Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Whistler'sMama

How can someone "find" an archived cache?

Recommended Posts

I received an email this morning from Geocaching about a find on an old cache that has been archived. I haven't lived near that location for many years.

 

The cache is at this address: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCT6MM_you-can-do-it-we-wont-help-1

 

I've copied and pasted the email below. Doesn't it seem weird that someone would take 10 years to log their find? I too am a procrastinator, but I logged my finds pretty quickly when I was more actively geocaching. Or do people look for archived caches and log finds to bump up their stats?

 

You Can Do It, We Won't Help #1 (GCT6MM) has a new log:

·         Logged by: RATCHET_WXJ

·         Log Type: Found it

·         Date: 03/06/2010

·         Location: British Columbia, Canada

·         Type: Multi-cache

Log:

Nice easy one for a beginner like me.

Went after store hours to make it a bit simpler

TFTHeh!!

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Whistler'sMama said:

I received an email this morning from Geocaching about a find on an old cache that has been archived. I haven't lived near that location for many years.

 

The cache is at this address: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCT6MM_you-can-do-it-we-wont-help-1

 

I've copied and pasted the email below. Doesn't it seem weird that someone would take 10 years to log their find? I too am a procrastinator, but I logged my finds pretty quickly when I was more actively geocaching. Or do people look for archived caches and log finds to bump up their stats?

 

You Can Do It, We Won't Help #1 (GCT6MM) has a new log:

 

·         Logged by: RATCHET_WXJ

 

·         Log Type: Found it

 

·         Date: 03/06/2010

 

·         Location: British Columbia, Canada

 

·         Type: Multi-cache

 

Log:

 

Nice easy one for a beginner like me.

 

Went after store hours to make it a bit simpler

 

TFTHeh!!

Sometimes kids grow up (usually), and decide to have their own account, backlogging the founds they made with parents. Or maybe a couple got divorced, or each want their own account, and are backlogging on their new accounts. Sometimes someone went geocaching with a friend, just now decided it sounded like fun, and are logging what they found back then.

Just some possibilities.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

If this cache is archived the CO should have removed the litter. If they haven't done the right thing and left the litter behind to disintegrate (plastic into micro plastic), anyone finding it can log it. If the cache has been removed, the CO can delete the log, as obviously there was nothing to find. If it's still in place (naughty CO) the CO should now finally be responsible and go and pick up their geo-litter.

 

If on the other hand, the log was dated back over ten years to before the cache was archived, as the CO I would expect the log to be comprehensive enough to explain why they are logging so late and to convince me this is genuine. Otherwise, I would consider deleting the log and think it armchair logging.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

If this cache is archived the CO should have removed the litter. If they haven't done the right thing and left the litter behind to disintegrate (plastic into micro plastic), anyone finding it can log it. If the cache has been removed, the CO can delete the log, as obviously there was nothing to find. If it's still in place (naughty CO) the CO should now finally be responsible and go and pick up their geo-litter.

 

If on the other hand, the log was dated back over ten years to before the cache was archived, as the CO I would expect the log to be comprehensive enough to explain why they are logging so late and to convince me this is genuine. Otherwise, I would consider deleting the log and think it armchair logging.

If the log doesn't state the reason, as a CO I would message them and ask about the ten year delay.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

If the log doesn't state the reason, as a CO I would message them and ask about the ten year delay.

Considering contacting the logger is part of "consider deleting the log and think it armchair logging". If I hadn't considered deleting this log, I wouldn't bother contacting them.

Share this post


Link to post

Another possibility is they've logged the wrong cache, perhaps mistyping the GC code in a search or something. Just send them a message asking them to satisfy your curiosity, as most times like this it turns out either to be a legitimate reason or an honest mistake.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post

They have actually entered a (remote) past date, so it seems strange this would be an inadvertent GC code log. Maybe they fired up an old GPS and the log was in there. I would query it, I think in the case of a 10 year late log the onus can be on the finder to satisfy the CO that their log should stand.... and there needs to be a reasonable reason..... which should be offered up front in their log I think.

Maybe the website could query logs backdated by a certain amount with the splashscreen suggesting what they should do, especially on an archived cache.....

