Jump to content

Log as a found or a not found??


Recommended Posts

I've noticed that a few people are logging caches as 'found' but in their log they are saying that they got to the location, found where the cache was, but the cache is no longer there. No I wonder what people think about this. I know this shouldn't be a numbers game and all that, but I sympathise with people who get to the correct location but because someone has trashed the cache, then they can't log it as a find. When Mrs H and I were in the Lake District we have three in a row that the caches were missing. It wasn't our fault we couldn't log them as a find. We were at the right location. Perhaps GC.com should have another category. Not found as cache is missing.

 

What do other people do, if they get to a site and the cache is obviously gone??

 

There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.

Link to comment

I have always thought that to log a find one should sign the logbook in the cache - othewise there was no way to verify the visit. If a cache is missing there is provision to advise that it should be archived - the owner can then check it out and archive it or replace it if it really has been trashed. Several of us after the Alston cache event visited a cache site to find it missing and as far as I can remember none of us logged a find and the owner has since replaced it, so we can go again - and hopefully find it is there!

 

Member Geocaching Association of GB

Link to comment

I kind of see the found/not found thing as a message to the owner & the next visitor.

 

We once found a completly waterlogged cache (couldn't write in the log) - that to me is a find. We reported the state of the cache to the owner. Other than that I think it should just be if it is not there log it as a didn't find, that way people will be aware its gone missing.

 

If the cache has been completly destroyed with the contents trashed, then I think you have a choice:

Salvage what you can into a replacement container, log a find or collect up the rubbish and log it as either a find or a no find (up to you - though I would log a no find).

 

I think people sometimes log finds to get caches of there local lists.

 

I'm always logging loads of not founds - for me the location is the treasure so I'm not that bothered wether I find the box or not.

 

THOUGHT: Why doesn't GC.COM or GCUK.COM keep stats on not founds - I recon we would be doing pretty well in that numbers game icon_smile.gif

Chris

 

If only life had an undo button....

London & UK Geocaching Resources: http://www.sheps.clara.net

Link to comment

I would either log a not-found or post-a-note. If I am sure I am in the right place and the cache is missing I tend to post a note.

 

There is a cache on my nearest page that used to be a physical cache but has been trashed. It has been left active, you can now log if you get to the location and the cache isn't there. I find this very annoying as I don't think logging where a cache isn't counts as a find, but I am going to end up logging it as a find just to get it off my front page. I actually found the cache immediately after it had been trashed - the front page of the log book was still in the woods, but I logged it as a not found as the cache was trashed. The next person along logged it as a find as the log book was still floating around!

Link to comment

We recently visited "the first cache in Wales", and having spent nearly 3 hours looking were convinced that somebody had removed it. Especially when looking back at the logs and the three people before us not being able to find it... Sure enough a few days later we saw the note of the next team out to the cache... "Went straight to it!" icon_eek.gif

 

Look at the number of times you see a note of found it on the second / third attempt, it just like when you can't see something for looking. If you find it and open the lid that's a find (just for those situations where the log is full or the cache is full.. of water icon_wink.gif).

Going back to the days of letter boxing, if you didn't have the stamp in your book, you hadn't found it! icon_smile.gif

 

There will always be odd situations – but it’s the sprit of the game that must be adhered to. It relies on an honour system, whereby you declare a cache as found, when you’ve found it!

 

Would I be right in thinking if, the person who owns the cache deletes your “found it” note, your stats get altered? That way the owner can check that all the people who claim to find a cache have written in the logbook – if there is no sign of them in the logbook, then they are removed?

 

Cheers,

 

Dean

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Dean&Abi:

We recently visited "the first cache in Wales", and having spent nearly 3 hours looking were convinced that somebody had removed it. Especially when looking back at the logs and the three people before us not being able to find it... Sure enough a few days later we saw the note of the next team out to the cache... "Went straight to it!" icon_eek.gif


Had exactly the same thing happen to me at that cache too icon_frown.gif

I didn't have the photos with me but the cache page said something about a dayglow orange panel on the box so that's what I searched for. It turned out that the box was wrapped in a black bin liner.

