Multiple logs = Single FTF or Multiple FTF's???

[+drake72]

Greetings,

For a number of reasons I have created a geocaching container that will have 13 logs in unique parts of the container. Each of the 13 log sheets will have unique and humorous sub-titles and an area which can be signed. In my opinion there should only be one FTF (and everyone in the area knows who that will be) for this container however Mrs Drake72 thinks it should be 13 different FTF opportunities. Then I read the HQ guidelines which is not something that they have guidelines for. What are your opinions?    

Edited September 1, 2020 by drake72

[+Max and 99]

10 minutes ago, drake72 said:

Greetings,

For a number of reasons I have created a geocaching container that will have 13 logs in unique parts of the container. Each of the 13 log sheets will have unique and humorous sub-titles and an area which can be signed. In my opinion there should only be one FTF (and everyone in the area knows who that will be) for this container however Mrs Drake72 thinks it should be 13 different FTF opportunities. Then I read the HQ guidelines which is not something that they have guidelines for. What are your opinions?    

One FTF. 

[+barefootjeff]

FTF is a side game with no rules. It was confusing enough at one new cache I did where I signed what I thought was the front of the logbook and the other cacher who arrived just as I was leaving signed what she thought was the front of the logbook. All resolved amicably afterwards, and I made sure she got in ahead of me on the next new local cache, but 13 logbooks?

[+Max and 99]

More than once I've been the first to sign the official log book only because the FTF accidentally signed a swag item that they thought was a log book. 

[+cerberus1]

50 minutes ago, drake72 said:

For a number of reasons I have created a geocaching container that will have 13 logs in unique parts of the container.

Each of the 13 log sheets will have unique and humorous sub-titles and an area which can be signed. In my opinion there should only be one FTF (and everyone in the area knows who that will be) for this container however Mrs Drake72 thinks it should be 13 different FTF opportunities. Then I read the HQ guidelines which is not something that they have guidelines for. What are your opinions?    

 

Please give one reason.  Thanks.        Sounds like a maintenance nightmare to me.  If you plan on checking signatures once in a while...

Since there is no "rules" on FTF, you can play how you like, but others will too.  Some take that side-game seriously.

We were at a lot of caches FTF (night shifters), so most in the area knew that if we were there at 0600, anyone else after that ain't it.  

Even those pesky "one of 50 film cans inside this 50cal has the log" caches, we'd leave something so all knew who was there first.  

 

 

 

 

[+niraD]

1 hour ago, drake72 said:

What are your opinions?  

Multi-stage caches have enough trouble with "helpful" people adding "replacement" logs to the non-final stages, and seekers logging the caches as found when they've found only non-final stages. There is no need for the CO to promote this kind of confusion by adding logs to the non-final stages in advance.

[+baer2006]

My opinion: Single FTF. "First to find" should refer to the cache, and not one of several logbooks.

But as others have said, there are no "rules" for the FTF game anyway. If someone claims "FTF" in their log, there is basically nothing which the CO or other finders can do about this if they disagree with the FTF statement.

[+dprovan]

So you mean there are 13 logs, and the seeker can find any one of them to claim the find? Sure, celebrate the first signature on every log, although I'm not sure how you're going to determine who that is if they don't say something in the find log.

 

But just to avoid a problem, I'd celebrate the very first finder more than the subsequent first signers.

[+on4bam]

There can only be 1 FTF even if people claim they were FTF in a group.

As for the different logbooks, it will be fun seeing all the online logs but it will also create uncertainty for some finders. We even saw people signing the paper that's saying "this is not the logbook, keep searching" and then claiming the find online. Some newbies finding stage 1 of a multi sometimes claim a find.

You'd better make sure it's 100% clear what the real logbook(s) is/are.

 

 

[+Goldenwattle]

10 minutes ago, on4bam said:

There can only be 1 FTF even if people claim they were FTF in a group.