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had a log on one of my cahes stating they had found it with another cacher about 5 years before,  I emailed the other cacher who responded that his son was logging all of the finds that where made with his father. Needless to say I let the new (old) log stand.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

The first thing I do with a log like that is loop back in the cache logs to see who else logged that date, or check their find history to see what else they logged that date. If it seems consistent, then I won't care. If it's that backdated, the log won't affect anyone but them, and if it appears consistent, I'm not going to demand evidence else delete the log. If it's a recent log that could imply the wrong state of the cache (especially if it's the latest log), and it does not seem like a valid find, that's a different story...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/5/2020 at 7:57 PM, Whistler'sMama said:

Doesn't it seem weird that someone would take 10 years to log their find?

I too am a procrastinator, but I logged my finds pretty quickly when I was more actively geocaching.

Or do people look for archived caches and log finds to bump up their stats?

 

Not at all, we see that a lot with people who were kids caching with the family. Thousands of back-dated finds could take a while.  ;)

They usually mention why they're back-dating logs though...

I don't feel this person "procrastinated", since they wrote in a specific date.    Worth an email if it bugs you that much.   :)

 

We have a local that leaves a pic of signed log on every cache found because they cache more than log (but not ten years back...).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I know of Ratchet, so I'll provide some insight. His wife (I presume - they're always caching together) caches under the name "EEVAH" and his son (again, I presume) caches under the name "FERRET_FMR". He himself used to cache under the username "RATCHET_FMR" but changed it recently.  This leads me to believe that he's not a kid back-logging or part of a caching-team that broke up. 

 

I also haven't ever heard gossip (can't think of a better word) of him ever forging cache logs, so I'd guess that it's (a) a legitimate mistake, or (b) a forgotten "found-it" log. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have logged about 3 or 4 archived caches. In all cases the owner had archived them without removing them and I want to put cache in the general area, so I went searching for the caches, in some cases leaving the new caches in the locations that I found the archived caches in as they were still there after 4 years of inactivity. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/5/2020 at 8:20 PM, Goldenwattle said:

If this cache is archived the CO should have removed the litter. If they haven't done the right thing and left the litter behind to disintegrate (plastic into micro plastic), anyone finding it can log it. If the cache has been removed, the CO can delete the log, as obviously there was nothing to find. If it's still in place (naughty CO) the CO should now finally be responsible and go and pick up their geo-litter.

 

Sometimes a CO goes looking for the cache to remove and they can't find it. At some future date a cacher accidentally finds it, 100 feet from where it was originally hidden. Either moved my critters or weather and sometimes both.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, it's odd that they'd wait 10 years to log it, but perhaps they just came across a note in their caching bag or something.  Best way to find out is to ask 'em, I'd say.

 

I'm a little surprised that there is any concern about the cache now, given how it got archived, but c'est la vie.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I recently logged on that I had found in 2013 but forgot to log back then!  And my son went to all of the old ones we'd found together and logged them with his new account--most of those were archived.

Share this post


Link to post

I photograph the logs and post them in my OM logs. Therefore I could go back and check the photograph of the log. If there, it's okay; if not, I would check others who logged that day to see if they mentioned the logger. If they did the log stays. This is presuming, that is, the date they are logging is before the cache was archived and removed. If after the cache removal date and if it's been removed, I would delete without messaging them, as there was nothing there to find.

However in my case the two caches I have archived, it's a little tricky. One, a nano (my only ever nano - I was a beginner and thought them cool. I know better now.), went missing, but I can presume this really has gone missing because the grass about it is regularly mown and cleaned up, but the other I might need to check with the claimant. I archived it after a load of garbage was dumped on top. It is possibly this garbage could have been removed since and the cache is still there. At the time I was unwilling to arrive with a shovel and start digging for it, so I archived the cache and I haven't been back to check.

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

One, a nano (my only ever nano - I was a beginner and thought them cool. I know better now.)

 

At the risk of veering off-topic, I just want to say that I've seen a couple of nano hides that were VERY cleverly done, one in particular comes to mind and has 146 well-deserved favorites (72%).   I will say a lot of nanos are hidden where another size would work just as well or bettter, and the nano makes it just plain evil.  But I have seen some where the nano container works very well.