However, I've another trip to that area planned in the not-too-distant future so hopefully, my honour will be redeemed at the second attempt.

 

John

Age and treachery will always triumph over youth and ability icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

There have been a number of occasions (two) when, in my haste of logging on GC.Com, I have inadvertantly logged a found when I was supposed to have logged a DNF. The owners of these caches thankfully contacted me and asked me to change it to a DNF. The logs stated that I didn't find but I'd clicked the found button.

 

I think if you find it you log it as such. However if you found the hiding place and not the cache, which, lets face it, is the goal of all geocachers, then you log a DNF.

 

But, lets not forget this is only a game and is supposed to be fun. icon_smile.gificon_smile.gif

 

Onwards and upwards. Never retreat, never surrender.

Link to comment

quote:
Would I be right in thinking if, the person who owns the cache deletes your “found it” note, your stats get altered? That way the owner can check that all the people who claim to find a cache have written in the logbook – if there is no sign of them in the logbook, then they are removed?

 

Dean


 

Just one point on this. I recently visited a cache and found the box, but was unable to get it out because it was too high. I tried everything to get it out, without success. I was unable to write in the log book, even though I had found the cache.

 

Sometimes it may be impossible for you to write in the log book.

 

Another time it was POURING with rain. I didn't want the contents to get wet. So, again, I didn't open it or write in the log book.

 

Sometimes we have to trust and endear ourselves to others icon_confused.gificon_confused.gificon_biggrin.gif

 

Onwards and upwards. Never retreat, never surrender.

Link to comment

Recently whilst caching with some of our American friends we went to find a cache which had been shown by the last 2 or 3 as missing. If you looked at the clue, indeed, it was not exactly where the clue stated. It was, however, about a foot away.

 

I'm sometimes guilty of not looking hard enough, or long enough, but rather like C&M above, the journey is what it is about, not necessarily the finding. (Although I get B****** annoyed when I don't find it! icon_biggrin.gif ) If I don't find it I count it as a DNF and watch for what happens with the following visitors.

 

Finding your caches - Losing my marbles.

Link to comment

There was a case of something similar where my dad lives in Adelaide. Australia.

 

A certain guy who will be left un-named kept logging caches as found and using silly things like "found a piece of plastic that looked cache like" he even logged a cache as found when the owner had removed it 5 days before :-)

 

Sure enough when my father checked the log book in a few of his caches the guys log was not in the book but was on the site

 

Its a game, its not just the finding that counts. Some people do take it to serioulsy and focus more on how many they can find rather than just enjoying their surroundings.

 

Tip of the day : Always be nice to your mother and don't eat yellow snow :-)

Link to comment

If we do not find the cache we log it as a DNF, we cannot say that the cache is definately not there as it may be that we were just unable to find it.Like the Orange Tree which we have searched 3 times unsuccessfully! I think logging that you have been unable to find it will notify the owner of the cache that there is possably a problem with the cache.

Link to comment

We came across the problem of people logging phoney finds a number of times when being UK admins. We have always taken the opinion that if we couldn't find the box, then we haven't found the cache. Another similar problem is people who visually spot the cache, but then can't get it. To use Paul Blitz's night cache as an example, there was a cache out of reach up a tree, if that were considered 'found' for merely spotting the cache, you wouldn't have solved it.

 

The frustrating thing about this game is that one person, even a pretty experienced cacher can have real problems with a cache that other people have found really easy.

 

I guess the only way round the problem would be to introduce something like the TravelBug logging system where each cache has a unique number marked on it in some way, and then you can only log a find when you have that number, that would then force you to physically find and retrieve the box.

 

Regards,

 

Richard

Link to comment

As ever there's no simple yes/no answer. To give a few examples I've personally come across.

 

1) A Dan and Pid cache obviously designed for people younger and more nimble than me (surely not you cry icon_wink.gif) To claim this cache I had to climb up a tree, nearly crippling myself as I kept sliding back down. To my mind the fun was in the retrieval (and replacement which was even harder!) so to log a Found by merely seeing the box would have been wrong.

