Pre signing the log

[+seneca]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbell111:

as a local fellow has gotten a burr up his butt and deleted my 'find' logs on all of his caches.

---

 

This is far more egregious conduct than posting a dubious find. This person should be turfed.

 

I think that most of the points made regarding proper and improper find reports are valid (and I like the guidelines posted by sbell111) but I believe that ultimately finds should be self-determined by the finder, and certainly not unilaterally regulated by the hider (which can only result in rather ugly p***ing matches). The only other alternative would be for a third party arbitrator/referee applying rigid rules - which I don't think anyone wants (particularly in view of previous threads that have indicated find counts dont'really matter anyways).

 

This doesn't mean we shouldn't be discussing proper and improper conduct regarding posting finds on this forum - I believe we attain our morals through communications with others.

 

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!)

[Eric O'Connor]

quote:

---

Originally posted by seneca:

I believe that ultimately finds should be self-determined by the finder, and certainly not unilaterally regulated by the hider (which can only result in rather ugly p***ing matches).

---

 

This has been brought up before, but it would be quite trivial to setup a password to log a cache as a "find".

 

Traditional caches could have it written inside the lids, virtuals could use this as the required word to log...etc.

 

The way to make this fair would be to have the log be considered valid if the password was valid. Removing the ability to indiscriminitly delete logs that were properly submitted. (Groundspeak administration being the obvious exeption)

 

The cache hider could change the password as often as they'd like but this would require more work on their part since they'd have to be sure that someone could log it.

[+Alan2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eric O'Connor:

 

This has been brought up before, but it would be quite trivial to setup a password to log a cache as a "find".

 

Traditional caches could have it written inside the lids, virtuals could use this as the required word to log...etc.

 

The way to make this fair would be to have the log be considered valid if the password was valid. Removing the ability to indiscriminitly delete logs that were properly submitted. (Groundspeak administration being the obvious exeption)

 

The cache hider could change the password as often as they'd like but this would require more work on their part since they'd have to be sure that _someone_ could log it.

---

 

If you remove the ability for the cache owner to modify or delete a log by others, he would not be able to handle spoilers that are posted. Asking administration to handle it would be burdensome to them.

 

Alan

[Sickticket]

I have had to edit a find log on one of my caches. I had clearly stated that the cache was on posted association property and that I owned property in the association. I gave them coordinates for the best entry point that caused them to cross the least amount of posted land and that if there were any questions of why they were there I have my name in the clue section.

 

Someone got miffed that the land was posted and that the cache should be archived and made inactive. All other cache finders loved the spot and understood that there would be no problem crossing posted land. I deleted the negative log so that other seekers would not be scared away.

 

Was I correct in my actions???

[Eric O'Connor]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan2:

If you remove the ability for the cache owner to modify

---

 

I left out the word "modify" intentionally, the cache owner would still be able to encrypt or possibly even "hide" the log where nothing but the smiley face and finder name is displayed.

 

Spoilers are a seperate issue, but equally as serious, even though I never-ever-ever-ever read the logs prior to a hunt just in case someone happened to sneak in a spoiler or tidbit that changes the experience.

 

All of this is assuming that the Groundspeak team see this as worthy-of-code.

[Eric O'Connor]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sickticket:

I gave them coordinates for the best entry point that caused them to cross the least amount of posted land and that if there were any questions of why they were there I have my name in the clue section.

---

 

As an owner, can you put little geocaching.com logo stickers on/near these posted signs with a thumbs up image?

 

Something to the effect of "Everyone keep out unless you happen to be looking for a cache, and then be careful so you don't hurt yourself and sue me for every red cent I own" or something like that...

[Eric O'Connor]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sickticket:

I gave them coordinates for the best entry point that caused them to cross the least amount of posted land and that if there were any questions of why they were there I have my name in the clue section.

---

 

As an owner, can you put little geocaching.com logo stickers on/near these posted signs with a thumbs up image?

 

Something to the effect of "Everyone keep out unless you happen to be looking for a cache, and then be careful so you don't hurt yourself and sue me for every red cent I own" or something like that...

[+JeeperJohn]

I don't see anything wrong in letting a companion log a cache you've just hidden as long as they had to actually hunt for it. I think it is just plain WRONG to log your own hidden cache as a find. BOOOO.

[+glenn95630]

I went down to Wal-mart and signed the first page of all the little notebooks for sale. Was that wrong?

[cap kal]

quote:

---

Originally posted by glenn95630:

I went down to Wal-mart and signed the first page of all the little notebooks for sale. Was that wrong?

---

 

That has got to be the best thing I've heard yet.

[Team Dragon]

quote:

---

I have had to edit a find log on one of my caches. I had clearly stated that the cache was on posted association property and that I owned property in the association. I gave them coordinates for the best entry point that caused them to cross the least amount of posted land and that if there were any questions of why they were there I have my name in the clue section.

 

Someone got miffed that the land was posted and that the cache should be archived and made inactive. All other cache finders loved the spot and understood that there would be no problem crossing posted land. I deleted the negative log so that other seekers would not be scared away.

 

Was I correct in my actions???

---

 

You need to remember that a HOA is a separate legal entity and being a member of a HOA normally doesn't give you the right to put anything on HOA property any more than being a shareholder of a company allows you to put a cache at their headquarters.

 

If the poster was complaining about this then I could see his point. Of course, your rights would vary depending on the HOA and getting permission from the board would be best.

[+Alan2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by glenn95630:

I went down to Wal-mart and signed the first page of all the little notebooks for sale. Was that wrong?

---

 

Only if you didn't post it on the cache's web page!

 

Alan

[+Logscaler and Red]

... do you think you just might tell "the rest of the story" as the saying goes ? You just might want to tell the relationship between the people involved in this story. I have been the "first" finder to a few of those caches myself and understanding the situation, I have no problem with it. Anyway, whats the big deal about being first ? Red and I have around 60 +/- first finds out of 280 +/- finds and there was nothing any better or worse about them then the rest. Just enjoy the hunt, be it your log is 1st, 3rd, or 500. Just sign the book, harass B*****D on the log book page and on the web and know that you are the "Legitimate" first finder