 

Back on topic - I have a notification set for caches around me that get archived, for a few reasons.  Primarily, I watch those that are reviewer archived for CO non-attention; if feasible, I "clean up" if the cache is still there, especially if it is one I have already found and I know where to look for the abandoned container.  Some CO's archive their own and do take care of their geo-litter; many that are reviewer archived due to non-attention still have bits and pieces and sometimes whole containers eft behind.  Sometimes it's just junk, but I have found a few reusable containers now and then.

 

Some are in a location I may want to use for one of my OWN caches, and I am aware the spot is now open.  For some caches, the notification serves as an "Oh, well, guess I won't ever find THAT cache!" and I can take it off my to do list.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

i once got a state souvenir from Minnesota... in between 2 finds the same day in Texas!!!   I had slipped a character when logging. I went back and corrected my errant log.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, ras_oscar said:

i once got a state souvenir from Minnesota... in between 2 finds the same day in Texas!!!   I had slipped a character when logging. I went back and corrected my errant log.

 Some did that intentionally because correcting the "errant" log doesn't remove the souvenir.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I assure  you I do not want my account to show anything  did not earn.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

I've seen a couple of nano hides that were VERY cleverly done, one in particular comes to mind and has 146 well-deserved favorites (72%).

Of all the nanos I've found I can only think of one like that. It was placed outside a brothel, strategically on a piece of sculpture. Many of the rest just seemed lazy to me, as a better cache could have been placed. But to be fair to (some) of the placers, they were beginners; finds only in the three figures at most, and like me when I placed my nano, likely thought a nano was 'cool' and knew no better.

8 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

I have a notification set for caches around me that get archived, for a few reasons.  Primarily, I watch those that are reviewer archived for CO non-attention; if feasible, I "clean up" if the cache is still there, especially if it is one I have already found and I know where to look for the abandoned container.  Some CO's archive their own and do take care of their geo-litter; many that are reviewer archived due to non-attention still have bits and pieces and sometimes whole containers eft behind. 

That is good of you to do.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ras_oscar said:

i once got a state souvenir from Minnesota... in between 2 finds the same day in Texas!!!   I had slipped a character when logging. I went back and corrected my errant log.

 

I did that once and got a German state.  Geocaching removed the souvenir for me.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Of all the nanos I've found I can only think of one like that. It was placed outside a brothel, strategically on a piece of sculpture. Many of the rest just seemed lazy to me, as a better cache could have been placed. But to be fair to (some) of the placers, they were beginners; finds only in the three figures at most, and like me when I placed my nano, likely thought a nano was 'cool' and knew no better.

 

I've been caching since early 2001, and have yet to learn that nano's aren't "cool" or "to know better."  I agree you have the right to that opinion, but reject the implied "everyone knows that any other cache is better than a nano."  There is no universal consensus on what is a "better cache."  A bigger cache is not always a good choice, and a nano is not always a bad choice.  I've seen many a lazy hide using an ammo can - toss it behind any old tree/stump/log or under a random bush.  It all depends on the situation and setting, and what the CO is trying to do.  Personally, I really don't like needle-in-haystack hides, but in the right setting I've been known to work thru one (like the group hunt of blinky hidden in plain sight on an exterior, 4 story staircase on a parking garage - solo I would have quit fairly quickly, but with the group we had fun not quitting until someone found it).  I'm not saying there's no such thing as a poor cache, but I won't subscribe to classing a size of cache as poor or bad.

 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, The Jester said:

I've been caching since early 2001, and have yet to learn that nano's aren't "cool" or "to know better."  I agree you have the right to that opinion, but reject the implied "everyone knows that any other cache is better than a nano."  There is no universal consensus on what is a "better cache."  A bigger cache is not always a good choice, and a nano is not always a bad choice.  I've seen many a lazy hide using an ammo can - toss it behind any old tree/stump/log or under a random bush.  It all depends on the situation and setting, and what the CO is trying to do.  Personally, I really don't like needle-in-haystack hides, but in the right setting I've been known to work thru one (like the group hunt of blinky hidden in plain sight on an exterior, 4 story staircase on a parking garage - solo I would have quit fairly quickly, but with the group we had fun not quitting until someone found it).  I'm not saying there's no such thing as a poor cache, but I won't subscribe to classing a size of cache as poor or bad.

