Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Crazedllama

Why is deletion of adoption logs possible?

Recommended Posts

Hello, 

There is a geocacher here in Korea that has stirred up a lot of controversy recently by placing caches using their own account, then adopting it to another account, deleting the adoption log, and renaming the owner of the cache to the new account. Then he logs ftf. When he was caught, Groundspeak had him readopt all of those caches and then locked the other account. But then, he has now adopted those caches to a third account and archived them. In every instance he has deleted the adoption logs to cover his tracks and make it look like he didn't do anything. It's the second time he's done this in ten years sometimes adopting a cache 6 or 7 times before finally archiving it. 

 

So I guess my real question is... Why can adoption logs be deleted in the first place? It seems like an important log akin to disabling or enabling a cache, logs which cannot be deleted. It just seems to me that allowing the deletion of adoption logs enables this type of cheating to be hidden from the community. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

That sure is odd behavior... have you contacted the site about this instance ?    :)     Any Reviewer or Lackey can read deleted logs.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

That sure is odd behavior... have you contacted the site about this instance ?    :)     Any Reviewer or Lackey can read deleted logs.

The local reviewers and Groundspeak are aware of the issue and have restored and locked many of the logs, but they are volunteers and there are thousands of instances of this geocacher deleting logs.  

 

My broader question is why is it even possible to delete these logs. They seem just as, if not more than, important as other types of logs that cannot be deleted. It just seems like a great way to cut down on this type of cheating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

Hello, 

There is a geocacher here in Korea that has stirred up a lot of controversy recently by placing caches using their own account, then adopting it to another account, deleting the adoption log, and renaming the owner of the cache to the new account. Then he logs ftf. When he was caught, Groundspeak had him readopt all of those caches and then locked the other account. But then, he has now adopted those caches to a third account and archived them. In every instance he has deleted the adoption logs to cover his tracks and make it look like he didn't do anything. It's the second time he's done this in ten years sometimes adopting a cache 6 or 7 times before finally archiving it. 

 

So I guess my real question is... Why can adoption logs be deleted in the first place? It seems like an important log akin to disabling or enabling a cache, logs which cannot be deleted. It just seems to me that allowing the deletion of adoption logs enables this type of cheating to be hidden from the community. 

Help me out. What was he cheating at? Odd behavior, I agree.

 

It almost sounds like you're saying he cheated by claiming FTF on his own caches, but Groundspeak wouldn't get involved in that issue.

 

 

Edited by Max and 99
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

Help me out. What was he cheating at? Odd behavior, I agree.

 

It almost sounds like you're saying he cheated by claiming FTF on his own caches, but Groundspeak wouldn't get involved in that issue.

 

 

He was impersonating another already existing geocacher, and it was his second time doing so. Groundspeak did get involved, both times and locked those accounts. That's not really what I'm asking though. 

 

Essentially, why was he able to delete the adoption logs in the first place? Wouldn't it be easier for Groundspeak and the hard working reviewers to lock all adoption logs so they can't be deleted? It just seems like the cheating would've been more difficult to hide. 

Share this post


Link to post

It is well known this cacher has been bending  the rules to suit his style of play in order to log more finds, ftfs, etc. He even search he's the accounts of others on Project gc so he can point out discrepecies. We have called him out on numerous occassions but he co tinues to use other people's accounts, even dead people. It's high time his activity is shut down once and for all. He is a stain on the good graces of honest geocacher in Korea. Anything short of that is to me and others, unacceptable. But locking adopted logs would go a long way to keep him from continuing in this behavior.

Share this post


Link to post

yup. not a fan of how CheetHo abused the system to keep/attain his "#1" rank.... and i could rail for hours about things he's done that are borderline unethical, if not outright unethical... but that's his lame game.

 

as for the original question, yeah, i think adoption logs should not be able to be deleted. they don't hurt anything. i can see COs cleaning spoilers or fake logs, but transferring logs are the same as reviewer notes to me... there to inform others (and the CO). I could see it being helpful if i were looking for a particular cacher because i enjoy their hides... then not being able to find them because some jackhat like CheetHo decided his personal game was superior to and more important than the community.

