Jump to content

Checking log sheets for signatures


1mech

Recommended Posts

I have a few caches I have placed over the years and I seldom, if ever go back to check the names on the cache page against the names on the log sheet itself, to make sure they actually have signed it.

What about you other cache owners, do you ever verify that the user logging a find has actually signed the physical log sheet?

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, 1mech said:

I have a few caches I have placed over the years and I seldom, if ever go back to check the names on the cache page against the names on the log sheet itself, to make sure they actually have signed it.

What about you other cache owners, do you ever verify that the user logging a find has actually signed the physical log sheet?

I seldom check the physical log sheet, and it's almost always after a suspicious online log. Like someone with three finds logs a difficult puzzle geocache and says only "found it". Or the online log says something that doesn't match with where I hid the final.

99% of the time my instinct is right. 

It's not uncommon for it to be just an honest mistake, someone thinking their group went to a certain geocache, but they actually didn't. 

 

Edited by Max and 99
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, 1mech said:

What about you other cache owners, do you ever verify that the user logging a find has actually signed the physical log sheet?

 

My caches all have logbooks rather than logsheets, and with one exception get few finds these days (eight have had no finds this year and one was last found in 2020), but when doing routine checks I'll generally have a look in the book to see what those rare finders might have written as often it's more than just a date and a name. Unless an online log makes me suspicious, I generally don't try to correlate logbook logs with online ones, and even when I do it's often fraught with difficulty as a lot of newbie cachers sign the log with a different name to what they use online.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

I check logs and if I don't find the signature I give the person a chance to supply other proof, such as a photograph or good description. If they do that their logs stays. Almost every time I check a log (my longest between checks was three years) there are missing signatures. Most people don't reply. Some do reply and give me other proof, and their log stays, although I might suggest that they sign future logs. Then I have had the very vague answers, asking me what I want to know. I tell them again. Oh, they don't understand, etc, and this goes backwards and forwards. The worst offender (high number of finds) of this I have now worked out that if she finds a cache she signs it, but if she can't find the cache, she still logs it...after all she was in the area :rolleyes:. I have seen too many logs now where her signature is missing. Usually more tricky hides. I now know just to delete her logs on my caches if I can't find the signature. I don't need the vague waffle.

I was visiting a place near one of my caches today, so checked it while in the area. This wasn't just to check signatures, but to check the log and cache condition, make sure the spider guardians are still there and there is sparkly jewelry in the treasure chest (covered in spiders). All was good, but I still have to check the log. That cache gets favourite points, and apparently screams :antenna:.

I wish everyone would check their logs, and then I would find far less missing signatures.

 

Added: Checked the log and all's good. Some of the guardians. The others are elsewhere.

Guardians.jpg

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

I've told this story before, but it was a big pivot of mine in geocaching.

 

One time I was maintaining a cache that isn't found often and I swapped out the log sheet.  I decided to audit the log since it wouldn't be that difficult, and I couldn't match two online logs to physical logs.  One was from a person I knew so I messaged that person first and asked about it.  What I received back was a swear filled tirade about how they always sign the log and how dare I insult them about something like this.  It was shocking as I'd never had that level of vitriol directed at me before.  I saved that email to a save folder so I could always remind myself of the unexpected things I could encounter with geocachers, especially ones I thought I knew.

 

I never audit logs anymore, it's just a game and unless someone is obviously faking something, I don't really care who logs what.  If people want to cheat themselves, that's on them.

 

This person and I are fine now but it took a lot of work on my part to rebuild that peace.

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

One time I was maintaining a cache that isn't found often and I swapped out the log sheet.  I decided to audit the log since it wouldn't be that difficult, and I couldn't match two online logs to physical logs.  One was from a person I knew so I messaged that person first and asked about it.  What I received back was a swear filled tirade about how they always sign the log and how dare I insult them about something like this.  It was shocking as I'd never had that level of vitriol directed at me before.  I saved that email to a save folder so I could always remind myself of the unexpected things I could encounter with geocachers, especially ones I thought I knew.