 

The ammunition tin allows contents. Trackables can be left in it along with trinkets. And importantly, a decent sized log (the signatures will also be more readable), that is likely to last and not become a sodden mess as many logs I have found in nanos become. Also, it's common to find nano logs full because they are so tiny. The log is often almost unreadable, which makes it difficult to check the logs.  I cannot even come close to considering a nano a better cache than a ammunition tin.

 

I mostly see micros, rather than nanos on stairways, which has proven to me, that micros can be hidden on most metal stairways, and they are far better than placing a nano.

  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/19/2020 at 10:03 PM, Goldenwattle said:

However in my case the two caches I have archived, it's a little tricky. One, a nano (my only ever nano - I was a beginner and thought them cool. I know better now.),

My most favored cache, if I remember correctly, is a nano. It is very cool.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I cannot even come close to considering a nano a better cache than a ammunition tin.

 

There are lots of places a nano works better than an ammo can - in fact, there are many places that an ammo can would be the wrong choice.  The one nano hide I have would never support an ammo can.  Just about any size could be hidden there, but pretty much anything but a nano would found by muggles and vanish.

 

As to trackables, I hid a bowling ball TB "in" a micro size cache once - in fact, I almost placed the cache in the TB (one of the finger holes!).  You just have to be creative (it doesn't hurt that a bowling ball can't be damaged by getting wet).  The first LPC (film can) I found had a bunch of trinkets & TBs under the skirt with it.  I'll repeat my statement, there isn't a universal consensus on what is a better cache - trades and trackables aren't for everyone.

 

Wet and full logs aren't just in nano's, I see them in every size cache.  That's on the CO not the size of the cache.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, The Jester said:

I'll repeat my statement, there isn't a universal consensus on what is a better cache - trades and trackables aren't for everyone.

 

Yes, and what's a great container in one location can be a disaster in another. There's an ammo can hidden in a place subject to a lot of sea spray and after just eighteen months it had turned into this:

 

RustyAmmoCan.jpg.d46b07af284b4bf67a100ce970d55c32.jpg

 

Some of the containers I've used, like the steel cash boxes and even my stainless steel cooking pot, are fine because they're hidden in dry places like caves. Out in the open where they'd be rained upon, or in a creek gully where the air would be constantly wringing with moisture, probably not so good. The plastic Sistema containers are generally a good choice around here unless they're in a spot subject to flash flooding in storms where they'll likely float away, or if they're exposed to direct sunlight which will cause the plastic to turn brittle.

 

The biggest problem I've seen with nanos is the logs constantly filling and the rubber seals failing. I've seen some creative nano hides where nothing else would have worked, but they are generally a high maintenance choice. Perhaps one that was protected from the weather and only got a couple of visits a year might be long-lasting, but most locations that isolated don't need a cache that small.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Jester said:

There are lots of places a nano works better than an ammo can - in fact, there are many places that an ammo can would be the wrong choice.  The one nano hide I have would never support an ammo can.  Just about any size could be hidden there, but pretty much anything but a nano would found by muggles and vanish.

 

As to trackables, I hid a bowling ball TB "in" a micro size cache once - in fact, I almost placed the cache in the TB (one of the finger holes!).  You just have to be creative (it doesn't hurt that a bowling ball can't be damaged by getting wet).  The first LPC (film can) I found had a bunch of trinkets & TBs under the skirt with it.  I'll repeat my statement, there isn't a universal consensus on what is a better cache - trades and trackables aren't for everyone.

 

Wet and full logs aren't just in nano's, I see them in every size cache.  That's on the CO not the size of the cache.

 

"I cannot even come close to considering a nano a better cache than a ammunition tin."

When I wrote that, I was not meaning that an ammunition tin could go everywhere that a nano is found. That was not the meaning. The meaning was, that's it's nicer to find an ammunition cache than almost every nano I have ever found. I still consider that many nanos are placed where at least a micro sized cache could also be placed. Perhaps not in full view on that lamppost (we don't have lampposts with covers around the base), but nearby in another hide. Often I have found the nano the lazy (as in lacked thought) choice. I look around and think, there's a better hide, how about there...