 

too many people think it's a regional game, when it's global... and too many people forget that it's just that, a game.  take that attaboy out of petty cash... pat yourself on the back, because there are no prizes or trophies for being the "best", especially if you have to resort to cheating to get there. but, i digress...

 

in conclusion, adoption logs should be locked in. 😉

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, mighty_lamp75 said:

in conclusion...

 

Awesome rant.  Thanks !  :D

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

He was impersonating another already existing geocacher, and it was his second time doing so. Groundspeak did get involved, both times and locked those accounts.

2 hours ago, pattayadave said:

...he continues to use other people's accounts, even dead people. It's high time his activity is shut down once and for all.

 

This is starting to  sound (to me) that this may be more like criminal behavior, and not simply "fixing" a game (that has no prizes, and everyone knows he's a cheat...).

I can't get  how one would be able to use another's account.  You need passwords for that.

If this is possible, than I agree, locking adoption logs might be a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

There is a geocacher here in Korea that has stirred up a lot of controversy recently by placing caches using their own account, then adopting it to another account, deleting the adoption log, and renaming the owner of the cache to the new account. Then he logs ftf.

 

Anybody can log as many FTF logs as thay wish. There is no official rules for them. If you think that the original FTF was not genuine just add your own to the list.

 

There is something I do not understand. Why the player is using his own nickname when hiding caches? The normal procedure is to use different nickname for hiding caches and them find the cache using the real nickname. Earlier it was possible to adopt unpublished caches and removing the adoption note before publishing was quite practical. Anyway, I don't see how this locking could solve the problem you have.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I was aware of some of this behaviour before my first trip to Korea, as I was researching some lonely FTFs I wanted to attempt.  This cacher suddenly archived one of the caches without warning (before I had the plane ticket), and I noticed he adopted it over to a "secret" account holding over 1000 dead caches.  This, presumably, to keep the regular profile looking clean.

 

Seeing such an "archive flow" of caches in the country I wanted to visit made me seriously reconsider the whole idea.  (Though later I did go, twice, and loved it.)

  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, pattayadave said:

It is well known this cacher has been bending  the rules to suit his style of play in order to log more finds, ftfs, etc. He even search he's the accounts of others on Project gc so he can point out discrepecies. We have called him out on numerous occassions but he co tinues to use other people's accounts, even dead people. It's high time his activity is shut down once and for all. He is a stain on the good graces of honest geocacher in Korea. Anything short of that is to me and others, unacceptable. But locking adopted logs would go a long way to keep him from continuing in this behavior.

How??

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Max and 99 said:
10 hours ago, pattayadave said:

We have called him out on numerous occassions but he co tinues to use other people's accounts, even dead people.

How??

Yeah, I don't understand that part. If he's repeatedly contacting HQ and attempting to gain access to other people's accounts by impersonating their family, then I would think HQ would have dealt with that in a permanent fashion by now. Other than going through the dead cachers' families and then to HQ - or hacking - I don't know of any way that you can gain access to someone's account.

 

As for the adoption logs, they're just "Write note" logs. There isn't anything inherently special about them, other than the fact that they're automatically generated when a cache gets adopted. As such, I don't think locking them can be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

As for the adoption logs, they're just "Write note" logs.

 

Unfortunately, I think you're right.  I've noticed it's possible to "permanently encrypt" (by simple ROT13) one of these logs, as the CO has done on at least one cache I'm familiar with, one where he, I, and HQ have all crossed paths.

 

He's not very good at covering his tracks.  I'd have deleted the adoption logs (yes plural) before HQ locked the cache.  So the logs on that one tell a tale, but I guess I can't identify the cache without "outing" the owner, sorry to all who are curious.

 

Edited by Viajero Perdido

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

This is starting to  sound (to me) that this may be more like criminal behavior, and not simply "fixing" a game (that has no prizes, and everyone knows he's a cheat...).

I can't get  how one would be able to use another's account.  You need passwords for that.

If this is possible, than I agree, locking adoption logs might be a good idea.

 

9 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

How??

He was using their passwords, or... That's what we assume he was doing. The response we got from HQ when he archived close to 500 of one of those cacher's original caches was that because they gave up their password, they lost control of their account. I'm not sure why he thought it was ok to use a deceased person's account though... Regardless, he didn't cover his tracks well enough and the accounts were locked. There are about 5 other puppet accounts he has though. 

