrier and some rope.  Nice n light.

 - It's often the first few branches that either get broken (old pines mostly... why do people place caches up in old pines?), or these old bones don't wanna start at 6', and it gives me those extra couple feet needed for a comfy climb.   :)

I carry 50' rope for those steep bluffs we would have to climb down. My partner broke his leg as he tumbled down a steep grade. Since then rope came very useful. If we find a nano/micro placed in a tree where I cannot reach with the step and grabbers It's a DNF. I'm 6'1. I will not touch a tree full of sticky sap. Found a small cache box hid under a sappy tree. The box was sticky all over it. Another DNF. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, iroquoisarcher said:

Got to a cache and could obviously see where it was supposed to be (coordinates were also spot on) and how it was hid but no container. A bit of looking and found the top of the container (yellow cap with camo tape on top) a few feet away but nothing else.

 

By the rules that's a DNF but if the cache is really missing the owner might allow you to log the find. So I would log a DNF and contact the owner to tell him what's left of the cache. The owner knows best what to do so I would not put a replacement! Perhaps he even tells "no that's not the cache" - then everything is okay, too, I have to return later. Sometimes they allow me to log the cache though it has not been missing - then I won't log the found it but if it's really gone and I found the hide why not log it?

 

10 hours ago, GEO COWBOYS said:

The can was rusted and the lid was rusted shut so we could not open it. Even though we had the container in hand, we couldn't sign a log.

 

That's a find for me. If it is a tricky opening mechanism that is something different, of course, but if it should open without problems but doesn't due to rust then I would log the find telling the story. But I usually say that the owner may delete the log if he does not feel okay with me not opening the box and not signing the logbook.

In fact I could use more force to open the container - but it might go broke and I don't think that this is what the owner wants to happen. So in most cases they are happy about the information and don't have any problem with the cache.

 

So if the cache is missing I'd log a DNF and probably change it to a find (or write a new found it) if I found the hide and the owner allows me to log it. If I had the container in hand but there's some problem that has nothing to do with me I'd take the found it but would agree if the owner deleted the logs. Works both fine for me and that is how I would want it as owner. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, frostengel said:

So if the cache is missing I'd log a DNF and probably change it to a find (or write a new found it) if I found the hide and the owner allows me to log it. If I had the container in hand but there's some problem that has nothing to do with me I'd take the found it but would agree if the owner deleted the logs. Works both fine for me and that is how I would want it as owner. :-)

 

If it's missing= DNF if the CO allows to log a find, I decline ALWAYS

If I find the cache but can't open it, no matter what the reason is = DNF

In short, log not signed = DNF, CO allows find if log not signed = DNF

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, on4bam said:

If I find the cache but can't open it, no matter what the reason is = DNF

 

 As I stated somewhere else: fun part of geocaching is searching the cache box and solving all the other problems the owner wants me to solve: that includes riddles (unknown caches), trick locks (opening a box with intended problems), climbing (high terrain caches) and many more. But it dows not include rust or a wet logbook.

The simple part of being able to write 10 letters in a book is not the most important part which defines geocaching for me.

 

So when I walk 10 miles through the mountains after I have solved the owner's mystery and climb the tree which the owner wants to me to climb and find the cache box - than it is a find like the owner wanted it to be. And now as the container won't open because of any not intended problems that is not a find? I cannot image many owners to want that.

 

I can't understand putting the fact of writing a name ABOUT any of the other parts which define the cache. I am curious if someone thinking like that is having fun in geocaching or having fun in following rules?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, frostengel said:

I can't understand putting the fact of writing a name ABOUT any of the other parts which define the cache. I am curious if someone thinking like that is having fun in geocaching or having fun in following rules?

 

I can't understand why it's more fun if a cache has been logged as "found it" online instead of DNF. Maybe we should step away from logging "found it" and use "logged it" instead. It would be 100% clear when to use that instead of "finding" it.

 

 

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, on4bam said:

 

I can't understand why it's more fun if a cache has been logged as "found it" online instead of DNF.

 

A feeling of success and seeing a smiley on the map which is much happier than the frowney face?

The fact that I found the cache but log a "I did not find it." would feel wrong?

And of course encreaing numbers which say how many caches I have FOUND?

 

49 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Maybe we should step away from logging "found it" and use "logged it" instead. It would be 100% clear when to use that instead of "finding" it.