As for the different logbooks, it will be fun seeing all the online logs but it will also create uncertainty for some finders. We even saw people signing the paper that's saying "this is not the logbook, keep searching" and then claiming the find online. Some newbies finding stage 1 of a multi sometimes claim a find.

You'd better make sure it's 100% clear what the real logbook(s) is/are.

 

 

Locally here, everyone who was searching together for the FTF claims it, and that's excepted practice.

[+on4bam]

2 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Locally here, everyone who was searching together for the FTF claims it, and that's excepted practice.

Like a bicycle team in a race all claim the win if one of the teammembers wins? Let"s not get into that again, it's been discussed before.

 

 

[+Goldenwattle]

2 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Like a bicycle team in a race all claim the win if one of the teammembers wins? Let"s not get into that again, it's been discussed before.

 

 

Like the winning bicycle team.

[+frostengel]

My answer is:

 

No FTF at all!

 

But the loggers can log what ever they want so even if the sixtieth finder would log FTF (for some reason, maybe he's drunk ;-)) it's his thing not yours. It's not your decision what the finders see as FTF - you can write a suggestion in the listing but you can't force the logs.

[+on4bam]

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Like the winning bicycle team.

You saw Bottas win the F1 race in Belgium yesterday? Neither did I. His team mate won though.

 

[+TmdAndGG]

 

3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Locally here, everyone who was searching together for the FTF claims it, and that's excepted practice.

It's the same around here.

I like it like that.

[+TmdAndGG]

1 hour ago, on4bam said:

You saw Bottas win the F1 race in Belgium yesterday? Neither did I. His team mate won though.

 

You seem to like comparing an actual competitive sport to a game/hobby. Nice move.

Edited August 31, 2020 by TmdAndGG

[+on4bam]

5 minutes ago, TmdAndGG said:

You seem to like comparing an actual competitive sport to a game/hobby. Nice move.

Because FTF hounds see it as competitive.

 

[+TmdAndGG]

18 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Because FTF hounds see it as competitive.

 

You really think every single FTF hound sees the side game as competitive?

I like to get FTFs. Does that automatically make me a first to find hound?

If I meet someone out in the field, searching for the cache, and I find it first, I'd be happy to share Co-FTF with them.

If I meet someone out in the field, searching for the cache,  and they found it first, I'm still claiming Co-FTF and there's nothing they can do about it.

Do you think I see the game as competitive? I don't.

There are plenty of other people out there like this.

I just like to try to be friendly when I meet other people out geocaching, regardless of the situation.

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, on4bam said:

Because FTF hounds see it as competitive.

Geocaching should be friendly. I don't want to play your competitive game. Who gets to claim FTF in your game, the person who pointed at a likely hide, the person who followed those instructions and is first to place their hand on the cache, but wouldn't have found the cache without the other person suggesting that place?  Or the person who snatches the cache out of another's hand and gets their name first on the log? Yes, this discussion has been had. Don't complicate it; everyone who was there first and searching can remain friendly and claim FTF, and all leave smiling. No need for pushing and shoving, which with your rules, this sounds like it could potentially lead to.

And as I said, where I live, people happily share FTFs, keeping the game friendly. Yes, they all rush to be FTF, but if several turn up fine, all search, all remain friends and get the FTF. Then stand around chatting.

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, TmdAndGG said:

You seem to like comparing an actual competitive sport to a game/hobby. 

Veering OT...

Well, there are at least two third-party sites that claim FTF in stats.  Are you saying that stats have nothing to do with competition ?    

If that's the case, the site wouldn't have "points" as smilies.   

We don't consider this hobby competition now, but FTF for the other 2/3rds was serious.  We became PM just for notifications for FTFs.

 

We started the FTF side-game because other cachers in the area were happy-as-a-clam that the local "FTF King" was whining about "those new people" at every event.     They even mailed, asking the other 2/3rds to keep it up.     