 

5 hours ago, The A-Team said:

As for the adoption logs, they're just "Write note" logs. There isn't anything inherently special about them, other than the fact that they're automatically generated when a cache gets adopted. As such, I don't think locking them can be done.

I was afraid that the log was just note type and maybe nothing could be done. Couldn't a script be written to automatically lock a adoption log upon adoption? Right now it just seems like this cacher has caused a lot of unnecessary work for our reviewers and HQ. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

I was afraid that the log was just note type and maybe nothing could be done. Couldn't a script be written to automatically lock a adoption log upon adoption? Right now it just seems like this cacher has caused a lot of unnecessary work for our reviewers and HQ. 

 

Reviewers and HQ can see these logs. Locking them do not help at all from this perspective.

 

5 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

He was using their passwords, or... That's what we assume he was doing.

 

These accounts must be locked if they are abused. I do not see any real problem if someone wants to move their archived caches to a graveyard account. (Not meaning that the owner should be in a graveyard)

 

From your point of view, what your primary problem and how locking adoption notes could help to solve this primary problem? I am asking this because I know that HQ will implement all tools they need to solve their own problems.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, pattayadave said:

It is well known this cacher has been bending  the rules to suit his style of play in order to log more finds, ftfs, etc. 

What rule is he bending to log more ftf and finds?

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/21/2019 at 11:14 PM, Crazedllama said:

It seems like an important log akin to disabling or enabling a cache, logs which cannot be deleted.

Enable and Temp Disable logs can be deleted, as can Update Coordinates.  Any log a player posts can be deleted by that player. Any log on a cache owner's cache page can be deleted by that cache owner, except, for the most part, logs by reviewers and HQ staff. Some logs cannot be edited - announcement, update coords for sure, but they can be deleted

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, arisoft said:

Reviewers and HQ can see these logs. Locking them do not help at all from this perspective.

 

These accounts must be locked if they are abused. I do not see any real problem if someone wants to move their archived caches to a graveyard account. 

 

From your point of view, what your primary problem and how locking adoption notes could help to solve this primary problem? I am asking this because I know that HQ will implement all tools they need to solve their own problems.

You're right, reviewers and HQ can absolutely see deleted logs, but they can't be everywhere and don't tend to go looking for violations. It was us regular geocachers that caught on to the strange behavior in Korea, not the reviewers or HQ. Reviewers and HQ tend to rely on the local communities for input. (A reviewer told me this). And when those logs are delete-able it's difficult to spot potential problems. 

 

I don't see a problem with archive graveyards either. Not my style, but to each their own. 

 

Locking adoption logs automatically would be an easy way to expose potential abuse while it's happening. If a cacher bounces a cache between multiple accounts it would throw up red flags in the community that something strange is going on. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

Enable and Temp Disable logs can be deleted, as can Update Coordinates.  Any log a player posts can be deleted by that player. Any log on a cache owner's cache page can be deleted by that cache owner, except, for the most part, logs by reviewers and HQ staff. Some logs cannot be edited - announcement, update coords for sure, but they can be deleted

I stand corrected. You're right. I've never seen any cacher delete these logs and thought I remembered seeing warnings when editing the text before. 

 

Not sure why these logs would need to be deleted either. Anyone know why someone would want to delete a disable or maintenance log? 

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Crazedllama said:

Anyone know why someone would want to delete a disable or maintenance log? 

 

Well, the Cache Health Score  ( CHS )    might be one.  The "appearance" of issues for future finders maybe another.     :)

 

Share this post


Link to post

I think that the log for a cache adoption should not be a 'write note' log. Personally, I think that it should have its own log type. Even 'owner maintenance' (because the cache listing was updated) would be a better log type to use, IMO. 

 

Every significant event related to a cache (and its listing) should be recorded with its own log type. To me, a new owner implies a different level of CO support (good or bad) for the cache. Cerberus1 points outs the CHS implications. With a 'cache adoption' log type, the CHS would be able to take that into account. It also makes it easier for other automated systems to note, and possibly take action on.

