Confusing find count

[+Cacher_Penguin]

On geocaching.com - it says i have 212 finds.  Your Geocaching Logs (Filtered by Log Type) and filter it to 'found', it shows 206 'found' logs and my personal count, and in GSAK my find count is 208.

 

Please can someone help me make sense of this confusion

[+Hügh]

You have 213 finds, consisting of:

• 5 Adventure Lab caches
• 2 events (which are logged using the "Attended" log type, not the "Found it" log type)
• 206 geocaches

When you filter to the "Found it" log type, you have the 206. GSAK gives you the 206 caches + 2 events = 208 non-AL caches you've found.

Edited October 3, 2023 by Hügh

[+thebruce0]

Think of the number next to the smiles as "Smilies", not physical geocache 'finds' as implied by, well, "finds". The smiley count consists of multiple things, as Hugh mentions above.  I stopped calling them finds some time back because of this confusion...

[+gimligliders]

When we started caching in '09 (I sound like a geezer....), I decided to start a caching journal to document our finds. I notate the GC code, name of cache, D/T rating, size and CO's name. Sometimes I will write a few lines describing something funny, amazing or dramatic that happened while seeking the find. I indicate whether we favourited the cache, what number find it was for us and the day we made the find. This is all done in a little 3 1/2 by 6" hardcover book. Today I just filled up journal #10 after logging yesterday's finds. These journals have come in handy when I've had to determine whether we qualify for a challenge cache and it doesn't have a challenge checker. Once in a while just to reminisce, I will go back through the journals and read some of the accounts that I've written in the past....just narrowly missing an encounter with a nearby bear, how we managed to solve a difficult puzzle cache, encounters with other cachers (or muggles), the time my hubby climbed 20 feet up a tree to find a cache but had to come back down to get a pencil....The list goes on. It is so much fun to read these stories years later. 

 

One other added bonus to journaling our finds: as I log our finds online, I always make sure that the number indicating our finds beside our profile name in the upper RH corner of the webpage matches the number I have entered in the journal. This way I know that my records always match my online profile.

[+Hynz]

13 hours ago, gimligliders said:

Once in a while just to reminisce, I will go back through the journals and read some of the accounts that I've written in the past....just narrowly missing an encounter with a nearby bear, how we managed to solve a difficult puzzle cache, encounters with other cachers (or muggles), the time my hubby climbed 20 feet up a tree to find a cache but had to come back down to get a pencil....The list goes on. It is so much fun to read these stories years later. 

So your online logs do not contain these stories? Why do you exclude owners and other finders from that fun?

Even when some of your stories are only loosely connected to the cache find, as an owner I would be much more interested in those than in an other short and generic logtext.

Edited October 23, 2023 by Hynz

[+Goat62]

I have often wondered if logging a "found it" on a cache that you hid is considered cheating/ethical? I have noticed most Co's don't do this. On the other hand, I seen one co doing maintenance on their caches, but logging each one as a "found it" (looked like falsification of their real find numbers on their profile)

[+Max and 99]

2 minutes ago, Goat62 said:

I have often wondered if logging a "found it" on a cache that you hid is considered cheating/ethical? I have noticed most Co's don't do this. On the other hand, I seen one co doing maintenance on their caches, but logging each one as a "found it" (looked like falsification of their real find numbers on their profile)

If you're talking about logging a find on the geocache they hid with the same account, that stopped being a thing many years ago. It doesn't stop someone from logging a find on a geocache they hid with a different username, something I see locally. 

[+Goat62]

So, if I log a "found" on one of my caches today, it would NOT post or show up on my profile?

[+x7Kevin]

30 minutes ago, Goat62 said:

So, if I log a "found" on one of my caches today, it would NOT post or show up on my profile?

 

I don't think it's possible to log a "found" on your own hides, the option doesn't exist on the website or app. 

[+Max and 99]

2 hours ago, Goat62 said:

So, if I log a "found" on one of my caches today, it would NOT post or show up on my profile?

Correct! 