Night-shifters, it was easy.  He finally started heading out at 0600, the other 2/3rds would head out at lunch time (or around 0200).

It was nuts enough that I stopped counting at 350.

 if there are two logs, and both of us are picking one up ... if the cache is under your log,  you're FTF.  

Guess I don't understand how anyone can dispute that...

[+dprovan]

3 hours ago, on4bam said:

You saw Bottas win the F1 race in Belgium yesterday? Neither did I. His team mate won though.

Very selective. The correct race analogy is a relay race, not individual competitors that team up for reasons other than winning as a group. Although the even more obvious example is team sports. In fact, now that I think about it, you had to dig really deep to come up with a sports example where there's a team, but individuals still win. Most sports with teams, the team really and truly wins as a unit, thus being the perfect case[ for a group claiming FTF.

 

But I agree we shouldn't bother to go into it again. You'll just lose again. :-)

[+Max and 99]

I've seen large groups of people who all find a new cache on the same day, at different times, agree to all log first to find. 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

7 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

I've seen large groups of people who all find a new cache on the same day, at different times, agree to all log first to find. 

 

What I find interesting is that when people geocache as a team they'll claim that the "team" was FTF but when it comes to logging the they all become individual geocachers again, each claiming to be FTF.  The same thing happens with divide an conquer practices are employed by a "team" of geocachers that have split up to find different groups of caches.  Somehow, when it comes time to log finds, the team dissolves and each cacher individually logs a found it on every cache found by any member of "the team".  

[+funkymunkyzone]

13 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

What I find interesting is that when people geocache as a team they'll claim that the "team" was FTF but when it comes to logging the they all become individual geocachers again, each claiming to be FTF.  The same thing happens with divide an conquer practices are employed by a "team" of geocachers that have split up to find different groups of caches.  Somehow, when it comes time to log finds, the team dissolves and each cacher individually logs a found it on every cache found by any member of "the team".  

 

Two very different situations, one where they were present when a cache was found, and the other where they werent... but im not sure what you expect them to do when logging, as there is only one way to log a cache: from your account. There is no team logging on the website or app.

 

Edit to add: divide and conquer isn't geocaching, but that's another topic...

Edited August 31, 2020 by funkymunkyzone

[+NYPaddleCacher]

5 minutes ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

Two very different situations, one where they were present when a cache was found, and the other where they werent... but im not sure what you expect them to do when logging, as there is only one way to log a cache: from your account. There is no team logging on the website or app.

Sure, the scenarios are different but in both instances, players are claiming individual credit for something done as a team.   

 

Yes,  there is only one way to log a cache;  as an individual.  Players know that, yet they don't limit their logs to individual accomplishments.   

[+chuck4564]

What would happen to the plan if one cacher signed several or even all 13 logs?

 

Since the FTF side game is an activity without universally accepted rules it will forever be fraught with differing perspectives. Round and round we go.

[+funkymunkyzone]

1 hour ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Sure, the scenarios are different but in both instances, players are claiming individual credit for something done as a team.   

 

Yes,  there is only one way to log a cache;  as an individual.  Players know that, yet they don't limit their logs to individual accomplishments.   

 

I still don't get what you're trying to argue.  It seems as if you want to denigrate the efforts of cachers who might make a find as part of a group.  I mean to what standard do you think their logs should aspire to? Is there some specific format you'd like to see that ensures that it's clear it was this team or that or whatever?  I don't get it.  I happily cache by myself or in a group and I usually mention the rest of the group if that's how it was.  Sometimes I forget - are you suggesting I'm trying to take more credit than I'm due?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

28 minutes ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

I still don't get what you're trying to argue.  It seems as if you want to denigrate the efforts of cachers who might make a find as part of a group.  I mean to what standard do you think their logs should aspire to? Is there some specific format you'd like to see that ensures that it's clear it was this team or that or whatever?  I don't get it.  I happily cache by myself or in a group and I usually mention the rest of the group if that's how it was.  Sometimes I forget - are you suggesting I'm trying to take more credit than I'm due?

