No visit but friend sign log

[+OOH YEH]

What can I do if I know that someone is writing in all other fellow geocaching on my log but haven’t my cache ????

[+Max and 99]

7 minutes ago, OOH YEH said:

What can I do if I know that someone is writing in all other fellow geocaching on my log but haven’t my cache ????

Nothing.

It happens. If their name is on the physical log they can log the geocache online. 

[+niraD]

15 minutes ago, OOH YEH said:

What can I do if I know that someone is writing in all other fellow geocaching on my log but haven’t my cache ????

Technically, according to the guidelines, "Caches can be logged online as 'Found' after the geocacher has visited the coordinates and signed the logbook." So technically, visiting the coordinates is necessary.

 

But practically speaking, Max and 99 is right. If they signed the log, or if someone else signed on their behalf, then they'll probably win if you delete the Find log and they protest to Groundspeak.

[+Sagefox]

Often one person signs the log for everyone when the others are standing right there with them.  Do you know if this is the case?

[+Goldenwattle]

59 minutes ago, Sagefox said:

Often one person signs the log for everyone when the others are standing right there with them.  Do you know if this is the case?

Happens all the time. One person grabs the log and signs for everyone. That's okay if the others are there. In fact one of those not signing for themselves might be the actual person who found the cache.

[+niraD]

2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

In fact one of those not signing for themselves might be the actual person who found the cache.

Yeah, when I've been in groups that play huckle-buckle-beanstalk style, usually the last person to spot the cache is the one who retrieves and replaces it. And sometimes the last person to spot the cacher is the one who signs for everyone.

 

[+Goldenwattle]

39 minutes ago, niraD said:

huckle-buckle-beanstalk style

I had to look that one up . New expression for me. But appropriate to geocaching .

[+Hynz]

9 hours ago, niraD said:

If they signed the log, or if someone else signed on their behalf, then they'll probably win if you delete the Find log and they protest to Groundspeak.

True. Nevertheless without fighting no winning.

I would contact the logger and his friend, asking them to stop by showing the guidline and ask friendly to delete the log. Without or with an unfriendly reaction I would collect hints showing the suspicious log behaviour and would then delete the log.

Dependig on the reaction I probably would stop the fight but eventually I would write a note adjacent to the relogged fake log pointing out the situation as I see it.

[+niraD]

9 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

10 hours ago, niraD said:

huckle-buckle-beanstalk style

I had to look that one up . New expression for me. But appropriate to geocaching .

Yeah, when I started, there was a geocaching glossary (on a site that no longer exists) that described the two main styles of group caching:

 

Huckle-Buckle-Beanstalk – A method of group caching, which takes its name from a classic children's game. When a member of the group spots the cache, they walk elsewhere (to not give away the cache's location), then call out, “huckle-buckle-beanstalk!” (or whatever word or phrase the group has decided on). This continues until everyone in the group has either spotted the cache, or given up, after which the cache is retrieved and logged. Compare this to the Three Musketeers method.

 

Three Musketeers – A method of group cache hunting, which takes its name from the Musketeer motto, “All for one and one for all.” Unlike the Huckle-Buckle-Beanstalk method, as soon as one person in the group finds the cache, the hunt is over, and all members of the group log their find.

 

 

When group caching, I always prefer the huckle-buckle-beanstalk style, although it can be frustrating with a group that is willing to go along with it, but that is REALLY BAD at hiding their reactions when they spot the hide.

[+cerberus1]

21 hours ago, OOH YEH said:

What can I do if I know that someone is writing in all other fellow geocaching on my log but haven’t my cache ????

 

Please explain further.  Wording isn't clear...   Thanks.

Is this a group find, or is someone writing in names of people not there?  

Are you physically watching who's signing your cache?  You have a large number of finds; you never went with a group?

The first months we started, we went with a "group" of cachers on a multiple cache series.

One person signed for everyone in the group (they signed it as a "team name").  

[+kunarion]

22 hours ago, OOH YEH said:

What can I do if I know that someone is writing in all other fellow geocaching on my log but haven’t my cache ????