 

Or why not just let anything as it is as long as the finders AND the owners are pleased? And if the owner does not want the log (I'd always tell what happend in the log) he may ask me to delete it.

 

Sorry but I always thought it's about having fun for anyone, it is a hobby. There are so many problems in geocaching (coordinates in facebook are a big thing in Germany these days) but I do not see the problems here.

 

---------------------- 8< ----------------------

 

Just one question - I do not need an answer:

Person A gets the coordinates of an unknown cache somewhere (facebook, friends) and just goes to the cache and signs the log.

Person B has his friend X sign the logbook for him when X is at the cache.

Person C solves the riddle and finds the cache but cannot open it for some reason or cannot write in the wet logbook.

Considering the guidelines persons A and B may log the find online and person C doesn't. If you were the owner would you deny C the log and be happy about A's and B' log?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, frostengel said:

 

A feeling of success and seeing a smiley on the map which is much happier than the frowney face?

The fact that I found the cache but log a "I did not find it." would feel wrong?

And of course encreaing numbers which say how many caches I have FOUND?

 

...

 

Considering the guidelines persons A and B may log the find online and person C doesn't. If you were the owner would you deny C the log and be happy about A's and B' log?

 

 

You have slippery questions. There is a distinction that you ignore, I guess for the purpose of being contrary. As a Cache Owner I may allow you to do whatever non-compliant thing you wish to do. Yet for myself, as a Finder, I find and sign, I may hike that entire trail again especially when I can see the container but can't sign the log. Two different approaches. You "see the container" and spin on your head and spit wooden nickels, and I as Cache Owner may allow whatever inspid ploy you are currently pulling, I allow your log, enjoy. However as a Finder, I actually like Geocaching, you know the kind where I Find The Cache and Sign The Log, so I do that or comeback later without any showboating at all. The non-signing entitled jerk in your story is on his way out of Geocaching. By definition, it's not Geocaching, anyway. He should go away and do that QR code game instead, where you get to vandalize property with stickers. Fit right in.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, kunarion said:

However as a Finder, I actually like Geocaching, you know the kind where I Find The Cache and Sign The Log, so I do that or comeback later without any showboating at all. The non-signing entitled jerk in your story is on his way out of Geocaching. By definition, it's not Geocaching, anyway. He should go away and do that QR code game instead, where you get to vandalize property with stickers. Fit right in.

 

 Pardon???

 

The "jerk" does the same as someone "vandalizing property" (*)? Because he could not open a rusted container that should not be rusted at all or because he forget his pen as discussed in the other thread?

 

Thanks for discussion!

 

(*) You can have that discussion with the munzee seekers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, frostengel said:

Thanks for discussion!

 

Do you know what the discussion is?  You skipped that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, kunarion said:

 

Do you know what the discussion is?  You skipped that part.

 

Perhaps my English is too bad for that. I just understood that someone called me and others a "jerk" (I had to translate that via google but I knew that is was insulting) for reasons I do not know. By the way I still do not know the reason. I usually like the tone in the forums but that changed drastically with that one post.

 

Sorry again for any offtopic and for my bad language (I do not know better I am just a German fellow) but keep your insults with you, please.

 

I am out of this - the sun is shining and it may be the last summer weekend in Germany. :-)

 

Jochen

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, frostengel said:

I am out of this - the sun is shining and it may be the last summer weekend in Germany. :-)

 

I guess I'm lucky in Atlanta.  At least it may not freeze til January.  At that point, poison ivy is dead (fallen, whatever), and ticks are dormant.  For a couple of months, it's a whole new ballgame. :D

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, frostengel said:

 

A feeling of success and seeing a smiley on the map which is much happier than the frowney face?

The fact that I found the cache but log a "I did not find it." would feel wrong?

And of course encreaing numbers which say how many caches I have FOUND?

 

 

Well, you said:

Quote

fun part of geocaching is searching the cache box and solving all the other problems the owner wants me to solve: that includes riddles (unknown caches), trick locks (opening a box with intended problems), climbing (high terrain caches) and many more.

 

  • So you had the fun part anyway.
  • A feeling of success? It's in your mind only. One, if not the most important rule of geocaching is to find the cache, sign the log and place it back where you have found it. It can't be a success if you failed to do just that little thing.
  • What's that number worth if it includes caches you haven't even signed the log?