 

I'm not trying to stop people from caching as a group but I'm well aware that some that are caching as a group are intentionally gaming the system by creating an adhoc team specifically for increasing find counts,  to claim credit for finding the cache before others that didn't happen to be part of a group, or to add a 5T cache to their profile when all they did was stand around and watch someone climb a tree.   I'm not advocating a specific solution.   Forgetting to mention that you were part of group when finding a cache is one thing.   Creating an adhoc group so that  several people are logging with a team  name, but individually claiming finds is quite another.   I would like to see a bit more honesty and integrity.  

[+funkymunkyzone]

14 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

I'm not trying to stop people from caching as a group but I'm well aware that some that are caching as a group are intentionally gaming the system by creating an adhoc team specifically for increasing find counts,  to claim credit for finding the cache before others that didn't happen to be part of a group, or to add a 5T cache to their profile when all they did was stand around and watch someone climb a tree.   I'm not advocating a specific solution.   Forgetting to mention that you were part of group when finding a cache is one thing.   Creating an adhoc group so that  several people are logging with a team  name, but individually claiming finds is quite another.   I would like to see a bit more honesty and integrity.  

 

Well that's quite a stretch from the topic at hand but ok... So from what you're saying about honesty and integrity, and apparently a ban on adhoc groups, im guessing if you are out caching and happen upon another cacher searching for the same cache as you, if they find it, you will never log a found it yourself, because you didn't find it, they did...?  Even if you went back later its too late, they found it and you know where it is because they showed you, so you can never truly find it yourself... lol

[+barefootjeff]

2 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I'm not trying to stop people from caching as a group but I'm well aware that some that are caching as a group are intentionally gaming the system by creating an adhoc team specifically for increasing find counts,  to claim credit for finding the cache before others that didn't happen to be part of a group, or to add a 5T cache to their profile when all they did was stand around and watch someone climb a tree. 

 

Would you also begrudge a tall cacher handing a high-placed cache down to a short cacher? Or someone retrieving a cache at ground level for another with arthritis who can't easily stoop? Or one giving a helping hand to another on a steep climb? Or someone helping a wheelchair-bound cacher access a few >T1 caches? You mention T5s, but most of those around here are boat access, so is it also wrong to get a ride in someone else's boat to one of those?

 

All the group caching trips I've done have been about having a good time with a bunch of friends and sometimes getting to those tougher caches where attempting them alone is too dangerous. And yes, if I'm with a group I always mention that in my log. It's not about getting some particular terrain rating on my profile, it's about experiencing some wonderful caches that I wouldn't be able to get to alone and sharing those experiences in my logs and photos.

[+colleda]

The FTF novelty for me  wore off a long time ago. I recently scored 2 FTFs as I just happened to be in the area a day after they were published. I was very surprised they hadn't been found sooner but I'm beginning to think that FTFing  is wearing off among local cachers.

[+Goldenwattle]

7 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

What I find interesting is that when people geocache as a team they'll claim that the "team" was FTF but when it comes to logging the they all become individual geocachers again, each claiming to be FTF.  The same thing happens with divide an conquer practices are employed by a "team" of geocachers that have split up to find different groups of caches.  Somehow, when it comes time to log finds, the team dissolves and each cacher individually logs a found it on every cache found by any member of "the team".  

Wrong, at least where I live. The practice is, "FTF with...and list other names.' So not logging as though they are the only FTF, but naming people, as in a team win. As in many sports, a team wins.

Imagine, a game of football and John Smith made the final run and crossed the line and so won the game (I actually don't watch football but I think that's what happens). Do you ignore the rest of the team that helped get him there? Only John Smith gets to stand on the winner's podium. Bad luck the rest of the team.

