Logging a cache as found when you couldn't find it...

July 16, 2002

Need some advice...

One of my caches appears to be MIA. I am having a friend go to it in the next few days to see if it is indeed gone or misplaced. Someone visited the cache sight yesterday and logged it as a find, though they say it was missing. What is the proper way to handle that? Just let it go? I never log (as finds) caches I can't find... or are obviously missing... they are just.. missing.

20.7k · July 16, 2002

I would email the cacher and ask him to change his post to a 'not found'. If he refuses to change it after a reasonable amount of time, you are certainly within your right to delete his log.

5.9k · July 16, 2002

I've banged my head against a tree before (may explain a lot) thinking the cache was MIA, only to find it after a fresh start or a re-read of the clues. It ain't MIA 'til you say it's MIA.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

What is the price of experience, do men buy it for a song,

Or wisdom for a dance in the street.................

July 16, 2002

Since there are advocates of logging a find when they find the cache location but no cache, I would email the finder, ask him exactly where he thought the cache should have been, and let him keep the find as long as 1) he/she was in the right spot, and 2) the cache is indeed missing. If he was looking under the rock in the picture (entitled "Where the cache isn't"), and that's not the place, he should change his log to a not found.

Had I been the finder, I would've posted a note and emailed you to make sure that I was in the right spot before logging a find that I didn't actually find, but felt I was entitled to.

-Craig/TeamCNJC

... Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--

I took off through the thorns, chest high, ...

5.3k · July 16, 2002

They didn't find the cache. How they can claim it as a find is beyond me. They even admit to not thoroughly searching for it! My guess is that it is still there and they just didn't find it.

Email them and ask them to change their log to a Not Found. If they don't, then delete the log.

July 16, 2002

I found a $100 bill in the street the other day ... well, I was in the exact spot that my friend said he dropped it in but it wasn't there. Am I $100 richer?

1.1k · July 16, 2002

just a nature hike. If I go deer hunting but do not bag a critter, I do not get steaks. Find "it" or known parts of "it" or, post a "not found" or a "note" and describe your search. If your close, the owner has the option of sending you more information to continue or renew your search or the information will let the owner know there is a problem and the cache needs attention. just my nickels worth.

July 16, 2002

Part of the challenge of Geocaching for me are the unexpected pitfalls that get in the way of finding the cache. One of those pitfalls is that somebody may have stolen/plundered the cache before you got there. Calling that a find would be like saying, "I would have found it, if it didn't get dark, so I am posting it as a find". But, heh... if people want to cheat at solitaire....who are they cheating?

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

July 16, 2002

I am still mulling it over. I hate to be the bad guy! But I also have a few caches under my belt that I wasn't able to find and haven't logged cuz it just doesn't seem right. If indeed the cache is missing, I will have to rethink it. We had a friend log it a week and a half ago, and all was well.

*sigh*

July 16, 2002

We had a finder not find the cache, and log it by saying they "knew" they had found the spot. The previous finder removed the cache and returned it BEFORE the aforementioned finder didn't find it.

confused?

July 16, 2002

Zzzoey,

We have both searched for the same cache and neither of us were able to find it and we both logged it as a "not found" as we beleived it was missing. As to date the cache owner has archived the cache BUT has still not comfirmed whether it is there or not and I feel that our "not found" logs are proper. (If) it shakes out to as it is there and we missed it, I will leave the log as posted. (If) it turns out that it was indeed MIA then I may change the log to a note stating that the cache was MIA and therefore NOT a "not found" log on our stats. I think that it is best to log a cache as found ONLY if it is actually found (and not just the location), or log it as not found, or don't log at all. In the case where you didn't find it and then returned later to find it on another day, I would mention in the log that we didn't find the 1st time but did the next. So I'm with seneca...It's not found 'til it's found! I would also e mail the poster and ask them to read this thread.