As for:

Quote

 

Just one question - I do not need an answer:

Person A gets the coordinates of an unknown cache somewhere (facebook, friends) and just goes to the cache and signs the log.

Person B has his friend X sign the logbook for him when X is at the cache.

Person C solves the riddle and finds the cache but cannot open it for some reason or cannot write in the wet logbook.

Considering the guidelines persons A and B may log the find online and person C doesn't. If you were the owner would you deny C the log and be happy about A's and B' log?

 

None of these three should be allowed to log the cache as found online but since A and B can't be enforced, their log will stand.  If they feel successful afterwards it says a lot about them and their ethics. BTW, if I can't solve a mystery I don't feel the need to get the solution elsewhere, I just skip it just as easily as I skip some run of the mill micro traditional I might pass as close as 5m during a multi.  That +1 seems so important for some ;)

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, on4bam said:

None of these three should be allowed to log the cache as found online but since A and B can't be enforced, their log will stand.  If they feel successful afterwards it says a lot about them and their ethics. BTW, if I can't solve a mystery I don't feel the need to get the solution elsewhere, I just skip it just as easily as I skip some run of the mill micro traditional I might pass as close as 5m during a multi.  That +1 seems so important for some ;)

 

Often a caching buddy will tend to notice that I haven't solved a puzzle he wishes to hunt.  He solved it.  If he has a long time to wait :huh:, he writes to ask if I solved it (a nudge to me that it's simple enough a puzzle that even I can figure it out :rolleyes:).  Otherwise, he asks if I wish to tag along.  I can do the math on the way, but he did all the heavy lifting in advance.  "Maritime flags, See? Decodes to N 084...".

 

On the one hand, if I could figure it out myself, I'd like to do so.  On the other hand, if we're all heading to that cache anyway, I don't mind that I didn't actually solve anything.  But I do mind that we all arrive/sign/leave in like five seconds.  I wanna go back and check out that place! :)

 

But, yeah, I do sign the log. For a cache up in a tree, where I can see that container yet can't sign, I may log a DNF.  Getting it down may not be an issue, hanging it back on its dead twig, that's what requires the climb.  What I did most recently is, during a CITO trip, the CO himself climbed along that leaning tree and retrieved and placed the container for me.  My thing is that it's entirely up to the CO.  But if I didn't find and sign the log, even if I touched yet didn't open the container, I will come back and try again (once I have a plan of attack).  I won't put the CO in the position of having to "Gimme a Smilie because I wanna Smilie", based on what I declare is a Find today.  B)

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

We've seen plenty of people with high find counts, and how they came by them.   

Even hobbies/games have 'rules", and if some can't be bothered to abide by the basics of that hobby/game, I guess I don't understand why they continue.

Like playing cards or board games, eventually no one wants to play with the cheater.

There are a couple now that won't attend events anymore, after bragging of their "find count", and being called on it   :D  

 

I understand that there are even sites for people who, for some odd reason, want to cheat in a hobby

 - Low self esteem maybe...

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, on4bam said:
  • What's that number worth if it includes caches you haven't even signed the log?

 

1) I count the caches which I found as the owner had intended. And afterwards I'll give credits to his work in the online log.

There is a big difference of not signing the offline log when there is a problem not intended by the owner and not signing it because I was not able to reach it/find it/open the trick lock. In the second case I would not log it online of course.

Again: As soon as I have done everything that the owner wants me to do that's success for me. Signing the logbook is only the usual thing to do and so I alwasy do it if possible. But this gives no more feelings to me.

 

I still have the feeling that signing the logbook is much more important than the rest for you. Why? Just as it is written in the guidelines!?

 

2) Returning next week after the owner has oiled the jammed lid doesn't give anything new (neither for the owner, neither for me) but some signs in the logbook. Returning with a new idea how to open the trick box or with a new idea how to reach the container is something completely different.

 

I am owning several caches, too, and what I want the finders to do:

- have fun at all

- solve the mysteries (alone or in a team) and have fun doing so :-)

- search for the container and find it

- write a nice online log (where nice can mean anything but a short or copy and paste log)

And if they write some sentences in the offline logbook that is nice, too, as I keep all my logbooks. But that is really rare these days; just putting your name in, using a stamp to be faster (!)....