 

2) One of Putt's caches in California required you not only to find the cache (which was difficult in itself) but once having found it you realise it's impossible to get at unaided. To retrieve the cache you then had to find the means of retrieval. Again just spotting the box would certainly not qualify for a "Found" in my book.

 

3) A multi cache in London consisted of visiting a number of locations gathering clues. These led to a particular location in a very public place with only one possible hiding place. The encrypted clue confirmed the hiding place was correct. There was no box! I logged a DNF but e-mailed the owner requesting confirmation that the cache had gone. Subsequent hunters came to the same conclusion. The owner never responded to e-mails. Should this be logged as a DNF or a "Found"? A little more difficult this one. I started by logging a DNF but when others had the same experience and when I never received an e-mail from the cache owner and when I was absolutely certain I'd found all the intermediate points and was certain I'd found the right hidey-hole I changed it to a "Found". Was I wrong to do so? I don't think so.

 

I come back to my usual axiom - "Use common sense". After all as Dan says "It's only a hunt for a plastic lunchbox"

 

_________________________________________________________

 

Enthusiastic user of GeocacheUK - Information, not control.

 

It is better to regret something you did, rather than to regret something you didn't do.

_________________________________________________________

Link to comment

I am really taking about when the cache goes missing. If I look for a cache and can't find it then we log it as a DNF. However there has been a couple of times where it has been obvious that the cache is no longer there e.g. one was supposed to be under a rock next to a post, the post and rock were there and there was a cache shaped hole under the rock. Now it's not our fault the cache has gone missing.

 

Peter

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr & Mrs Hedgehog:

...... Now it's not our fault the cache has gone missing.

 

Peter


 

No it's not - and it's not a find either (IMHO). I have four NF - two are caches declared missing. They're still NFs. I thought about making them into notes, but decided it doesn't matter - as long as I don't declare them as finds and mess up my real find count.

 

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Bill D (wwh):

It's always seemed very simple to me. If I find the cache it's a find, and if I don't it isn't. icon_razz.gif

 

Bill

 

-------------------------------

"Ah, take the Cache and let the Credit go..."

_The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, trans. Edward Fitzgerald_


 

My thoughts on the subject exactly. It's either found or not found, period.

 

Bob....

http://www.bobh.co.uk

'Life, it's a game with one serious bit - geocaching!'

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr & Mrs Hedgehog:

I am really taking about when the cache goes missing. If I look for a cache and can't find it then we log it as a DNF. However there has been a couple of times where it has been obvious that the cache is no longer there e.g. one was supposed to be under a rock next to a post, the post and rock were there and there was a cache shaped hole under the rock. Now it's not our fault the cache has gone missing.

 

Peter


 

I can think of at least one occasion in the last year where three people over the space of a year had failed to find a cache, all of them adamant that the cache has gone as nobody had found it for so long. They also were all sure they were following the clue correctly. In the end I was asked to archive, however after e-mailing the cache owner it turned out that the cache was still there, and it has been succesfully found since.

 

We too have had the frustration of not finding a cache, but I really think that not finding it is as much a part of the game as finding it. Certainly there have been two or three caches that I was sure I knew where they were, complete with pictures and clues, but on the first, and sometimes second attempts failed to find them. Then on a return visit you find you've been looking in the wrong bit of woodland, or under the wrong rock. Although it's frustrating at the time, I find I get much more satisfaction from finding one that I've had problems with than any number of lunchbox under a log caches.

 

Richard

Link to comment

I agonised over this problem when I did Lofty at the Grand Prix

 

The problem was, the cache had been trashed, yet it was possible to know that you had found the exact location because of the fact that a photo of the correct tree was supplied on the web[page by the cache owners. Subsequent trips to look for teh cache eventually turned up the old lid to the now-missing cache. Until that final trip I had decided not to log the thing as a find, which annoyed me since I couldn't get it off my front page, and no-one at the time would archive it (which would have achieved the same effect).