From May 2017:

 

https://forums.geocaching.com/GC/index.php?/topic/344276-release-notes-website-logging-rules-may-8-2017/

Edited February 7 by Max and 99

[+arisoft]

2 hours ago, Goat62 said:

I have often wondered if logging a "found it" on a cache that you hid is considered cheating/ethical? I have noticed most Co's don't do this. On the other hand, I seen one co doing maintenance on their caches, but logging each one as a "found it" (looked like falsification of their real find numbers on their profile)

 

It is as cheating/ethical as attending your own event to earn a find.

 

It has been said that the organizer of the event also participates in the event. But it is even more certain that the owner of the cache has visited the cache coordinates. There is no difference between these cache types whether the player visited coordinates or not.

 

Currently system allows this "unethical cheating" only with events. You can not log a find if you are the cache owner. The result in Finland is that there are more events than caches published this year.

Edited February 7 by arisoft

[+cerberus1]

2 hours ago, Goat62 said:

I have often wondered if logging a "found it" on a cache that you hid is considered cheating/ethical? I have noticed most Co's don't do this. On the other hand, I seen one co doing maintenance on their caches, but logging each one as a "found it" (looked like falsification of their real find numbers on their profile)

 

Guessing that was quite a few years ago...     We used to have fun when they'd enter the forums asking why their counts were off.

Wanted to blame everyone but themselves, to find they were logging their own caches "Found" every time they did maintenance.   

Those people now have an option to hide their find count, and now the "cheaters" are protected from view...

[+Goat62]

Yeah, it was several years ago. I just pulled up one of MY caches & you're correct. The Found It log type isn't there. As posted, apparently you could prior to 2017. Thanks for the replies. 

[+thebruce0]

1 hour ago, arisoft said:

It has been said that the organizer of the event also participates in the event. But it is even more certain that the owner of the cache has visited the cache coordinates. There is no difference between these cache types whether the player visited coordinates or not.

 

enh. To log an event as Attended, you just need to Attend the event; as a host of the event you also attend the event.

To log a geocache as 'Found', you need to find the geocache. If you placed it, you didn't find it; you own it. There is a difference between "attended" and "found it".

Edited February 7 by thebruce0

[+fuzziebear3]

You can however have found a cache, and then subsequently adopt it.   So you can have a found on your own cache in that case.

 

[+arisoft]

3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

To log a geocache as 'Found', you need to find the geocache.

 

Do you have any reference for this requirement? It is new to me. Many players sign caches they definitely haven't found but they meet the requirements to log a find. In many cases, this happens when a group on geocachers are searching a cache at the same time and only one of them actually finds the cache.

Edited February 8 by arisoft

[+arisoft]

3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

To log an event as Attended, you just need to Attend the event; as a host of the event you also attend the event.

 

I may be twisting words if I say that the host is hosting the event and attendees are attending the event. In most cases, the host is indeed present at the event, actively managing and overseeing the proceedings. They may not be able to fully participate as a guest, as their primary role is to ensure the smooth running of the event and attend to the needs of the guests.

Edited February 8 by arisoft

[+barefootjeff]

3 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

I may be twisting words if I say that the host is hosting the event and attendees are attending the event. In most cases, the host is indeed present at the event, actively managing and overseeing the proceedings. They may not be able to fully participate as a guest, as their primary role is to ensure the smooth running of the event and attend to the needs of the guests.

 

Most of the events here are pretty low key, with the attendees themselves bringing nibblies for the table, and about all the host does during the event is draw the FTF prize. Even for my Community Celebration Event, where I provided a puzzle based on identifying ten Classic Central Coast Caches from a set of photos, most of the preparation was done beforehand and there was little for me to do other than mingle during the event.

[+Goldenwattle]

3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Most of the events here are pretty low key, with the attendees themselves bringing nibblies for the table, and about all the host does during the event is draw the FTF prize. Even for my Community Celebration Event, where I provided a puzzle based on identifying ten Classic Central Coast Caches from a set of photos, most of the preparation was done beforehand and there was little for me to do other than mingle during the event.