 

Do you mean they made an online log, yet there is no written signature in the cache log?

 

I have found that these things require some detective work to match up signatures.  I recently almost deleted a child's log when his parent's log was the only apparently related signature.  It became clear that the persons were all in the same family (hunting caches together) only when I happened to see a different log on a different cache, and I managed to put two and two together. 

 

But there are many legitimate reasons for logs to not perfectly match up.  And there are situations where the logs become ever more disconnected from The Suitable Way To Make Logs.  If you're the Cache Owner and uncertain, you may ask that cacher what happened.

Edited November 21, 2023 by kunarion

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, kunarion said:

I have found that these things require some detective work to match up signatures.

 

I've noticed a lot of new players are signing the log with their real name instead of their caching name and it gets even harder when they muddle up the date as well or sign in the first bit of empty space in the logbook rather than after the most recent finder. On one cache, I struggled to match up any of the names in the logbook with the online finds, but there were roughly equal numbers of both so I just shrugged and continued on my way. No point fretting over stuff like this.

[+Goldenwattle]

9 hours ago, niraD said:

Three Musketeers – A method of group cache hunting, which takes its name from the Musketeer motto, “All for one and one for all.” Unlike the Huckle-Buckle-Beanstalk method, as soon as one person in the group finds the cache, the hunt is over, and all members of the group log their find.

That's how my caching friends and I mostly cache. Then we can move on. We usually just say the 'boring' "found it." Most times people are happy for one person to have found it, but occasionally someone will want to find it themselves.

 

9 hours ago, niraD said:

Huckle-Buckle-Beanstalk – A method of group caching, which takes its name from a classic children's game.

 Maybe an American game?

[+barefootjeff]

10 hours ago, niraD said:

Huckle-Buckle-Beanstalk – A method of group caching, which takes its name from a classic children's game. When a member of the group spots the cache, they walk elsewhere (to not give away the cache's location), then call out, “huckle-buckle-beanstalk!” (or whatever word or phrase the group has decided on). This continues until everyone in the group has either spotted the cache, or given up, after which the cache is retrieved and logged.

 

Gosh, if we'd done that on Sunday's group caching trip we'd still be out there! While the rest of us were searching under rock ledges on multiple levels, eagle-eyed Samuel twigged to something in the hint, scampered up a tree and found it.

[+niraD]

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

10 hours ago, niraD said:

Huckle-Buckle-Beanstalk – A method of group caching, which takes its name from a classic children's game.

 Maybe an American game?

I'm not sure where the name comes from, but the basic game goes by many names (Hunt the Thimble, Hot Buttered Beans, etc.). I never heard the phrase "huckle buckle beanstalk" until I started geocaching.

 

 

27 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Gosh, if we'd done that on Sunday's group caching trip we'd still be out there! While the rest of us were searching under rock ledges on multiple levels, eagle-eyed Samuel twigged to something in the hint, scampered up a tree and found it.

As time goes on, our groups usually start offering "warmer" and "colder" hints to the people who are still looking. And sometimes, the remaining searchers give up before they spot it (especially in mixed groups where some prefer Huckle Buckle Beanstalk and others prefer Three Musketeers).

[+cerberus1]

18 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I've noticed a lot of new players are signing the log with their real name instead of their caching name and it gets even harder when they muddle up the date as well or sign in the first bit of empty space in the logbook rather than after the most recent finder. On one cache, I struggled to match up any of the names in the logbook with the online finds, but there were roughly equal numbers of both so I just shrugged and continued on my way. No point fretting over stuff like this.

 

Yep, no point.   When we used to take new folks out, most used their real names until they decided to join. Some joined months later.  

All remembered to mention they were with us, so finding us in the log would solve any issue (if they even looked).

I sign the first open space I see.  It may not be in with recent finds, but the date right next to the sig should suffice.  

I do that after getting NM from people who didn't have the common sense to realize there's two sides to every piece of paper...

[+baer2006]

54 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I do that after getting NM from people who didn't have the common sense to realize there's two sides to every piece of paper...

Note to self: Put a möbius log strip into my next cache.

 

SCNR