 

However, at the point where I found the lid, I decided that I had enough moral justification for logging the cache as found, just to get rid of it. Had there been a method of getting rid of it from my cache page *without* logging it as a find, I would have done so and logged is as not found. It was partly the functionality of the GC website that swayed my judgement. I didn't like the situation particularly, but I felt that having the lid was virtually as good as completing the cache "properly".

 

Having said all that, and on all other caches I have done since the rule is very simple. If I don't write in the logbook, its not counted as a find, since I am one of those who likes to take my numbers a bit seriously. If the cache box is missing, tough, you don't get to log the find. I will also add that this is a rule I will enforce for my own caches. If I find someone has logged one of my caches and not written or marked the logbook in any way, I will delete their log on the site, unless they can give me five dadgum good reasons why I shouldn't.

 

This then brings up the related subject of cache owners who allow people to log their cache as a find, even when it is known the box is not present. The classic example of this is herewhere the owners state specifically that a photo of you at the location is sufficient to claim a find. I'm not personally happy with this, and don't think that it is right for a cache owner to be able to make such a rule for any type of cache other than a virtual.

 

I also am not happy with those who have claimed a find under such circumstances, and it is indeed the only reason I have not attempted the cache myself. Some of the people concerned know I am not entirely happy with it, but as they rightly point out, its not something I can do anything about.

 

Another related situation is that where two people hide a cache, but only one is allowed by the system to actually be the owner. The other person, on their account has the choice between the cache sitting on their cache list for ever, or they just log is as a find to clear it off.

 

I know of occasions where that has happened too, but in these cases, of course, they have actually held the box in their hands, and may well have also written in the logbook, even though they didn't ever "find" the cache at all. Once again, there is some blame to fall partly on the way the site works in that two accounts cannot be registered as the shared owners of a cache. I still don't like it.

 

If you ain't found the box, you ain't found the cache. simple as that in my book.

 

No trees were harmed during the production of this posting, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced....

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by MCL:

I agonised over this problem when I did http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=19364

....


 

"Agonised"?

 

Here's how you do it- Log it as a Note.

 

I found the trashed cache but obviously not in the position it was originally hidden. So it's not a find.

 

And what's this justificaion - getting the cache off your cache page? Now that's weak.

 

"But Officer, I was only breaking the speed limit because everyone else was".

 

You say you take the numbers "a bit seriously". Unfortunately not seriously enough.

 

Just a little rant as I've been through these discussions before and the "getting the cache off my nearest cache page" has to be the weakest excuse.

 

Right up there with the cache in Wales that had been archived, but was claimed as a find because a bit of the cache's container green paint was found!

 

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum

Link to comment

In my opinion no box = no find (For normal and multis). If you find a smashed up cache you could justify logging it as a find. If the logbook is wet or missing then write a log entry on a piece of paper and leave it with the cache and inform the owner.

 

Simple as that. Cache find entrys on lost caches are not valid. Who's to say the cache is not lost and you have failed to find it?

 

Anyway that's my opinion on the matter and that's how I play the game.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

 

LASSITUDE- (noun) Tiredness and apathy: a state of weariness accompanied by listlessness or apathy[15th century. Via French from Latin lassitudo , from lassus 'weary'.]

Link to comment

If you found it, then you will know you found it. If you're not sure - then you haven't found it.

 

If the cache doesn't exist as a cache (ie it is litter or disappeared) then you can't possibly find it.

 

A small step sideways.

There is a local cache (on my nearest page) which has a duplicated cache page - same co-ords, same cache. I have found it, but I still can't bring myself to log the duplicate as found, even though it would help clear my list. It doesn't feel right.

 

So Messrs Hedgehog - you know you don't want to log these dubious caches. Don't weaken, use the force!!!!

 

042502_2217_1578_prv.gif It's dark and we're wearing sunglasses.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by crr003:

"Agonised"?