Capt. Jack

July 16, 2002

I had forgotten that cache Jack. That was a tough haul too, and not near much else. I know those guys are still out and about caching, but maybe haven't had a chance to go up and retrieve it. Or maybe they did but didn't log it cuz the cache was archived. I personally like to see notes on archived caches just as a courtesy for folks who tried.

I cross my fingers that "Erratic Memories" is still there. Hate to lose two caches in a week. Of course we don't know if "Quest for the Holy Grail" is lost, but it seems very likely it probably got melted in the wildfire

At least Navdog got to it.

It seems this is a fairly hot topic and that maybe Jeremy should weigh in. Actually, I think everyone is on the don't log it unless you write in the book (at least on a traditional cache).. so there isn't much debate. Thanks!

July 16, 2002

I had forgotten that cache Jack. That was a tough haul too, and not near much else. I know those guys are still out and about caching, but maybe haven't had a chance to go up and retrieve it. Or maybe they did but didn't log it cuz the cache was archived. I personally like to see notes on archived caches just as a courtesy for folks who tried.

I cross my fingers that "Erratic Memories" is still there. Hate to lose two caches in a week. Of course we don't know if "Quest for the Holy Grail" is lost, but it seems very likely it probably got melted in the wildfire

At least Navdog got to it.

It seems this is a fairly hot topic and that maybe Jeremy should weigh in. Actually, I think everyone is on the don't log it unless you write in the book (at least on a traditional cache).. so there isn't much debate. Thanks!

1.3k · July 16, 2002

Just because someone couldn't find a cache doesn't mean it's not there. We had two no finds in a row on one of our caches. One from an experienced team and another from a newbie. We checked the cache out and it was right where it's supposed to be.

If it had gone missing I think we would have allowed the people to change their logs to a find, if they told us they were looking in the right spot. (not just the general area)

I think you are well within your rights as a cache owner to ask the person to change their find to a no find or just a note until you determine the status of the cache.

If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people??

July 17, 2002

Interested in the group's view on this one:

Cache page has a "cache is missing" warning on it.

Someone goes out to cache, unaware of the status of the cache (maybe downloaded coords without looking at the page).

Person cannot find cache, but finds signs it was there (say paint from the cache box).

Person logs a "find" based on having been in the correct location.

Cache page now shows Find log after a No Find log and the cache is officially missing.

5.3k · July 17, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Capt. Jack:

(If) it shakes out to as it is there and we missed it, I will leave the log as posted. (If) it turns out that it was indeed MIA then I may change the log to a note stating that the cache was MIA and therefore NOT a "not found" log on our stats.

Huh?

Are you under the impression that a "not found" log is some kind of black mark on your record? That view is absurd.

You searched for the cache. You didn't find it. You posted a "not found" note. All those are proper. Don't go changing it in some misguided attempt to "improve" your statistics!

5.3k · July 17, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Capt. Jack:

(If) it shakes out to as it is there and we missed it, I will leave the log as posted. (If) it turns out that it was indeed MIA then I may change the log to a note stating that the cache was MIA and therefore NOT a "not found" log on our stats.

Huh?

Are you under the impression that a "not found" log is some kind of black mark on your record? That view is absurd.

You searched for the cache. You didn't find it. You posted a "not found" note. All those are proper. Don't go changing it in some misguided attempt to "improve" your statistics!

July 17, 2002

Well I dunno. I thought the idea was to be able to physically sign the log. I guess I can't do that if I don't find the cache itself?

I have posted some "not found" logs, and one even turned up truely missing. That one made me feel somewhat good in that #1 we weren't blind and #2 the cache owner checked, confirmed missing, and updated the cache. Now others won't spend their time looking for what is not there.

One cache near me went missing, and the owner turned it into a virtual until they can replace it. I guess in this case, just "visiting" the area will count as a find, but this seems to be one of those rare instances.

Related... I know one virtual cache near me, and I know exactly what it is and where it is. I haven't been back for over a year, before I started cache hunting. But I won't log this one as a find until I actually get there...