Edited September 1, 2020 by Goldenwattle

[+barefootjeff]

4 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Wrong, at least here. The practice is, "FTF with...and list other names.' So not logging as though they are the only FTF, but naming people, as in a team win. As in many sports, a team wins.

 

Yes. I recently logged a "FTF" on a new cache in the Watagan Mountains. The other two passed me on the road and reached the cache a minute or two before I got to GZ, and I'd have been content to claim 3TF, but they insisted on making it a joint FTF. Here's my log in full:

 

 

In these parts at least, FTFs aren't competitive, they're just an opportunity for a mini-event which is extra special at the moment since we can't hold regular events.

 

[+Goldenwattle]

17 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Yes. I recently logged a "FTF" on a new cache in the Watagan Mountains. The other two passed me on the road and reached the cache a minute or two before I got to GZ, and I'd have been content to claim 3TF, but they insisted on making it a joint FTF. Here's my log in full:

 

 

In these parts at least, FTFs aren't competitive, they're just an opportunity for a mini-event which is extra special at the moment since we can't hold regular events.

 

I have arrived after the cache has been found and even though the finders are still there (likely chatting) I have never claimed FTF. If they handed it to me and insisted I share the FTF I might consider it, but otherwise not. A shared FTF is when I have arrived in time, before the cache is found, to share the search. (I did think it mean though when two fitter (and younger) cachers passed me going up a steep hill and got the FTF before me. I would have likely waited and offered the slower persona share of the FTF. They didn't .)

Nothing against you sharing the FTF. That's the way it was.

[+barefootjeff]

17 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I have arrived after the cache has been found and even though the finders are still there (likely chatting) I have never claimed FTF. If they handed it to me and insisted I share the FTF I might consider it, but otherwise not. A shared FTF is when I have arrived in time, before the cache is found, to share the search. (I did think it mean though when two fitter (and younger) cachers passed me going up a steep hill and got the FTF before me. I would have likely waited and offered the slower persona share of the FTF. They didn't .)

Nothing against you sharing the FTF. That's the way it was.

 

Yeah, on that one I initially didn't say anything in my log about the joint FTF but one of the others messaged me, insisting that I add it. I don't keep any tally of FTFs or use the special notation that project-gc recognises - it reckons I've never had any - there just a bit of fun when a new cache is published.

[+cerberus1]

4 hours ago, colleda said:

The FTF novelty for me  wore off a long time ago. I recently scored 2 FTFs as I just happened to be in the area a day after they were published.

I was very surprised they hadn't been found sooner but I'm beginning to think that FTFing  is wearing off among local cachers.

 

Same here.  If I'm ever FTF now it's usually something pretty-far off, but there's even a FTF cacher for those too now.    

We figure it's good to let them have at it.   Beta testing for new app cachers with no finds not all that fun anymore.

 - And that's if the cache was even placed when published.   We noticed the same old-time FTFers are letting others do those first. 

[+dprovan]

15 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Sure, the scenarios are different but in both instances, players are claiming individual credit for something done as a team.

In the Olympics, every member of the team gets an individual medal.

 

15 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

I've seen large groups of people who all find a new cache on the same day, at different times, agree to all log first to find.

Yeah, pretty silly. But, whatever. No skin of my nose, so I just shrug my shoulders.

 

7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Yeah, on that one I initially didn't say anything in my log about the joint FTF but one of the others messaged me, insisting that I add it.

Weird. I can't imagine anyone insisting, and I can't really think of a reason I'd acquiesce.

[+on4bam]

20 hours ago, TmdAndGG said:

You really think every single FTF hound sees the side game as competitive?

 

I just like to try to be friendly when I meet other people out geocaching, regardless of the situation.

 

1. Where did I write that? If I say birds fly have I said everything that flies is a bird?

 

19 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I don't want to play your competitive game.

 

Which competitive game is mine? If you had read any of my posts anywhere on these forums you'd know I don't compete with anyone.