 

Here's how you do it- http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=41960

 


 

Yes, I said agonised and I meant agonised. Look, I was a newbie when I did it last september, and all the while I had only found the location and no physical objects, I did exactly as you said and logged a note. I only felt justified in logging a find once I had some hard remains of the cache in my hand (the lid) The agonising was over whether I could switch the note to a find after finding the lid. At the time, I decided, on the whole, that I would. It was a *combination* of two things which swayed me.

 

- I found the lid, proving I had done all the right hunting and got to the right place

- I did seriously want to clear it off my front page

 

Either one on it's own probably would not have been enough, but the two together just tipped the scales in my opinion back then.

 

quote:

And what's this justificaion - getting the cache off your cache page? Now that's weak.


 

As I said, on it's own it would not be enough for me, but combined with another reason, it is acceptable to throw it into the argument.

 

quote:

"But Officer, I was only breaking the speed limit because everyone else was".


 

I dunno where you get that analogy. I think of it more like "Officer, I am towing away his car because he repeatedly parks it on my driveway and its the only way I have of removing it. I want it off my drive and I want it off now."

 

quote:

You say you take the numbers "a bit seriously". Unfortunately not seriously enough.


 

You think so? OK. If you can find one other person to support your view that I am not taking the numbers seriously enough, then I will gladly switch the find back to a note. I take allegations like that very seriously.

 

No trees were harmed during the production of this posting, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced....

Link to comment

Whether or how you log a cache is between yourself and the cache owner. Everyone works to different levels.

 

I found a cache that was trashed. Found just about all the contents and the lid but not the box. I logged a find. The cache owner was happy enough with that as he was pleased to get the log book back so he could re-locate the cache.

 

If anyone else doesn't like that, then tough sh1t. My stats are my stats - they are of no business to anyone else and I'm not really bothered what anyone else does with their numbers.

 

Do what you feel is right. It's your call and no one elses.

 

Alex.

 

------------------------------------------------

Knights of the Green Shield stamp and shout.....

Link to comment

Now this is all getting a little serious!

 

Calm down! If we were ever in doubt over logging a cache we would post a note here and see what you guys and the owner thinks before logging it as a find.

This whole thing is a bit of fun; it's not a race! But I would want to keep in the spirit of the game - it's a community thing.

 

Common sense should rule here!

 

P.S. We are going back to "The first cache in Wales" and we WILL find it this time!!! (Hopefully)

icon_wink.gif

 

Eagles may fly high, but weasels don’t get sucked into jet engines…

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Lance Ambu:

So Messrs Hedgehog - you know you don't want to log these dubious caches. Don't weaken, use the force!!!!


 

Messrs??????? Mr & Mrs Hedgehog if you don't mind ;-)

 

Well what raised this question was a cache we did with with a couple. It was a multi. We did all the clues but the final cache had gone. Now we wish we could count it as 4/5th of a find icon_smile.gif, but orginally we logged it as a 'not found', but the couple we were with, logged it as 'found'. Hence my question.

 

There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr & Mrs Hedgehog:

 

Messrs??????? Mr & Mrs Hedgehog if you don't mind ;-)

 

Well what raised this question was a cache we did with with a couple. It was a multi. We did all the clues but the final cache had gone. Now we wish we could count it as 4/5th of a find icon_smile.gif, but orginally we logged it as a 'not found', but the couple we were with, logged it as 'found'. Hence my question.


 

Dear Mr and Mrs Hedgehog

In that Case I think you were right.

 

However (so much nicer than But, don't you think) In relation to 4/5 of a multi being worth more than a did not find - mind if I set down this new can of worms next to your kettle of fish for a minute.

 

I would tend to agree, likewise a cache with a high level of difficulty should perhaps count for more than one point (consider- locationless as negative points, Oh er missus) Relative values would lead to plenty of disagreements i'm sure, but at the minute, the rule is find it count one, regardless of anything else.

 

I think the numbers are important as a marker, a badge of experience, a target. It is perhaps the value that individuals ascribe to the numbers that become the issue - are my 100 the same as your 100 for example. To use the numbers to compare between individuals would not be a true comparison, in my opinion, as there are too many different variables contained in that score to infer any sort of ranking.