38.2k · July 17, 2002

Here's an interesting one. Missing for nearly a year, it's since been logged by 16 people. It was originally a jar with its lid screwed to a board. At first people were logging the find of a lid. In the end they were just logging the screw holes!

One guy didn't even find those and posted it as a find. Some of these people are veteran cachers too. Kind of dishonest I think. It was thankfully archived this week or who knows how many would have counted it as a find:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=4364

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on July 17, 2002 at 03:35 AM.]

July 17, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Fizzymagig
Huh?

Are you under the impression that a "not found" log is some kind of black mark on your record? That view is absurd.

You searched for the cache. You didn't find it. You posted a "not found" note. All those are proper. Don't go changing it in some misguided attempt to "improve" your statistics!

If I thought that a "not found" was a black mark then I wouldn't have posted it as such. If this particular cache ends up being MIA and (IF) I did change the post, it would be to a note which would not change stats one way or the other. We also went to another cache and discovered it MIA, confirmed the site with a cacher that had been there previously and it was quickly archived. So we posted a "note" instead of "found" or "not found". Does this seem "misguided"?

Back to original topic, I think that for a "find" to be logged (on traditional caches), one should physically have the cache in hand & sign the log book.

July 17, 2002

That's a new one. But funny nonetheless.

The numbers game is just a numbers game. It means very little. I realized that when we went to K Falls and got 22 caches in a day and a half. Since the density and difficulty of caches varies so much, the number of finds has VERY LITTLE to do with the effort a cacher has put into finding his caches. Some folks avoid all caches above a 2 difficulty. We can't really afford to do that.. We end up spending lots of time on very difficult caches, just cuz they are geographically closer to us, and getting motels a day away can get expensive. And besides, the more you have to work for a cache the more you appreciate it (just my opinion-or at least I keep telling myself that)... But the biggest reward for us, is that you are usually rewarded with a nice view or spot to cool your hooves before continuing on to the next one.

I am still waiting on my dad to visit the Erratic Memories cache to see if he can find it. Wish I weren't so far away, I would run over after work to check on it. Ahh.. the trials and tribulations of having placed caches OUTSIDE of my area of habitation. *sigh*

July 17, 2002

I think that logging a find when you didn't actually find the cache and just because you are in the area is not appropriate. Log it as a "Note" or as a "Not Found". Mostly, no one cares about the found statistics, anyway--It's a game!

Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son!

July 17, 2002

I think that logging a find when you didn't actually find the cache and just because you are in the area is not appropriate. Log it as a "Note" or as a "Not Found". Mostly, no one cares about the found statistics, anyway--It's a game!

Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son!

5.3k · July 17, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Capt. Jack:

We also went to another cache and discovered it MIA, confirmed the site with a cacher that had been there previously and it was quickly archived. So we posted a "note" instead of "found" or "not found". Does this seem "misguided"?

Yes, it does. A "not found" note would have been appropriate, since it reflects what your experience was.

Despite your protestation to the contrary, I suspect that you consider a "not found" note a sign of some kind of failure. As I said before, that it absurd.

July 17, 2002

It implies the cache is there, but the cacher couldn't find it. It may not reduce your find count, but that frowny face is a haunting presence on your "mycache" page. If I know a cache is missing, or confirm it is missing, I won't log a "not found"... that implies that there was something to find. I totally agree with Capn Jack on this one.

PS Still haven't heard back about Erratic Memories *sigh*

5.3k · July 18, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Zzzoey:

A Not Found is a failure IMHO

It implies the cache is there, but the cacher couldn't find it.

It is so sad that you believe the above. Of course, it implies nothing of the sort.

July 18, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Zzzoey:
...If I know a cache is missing, or confirm it is missing, I won't log a "not found"... that implies that there was something to find...*sigh*

By no stretch of the imagination (or the English language) does "not found" imply there was "something to find"

I LIKE MY FROWNIE FACES!