Someone once found an empty lunch box about 20 metres from my cache and claimed a find, saying the log was missing. I went and checked. My cache was still there with log, in a very obvious place. Basically under a pile of rocks with nothing close by. Initially the conversation with this person was civil and they promised they would return and sign the log. I suggested they should change their log to a DNF, but they refused. (For some reason some people are very allergic to making a DNF.) I gave them time to return and sign the log, and I went away for awhile and the cache slipped my mind. Three months later I was back and checked the log. Still no signature, so I politely reminded them again about it. That's when the return message got rude and aggressive. I was impatient (three months I gave them), they wouldn't tell me next time if they found something wrong with my cache (it was a lunch box, 20 metres from my cache. They never found my cache to tell me something was wrong with it.) They still refused to change the log into a DNF or note. With such a rude response, I deleted their log immediately.

I too have been challenged about a find of mine. I didn't take offence. Why would I? The CO was doing their job. I politely replied with a detailed description of the cache, hide and even the parking area. There was absolutely no offence to be had being asked to prove I had found it. I had signed the log, but the log was basically bits of paper, so it could have gone missing. I don't know what some people's problem is. I also found the wrong thing one day. When told I had, I deleted my log that day. Again no offence taken. Some people are so brittle, so precious, that even a polite request gets a nasty reply.

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, 1mech said:

I have a few caches I have placed over the years and I seldom, if ever go back to check the names on the cache page against the names on the log sheet itself, to make sure they actually have signed it.

What about you other cache owners, do you ever verify that the user logging a find has actually signed the physical log sheet?

 

Yes.  I check to be sure they logged the correct cache, because if I logged the wrong one by mistake, I'd appreciate the info from a CO.

 

A couple particular caches of mine become one-off logged by persons who walk past several easy ones to get there, people who previously logged caches in another state or country, and who logged no other caches here.  No photo is posted, just a terse log that it was "fun".  So far, such logs on my caches are legit logs, and apparently family accounts (likely a hint about what's going on). 

 

And I sometimes invite a cacher to log online if they signed but didn't submit it (if they posted other online logs).

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, 1mech said:

I have a few caches I have placed over the years and I seldom, if ever go back to check the names on the cache page against the names on the log sheet itself, to make sure they actually have signed it.

What about you other cache owners, do you ever verify that the user logging a find has actually signed the physical log sheet?

I have run into the problem where the signatures don't match the online logs at all because some nitwit didn't want to take the time to open the cache and sign the log so they just switched the cache out and went on their way. Doing that makes it impossible for a cache owner to audit their log. 

Edited by Max and 99
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

I have run into the problem where the signatures don't match the online logs at all because some nitwit didn't want to take the time to open the cache and sign the log so they just switched the cache out and went on their way. Doing that makes it impossible for a cache owner to audit their log. 

:sad:

Link to comment

I have personal trackables that travel with me when I am geocaching and I log a visit for them in each cache.  I frequently take a photo of them beside the log sheet,  That helps to show that I was really there, lets me post a photo for my trackables, and it lets the CO look at a few other signatures.

 

I have not had to deal with fake logs on my own caches but I have on my trackables.

IMG_7763.jpg

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
16 hours ago, 1mech said:

do you ever verify that the user logging a find has actually signed the physical log sheet?

 

Several of our caches, and those belonging to our son, are very close by our home, and those I do check the logsheets and signatures.  I haven't ever deleted anyone's online logs, but there were a few newb cachers who claimed online finds for several local caches, but no signatures on any logsheets.

 

I have had the opposite happen - the signature is on the logsheet but I know for a fact the cacher was not there - it was signed by another cacher who also claimed the find for themselves.  In other words, one cacher signed for 2 people (yes, the handwriting was identical!) one of which was not there.  I did not delete the one I knew was not there; not worth starting something I really don't want to get into an argument over, but let's say I have lost a little of the respect I felt for this particular well-known cacher.

Link to comment

I only recall checking signatures once (and it's in the forum somewhere).  Someone was on a road trip from New England to Virginia, and logged lots of caches along the way.  He logged two of my caches in one day.  No one had ever done that!  They were about two miles apart.  Driving time between them is at least an hour!  So, I checked them, and he had not signed either cache.  I think he got banned from Groundspeak, when the reviewer checked his caches, and the geocacher had not signed any of them either.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I've actually checked names only twice. One,  I have a puzzle cache where the name starts with the letter X -- very useful for certain challenges.  In this case it was the only cache the person logged in the state of Colorado.  No sig on the log.  Deleted.  The other "forgot my pen."  I messaged him that he could have used the pencil that was in the cache.  He went back and signed it within a few days.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
41 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Are you sure they were not there? I go caching with a friend and he almost always signs the log for both of us, and anyone else present too.