 

There is one reason for which the ofline log is important: for prooving that one has really found the box, not more, not less. I don't know how its overseas but I usually trust my finders if for any point they can't sign the log. :-)

 

Jochen

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, frostengel said:

I don't know how its overseas but I usually trust my finders if for any point they can't sign the log. :-)

 

I'm in Belgium, not "overseas" ;)

As for the bold part, search for "greetings from Germany" on this forum .... not judging, just saying.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

For me, signing the log is simply the culmination of the journey, or  tasks presented and completed beforehand.

 - But, that I can log a find with a clear conscience is important to me.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, on4bam said:

As for the bold part, search for "greetings from Germany" on this forum .... not judging, just saying.

 

I don't have to as I "know" the stories. And I also know many German cachers.

So why should I read something about "all Germans" what isn't true for most of the cachers I do know?

 

I think those who always write about "the Germans" as cheaters (I remember something like "Whenever I read Greetings from Germany I go out and look if they really have signed the logbook.") sometims forget that the German cachers with the most founds (who are perhaps cheating - I wouldn't put my hand into the fire for them) still are doubled the numbers by several US cachers.

By the way, I made my 10.000 found after over 10 years of geocaching lately. Some US cachers do the same and more in one year - but those are heroes and we are cheating? Yeah, fully agreed! Because we are Germans. :-)

 

Sorry to say but I do not want to read these stories. By the way in Budapest (Europian city) there is/was a cache with my log in the book but I never logged it online. I solved a riddle for friends and they logged my name what I didn't want to and so (of course!!!) I never made the online log. Happens - but of course we are all cheaters. :-)

 

So I think you can say what you want. But you really should be careful judging as "the Germans" and "the Belgiums" and "the ...." don't exist. And some black sheeps are anywhere but what does that mean to the others?

 

So now we are talking about cheating, about jerks, about .... just because you have a bad feeling for Germans and for those who think finding the cache is more important then writing some letters in a book? If so I start judging. ;-)

 

Jochen

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, frostengel said:

So why should I read something about "all Germans" what isn't true for most of the cachers I do know?

 

I didn't say anything about "all Germans".  I reacted to "I usually trust my finders" but I wanted to point out you should be careful about things like that. Read the "found it, didn't find" thread then. I posted there too and those are Belgian logs. If one thing is universal it's logs like that.

 

Also:

Quote

just because you have a bad feeling for Germans

 

I can assure you, I don't and I've spend enough time in Germany (near Cologne) pre-caching.

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, kunarion said:

 

... do that QR code game instead, where you get to vandalize property with stickers.

 


Wow! Do you really imply that geocachers do not vandalize somebody else's property? Because quite frequently they do. Especially on archaeological/historical sites. :(
I've seen holes drilled in parts of buildings, stones from restored ancient buildings thrown around, hundreds of nails knocked in trees, street signs bent. Sticking QR codes seems pretty innocuous compared to what geocachers do.
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, on4bam said:

I reacted to "I usually trust my finders" but I wanted to point out you should be careful about things like that.

 

When I can't open the lid because of rust - which was one starting example here - I'll tell the owner. If I forget my pen or it won't write I'll tell the owner.

And if someone tells me the same thing I trust him. The chance of anyone haven't found the box when they have such a good excuse and even admit that they could not sign the logbook is very small. Who ever logs without having found the cache writes something like "quick found today" or else...

By the way I do not check my logbooks regularly (do you?) and usually I can tell from the logs that they really have done the cache. But that might be easier to say when you do not have traditionals or simple caches...

 

Those who want to cheat would never tell me - as I wouldn't do if I wanted to cheat. That's all I want to say: If you can't sign the logbook just communicate with the owner. Communication is key.

 

By the way: If you want to cheat claim to have signed micro caches as it is often impossible to follow the logs when the logbook is a little older. With bigger caches with real logbooks (like mine :-)) you can find any log - another reason why I don't think they log my caches without signing the logbook.

 

And yes, I had quite obvious cheaters - but those got the coordinates of a D4/T5 nightcache of mine and went directly to the final. So they are cheaters but they have signed the logbook - and so far I can't do anything and signing the logbook doesn't say anything. The cheat here was very obvious as they did the nichtcache by daytime and did many other very complicated multi caches the same day.... and they all had the same nonsense log.

 

So better don't trust anyone even if he has signed the log. ;-) Pity world!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, BillyGee said:


Wow! Do you really imply that geocachers do not vandalize somebody else's property? Because quite frequently they do. Especially on archaeological/historical sites. :(
I've seen holes drilled in parts of buildings, stones from restored ancient buildings thrown around, hundreds of nails knocked in trees, street signs bent. Sticking QR codes seems pretty innocuous compared to what geocachers do.
 