Out of my meagre lot of finds/not founds I have three frownie faces. The first, I went back and found - so it makes me feel good when I look at it - perseverence paid off!; The second, I am planning (and looking forward to) going after again; the third was not there to be found - which gives me some satisfaction in knowing that it was not in anyway a failure on my part!

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

July 18, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Zzzoey:
...If I know a cache is missing, or confirm it is missing, I won't log a "not found"... that implies that there was something to find...*sigh*

By no stretch of the imagination (or the English language) does "not found" imply there was "something to find"

I LIKE MY FROWNIE FACES!

Out of my meagre lot of finds/not founds I have three frownie faces. The first, I went back and found - so it makes me feel good when I look at it - perseverence paid off!; The second, I am planning (and looking forward to) going after again; the third was not there to be found - which gives me some satisfaction in knowing that it was not in anyway a failure on my part!

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

July 18, 2002

Maybe in baseball they should not record the 'strikes' for batters. Only write down for the records the home runs. Or, if you get a triple, then you should be able to call it a home run anyway. I mean, you were more than half way around the diamond.

Talk about your plenty, talk about your ills

One man gathers what another man spills - St. Stephen (on caching)

-Dru Morgan www.theheavenlyhost.com/dru

3.1k · July 18, 2002

I recall once when I was the second cacher to log a cache. Well when I got there no one had signed the log in front of me. I mentioned this to the owner of the log and he asked me if I thought he should delete the guys log in front of me.

I didn't want him to delete it. After all this is sort of the honor system. He was within his rights to delete the log of course, but, no real harm is done. The cacher in front of me only had a few finds and he still only has a few finds.

Never Squat With Yer Spurs On

July 18, 2002

A quote by seneca ""I would have found it, if it didn't get dark, so I am posting it as a find". But, heh... if people want to cheat at solitaire....who are they cheating?"

This comment really gets down to the heart of things here. I mean really if the geocacher felt that they had gone through the efforts and want to count it as a find - what does it really matter. Thats their problem. Lets not police here. Let it be. If they are in direct competition with you in some way, well fine. But, in this sport its fro the individual.

July 19, 2002

'Since there are advocates of logging a find when they find the cache location but no cache'

How can anyone log anything as a find? how do they know they are at the cache location unless they sight the cache? common sense.

If you've seen it you've found it and can log it

If youve not seen it then you dont know if your in the right place or are in the wrong place and so as you havent found it you cant log it as found.

July 19, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by GAZWOZHERE:
'Since there are advocates of logging a find when they find the cache location but no cache'

How can anyone log anything as a find? how do they know they are at the cache location unless they sight the cache? common sense.

With physical caches, I'd say you gotta sign the log to count it. I wouldn't count it as a find if I merely found evidence that it had been there. It's annoying to get skunked but the uncertainty is part of the fun.

In checking my own caches, I've found some web entries without corresponding log entries and vice versa. From the owner perspective, I like to see all finders report it but, in the end, who really cares if the log is not completely accurate?

As for "cheating," well, it's kinda like people cutting in line. It doesn't pay to get too worked up about it. Like the man said, "They say it takes all kinds. It doesn't really but they're here anyway!"

July 22, 2002

This thread, Cheaters, kinda talks about that, too. Bothered me (as a mild competitor) to see someone log a find when they didn't. A guy in my area looked for one of my caches, logged it as a find and said in his log that he didn't want to get shot by a trigger happy neighbor (who was a State Trooper). We told him that the previous logs about the neighbor were actually anecdotal posts by cachers who had a great time. He deleted it, and a couple weeks later, he said he found it, TNLN, but when we checked the logs, he never signed it. Since he kept talking about how irritating it was to have the first page of caches from his Zip Code contain unfound caches, we are pretty sure he didn't find it.

Really, it doesn't do anyone harm but himself. And if he isn't harmed, I guess I don't care. I'm not going to start a fight with this guy just 'cause he is playing wrong (an opinion, but my right).

Sigh.

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

Go! And don't be afraid to get a little wet!

Logging a cache as found when you couldn't find it...

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation