Double Logging Finds?

[Guest Quinnow]

I have noticed on several cache pages that logs are being double logged when someone finds or responds to the cache. is this a glitch or are the people that find the cache logging wrong?...and is there a way to remove one of the two logs that are the same?

here is a "for instance" http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=58 and another would be the northampton cache in NY.

I have also noticed on the mail lists this happens also where when a reply is made I get two of each.

 

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

Quinn Stone

Rochester, NY.14616

www.Navicache.com

[Guest Alex]

Guilty as charged sir. I have logged twice on a site, when I filed my visit report and entered it the report did not go away... so I entered it again. Then the penny dropped and I realised that I had scored two for one.

 

Jeremy, can you delete my duplicate entry on GC178 Port Germein, Australia, and deduct 1 from my meagre found score? Thanks, and next time I will only enter once.

[Guest Markwell]

I also went out and scoped a site (http://www.Geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=761) and logged it as found, and then when I returned with my son a couple of weeks later and logged it, even though I only had 2 sites found (this and another) these two logs on the same site registered as separate finds, giving my user ID a total of 3.

 

I didn't explain this well. Sorry.

 

Jeremy, is there a way the number of "finds" can be limited to the number of SEPARATE finds? If not, can you delete my first find on "Herrick Lake Stash" (March 12)

[Guest Quinnow]

aH...I wasn't sure that you could log a cache as being found twice by the same person. But now that I know this Jeremy can you also check into the two caches I posted above and delete one entry from each?

If it's not...it might be a good idea to explain to people to click "enter" just once when they log a Find.

 

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

Quinn Stone

Rochester, NY.14616

www.Navicache.com

 

[This message has been edited by Quinnow (edited 03-28-2001).]

[+planetrobert]

And still this is an issue for us all... some like multiple finds cuz they have amnesia and forget that they found the cache before.

 

I personally am against finding any, even an event cache, twice.

[+sept1c_tank]

I, personally, think whatever floats your boat is fine. Of course, the cache owner has the final say.

 

And I think everyone should log DNFs every time they seek but don't find. I have logged as many as 4 DNFs on a cache.

 

Furthermore, I think people should hide and seek as many caches as they can just to get their numbers up, unless, of course, they don't care about the numbers. In that case they should just never log at all or hunt virtuals.

 

And speaking of virtuals, I like them. I like them a lot. Some of the good ones are worth logging more than once.

 

Maybe we could start a new cache type...we could call it "Incarceratable Cache." The idea is to see how many different times you can log it before someone goes to jail or the cache gets blown up.!

[PC Medic]

I, personally, think whatever floats your boat is fine. Of course, the cache owner has the final say.

 

And I think everyone should log DNFs every time they seek but don't find. I have logged as many as 4 DNFs on a cache.

 

I agree, ultiple DNF logs can actually be a signal that the cache owner may want to go out and confirm the cache is stiill in place. I have actually had to do this on a couple of occasions.

 

I also agree that in the end the cache owner has the final say, so if there are log entries that should not be made, the owner has the ability to remove them.

[dkhughes]

Maybe we could start a new cache type...we could call it "Incarceratable Cache." The idea is to see how many different times you can log it before someone goes to jail or the cache gets blown up.!

 

LOL

[+Kfam]

What's with the old threads?

Since the OP, changes have been made to allow cache owners and finders to edit and delete their logs.

I'm sure that multiple finds can (and for quite some time now) be adjusted for the folks that feel that the numbers really do matter, made a mistake, or simply didn't realize or know better.

[+Prime Suspect]

And still this is an issue for us all... some like multiple finds cuz they have amnesia and forget that they found the cache before.

 

I personally am against finding any, even an event cache, twice.

You must really have nothing better to do, if you're spending your time digging up 3 year old post that you can respond to.