Point is that FTF hounds are the ones heading out within seconds of receiving a notification and often find they are not alone at the cache. In order to "claim FTF" they "team up" for a few minutes so they can claim a "team FTF" instead of FTF for the one that retrieved the log first and STF, TTF  for the next ones.

 

[+IceColdUK]

14 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Point is that FTF hounds are the ones heading out within seconds of receiving a notification and often find they are not alone at the cache. In order to "claim FTF" they "team up" for a few minutes so they can claim a "team FTF" instead of FTF for the one that retrieved the log first and STF, TTF  for the next ones.

 

 

If I'm with others for a FTF - whether planned or by happy coincidence - then all of our names are added as a single FTF entry in the logbook, and I'll claim a 'joint FTF' in my online log, listing those with me at the time.  ('Teaming up'?  I guess.)

 

If only one person was 'allowed' to claim an FTF, that would just introduce such a weird element of competition at GZ.  Some would be all elbows trying to get there first, while politer / less-competitive cachers would be standing back, saying 'after you', as the cache is found in the only place it could possibly be hidden!  That would just seem bizarre to me.

 

Obviously, it's up to the individual to decide whether claiming an FTF is 'justified' or not.  For me, if I'm there when a cache is found, I claim a Find.  If I'm there when it's first found, I claim a FTF.  Simples!

[+on4bam]

4 minutes ago, IceColdUK said:

while politer / less-competitive cachers would be standing back, saying 'after you',

 

Yup, that would be me IF I were to run out immediately, which I don't.

 

[+TmdAndGG]

3 hours ago, on4bam said:

23 hours ago, TmdAndGG said:

You really think every single FTF hound sees the side game as competitive?

 

I just like to try to be friendly when I meet other people out geocaching, regardless of the situation.

 

1. Where did I write that? If I say birds fly have I said everything that flies is a bird?

You said FTF hounds see it as competitive. I figured by that you meant all FTF hounds, but apparently not. Maybe you should have been a little more specific.

 

Edited September 1, 2020 by TmdAndGG

[+niraD]

3 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

If I'm with others for a FTF - whether planned or by happy coincidence - then all of our names are added as a single FTF entry in the logbook, and I'll claim a 'joint FTF' in my online log, listing those with me at the time.  ('Teaming up'?  I guess.)

Admittedly, I don't have much experience with FTFs. I have two FTFs that I found by myself, which were puzzles that had been out a few days, where I was the first to come up with the final solution.

 

And I have one FTF where there were others at GZ with me. We all arrived as soon as the park opened. I happened to spot the cache first. The others who were there logged online before I did, and logged 2TF, 3TF, etc. None of us had heard of the idea of "sharing" the FTF among everyone who shows up at GZ.

Edited September 1, 2020 by niraD

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, niraD said:

None of us had heard of the idea of "sharing" the FTF among everyone who shows up at GZ.

You should have added, 'where you live', because that is not the same everywhere. As I wrote previously, "where I live, people happily share FTFs."

[+niraD]

13 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

2 hours ago, niraD said:

None of us had heard of the idea of "sharing" the FTF among everyone who shows up at GZ.

You should have added, 'where you live', because that is not the same everywhere. As I wrote previously, "where I live, people happily share FTFs."

I thought it was clear that "us" referred to the local geocachers who showed up as soon as the park opened to search for a new cache.

[+CAVinoGal]

12 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

If I'm with others for a FTF - whether planned or by happy coincidence - then all of our names are added as a single FTF entry in the logbook, and I'll claim a 'joint FTF' in my online log, listing those with me at the time.  ('Teaming up'?  I guess.)

...

Obviously, it's up to the individual to decide whether claiming an FTF is 'justified' or not.  For me, if I'm there when a cache is found, I claim a Find.  If I'm there when it's first found, I claim a FTF.  Simples!