 

As for what are significant events, I can see a number of criteria. I already mentioned the potential for use by the CHS. Another could be what GS allows on a pocket query. Coordinates, attributes, D/T, etc. I believe updated coordinates is a separate log type. A log if the D/T, cache type, or attribute list is changed are other candidates. Having log types for these changes may help out challenge cache seekers. 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

Every significant event related to a cache (and its listing) should be recorded with its own log type.

 

This could be better option for the OP as they could subscribe all adoption logs as instant notifications and follow all fishy adoptions to be reported to HQ.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

I think that the log for a cache adoption should not be a 'write note' log. Personally, I think that it should have its own log type. Even 'owner maintenance' (because the cache listing was updated) would be a better log type to use, IMO. 

I could get on board with this. An adopted cache just almost seems like a new listing to me, so a formal transfer log seems necessary. Maybe that's why it seems strange to me an adoption log can be deleted. It's almost like it's being republished. 

 

7 hours ago, arisoft said:

This could be better option for the OP as they could subscribe all adoption logs as instant notifications and follow all fishy adoptions to be reported to HQ.

Ugh... In this case I would've received thousands of emails in a single night just to look at the cache listings to find the logs had all been deleted. It would definitely do what you say, but at the sacrifice of my email inbox. Haha 

 

I actually only noticed the strange behavior from my pocket queries of unfound caches. They suddenly had new owners with no adopt logs. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Well, the Cache Health Score  ( CHS )    might be one.  The "appearance" of issues for future finders maybe another.     :)

 

Would deleting a log even change anything with CHS? I guess that's a question for another forum. 

 

The appearance of issues is definitely why we had a problem in Korea in the first place. He thought by deleting the logs, no one would notice. That's like a cacher who doesn't dnf a cache for fear the cache will get archived or deter future finders. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Crazedllama said:

He thought by deleting the logs, no one would notice.

 

I noticed, from the other side of the planet!

 

It cast a pall over the whole caching-in-Korea idea, thanks to his high degree of involvement. When you build a vacation around caching, you want stability, not flakiness.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

 

I noticed, from the other side of the planet!

 

It cast a pall over the whole caching-in-Korea idea, thanks to his high degree of involvement. When you build a vacation around caching, you want stability, not flakiness.

 

We're glad you decided to come anyway. There are so many amazing places in Korea. We just wish the country had a better geocaching reputation. 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

Would deleting a log even change anything with CHS? I guess that's a question for another forum.  

Some examples have been posted in other threads that suggest that deleting logs has no impact on the CHS.  I'm pretty sure the Developers took that type of gaming the system into account in the design of the CHS, since it's a pretty obvious hack.  It's just like the example of deleting a NM log type from a Listing page has no impact on the accompanying Attribute (e.g. the dreaded wrench).  I'm pretty sure the CHS sees everything, even if it's not visible to us.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Crazedllama said:
13 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

 

I noticed, from the other side of the planet!

 

It cast a pall over the whole caching-in-Korea idea, thanks to his high degree of involvement. When you build a vacation around caching, you want stability, not flakiness.

 

We're glad you decided to come anyway. There are so many amazing places in Korea. We just wish the country had a better geocaching reputation. 

 

Goes to show, that when people "play their own way" it does affect others. It can even have a major effect on a whole country.

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I'm just not experienced enough to have seen much of this type of activity, but it seems a rather unusual situation, one that an individual, targeted response would better handle, rather than a blanket change to how the system handles specific log types.  From reading it, I gather that the cacher mentioned in the OP seems to be up to more - far worse - than just getting unearned Smileys.

 

I went back to check and, sure enough, I have committed this infraction (deleted adoption note), though for far less nefarious reasons.  All the logs about NA, trying to adopt out, adoption tool not working, PLUS the final adoption note seemed like extraneous clutter - Log litter, if you will - for future cachers trying to get a sense of past experiences or glean a clue from past logs.  (I did leave [original CO's name + "adopted by" me] as the CO listed, though.) Perhaps it was a misjudgement on my part, but I really don't think it degraded the integrity of the cache.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, VAVAPAM said:

I went back to check and, sure enough, I have committed this infraction (deleted adoption note), though for far less nefarious reasons.  All the logs about NA, trying to adopt out, adoption tool not working, PLUS the final adoption note seemed like extraneous clutter - Log litter, if you will - for future cachers trying to get a sense of past experiences or glean a clue from past logs.  (I did leave [original CO's name + "adopted by" me] as the CO listed, though.) Perhaps it was a misjudgement on my part, but I really don't think it degraded the integrity of the cache.