 

In summary, count them whichever way you want - your score is your score - you know what it represents.

 

Get me a doctor - I caught the seriousness bug!!!!

 

042502_2217_1578_prv.gif It's dark and we're wearing sunglasses.

 

[This message was edited by Lance Ambu on August 26, 2003 at 12:31 PM.]

Link to comment

I agree with everything you said Lance. With anything like this there is no perfect solution. Indeed I see this with other hobbies as well. I'm both an aircraft and train spotter. In those hobbies people have their own variations on what they can and cannot count. So it's the same with this hobby..

 

There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr & Mrs Hedgehog:

I agree with everything you said Lance. With anything like this there is no perfect solution. Indeed I see this with other hobbies as well. I'm both an aircraft and train spotter. In those hobbies people have their own variations on what they can and cannot count. So it's the same with this hobby..

 

There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.


 

Reminds me of work mate who is a serious plane spotter. Listens in on his 'scanner', looks in the sky, sees a vapour trail and logs it!! I asked why he logged it although he could not actually see the plane itself? 'Because I just know it's there' he replied.

To me, all he did was log a 'vapour trail' not the plane as he could not actually see the plane or prove it was there?

 

Bob....

http://www.bobh.co.uk

'Life, it's a game with one serious bit - geocaching!'

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by golddust1000:

To me, all he did was log a 'vapour trail' not the plane as he could not actually see the plane or prove it was there?


 

I totally agree. I listen to my radio but I have to actually see the plane to count it... no some people need to read the registration on the plane to count it... which you can't do when its at 35,000 feet icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

MCL,

 

Sorry to take some time to respond - I've been out of computer contact.

 

Why do we have stats pages? There is absolutely no approved process to declare a cache as a find or not, so the accuracy of the stats that people work at producing is totally meaningless (if indeed it's supposed to have any meaning).

 

I've seen a Find claimed on an archived cache based on finding a bit of green paint and the original container was painted green. A find?

 

I've seen a No Find against a cache because the person drove within a few hundred yards, but didn't have time to stop and look for the cache. A no find?

 

I tried to provide a link to other discussions on this topic - the consensus was (at that time) to claim the find meant signing the log book - there was a proviso that if the log book was full or wet (couldn't be signed), that leaving a piece of paper with your proof of being there was acceptable.

 

Maybe I'm just too anal about this - I found a trashed cache in UAE. Obviously the box, and even some contents (no log book). I didn't find the cache where the hider had intended me to find it, so I personally don't think I can claim the find.

 

Do you take the numbers seriously? I'm sure in your own way you do. Just as in my way I do. Just different ways. And that's the bit that gets me annoyed (although I’m not in agony).

 

What happens when someone finds 100 caches? The board lights up with pats on the back and congratulations. Personally, I don’t care for this sort of thing; but if I am fortunate enough to get to a 100 finds, I’ll know in my mind that I really found a 100. (By my definition).

 

As others have said, and will say again – it’s a game, log or don’t log as you see fit.

 

I apologise if I’ve offended you – I see this issue as a basic tenet of the sport and open to vigorous debate.

 

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum

Link to comment

I think that if we had our own moderators (GAGB perhaps) then rules regulations might get sorted.

 

But why be so frustrated at this matter. IT'S A GAME and supposed to be FUN.

 

I don't understand why people get so het up.

 

If you find the cache you found it. If you found the area, but not the cache then DNF. Simple

 

If somebody wants to cheat, who does this effect. The only time is to allow other cachers to know the status of the cache.

 

I personally wouldn't want to go to a cache that the previous logger said they found when they didn't, and it wasn't there. That wouldn't be fair.

 

As long as the cache box is intact and the items are inside then why sign the log. You found the cache, then log as found.

 

Do we need geocache police?? I think the owners of the cache should be responsible for it.

 

Onwards and upwards. Never retreat, never surrender.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Sparticus:

.........

As long as the cache box is intact and the items are inside then why sign the log. You found the cache, then log as found.