Same here in Canberra. Mostly all the CO has to do is attend. A few might put on a sausage BBQ, but that's not the majority. Usually if there's food any attendee can bring it, and then it's placed on a table with other's contribution to share. I've been to other meet and greets in other places in Australia and it's similar. Actually the few international ones I have attended have been low key too.

[+JL_HSTRE]

It's possible to be the host of an event and not attend the event. Life happens.

 

It's also an Attended log. When logging a Find on your own cache was removed (and should have never been allowed) logging an Attend on your own event was retained. I think this was always an intended feature. Logging an Attend gives the host the chance to share their experiences at the Event.

[+JL_HSTRE]

13 hours ago, arisoft said:

Many players sign caches they definitely haven't found but they meet the requirements to log a find. In many cases, this happens when a group on geocachers are searching a cache at the same time and only one of them actually finds the cache.

 

Depends how narrowly you define "find."

 

I think there's a difference between finding as part of a group and "finding" via divide & conquer. 

 

[+JL_HSTRE]

I've noticed an increase in recent years of people finding their own caches via sock puppet hides.

 

It started with team accounts used for hiding event caches or power trails. Occasionally for thematic reasons. This had a certain amount of legitimacy because the team account was a management decision, not intended with any abuse.

 

However, this has escalated to people creating accounts for their children, pets, etc specifically (or the event account would place caches unrelated to the event) specifically for stats abuse. Extending streaks is probably most common reason, and various challenge qualifications (rare icons or specific DT combos) accounting for most of the others.

[+arisoft]

2 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

Depends how narrowly you define "find."

 

 

No, it is not depending at all. The guideline is clear: "You can log caches online as "Found" after you visited the coordinates and signed the logbook." There is nothing about finding at all. It is not obligatory part of the experience by the book.

 

There are some unspoken reasons why "Found" logs are considered disgraceful and prevented to log by the cache owner. I would like to hear these reasons one by one and then figure whether they apply to event caches.

[+arisoft]

16 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

I've noticed an increase in recent years of people finding their own caches via sock puppet hides.

 

Indeed. In Finland we have a local guideline for them. (Google translation follows)

 

Quote

Collective nicknames must state the names of the nicknames belonging to the group upon publication. If the caches of the name brand/common name brands have unmaintained caches, the inspector does not need to publish a cache trail.

 

[+thebruce0]

14 hours ago, arisoft said:

18 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

To log a geocache as 'Found', you need to find the geocache.

 

Do you have any reference for this requirement? It is new to me. Many players sign caches they definitely haven't found but they meet the requirements to log a find. In many cases, this happens when a group on geocachers are searching a cache at the same time and only one of them actually finds the cache.

 

We both know what "you" means. The nature of getting your name - or the name you're caching under for that find - on paper is irrelevant and always arguable. Personal ethic aside, HQ will not arbitrate the method of ink on paper. The point to the phrase is that you - whether by touch or sight or vocal confirmation or some other sense - have "found the geocache!" and your goal is to have the paper signed with a name you identify under. The intent of the spirit of the activity is confirmed as a "find" by signature on paper.

[+thebruce0]

7 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

11 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Most of the events here are pretty low key, with the attendees themselves bringing nibblies for the table, and about all the host does during the event is draw the FTF prize. Even for my Community Celebration Event, where I provided a puzzle based on identifying ten Classic Central Coast Caches from a set of photos, most of the preparation was done beforehand and there was little for me to do other than mingle during the event.

Same here in Canberra. Mostly all the CO has to do is attend.

 

Yep, and that's what the log implies - the poster has attended. A host may also "host" the event, but there is no log for that

The host hosts, and attends, and earns the right to log Attended.

But if a "Found It" log implies the act of discovery and success, a hider cannot "Found it" on their own geocache [which they hid, not including adopting after finding].