I agree, it didn't degrade the integrity of the cache.

 

For me, if I am looking at log files to decide if I want to go after the cache, I would mentally discount DNF, NMs and NAs that happened before the cache was adopted. That is why I would like to see adoption logs un-deletable (and their own log type).

 

It's like hanging out an "Under new management" sign on a business. An adoption log says, "Forget the past, this cache is under new management".

 

(Yes, its an analogy, and by definition, analogies are not perfect. Some past cannot be forgotten.)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

I agree, it didn't degrade the integrity of the cache.

 

For me, if I am looking at log files to decide if I want to go after the cache, I would mentally discount DNF, NMs and NAs that happened before the cache was adopted. That is why I would like to see adoption logs un-deletable (and their own log type).

 

It's like hanging out an "Under new management" sign on a business. An adoption log says, "Forget the past, this cache is under new management".

 

(Yes, its an analogy, and by definition, analogies are not perfect. Some past cannot be forgotten.)

Good point.  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to see a better preservation of the history of a cache listing, including adoptions, update coordinates, renaming the cache title, updating the description and probably also changing of cache size and changing of D/T.

That can be solved by locked logs but I think it would be nice to have this events "hadcoded" on the bottom of the cache listing. They don't need to be eye-catching so maybe put these even down on the bottom of the page or on a separate "Listing History Page".

 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/25/2019 at 8:40 AM, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

It's like hanging out an "Under new management" sign on a business. An adoption log says, "Forget the past, this cache is under new management".

 I like this analogy. Makes sense to me. When I see that a cache has been adopted, I understand that the owner has made an effort to keep their cache alive rather than letting it die. 

 

With what was happening here in Korea keeping the adoption log would have been an easier way to see that the caches were actually under the same management. 

 

I like some of the ideas posted above that maybe an adoption log should be its own log type and I think maybe it should be like a maintenance log that wipes the CHS slate clean. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Crazedllama said:

With what was happening here in Korea keeping the adoption log would have been an easier way to see that the caches were actually under the same management. 

 

This Korean issue is unique. I am sure that this is not going to end by locking adoption logs. But it does not mean that you are blocked out from your service. Some hints have been generated during this thread. As you said, locking notes only helps but there are other better means to achieve your goal.

 

We know that the owner id changes when an adoption happens. You could create a pocke query containing caches from one or more owners which you are stalking. Instead of trying to find adoption notes you have to save this query once and then compare future queries against it to easily pick potential adopted caches that are missing. If your problem is to find a suitable tool for this kind of surveillance your changes are mutch better than waiting for HQ to solve your problem as there are many possible sources for 3rd party tools. For example, I have made some simple tools to use data from pocket queries.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/23/2019 at 3:55 AM, Max and 99 said:

What rule is he bending to log more ftf and finds?

 

Logging finds on caches he placed.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, igator210 said:

 

Logging finds on caches he placed.

That's a rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, igator210 said:

Yup: 

 

Cache owners will no longer be able to log a Find, DNF, Webcam Photo Taken, Needs Archived, or Needs Maintenance on their owned caches

 

But they are able to. It is not uncommon in my area.

Clarification: to log finds on your own caches, but I've only once watched someone claim FTF on their own cache, and that was many years ago.

 

 

Edited by Max and 99

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Max and 99 said:

Cache owners will no longer be able to log a Find, DNF, Webcam Photo Taken, Needs Archived, or Needs Maintenance on their owned caches

 

But they are able to. It is not uncommon in my area.

They are ... still? 

 

Ownership after Publication

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, VAVAPAM said:

They are ... still? 

 

Ownership after Publication

Yes. Here's the thing: Groundspeak states that owners will no longer be able to log a Find on their owned caches. But it doesn't address the fact that geocachers can have multiple accounts, and STILL log a Found It on their owned caches. That's a glitch, in my opinion.

