Seeking comments about this cache

[+Salvelinus]

A friend and new geocacher brought this cache to my attention and asked me a couple of questions about it. After reading the logs, it seems this cache has been destroyed by an animal and stolen in its short career. Be that as it may, what puzzles me is:

 

1. Do these circumstances warrent someone getting credit for a find that they never really found?

 

2. Why would the owner post a find of their own cache...twice?

 

I understand that posting a find of your own cache is probably a newbie mistake and I understand cache owners can give credit to anyone they want. But, why post a find unless you actually found the cache, or at least remnants of it. What's the point?

 

Initially I felt some spirit of the game has been comprimised here and my friend sort of felt the same and wondered if logging finds of unfound caches was common practice. I said that I felt it wrong to log finds like this because I didn't want to give the impression to a new geocacher that this may be ok.

 

However, the circumstance with this cache may be enough that giving credit for an unfound find is alright. But, I was wondering what the community thinks. Normally I would let this stuff go, but since a young impressionable geocacher inquired to me, I figured the community opinion may be important!

 

Any thoughts?

 

"The trail will be long and full of frustrations. Life is a whole and good and evil must be accepted together"

 

Ralph Abele

[+Ltljon]

But each to their own.

I posted a find on a plundered cache once because I did find the hook from which it originally hung from & I put up a temporary cache there with a makeshift log book (before I left) which someone else found a few days later. Given all the time I'd spent looking for this thing (2 different trips & 350 miles from home) I felt just in considering it a find although most may not. Probably wouldn't do it again but at the time I hadn't been at it too long. Most will say if you didn't sign the logbook on a traditional cache...you didn't find it & for the most part that's true. I placed a cache at this same area after finding that the original placer had gotten out of the game.

Still I can see no reason to log a find on one's own cache, but again, to each his own...it's just a fun little game!

[+JoGPS]

If I had hiked 2.6 miles and found any part of it, You bet I would have logged it as a find. Because I had found part of it and let the cache owner know it had been destroyed ………JOE

[+IV_Warrior]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jogps:

If I had hiked 2.6 miles and found any part of it, You bet I would have logged it as a find. Because I had found part of it and let the cache owner know it had been destroyed ………JOE

---

 

notice however, they posted 2 NOT founds before posting the find. my guess is the owner decided they had found the correct LOCATION, but the cache was missing, and told them to post as a find for being in the right spot, or possibly actually finding part of the cache.

 

why the owner posts as FINDS instead of NOTES is beyond me, but it's not the first or probably last time someone will do it.

 

I'm lost. I've gone to find myself. If I should happen to get back before I return, please ask me to wait.

[+TMAN264]

I think that there are two different types of Geocachers. One group falls in the catagory of not caring what other people think, they cache for their own enjoyment and that is it.

The other school of thought is of a more competitive nature, where logging on your own cache is wrong, as is logging caches you didn't find, etc. I fall into the second catagory, but I try not to let issues like this bug me, as I don't like to ruin other cachers fun.

 

Just my opinion, I could be wrong!

 

Will cache for food.

[+sbell111]

Your second question is probably the easier one to get to the bottom of. We do see this fairly often. In my opinion, this is likely an error that they don't even realize that they are making.

 

The first issue, logging a find when you didn't close the deal has been addressed on a number of occasions. Check out this thread, this thread and this thread. I think people generally fall within a few distinct groups on this.

 

• If the cache wasn't in the original location, don't log as a find, even if you signed the log
• If you didn't sign the log, don't log it as a find
• If you found a piece of the cache, log a find
• If you searched for a while, log it as a find

 

I'll admit, I waffle on this one. Part of me says you shouldn't log a find unless you sign the log (#2). Part of me says if you find a chunk of it so you are certain that it is plundered, log as a find (#3). There are some clear problems with this theory. Since most people don't read the logs prior to searching for a cache, the fact that the last post was a find gives others the impression that the cache is fine, when it is, in fact, destroyed.

 

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

[+Salvelinus]

I chalked up posting your own cache as a find being a newbie mistake. No biggie.

 

However, If you didn't find any part of the cache, regardless of circumstances, after actually looking for it. Then IMO it should not be logged or given credit as a find.

 

I hope geocaching dosen't get so "feel-good" that we start agreeing that an actual "find" is the same as a "good try".

 

Salvelinus

 

p.s. I'm not into numbers, just concerned about integridity...see no locationless!

 

"The trail will be long and full of frustrations. Life is a whole and good and evil must be accepted together"

 

Ralph Abele

 

[This message was edited by Salvelinus on February 24, 2003 at 11:17 AM.]

[+Jamie Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TMAN264:

One group falls in the catagory of not caring what other people think, they cache for their own enjoyment and that is it.

The other school of thought is of a more competitive nature, where logging on your own cache is wrong, as is logging caches you didn't find, etc.

---

There may be different schools of thought, but I don't think these are them.

 

I like this game for both the competitive aspect (there's been some rivalry in the Mississippi state lead) as well as the part of the game where nobody keeps score. I like the hunt.

 

The thing is, none of that has anything to do with logging a find or not. Or at least it shouldn't. What about integrity or honesty? How can I feel good about logging a find when I didn't find the cache? I don't care what other people think, that's true. But I care what I think, and I think it would be fraudulent to post a find when I didn't.

 

Jamie

[+Polgara]

One of my more recent finds was a 5 location multi cache. When I went looking for the cache at the last site, it took me over 2 hours to find it, but I didn't give up cause i live over 3 hours away from this cache and i had put alot of work into finding it and i wasn't leaving without it. Maybe some people will think thats rediculous, but i just wanted to finish what i had started. If I hadn't found the fifth part and signed the book, I'd never had logged it online as a find, cause it wouldn't be complete, even though i had the other 4 parts.

 

I don't when 'close' ever translated to found, it sure wouldn't have worked for this recently found cache:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=46102&log=y&decrypt=

 

(Congrats Kevin & Susan)

 

As far as logging your own cache as a find, isn't that kinda like buying yourself your own birthday present?

 

True-North