 

+1

 

I've sometimes done a little detective work, and so far, I've determined such logs on my caches are actually legit.

 

On my caches where someone from Europe visits my cache in the US and no other cache along that same trail nor any other cache (and they haven't even found a cache since), the signature is sometimes different from the account name.  The date may be the following day's date.  Those are proven to be family accounts where one family member for some reason finds my cache in particular.  And they siged their personal Geocacher name.  Fortunately, that cache gets a find maybe once a month, so log book vs. online logs are pretty obvious.  And yes, it's that one cache in particular.  I'm not complaining that people hunt my cache, I simply find that whole situation a little mind-boggling.

 

Similar thing when a Dad signs my cache and two years later, the kid makes her online Find log (OK, sure, maybe using todays date, the default).  She had signed it just fine when it was found, and today has her own account.

 

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, kunarion said:
3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Are you sure they were not there? I go caching with a friend and he almost always signs the log for both of us, and anyone else present too.

 

+1

 

I've sometimes done a little detective work, and so far, I've determined such logs on my caches are actually legit.

 

The log still stands on the cache page - I did not delete though I have serious doubts that both the signer and the other cacher were both physically present.  Team caching - one solved the puzzle, the other went and found it?  I've caught the same signer "accidentally" logging another of my puzzles with the other cacher's name - then deleting and claiming the find under their own account....I now have doubts about BOTH of these cachers and their methods!  In any case, that's how they do what they do, and I haven't deleted any on line logs for any of the two of them.

 

BTW, back on topic - I did check the logsheet after the recent "find" on my puzzle that has since been deleted - (same two cachers involved) the one I knew was in the area that day does have a signature on the logsheet; the other cacher whose find log was deleted ("accidentally" logged by the actual finders under the wrong geocaching name, then deleted?) is not on the logsheet.  Online logs and logsheet now match - though I did not delete any logs.  It's shenanigans like this that make me more determined to keep MY caching honest!

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

A few times I've thought something was screwy about an on-line log, so I went to check the physical log. To be honest, I only remember one result, a case where it was already fairly clear someone was doing blanket logs in my area, so when no signature was there on that date, I just deleted it. I can't remember what happened in the other cases, since it was basically just curiosity, anyway. I do remember once finding someone else's cache where the last o-line found log seemed really unlikely -- a complete newbie with only a couple finds logging a really tough puzzle cache -- but, lo and behold, the signature was there, and I made sure to confirm it in my log.

 

I don't just generally checked signatures, although whenever I replace a full log, I do go over it to see how it compares with the on-line log. I've found a discrepancy or two, but I'm only curious, so I don't try to resolve them. I think once I sent someone a message 'cuz it just looked like it was a mistake, but I don't think I heard back, and I didn't do anything about it. I've also run into a couple cases where I found a signature in the physical log with no corresponding on-line log. At least once, it was someone I knew so when other on-line logs confirmed they were caching in the area that day, I pointed out they'd signed mine and reminded them to log it on-line

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, dprovan said:

I've also run into a couple cases where I found a signature in the physical log with no corresponding on-line log.

I've found that too, but unfortunately often signatures are hard to read, unless you know the name, or have something to compare online. I just figure that sooner or later they will get around to logging, and then forget about it.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

 

BTW, back on topic - I did check the logsheet after the recent "find" on my puzzle that has since been deleted - (same two cachers involved) the one I knew was in the area that day does have a signature on the logsheet; the other cacher whose find log was deleted ("accidentally" logged by the actual finders under the wrong geocaching name, then deleted?) is not on the logsheet.  Online logs and logsheet now match - though I did not delete any logs.  It's shenanigans like this that make me more determined to keep MY caching honest!

 

 

I can't stand it when others sign for me when I'm there with a group.  Did they even get my name right?

They: "Kenotraiark"?  How do you spell that?!"

Me:  "k, u, n, a, r, i, o, n", all lower case".

They (writing in the log): "Q...R...E...K...O... and what else?"

