False Claims for FTF?

[+HazMatKat1976]

We've got a local geocache that just happens to frequently claim FTF on virtually almost every single new geocache in our area within moments of publishing regardless of the distances between the geocaches.

 

Couple questions I have 

1. Can the individual reviewing the new geocache for publication actually log the cache?

 

2. Are there any methods within the community to deal with this? It really is a sleazy means by which to screw other geocaches out of the opportunity for their first FTF.

 

I ask these questions because I've personally experienced being the FTF on an unsigned paper log but yet within moments when I went to log it online, their GT had already claimed FTF already, and I'll note it's happened SEVERAL times not just isolated occassions either.

 

I had one occasion where the CO literally had sat on their back porch all day, the day the cache was published so they could congratulate the FTF....the woman was astonished when she saw that this other dastardly culprit had claimed the FTF and she was the one that caught that there name was not on the log and nothing in the area had been disturbed.

 

Thanks!

[+HazMatKat1976]

We've got a local geocache that just happens to frequently claim FTF on virtually almost every single new geocache in our area within moments of publishing regardless of the distances between the geocaches.

 

Couple questions I have 

1. Can the individual reviewing the new geocache for publication actually log the cache?

 

2. Are there any methods within the community to deal with this? It really is a sleazy means by which to screw other geocaches out of the opportunity for their first FTF.

 

I ask these questions because I've personally experienced being the FTF on an unsigned paper log but yet within moments when I went to log it online, their GT had already claimed FTF already, and I'll note it's happened SEVERAL times not just isolated occassions either.

 

I had one occasion where the CO literally had sat on their back porch all day, the day the cache was published so they could congratulate the FTF....the woman was astonished when she saw that this other dastardly culprit had claimed the FTF and she was the one that caught that there name was not on the log and nothing in the area had been disturbed.

 

Thanks!

[+Max and 99]

7 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

We've got a local geocache that just happens to frequently claim FTF on virtually almost every single new geocache in our area within moments of publishing regardless of the distances between the geocaches.

 

Couple questions I have 

1. Can the individual reviewing the new geocache for publication actually log the cache?

 

2. Are there any methods within the community to deal with this? It really is a sleazy means by which to screw other geocaches out of the opportunity for their first FTF.

 

I ask these questions because I've personally experienced being the FTF on an unsigned paper log but yet within moments when I went to log it online, their GT had already claimed FTF already, and I'll note it's happened SEVERAL times not just isolated occassions either.

 

I had one occasion where the CO literally had sat on their back porch all day, the day the cache was published so they could congratulate the FTF....the woman was astonished when she saw that this other dastardly culprit had claimed the FTF and she was the one that caught that there name was not on the log and nothing in the area had been disturbed.

 

Thanks!

Ignore this person's claim and the real FTF should log that they were FTF.

If a Reviewer was logging FTF on a cache they reviewed....I just can't imagine that happening!

Edited September 12, 2019 by Max and 99

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

FTF is a side game. TPTB won't take any action. It's up to the CO to determine if the online log is accurate, and delete the ones that are not. You could e-mail the CO with your experience, but beyond that, I wouldn't go any further. 

 

As for your other question, yes the person reviewing the cache can log the cache. However, most, if not all, reviewers have multiple accounts. One that they use for reviewing, and another for their actual caching identity. But, when logging, they should be following the same process as any other cacher. Find the cache, sign the log, log it online.

[Keystone]

Community Volunteer Reviewers (1) do not actually visit the physical cache location during the review process; (2) follow ethical principles to keep the details of an unpublished geocache confidential; and (3) follow ethical principles for claiming FTF, which includes actually visiting the cache and signing the log.  I doubt highly that your reviewer is the root cause of your angst.

 

"FTF" is an unofficial side game that isn't regulated except by local community standards.  The true FTF (first signature in the clean log) is welcome to claim FTF in their online log; I would mention in that log that I was "first to sign the clean logsheet."