 

Wow, the way you clipped my reply, it sure makes it look like I implied that. Super.  Stop that.

 

Do you mean to imply that by condemning vandalism, that I approve of vandalism? Because that is your context.

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, BillyGee said:


Wow! Do you really imply that geocachers do not vandalize somebody else's property? Because quite frequently they do. Especially on archaeological/historical sites. :(
I've seen holes drilled in parts of buildings, stones from restored ancient buildings thrown around, hundreds of nails knocked in trees, street signs bent. Sticking QR codes seems pretty innocuous compared to what geocachers do.
 

 

Astounding that you have seen all this geocacher-caused vandalism in you 8 finds over the 1-1/2 years you've been a member.  I've seen and participated in several CITO events where geocachers clean up hundreds of pounds of trash left by others in parks, city streets, etc.

 

Regardless, slapping stickers on unauthorized locations is vandalism, and I have removed them from some places over which I have control.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, frostengel said:

So when I walk 10 miles through the mountains after I have solved the owner's mystery and climb the tree which the owner wants to me to climb and find the cache box - than it is a find like the owner wanted it to be. And now as the container won't open because of any not intended problems that is not a find? I cannot image many owners to want that.

Great example. I'd break the sign-the-log rule for lesser reasons. I'd accept a CO deleting my find if they didn't like it, but, like you, I can't imagine that happening.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, a stupid LPC in a buymore parking lot, why bother to log the find when the container's rusted shut?

 

I find the biggest problem is people being rigid. I can't understand why anyone would want to log a find on the stupid LPC, so in that case I see the point of the people that insist the log must be signed. But I also can't understand why anyone would care if I logged a find after a 10 mile hike to a remote puzzle cache. I have no problem if everyone involved decides not to follow the rules precisely in order to have more fun in unusual situations.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, dprovan said:

On the other end of the spectrum, a stupid LPC in a buymore parking lot, why bother to log the find when the container's rusted shut?

 

I had some DNFs lately with two obviously missing. But they were drive-by caches (by bike :-)) and I wouldn't ask to log them; if the owner asked me to log those finds I would probably do but I wouldn't ask myself. At the same tour we found a wrong water pipe in an old building which should carry a nano cache - I like that idea but the nano cache has gone missing. :-( We already have the allowance to log the find and I'll probably do it though it is not a very interesting cache considering the statistics; but it was a fun idea so for me it's something special.

Sometimes I return to those caches and sign the lobbook later on. I'll use writ note than to inform the cache owner.

 

Fun fact: "LPC" is "lost place cache" in Germany or "barrier cache" (German: Leitplanke) but I know your lampposts. :-)

 

Quote

I have no problem if everyone involved decides not to follow the rules precisely in order to have more fun in unusual situations.

 

Important for me: searching a cache involves the owner and me and not all the others around. It's just between the two of us. And if we are both pleased with the situation everything is okay. If he isn't - I am (usually) not, too.

The same is true for the finders of my caches, of course!

Edited by frostengel
grammar... "now" should be "know" :-)
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Here goes:blink:   In my opinion that's not a dnf.   You found the cache but couldn't, for what ever reason,  retrieve it and sign the log.   I would post a note explaining exactly that.   

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Here goes:blink:   In my opinion that's not a dnf.   You found the cache but couldn't, for what ever reason,  retrieve it and sign the log.   I would post a note explaining exactly that.   

 

And as owner I would than allow you to log a found it (if you wanted to). Meanwhile I would disable the cache and only the non-signing logs that come afterwards would be candidates for deletion...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, frostengel said:

 

And as owner I would than allow you to log a found it (if you wanted to). Meanwhile I would disable the cache and only the non-signing logs that come afterwards would be candidates for deletion...

Why would you allow me to log it as a find?   It was my choice not to climb the tree and retrieve the cache so I'm not entitled to l the find.     Lets say you had this cache's D/T rated too low and I had no way of knowing I'd have to climb a tree to retrieve it.   In that case you as the cache owner have every right to offer me the find if you feel it's the right thing to do.    The question is should I log a dnf.   If you Did Not Find a cache it's because you went looking in the right spot or it's missing.   In this case neither is true.   This is why I think a note is the best course of action in this situation. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

×