........


 

Are you serious? Is this a wind up?? The only reason you could possibly not sign the physical log is because you can't write. If the log's full/too damaged to sign, you leave another piece of paper.....

 

It's just rude to the cache owner not to acknowledge the find properly.

 

"Do we need geocache police?? I think the owners of the cache should be responsible for it."

 

Exactly - which is why if you don't log in the physical log, the on line log should be deleted by the cache owner, per Eckington.

 

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Sparticus:

 

If somebody wants to cheat, who does this effect.


 

Hands up all those who can hear their school teachers voices saying "the only person you are cheating is yourself" when you got caught with all your french verbs written up under your shirt sleeve. icon_wink.gif

 

Not that I did, oh no!

 

Finding your caches - Losing my marbles.

Link to comment

I failed to find a couple earlier today which had I found them would have brought up my ton. (I'll be logging them later this evening). Unfortunately they are DNFs, one because I was just being my useless self,(probably)(if you planted one in a window box I'd fail to find it!) the other I was definitely in the right place, checked the clue and was so specific I couldn't fail to find it, although I'm never so certain I wouldn't put it past me to have walked right over it. (I once couldn't find a cache and I was stood on it, literally! icon_rolleyes.gif )

 

It must be annoying when you don't find them and you've travelled a distance to get them, but those two today involved a 50 mile drive and a good mile and a half walk.

 

My view is that if they are still there I'll have to go back and have a better hunt and if they were missing and get replaced, I'll know exactly where to look next time so it'll make it easier.

 

Finding your caches - Losing my marbles.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by crr003:

quote:
Originally posted by Sparticus:

.........

As long as the cache box is intact and the items are inside then why sign the log. You found the cache, then log as found.

........


 

Are you serious? Is this a wind up??


 

I think some people get wound up easier than others. IT'S A GAME

And as for other reasons for not signing the log, there are others. I sign all my logs except those I can't. I don't carry a spare pencil or paper, maybe another rule that all geocachers should do. Just in case the cache is short of one or the other.

What about standing in the pouring rain? I signed one log a few months ago and tried to keep the contents dry, without much success I'm afraid. I then decided that if other caches I found that day were compromised by the inclement weather, then I wasn't going to open them. Does that mean I didn't find them and subsequently am unable to log a find, even though I had the box in my hands.

I think common sense should prevail and if a cache owner suspects someone of 'cheating' then an email to that person should be called for.

 

We all subscribe to the same tune, unfortunatly some interpret differently and notes get misplaced.

 

Onwards and upwards. Never retreat, never surrender.

 

[This message was edited by Sparticus on August 30, 2003 at 05:35 PM.]

Link to comment

Trouble is that everybody is right! There will be times that you can’t sign the logbook, for any number of reasons. But it would be worth stating why when you log it on the web site. We enjoy reading other peoples notes in the logbooks when we find / maintain a cache.

But at the end of the day, the only reward you get in this game is finding the cache. Okay you might want the kudos of reaching 100, 200 or more. But if you are cheating then and logging lots of finds that you haven’t actually made – you will be found out. We all seem to be getting bogged down in the semantics of what is the find of a single cache. The cheaters aren’t the people who “interpret” a single find; it’s the people who are just spoiling it for all of us making armchair finds!

 

There are a lot of people who feel passionately about Geocaching out there, and Geocachings success comes from each of them feeling that it is “their” game. But at the end of the day, the rules are quite loose so that anybody can play the game from families, to teens to OAP to people with mental or physical disability to Rock climbers to People who haven’t wanted to walk very far for years. Each individual can play the game to their own standard, and each enjoys their own achievement at getting out there and playing the game.

 

…We’ll put our soapbox away now… icon_wink.gif

 

Eagles may fly high, but weasels don’t get sucked into jet engines…

Link to comment

Sparticus,

 

If you can't be bothered to carry a pencil/pen, maybe you shouldn't be allowed to log the cache. As for standing in the rain, personally I crouch down and shield the cache/log book with my coat. Maybe you don't take a coat. I'm sure you can come up with a few other cases that make the log signing impossible. (Oh, if my back up pen fails I carry a Leatherman Wave so I can cut my finger and sign in blood - not needed to yet though).