^^^ THIS  ^^^

We've (we, meaning hubby and me) been FTF on several caches in lour local area - I wouldn't classify us as "hounds", but if the timing works we'll go and try to be the first on ones that pop up nearby (within 5 miles or so).  If another cacher happens by while we are there, or if we happen by while someone else is there at GZ, we'll search together and all claim FTF (for what it's worth, a stat in Project GC, and nothing at geocaching.com!).  

 

We've been heading back to our car after signing first on the logsheet, and met other cachers heading in - in that case the container has already been placed back where we found it and is waiting to be found again. No shared FTF on those types!  

 

Some cachers don't care about FTF, but if we are all together at GZ and there is a blank logsheet, we always offer to share co-FTF; it costs us nothing.  And cachers around here are very willing to share FTF's, which we will claim if we are present when the logsheet is first signed.

[+barefootjeff]

21 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

^^^ THIS  ^^^

We've (we, meaning hubby and me) been FTF on several caches in lour local area - I wouldn't classify us as "hounds", but if the timing works we'll go and try to be the first on ones that pop up nearby (within 5 miles or so).  If another cacher happens by while we are there, or if we happen by while someone else is there at GZ, we'll search together and all claim FTF (for what it's worth, a stat in Project GC, and nothing at geocaching.com!).  

 

We've been heading back to our car after signing first on the logsheet, and met other cachers heading in - in that case the container has already been placed back where we found it and is waiting to be found again. No shared FTF on those types!  

 

Some cachers don't care about FTF, but if we are all together at GZ and there is a blank logsheet, we always offer to share co-FTF; it costs us nothing.  And cachers around here are very willing to share FTF's, which we will claim if we are present when the logsheet is first signed.

 

Yes, much the same here. Early yesterday afternoon, two new caches near Norah Head were published. I headed off after reading the descriptions and uploading the GPX files to my GPSr, but it's a 50km drive so by the time I got to the first one, two others had already claimed FTF. They had both arrived at about the same time so searched together and claimed a joint FTF. They were long gone by the time I arrived so I was well and truly out of the running and happy enough to be the third to find, better than driving all that way for a couple of DNFs. I wasn't looking or even hoping for a FTF on either of them, just pleased they popped up and gave me some enjoyment on a nice sunny afternoon. FTFs are just the icing on the cake when they happen but not something I actively pursue.

[+The Jester]

Sometimes it is easy to say who "found" it first in a group, other times not.  I've been in groups where I could see the cache but not reach it, while another makes the grab from a closer/easier spot.  So who gets FTF, and who STF - me for  "seeing" it first or them for putting hands on it first?  Much easier to cooperate and share the 'glory'.

[+barefootjeff]

10 minutes ago, The Jester said:

Sometimes it is easy to say who "found" it first in a group, other times not.  I've been in groups where I could see the cache but not reach it, while another makes the grab from a closer/easier spot.  So who gets FTF, and who STF - me for  "seeing" it first or them for putting hands on it first?  Much easier to cooperate and share the 'glory'.

 

Yes. One person retrieves the container from its hiding place but is using their other hand to stop themselves falling so they pass it to a second person who opens it and then passes the logbook to a third person who's the one with the pen. Something very much like this happened on the group trip to my 1000th cache, although it wasn't a FTF.

[+Goldenwattle]

39 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Yes. One person retrieves the container from its hiding place but is using their other hand to stop themselves falling so they pass it to a second person who opens it and then passes the logbook to a third person who's the one with the pen. Something very much like this happened on the group trip to my 1000th cache, although it wasn't a FTF.

Or someone spots the cache and and says, 'There it is', but another person reaches for it and is first to get their hands on it. Too complicated. Everyone who is searching together can claim FTF; the same as members of the winning sports team all claim the win.

Also what about when more than one person spots it at the same time? Under some people's idea of only one FTF, do they have to toss for who can claim it.

[+barefootjeff]

13 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Under some people's idea of only one FTF, do they have to toss for who can claim it.

 

Pistols at 20 paces.