+Learned Gerbil Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 I visited the cache this morning. The webpage shows it as hidden on 9 February. Guildford Beach Ramble After I made my Log someone who "tested" the cache has posted a log dated two months earlier. Is this acceptable as I have not seen it done before? I am also surprised the system allows a find log date before the hidden date. Quote Link to comment
+Rocky Balboa Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 I dont think there is a rule, but if you've found a cache you've found a cache so I don't see a problem with logging it really. I've done a hornet cache before it was ok'd before, as he had sent me and pid a copy of the page over email. Two months does seem a little odd though, I don't know of many people who plant caches, then wait 2 months before putting them in the approval que! Was this other finder Seasider by any chance? he sniffs out cache locations a full year before they are planted and leaves a bit of scrap paper with his log on to be put into the cache on the planters arrival Quote Link to comment
+Seasider Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 Oi! I've not had a FTF for ages ..... well, not this week anyway! Cheers! Seasider Quote Link to comment
+mongoose39uk Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 No ftf for Seasider this week, only a third on a week when he isn't caching. Sure normal service will be resumed shortly. Quote Link to comment
+The Wombles Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 The same happened to me here, mine was probably a simple mistake on the part of a subsequent (inexperienced) visitor since they found it 10 months before it was placed! It's part and parcel of the casual nature of our hobby. That's life. Quote Link to comment
+Learned Gerbil Posted February 12, 2004 Author Share Posted February 12, 2004 I am not that bothered, it was an interesting cache, and worth the trip, but I am still surprised it is so easyt to claim to have found a cache before it officilly existed. In this case there was a note saying the cache was set in September, so it looks like there were some problems getting it authorised. Quote Link to comment
+stu_and_sarah Posted February 13, 2004 Share Posted February 13, 2004 I am not that bothered, it was an interesting cache, and worth the trip, but I am still surprised it is so easyt to claim to have found a cache before it officilly existed. In this case there was a note saying the cache was set in September, so it looks like there were some problems getting it authorised. Looks like you had a FTF after it was published. I'd still count that as a FTF myself. The previous finders did get it before you, but had the slight advantage of being contacted directly before it was approved on GC.com. It was just by chance that they had a cache placed nearby, so they were picked to check it out. I guess they can happily claim their FTF too. I think you both deserve your FTFs. Cheers, Stu Quote Link to comment
Dr Crippen Posted February 13, 2004 Share Posted February 13, 2004 In the overall scheme of things:- SARS, Nuclear proliferation, World hunger, Genocide, etc, etc, does it really matter who is/claims the FTF?? (Or any other statistic for that matter) Get a grip folks - "It's only a hunt for a lunchbox" Quote Link to comment
+stu_and_sarah Posted February 13, 2004 Share Posted February 13, 2004 In the overall scheme of things:- SARS, Nuclear proliferation, World hunger, Genocide, etc, etc, does it really matter who is/claims the FTF?? What a stupid question. Of course it matters! Seriously, that's what I love about GeoCaching... if you want to compete for FTF, and there are others in your area who also like it, then you've got another game for yourselves. If you don't compete for it, you can ignore it. Likewise, if you want to find as many as possible in a day, you can do it. Others might like to compete with you on that one, too. If you like a nice walk in the woods, and a picnic, and do one cache per trip, you can doo that also. It's a different game for each different player. And yes, I like my FTFs. Sometimes it's exciting to get up really early, or go after dark to be first there. Cheers, Stu Quote Link to comment
Deego Posted February 13, 2004 Share Posted February 13, 2004 (edited) In the overall scheme of things:- SARS, Nuclear proliferation, World hunger, Genocide, etc, etc, does it really matter who is/claims the FTF??(Or any other statistic for that matter) Get a grip folks - "It's only a hunt for a lunchbox" I am not overly bothered by FTF think I have 3. But its up to everybody how they play THEIR game. All stats matter. or why do it????? . Learned Gerbil were you the first person in the log book? Edited February 13, 2004 by Deego Quote Link to comment
+Learned Gerbil Posted February 13, 2004 Author Share Posted February 13, 2004 (edited) I was not first in the book. The first entry was by the person who planted the cache, five months before it was approved. There was also an entry for the find now logged on the page by the maintainer, but this entry made it clear it was a maintenance trip on behalf of the owner. That's why I thought it strange that this then appeared after I had logged a visit as a claim for first to find. As I said, I am not that bothered, just interested in the etiquette (or should that be cachequette?) of this sort of thing especially as I am in line to maintain a Canadian's new cache in Surrey and would like to know if I am expected to log it as a find. Personally, finding a cache before it is official is worthless, and if you are maintaining for someone else, it should count as one of your own - you can't maintain something if you don't know where it is! Edited February 13, 2004 by Learned Gerbil Quote Link to comment
+Lizzzzeeeee Posted February 13, 2004 Share Posted February 13, 2004 I was not first in the book. The first entry was by the person who planted the cache, five months before it was approved. There was also an entry for the find now logged on the page by the maintainer, but this entry made it clear it was a maintenance trip on behalf of the owner. That's why I thought it strange that this then appeared after I had logged a visit as a claim for first to find. He's right about the log entries m'lud. I was there this evening and can without doubt claim to be TTF (third to find). And I did it without a GPS - so ya boo sucks! And all this from a rodent who does this with a travel bug in a race: NobbyRacer #2 'The Demon' Please don't take this post too seriously and let it offend. I've been drinking m'lud. Quote Link to comment
+Learned Gerbil Posted February 13, 2004 Author Share Posted February 13, 2004 Today I also had to search without GPS - see - Old Sarum Quote Link to comment
+stu_and_sarah Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 As I said, I am not that bothered, just interested in the etiquette (or should that be cachequette?) of this sort of thing especially as I am in line to maintain a Canadian's new cache in Surrey and would like to know if I am expected to log it as a find. This is interesting. We have finds on a few of our own caches. That's because we found them, then later offered to maintain them when owners moved away or stopped caching. We're keeping those finds - even the one we found in the lost property office, and placed back into its correct location. We still had a one-hour hunt for the correct spot, using the spoiler photos and hint. In fact, it was even harder because we had to get the right location, but there was no pile of sticks or box to confirm it! If we became a maintainer for a cache prior to finding it, we would not log a find. But then again, it's unlikely we'd become a maintainer if we hadn't already found it, because we wouldn't know where it was. If you see what I mean. Cheers, Stu Quote Link to comment
+Learned Gerbil Posted February 14, 2004 Author Share Posted February 14, 2004 That's how I would expect it to work, and how I would do it. Quote Link to comment
+The Northumbrian Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 If we became a maintainer for a cache prior to finding it, we would not log a find. But then again, it's unlikely we'd become a maintainer if we hadn't already found it, because we wouldn't know where it was. If you see what I mean. Cheers, Stu My view is that if a person becomes a maintainer of a cache , then they become the adoptive owner, so all they have done is log their own cache, something which I woudn't do . I dont give out info about a cache before it comes on the pages, I like to give everyone the sporting chance of finding it first . Nige Quote Link to comment
+stu_and_sarah Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 I dont give out info about a cache before it comes on the pages, I like to give everyone the sporting chance of finding it first . That, of course, is a very good point. 'Reserved' first finds are a little odd in my opinion. Anyone remember the discussion a while back where the hider stated on the cache page who should be the first finder, and that other logs would be deleted. That was not received too well! They had published the details, but wouldn't allow anyone else to find it first. Hmmm... Cheers, Stu Quote Link to comment
+Seasider Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Err..no! Which cache was that? Cheers! Seasider Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.