[+arisoft]

3 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

But if a "Found It" log implies the act of discovery and success

 

As referred earlier, some players were used to log "Found" when they found the cache on their cache maintenance tour. I am sure that they comply with this "act of discovery and success" stipulation. Almost every day I am looking for things I have put somewhere and  I may find them with act of discovery and success. I am not buying this explanation. I prefer the "stats abuse" explanation. Don't you think that the primary reason to discourage finds to own caches is "stats abuse"? (Regardless of what "stats abuse" means.)

[+thebruce0]

7 minutes ago, arisoft said:

As referred earlier, some players were used to log "Found" when they found the cache on their cache maintenance tour. I am sure that they comply with this "act of discovery and success" stipulation.

And... the mechanics no longer provide for logging Found on your own cache. So the point is moot.

 

8 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Almost every day I am looking for things I have put somewhere and  I may find them with act of discovery and success.

That is not what the log in the context of geocaching implies. May as well log that I 'found' the trailhead. I 'found' parking. I 'found' the GC code!  No, the "Found It" log is created to indicate that user has accomplished the needed task in order to state that they have discovered and found the geocache. That's the implication. An owner can't do this on their own physical geocache.

 

9 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Don't you think that the primary reason to discourage finds to own caches is "stats abuse"? (Regardless of what "stats abuse" means.)

That is one reason, I can agree.

[+arisoft]

6 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

An owner can't do this on their own physical geocache.

 

I have done this so your statement must be false. A player sent me coordinates where he put my cache due to some reasons at the GZ. I went looking for it and found it. Then I logged "Found", because I legimately found it. This happened a long time ago when it was possible. Afterwards I removed this "Found" to avoid upsetting people with my single "stats abuse".

[+JL_HSTRE]

If you can Find your own cache once why not every visit? Why not log a Find on other people's caches every time you revisit it? How much does the cache need to be moved by a previous finder to count as a Find? It easily spirals into absurdity. Far simpler to say the cache only counts once, either as a Find or a Hide.

 

Events no longer have logbooks, or at least can't have mandatory physical logs. So that's a difference between Event's and non-Virtuals.

 

There are some who argue Events should not count toward one's overall Find count since they're not caches. There is nothing (no thing) to find; you are seeking people rather than an intimate object.

[+barefootjeff]

5 hours ago, arisoft said:

I have done this so your statement must be false. A player sent me coordinates where he put my cache due to some reasons at the GZ. I went looking for it and found it. Then I logged "Found", because I legimately found it.

 

I once found one of my caches rehidden 50 metres from where I'd placed it. My log for remedying that was Owner Maintenance, not Found It.

[+Cheminer Will]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:14 AM, Goat62 said:

I have often wondered if logging a "found it" on a cache that you hid is considered cheating/ethical? 

 

I have never done this but....  I have had a few times doing maintenance on a hide from long ago and had to look harder to find my old cache than I do on other people's hides!  It sure felt like a legitimate find even though it wasn't of course.

[+nachtmusik]

On 2/8/2024 at 8:57 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

It's possible to be the host of an event and not attend the event. Life happens.

This happened to me. We were driving from another country and the preparations and trip took longer than expected. Learned not to host events after travel.

I did not log Attended. 

[+thebruce0]

54 minutes ago, Cheminer Will said:

I have never done this but....  I have had a few times doing maintenance on a hide from long ago and had to look harder to find my old cache than I do on other people's hides!  It sure felt like a legitimate find even though it wasn't of course.

Another way you can put it, if you "find" something that someone else moved, which used to be how you hid it, then you didn't find your cache, you found whatever it is that the other person did to your cache, so it's still technically not a 'new' find on your cache. Still an owner maintenance if you fix it back to your cache.

[+NanCycle]

On 2/8/2024 at 8:52 AM, arisoft said:

 

I have done this so your statement must be false. A player sent me coordinates where he put my cache due to some reasons at the GZ. I went looking for it and found it. Then I logged "Found", because I legimately found it. This happened a long time ago when it was possible. Afterwards I removed this "Found" to avoid upsetting people with my single "stats abuse".

I had a cache in a local park which was moved by the groundskeepers when they cut down a lot of undergrowth.  I then had to "find" the cache -- and bring a ladder to retrieve it.  Afterwards I archived it.