 

It's interesting that in a parallel thread Eckington, (who I guess is important), has proposed (I haven’t read everything, but I think this is the gist of it) that if the cache owner doesn’t find your signature in the physical log book, then he/she could delete your log. Now if it was just me ranting on, I could understand the reaction to have a couple of quick mail exchanges and let life move on. But I do feel somewhat vindicated by the fact that higher authority(?) is also taking this seriously.

 

I do like Dean&Abi’s conciliatory posting, and I think this is probably the best way to go – if you can’t sign the book (arm broken, ink frozen…..), clearly state in the on line log and leave your find to the mercy of the cache owner.

 

It’s been an interesting discussion (for me at least).

 

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by crr003:

I do like Dean&Abi’s conciliatory posting, and I think this is probably the best way to go – if you can’t sign the book (arm broken, ink frozen…..), clearly state in the on line log and leave your find to the mercy of the cache owner.

 

It’s been an interesting discussion (for me at least).

 

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum


 

I agree 100%. Thanks for an interesting discussion

 

Onwards and upwards. Never retreat, never surrender.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Hornet:

and was certain I'd found the right hidey-hole I changed it to a "Found". Was I wrong to do so? I don't think so.

 

_________________________________________________________


If you were looking for your lost specs and found your glasses case would you consider that you have found your specs?

How you play the game is up to you. If you think thats ok then its ok, but for us we have to find

what we set out for. Our first not found was the worst, we found the place, even the hidy hole, matched the picture, nowhere else was close by but the cache was not there it had gone. How could we claim to have found the cache?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by kennamatic:

when you got caught with all your french verbs written up under your shirt sleeve. icon_wink.gif

 


 

It wasn't the french verbs I kept up my sleeve, it was more usually the individual french letters...

 

No trees were harmed during the production of this posting, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced....

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Spokes:

quote:
Originally posted by The Hornet:

and was certain I'd found the right hidey-hole I changed it to a "Found". Was I wrong to do so? I don't think so.

 

_________________________________________________________


If you were looking for your lost specs and found your glasses case would you consider that you have found your specs?

How you play the game is up to you. If you think thats ok then its ok, but for us we have to find

what we set out for. Our first not found was the worst, we found the place, even the hidy hole, matched the picture, nowhere else was close by but the cache was not there it had gone. How could we claim to have found the cache?


 

Having read the discussions on this (and another thread) I have now changed my mind. Although I 'know' I had the right location the box wasn't there. The log is now a NOT found. Shame really, it was a good cache (see here). It's a pity the cache owner never responded to e-mails. Maybe if he reads this we might get a response.

 

_________________________________________________________

 

Enthusiastic user of GeocacheUK - Information, not control.

 

It is better to regret something you did, rather than to regret something you didn't do.

_________________________________________________________

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Hornet:

 

_________________________________________________________

 

Having read the discussions on this (and another thread) I have now changed my mind. Although I 'know' I had the right location the box wasn't there. The log is now a NOT found. Shame really, it was a good cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=34080. It's a pity the cache owner never responded to e-mails. Maybe if he reads this we might get a response.

 

_________________________________________________________


As I said it’s up to you how you play the game but if you’re playing then its bad form not to reply to an email re the game you are playing.

Top Hat is a charter member and is active. It would not take much to reply.

Still even if Top Hat said you were in the right location, it was not there, so you did not find the cache. Shame it looks good.

A couple of caches I know of have been claimed when they are not there, because although the finder found the place they replaced the missing cache themselves.

I’m not sure about this as it could get out of hand.

One of ours was replaced but we had posted a note saying it was not there, but we had left a temporary marker and would replace when we could.

People finding the marker could log as a found. When we went to replace the cache we found that the day before it had been replaced as they had read in the log it needed a new box. I thought that was kind of them and that this was OK.

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...