Me:  :wacko:

 

But I also check logs on my caches for the same reason I do cache maintenance, to ensure everything's OK.  If there's something fishy about the logs, I'm gonna get to the bottom of it, because people who will falsify logs for a Smilie may do anything, and I shall make a note of who they are.  But I'm very careful about deleting anything.

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment

I think handwriting analysis is going a bit far.   When caching with my family, we are all standing there -- one writes our names in the logs, one is holding 'stuff', and one might be riffling through possible swag/TBs.   Just a division of labor.   But we were all there and all participated in finding the cache.

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment

I applaud everybody taking action against log cheeting and I try to hunt down suspicius online entries.

But I must admit last time I wanted to check online logs with physical logs on one of my cache I gave up because I could not wrap my head around the inconsistent and out of chronological order of the signatures. Not to speak of often terrible handwriting.

 

So I wonder what physical procedure do you use for making the comparision.

Do you print out the photos of the logbook and the webpage and tick of on both sides?

When using a true and big "logbook", do you photograph *always* *all* pages of the logbook?

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Hynz said:

So I wonder what physical procedure do you use for making the comparision.

My physical procedure is "Eyeball." I compare dates, mainly, and assume any signature I can't read agrees with the on-line log on the same date. I have to admit, chronological order is mostly the rule in my area, so that helps, but even when the order isn't perfect, I can almost always make out the date, or at least close enough to match it to an on-line log.

 

And it helps that I'm not really sweating it: if I can't match something up because I can't read something or can't sort out the order of the physical log, I just assumed it's probably OK.

 

By the way, I don't care about cheating. I'm just trying to make the on-line log more accurate.

 

I admit that I don't have any caches with a full logbook that people sign page by page, but if I did and wanted to check the accuracy without bringing the logbook home, I'd be tempted to take the on-line log into the field for comparing -- print it out if the cache was beyond connectivity -- rather than taking pictures of the physical log to compare at home later.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Hynz said:

So I wonder what physical procedure do you use for making the comparision.

Do you print out the photos of the logbook and the webpage and tick of on both sides?

When using a true and big "logbook", do you photograph *always* *all* pages of the logbook?

 

My caches are not Park-n-Grab, thus are found once a week, if that.  There's time to sign and then log it online, and logs match up if they're legitimate.  Weird logs stand out.  For example, if someone from another country or US State "took a walk" and found my cache.  And only that one in this state (or the whole country).  They "walked" right past other caches on the trail to get there.  And they've never logged a cache since.  And the log is terse with no photo.  Because it seems weird that someone would travel far to treat a specially selected cache like an LPC.

 

Those are the logs I look at closely.  I also flip through a log book in case they insist they "signed it real small near the spine on a random empty page, so that's why you missed it" or something.  And I cross my fingers and hope they also didn't "sign it in invisible ink".  Forum posts have mentioned CO frustration with such deranged cache finders who are one step away from ordinary muggle vandals.

 

So I don't take a lot of log page verification photos.  But when a log sheet is very odd on a cache I find, I sometimes post a photo of that, along with my stand-in avatar TB.  Because if the online logs have a lot of current "Finds", but the enclosed log sheet hasn't been signed in 2 years, I will mention how I found a lonely cache that hasn't been signed in 2 years.  An attentive CO would go check on what's happening with that.  I would.

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, Hynz said:

out of chronological order of the signatures.

 

A lot of my sigs are "out of chronological order" because I usually sign in the first available space.  In an actual logbook,  if dozens of people have signed using only the first side of the page, I will start using the reverse side of the first page.  On a small scroll with multiple pages, if the first side of the pages are used, I will start writing on the reverse.   Or if signers have skipped lines somewhere, I will use those blank spaces.  I try to always put in dates except on nanos.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
18 hours ago, NanCycle said:

A lot of my sigs are "out of chronological order" because I usually sign in the first available space.

 In an actual logbook,  if dozens of people have signed using only the first side of the page, I will start using the reverse side of the first page. 

 

Yep, me too.  We used to get notices that the logbook was full and find not a single person signed the back pages.  Odd behavior...

So, we put our name in any available space. Unless it's a nano, it always has a date to go by if a CO was looking.

Link to comment

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...
×
×
  • Create New...