What they mean to say is that Geocachers will no longer be able to log a Found It using the same account that was used to Hide/Publish the cache.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Max and 99 said:

Yes. Here's the thing: Groundspeak states that owners will no longer be able to log a Find on their owned caches. But it doesn't address the fact that geocachers can have multiple accounts, and STILL log a Found It on their owned caches. That's a glitch, in my opinion.

What they mean to say is that Geocachers will no longer be able to log a Found It using the same account that was used to Hide/Publish the cache.

 

Yes.  That's it.  Sock puppets and all.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

What they mean to say is that Geocachers will no longer be able to log a Found It using the same account that was used to Hide/Publish the cache.

 

How do they close that loophole? 

 

I think they mean:

10 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

owners will no longer be able to log a Find on their owned caches.

 

With some integrity on the owner’s part expected. 

Edited by L0ne.R
sentence structure

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

Yes. Here's the thing: Groundspeak states that owners will no longer be able to log a Find on their owned caches. But it doesn't address the fact that geocachers can have multiple accounts, and STILL log a Found It on their owned caches. That's a glitch, in my opinion.

What they mean to say is that Geocachers will no longer be able to log a Found It using the same account that was used to Hide/Publish the cache.

 

We see that a lot.  "Team" accounts where the person who placed is also a member mostly. 

Some logs come placed with all members already within it.  Usually in the middle somewhere, thinking it won't be noticed.  

  - Unless you're FTF...  

We haven't seen a guideline that hasn't been pushed yet,  so like speed limits and locks, we feel the site realizes that guidelines are for the already-honest.   :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

How do they close that loophole? 

 

I think they mean:

 

With some integrity on the owner’s part expected. 

I can't see a way to do it. My opinion is that the community thinking that the practice is bad form is about all that can be expected. Knowing that other geocachers in your community are shaking their heads at your behavior should be enough deterrence. But it's not, obviously.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

Knowing that other geocachers in your community are shaking their heads at your behavior should be enough deterrence. But it's not, obviously.

 

I think it depends on how verbal they are.   Not bragging or anything, but still "business as usual", they seem to still play.  They don't care.   :)

In the OP's instance, that person has already been nailed for this behavior already, and just... doesn't... care.

But have one go to an event, ego inflating like a puffin fish, there's bound to be "someone" eventually who'll call them on it.

We've seen a couple leave the hobby, even leave the area,  when called on their bs at an event.  So give some folks a while, they'll get there.  :laughing: 

Share this post


Link to post

In my area I am aware of 5 accounts that are used as second account or team account so they can get the finds on the caches they placed on their main account.... It's not really a secret here.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

We see that a lot.  "Team" accounts where the person who placed is also a member mostly. 

Some logs come placed with all members already within it.  Usually in the middle somewhere, thinking it won't be noticed. 

Rather rare around here. In fact, I can only think of one team that would put out caches together, then everyone would "find" them. It wasn't that many caches, certainly not enough to make a numerical difference to the members who all had thousands of finds already, and I don't think any of them had any illusions that they were fooling anyone. They did sign in the middle of the log, but it wasn't because they didn't think anyone would notice, it was just to make sure no one would consider them FTF.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

In my area I am aware of 5 accounts that are used as second account or team account so they can get the finds on the caches they placed on their main account.... It's not really a secret here.

Similar to my area. Honestly it doesn't bother me very much since their finds don't affect me. I get the impression from the OP that the community is bothered that their logger is claiming FTF on his own caches, and my first thought was why would Groundspeak get involved in that matter. I also read that the community is upset that the finder's activity makes his rank  #1.  Thank rank would mean nothing to me anyway, but especially considering the logging behavior. I wouldn't take any notice of his rank or FTF stats. Meaningless.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

Similar to my area. Honestly it doesn't bother me very much since their finds don't affect me. I get the impression from the OP that the community is bothered that their logger is claiming FTF on his own caches, and my first thought was why would Groundspeak get involved in that matter. I also read that the community is upset that the finder's activity makes his rank  #1.  Thank rank would mean nothing to me anyway, but especially considering the logging behavior. I wouldn't take any notice of his rank or FTF stats. Meaningless.

 

Well GS has a double standard about FTF they don't track them but at the same time encourage us to go run for them...

https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2019/07/dogs-of-geocaching/?newsletter=PM

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...