[+niraD]

6 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

We've got a local geocache that just happens to frequently claim FTF on virtually almost every single new geocache in our area

That's impressive. I've never seen a geocache claim FTF on another geocache before. (SICNR)

 

7 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

1. Can the individual reviewing the new geocache for publication actually log the cache?

First, the volunteer reviewers do not visit the caches they review. Many of them are hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of miles from regions where they review caches.

 

Second, I've heard volunteer reviewers say that they generally stay out of the FTF race. If they get an FTF, then it's just because they were already going geocaching in the area, and no one else had bothered to find the new cache yet.

 

10 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

2. Are there any methods within the community to deal with this? It really is a sleazy means by which to screw other geocaches out of the opportunity for their first FTF.

What exactly do you want to "deal with" in this situation?

 

Is the person claiming FTF by logging false Find logs? In that case, the cache owners should simply delete the Find logs, just as they would with any other false logs.

 

Do others (perhaps even you) want to get an FTF, but this person gets the FTF first? Well, then other people need to get out faster and find caches before the FTF hound finds them.

 

13 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

I ask these questions because I've personally experienced being the FTF on an unsigned paper log but yet within moments when I went to log it online, their GT had already claimed FTF already, and I'll note it's happened SEVERAL times not just isolated occassions either.

Post a photo of the blank paper log next time, and maybe a photo of the same log with your signature. And mention that you found the cache with an unsigned log. (Check the back for the FTF hound's signature though, because I've heard that some FTF hounds like to play a silly game where they sign and date the log, but they do it on the back, or at the bottom, or on the second page, or somewhere else like that.)

 

16 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

I had one occasion where the CO literally had sat on their back porch all day, the day the cache was published so they could congratulate the FTF....the woman was astonished when she saw that this other dastardly culprit had claimed the FTF and she was the one that caught that there name was not on the log and nothing in the area had been disturbed.

Yeah, like I said, fake Find logs should be deleted by the CO. This isn't the first time someone has posted armchair logs. It won't be the last.

[Keystone]

I merged two duplicate threads together.  I wish to note that I was FTF on one of them, and it was the earlier of the two threads, so I am the true FTF even though others posted in the later thread before I noticed its existence.  

[+Max and 99]

20 minutes ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

 

I had one occasion where the CO literally had sat on their back porch all day, the day the cache was published so they could congratulate the FTF....the woman was astonished when she saw that this other dastardly culprit had claimed the FTF and she was the one that caught that there name was not on the log and nothing in the area had been disturbed.

 

Thanks!

That's so easy for the CO to fix!

[+Max and 99]

1 minute ago, Keystone said:

I merged two duplicate threads together.  I wish to note that I was FTF on one of them, and it was the earlier of the two threads, so I am the true FTF even though others posted in the later thread before I noticed its existence.  

You're not a geocache. It doesn't count.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

If someone is just logging a FTF on every new cache published, it would seem like it would be fairly easy for the community to catch onto their shenanigans and ignore it. If you see this person logging a FTF...well, then you know that the FTF opportunity is still available!

 

Now, there are "ghost" cachers out there, but they generally operate in the reverse of what is happening here: they find the cache, sign the log but do not log the find online. There are also "true" ghost cachers who find the caches but don't log anything anywhere.

 

The ones who don't sign the log but log online, we don't call those ghost cachers...we call those armchair loggers. Sounds like you have an armchair FTF logger. The best way to deal with this is for the CO's to delete the fake logs.

[+cerberus1]

2 hours ago, HazMatKat1976 said:

We've got a local geocache that just happens to frequently claim FTF on virtually almost every single new geocache in our area within moments of publishing regardless of the distances between the geocaches.

Couple questions I have 

1. Can the individual reviewing the new geocache for publication actually log the cache?

 

2. Are there any methods within the community to deal with this? It really is a sleazy means by which to screw other geocaches out of the opportunity for their first FTF.