Share this post


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

My most favored cache, if I remember correctly, is a nano. It is very cool.

There is always an exception that can be found, but can you say that of most nanos? I too have found great nano hides, but at a much lower percentage than other size caches. At least a small size or larger cache, even if not an interesting hide, had its size in its favour. You can place a TB or trinket in it, and see what other people have left, which gives it some interest. A nano that is not a great cache, has nothing, besides another smilie, going for it. And they are fiddly little @$%#@... :anibad:

Edited by Goldenwattle

Share this post


Link to post

Classic forum off topic-ness! This time it went from finding archived caches to a nano vs ammo-can debate. Cool!:D

  • Funny 3
  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post

As posted elsewhere, my sister and I were hiding new caches on a trail.  I spotted an ammo can!  It was the final of a multi that she and my brother had DNFed four years earlier.  The first stage had gone missing, and the CO did nothing, and it was archived.  She used the ammo can on a new hide on a different trail.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

When someone mentioned finding an archived cache container near one of my puzzle caches, I investigated. The CO still has a couple of active caches, one of which I found earlier this year, but they archived a lot overnight (I'm told they were in the Air Force and got stationed elsewhere). So on Saturday on a maintenance trip of 5 of my caches (taking in a first visit to a pub since March...) Junior and I had a quick look for 4 of these archived caches. 3 very quickly discounted as gone or buried in undergrowth, but...

 

https://coord.info/GC165DP

 

nearly 10 years since its last find! A film pot in a hollow at the base of a big old gate post. The dry hidey-hole and the plastified paper meant it was in pretty much perfect condition. 

Share this post


Link to post

This is another manifestation of the fatal flaw of having an officially-sanctioned ALR within the Challenge cache guidelines.

 

You can have Found It logs on Challenge caches after they are archived which aren't really finds at all.

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC44EBQ_latitude-43-challenge

 

Of course it behooves me to mention there is a system that would fix this.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post

Not everyone completes the challenge and signs the physical log in that order.

 

I would suggest that the challenge caches be treated as any other.  If you can find the container and sign the log (which already happens post-archive), and have completed the challenge, you should be able to log the cache as a find whether it's archived or not.  When submitted, I don't think challenge caches are allowed to have 'expiration dates', so that wouldn't be a problem even out into the future.

 

That's a MUCH simpler system than

No need for anyone to modify any software.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/9/2020 at 12:26 PM, frinklabs said:

This is another manifestation of the fatal flaw of having an officially-sanctioned ALR within the Challenge cache guidelines.

 

You can have Found It logs on Challenge caches after they are archived which aren't really finds at all.

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC44EBQ_latitude-43-challenge

 

Of course it behooves me to mention there is a system that would fix this.

 

Oh good grief.

 

If you met the challenge and there is no doubt as to the cache that owns the abandoned container, I say log it. Now go solve a third world problem instead of looking for a problem to shoe-in your ready made solution. ;-)

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

For many ducks, it is a specific discipline - so-called archeocaching. There are even bookmarks of such caches. And of course we are not only dependent on the web, we have our offline databases, not in GSAK but in another system with more options.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Arne1 said:

For many ducks, it is a specific discipline - so-called archeocaching. There are even bookmarks of such caches. And of course we are not only dependent on the web, we have our offline databases, not in GSAK but in another system with more options.

 

I think there are different approaches:

 

You go out and (hopefully) try to find cache boxes of archived caches that are still in place. If you find them years later you might grab the container (if you are sure that the cache isn't listed anywhere else) and clean up the area. That's a good kind of "archeogeocaching".

 

Others take long archvied caches and simply log them online. Worst that can happen is that their log gets deleted but there are good chances that no one will notice (maybe the cache owner isn't active anymore) and they have one more for there statistics. I have even seen this trick: someone logged a "oh no I wanted to this" note when a terrain 5 cache was archived and changed the note to found it years later.

 

Some people would do anything to boast their statistics. The log mentioned in the original post may be one of the second kind or just someone logging an old find he's done with someone else (maybe after a team splitting up) but I think that should be mentioned in such a case so it might be a statitics boost!?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, frostengel said:

 

I think there are different approaches:

 

You go out and (hopefully) try to find cache boxes of archived caches that are still in place. If you find them years later you might grab the container (if you are sure that the cache isn't listed anywhere else) and clean up the area. That's a good kind of "archeogeocaching".

