What should cache creators do with old filled out logs?

[+Happy_Terd]

I have been wondering what should cache creators do with the old logs once they are filled up with signatures?  Silly newbie question perhaps; however, silly newbie is curious?

[+Bear and Ragged]

You have no hides on your account?

 

Scan/photograph them, add them to the cache page gallery. (Or another site/page with a link)

 

Some of the older/long standing caches can have some interesting stories in the log, that dont get written in the online log.

If its a newer cache with only "TFTC/date/cachername" logs - Is it worth it?

[+Jayeffel]

I believe you are referring to the logs  in the caches for name and date, you can keep them as mentioned, or you can simply look at the logs and compare with the online logs. If so disposed when you find an online log that does not match the cache log you can contact the  cacher logging to prove it was found or simply deleted that entry. This can be done but many don't - a game with rules but not that strict.

 

But most often by the time you find a full log that needs replacement it is unreadable, torn, and not worth keeping. I have found caches with many pieces of paper in to replace worn out logs.

[+Goldenwattle]

I photograph the logs and add the photographs to an owner maintenance log. I compare signatures and if I don't find the written one I ask the person for some evidence they found the cache. If that can't be supplied I delete their on line log. The uploaded photographs provide proof of who signed and who didn't. I ask them to please point out their signature.

[+Mudfrog]

It's really all up to the individual. I used to keep replaced logbooks because they usually had entries that included nice little stories and/or details of the cache hunt. Unfortunately, those kinds of logs are few and far between these days so most go into the trash.

[+cerberus1]

11 hours ago, Happy_Terd said:

I have been wondering what should cache creators do with the old logs once they are filled up with signatures?  Silly newbie question perhaps; however, silly newbie is curious?

 

First they have to be filled. Can't tell you how many times the other side of the paper logs were untouched after a "log full" note...

Years ago we used to get lengthy logs, sometimes with drawings, poems, or pressed flowers in our logbooks.  People stopped for lunch...

They're worth saving.

Today, you could have a book and there's only names n dates down the page.  Books last years now.  

Our last hides left have large notepads to keep things simple, we're more concerned for their safety and name/date is the norm.

Our simple micros, a bunch in a series, we weren't so picky about logs.  Most were meant to get new folks to learn the hobby, so I'll pitch our log strips when home.   The 5Ts though, you sign the log or get deleted....

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by cerberus1

[+GeoElmo6000]

I used to have a ziploc bag filled with the logs I swapped out of caches, then I realized I never once looked at them, so now I just throw the logs out.  And I threw out the logs in the ziplog bag.

 

I have a notebook that's my logbook for all my events for the last many years which is fun to keep.

[+lee737]

On 9/15/2022 at 1:21 AM, Goldenwattle said:

I photograph the logs and add the photographs to an owner maintenance log.

I do this too, I don't scour through the names for non-signers generally, unless there is a serial armchair account I'm policing....

 

[+barefootjeff]

My caches don't get enough finds for the logbooks to become full, even the original logbook in the 2005 cache I adopted is still only half full, so this is something I've yet to have to deal with. When I've been able to retrieve a cache I've archived (i.e., one that wasn't muggled, washed away or buried in a rockfall), I've kept the logbook as often people have written more than just the date and their name in it and it's something I might want to look back on in the future. I have some shelves in my spare room where my geocaching stuff goes so they end up there along with the spare containers, novelty camo and such.

[+Goldenwattle]

4 hours ago, lee737 said:

I do this too, I don't scour through the names for non-signers generally, unless there is a serial armchair account I'm policing....

 

If you don't check all the names, you might not find those 'serial armchair accounts'. I find that often it's not only one log they don't sign. They are always, 'losing their pen' (must have a grip problem), or their pen is always running out of ink (where do they buy such unreliable pens). Or in one case I know they visit the place (or I think they do), but if they can't find the cache they still log a find. Heck they were there. What does the five star difficulty mean! They were there, therefore they can log a find. (The last 5D scenario I made up, but I bet they would log the find still, going on their past behaviour.) I caught them out when I asked them for a hint to find a cache I had DNF-ed. They couldn't remember, they had found so many, and generally vague. Heck, they 'found' it only on the previous day. However, I it didn't twig then their behaviour. I just thought, what a vague person. It was only when I looked for their signature on logs it twigged. Since then I have found caches they logged a find on, but they didn't sign. Usually the more tricky finds. I have deleted a couple of their logs on my caches for no signature. Others they found and signed.

If I didn't check logs I wouldn't know about these people.

I recently had someone try to log a find on a virtual case of mine. Not a beginner, but someone with a reasonable find number. When they visited the cache hadn't been published yet. Got the story that their proof of visit photograph had failed. I know it's disappointing to just miss out on a cache in a remote area, but lying about the find is not appealing. Insulting too, if they thought I was that stupid to believe them. I told them that sometimes the truth might work better, rather than made up stories, and deleted their log. I also told them their log was unfair on other finders, especially the FTF, as they were claiming a find before them. Their answers to simple questions found at GZ were wrong too. The cinch was that their photograph was wrongly dated.

[+hzoi]

Well, I can make a hat, or a brooch, or a pterodactyl...

 

OK, seriously. I don't check the paper logs against the online logs, so I don't use them for an audit.

 

Back when people actually left a short (or long) note, I'd enjoy reading through. Now it's basically a list of names. (Not calling anyone out, I have taken to just leaving a date and a stamp or signature, too.)

 

So, what do I do with it? If there are enough empty pages left, I take out the used pages and use the log in a new cache. If there aren't, I flip through it and then recycle it.

 

I have one nice (trackable) logbook that I use for all the events we've hosted. Which reminds me, we haven't hosted an event in quite a while. Perhaps we'd better get off our butts.

[+barefootjeff]

5 hours ago, hzoi said:

Back when people actually left a short (or long) note, I'd enjoy reading through. Now it's basically a list of names. (Not calling anyone out, I have taken to just leaving a date and a stamp or signature, too.)

 

In some places, on some caches at least, people still leave more than just names and dates, like the four finds on my most recent multi:

 

 

Of course caches like this that are more about the adventure than the smiley will never get many finders (this one is unlikely to reach double digits) and its good-sized logbook will never fill even if everyone uses a whole page for their log, but eventually a time will come to archive it and, assuming it hasn't gone missing, the logbook will be a nice keepsake in my dotage.

Edited September 24, 2022 by barefootjeff

[+4wheeler]

When I started geocaching in 2002, it was common to write long logs in the log book.  Some caches even had continuing stories that each finder would add another paragraph to the story.