 

 I'd bet there's a couple times Reviewers have been able to hit a cache FTF,  simply not grabbed by others yet.   

 - That's how I get some now. Most a day or two after published.   I doubt a rogue Reviewer is fake-logging caches...

 

We had one similar to yours years ago.  A kid.  Maybe they figured that if FTF was already "taken" online, they'd have more time to head out.

 - We notice that still ...  caches often sitting for days unfound after a FTF.  We see that in other areas too.

One time the CO called to meet me as I opened the container, figured the field puzzle, and FTF a blank sheet.  Now they knew for sure.

Here, just talk at events (word spreads quick), and a mention of a fake FTF on the cache page got the kid to knock it off.

 - He depended on rides sometimes from an adult (who was at an event when it was discussed). I bet that helped too.   

 

Sometimes you have that kook that just likes to disrupt things.  Possible that simply disregarding them is enough for them to stop.

The "real" FTF could just log it, with no mention of the faker at all.   Not getting the attention they need, maybe they'll move to something else.

Can't hurt to give that a try...

 

[+Korichnovui]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the tracking of FTF by project-gc.com

If you put [FTF] or {FTF} in your log, then project-gc.com can keep track of that and generate actual FTF statistics.

That's it. I could be the 300th finder, put the {FTF} in my log, and it would count on project-gc.com

So in that sense, FTF's are only what you say they are. I like what Keystone said, "First to sign the clean logsheet."

I like to try to get FTF's. If someone logged an FTF online before me, I would be annoyed. But if I was the first to sign an empty log sheet, I would have that satisfaction inside that I was the true FTF. And that's good enough for me.

CO's could delete the fraudulent claims after checking with the log. That person could also easily be ousted as they've apparently made a habit of it.

 

Final thought - is there a possibility that this geocacher doesn't quite understand the game? Maybe they don't realize they have to physically visit the cache? Maybe they think that if they're putting the first "found it" log on the Internet, that is the First to Find? In other words, the geocaching only exists on the Internet for them? A strange misunderstanding, to be sure, but perhaps possible?

 

[+Max and 99]

9 minutes ago, Korichnovui said:

CO's could delete the fraudulent claims after checking with the log.

They can? That surprises me. (Assuming you are referring to FTF claim, not a fraudulent Found It).

[+kunarion]

9 hours ago, Korichnovui said:

"First to sign the clean logsheet."

 

There are various exceptions and weirdness and ways it's treated, but that's basically all I've ever considered to be First To Find: The person (cacher or not) who finds it first. Which could be different than the one who beats everyone else to an online log, or the one who is “the first person to find it on a Tuesday” or whatever. There may be team names, a group finds it, but they don't all sign the blank log anyway. A very small percentage are the exceptions.  I like to know when the above stated FTF occurs, because they found my cache as I intended, as close to its original hiding configuration as anyone may ever find it.  If a muggle finds it first, that's reeeeally important to me to know they found it. "The first person to find it on a Tuesday", that guy has less useful information about the state of my cache when I originally placed it.  The guy who logged it online only, he's just clicking buttons. 

 

It doesn't even matter what anyone or everyone says is the way they do it, because there is only one who is the first person to sign the blank log. It really is not all that complicated, and it doesn't even need rules or Official Recognition by Groundspeak. It's just reality. It doesn't need to be a race, and maybe even doesn't need to be a stat. But if it is a stat, then the “First To Find On A Tuesday” is also a stat. So be careful what you wish for.

 

Edited September 15, 2019 by kunarion

[+bruzie]

On 9/15/2019 at 2:56 PM, Korichnovui said:

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the tracking of FTF by project-gc.com

If you put [FTF] or {FTF} in your log, then project-gc.com can keep track of that and generate actual FTF statistics.

 

Project-GC can also track your FTFs if you specify a public bookmark list for your first-to-finds.