 

Others take long archvied caches and simply log them online. Worst that can happen is that their log gets deleted but there are good chances that no one will notice (maybe the cache owner isn't active anymore) and they have one more for there statistics. I have even seen this trick: someone logged a "oh no I wanted to this" note when a terrain 5 cache was archived and changed the note to found it years later.

 

Some people would do anything to boast their statistics. The log mentioned in the original post may be one of the second kind or just someone logging an old find he's done with someone else (maybe after a team splitting up) but I think that should be mentioned in such a case so it might be a statitics boost!?

There is another reason; the challenge of finding an archived caches. Nothing to do with the statistics. Or if accidentally finding it, then the challenge of working out which cache it was. I have had several of the latter. It was fun working out which cache it is.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

There is another reason; the challenge of finding an archived caches. Nothing to do with the statistics. Or if accidentally finding it, then the challenge of working out which cache it was. I have had several of the latter. It was fun working out which cache it is.

1) YES !!!!

2) If we have a good offline database and information from the bookmark, there is no need to look for what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

There is another reason; the challenge of finding an archived caches. Nothing to do with the statistics. Or if accidentally finding it

 

Pardon, as usual my post wasn't clear enough.

 

There are two kinds of loggers of archived caches:

1) Those who really find the cache box which is still in place. They log it offline and online.

2) Those who simply log archived caches for statistic purposes hoping that noone will delete the log.

 

You are obviously the good type 1 as Arne is.

The log mentioned in the original post might be of type 2. And that's against the rules obviously but they don't care!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Arne1 said:

1) YES !!!!

2) If we have a good offline database and information from the bookmark, there is no need to look for what it is.

I need to look for what cache my find was, as I don't have a list of archived caches. If the log doesn't give the GC number, I photograph the log and cross reference previous finders with this log, and work out what cache this is that way. As for the thought of anyone deleting my log because it's archived, I also then have a photograph of my signature on the log.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, frostengel said:

 

Pardon, as usual my post wasn't clear enough.

 

There are two kinds of loggers of archived caches:

1) Those who really find the cache box which is still in place. They log it offline and online.

2) Those who simply log archived caches for statistic purposes hoping that noone will delete the log.

 

You are obviously the good type 1 as Arne is.

The log mentioned in the original post might be of type 2. And that's against the rules obviously but they don't care!

Ah, I didn't understand what type 2 is, as I never considered the possibility of armchair loggers. I thought you were saying that there was something wrong with searching for archived caches and inferring that was just to get another smiley ("log archived caches for statistic purposes").

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Edit: bad idea, ignore me.  I suppose for the type 2 armchair / archeo logger types, that style of play could be good for people who either have mobility issues or used to be physically active but something happened and now they can't go out caching any more. 

Edited by Unit473L
Removed bad idea in case others read it later and think it's a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Unit473L said:

I suppose for the type 2 armchair / archeo logger types, that style of play could be good for people who either have mobility issues or used to be physically active but something happened and now they can't go out caching any more. 

Not good for anyone. If they can't find even drive-bys, this is not the hobby for them.

What you are saying, is that they could sit there and log cache after cache, anywhere, all over the world, as fast as they can log. Hundreds or more a day.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Unit473L said:

I suppose for the type 2 armchair / archeo logger types, that style of play could be good for people who either have mobility issues or used to be physically active but something happened and now they can't go out caching any more. 

 

Cheating isn't good for any game or hobby...      It's somehow magically-okay now, just because you have mobility issues ?

If they're even still thinking about this hobby after recently becoming immobile,  some do events, and sometimes get more involved in trackables. 

Maybe it's just me, but I don't have a problem telling someone they're a cheater, wheelchair or not.  :)

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Unit473L said:

I suppose for the type 2 armchair / archeo logger types, that style of play could be good for people who either have mobility issues or used to be physically active but something happened and now they can't go out caching any more. 

My favorite caching partner is in a wheelchair. He would not support this statement. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 3

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 4

×
×
  • Create New...