What To Do With These Mistaken Finders...

[+Uplink]

I did a maintenance run on this cache today because some recent finders said that the log was wet and needed replacing, and it turned out they were all logging the first waypoint of my multi/micro! It was listed as a micro, but the first words are The above coordinates are NOT the coordinates for Escape Pod Foxtrot... Since I last serviced the cache last June, 5 out of 13 folks have logged the first waypoint on a log put there by the second person to come by! I guess I should have caught this sooner! I guess my choices are:

1. Forgetaboutit.

2. Delete all mistaken finds.

3. E-mail all mistaken finders and tell em' to fix it however they like.

What would ya'all do?

[+Sparky-Watts]

I'd email them and tell them the story, ask them to change their "Found It" to a "Note" in a polite manner. If they refuse to change it on their own, delete the logs with a note to them explaining that their log was deleted because they actually didn't find the cache, only the first stage of the cache. I know it sounds harsh, but I think that's the right thing to do since they didn't actually find the whole thing.

 

I know I'll get flamed for that response, but that's ok, because wet cats are fireproof.....

[+evergreenhiker!]

I definitely wouldn't delete the finds. Just politely ask them to find the real cache and log if it's really that big of a deal. Otherwise just let it go. what you can do is to bold the text stating that the coords above are not the final's...perhaps make it red.

[+Og's outfit]

Hmmm? I think I'd let the offenders know via e-mail, then delete their logs. After all, they did not find the cache. It's quite obvious that the cache in question is a multi. I think some folks that are new to caching simply zip the nearest caches in their units and then go a-huntin'. (my bro-in-law did this.)(sorry bro P ) If you just ignore this, these people won't know they've missed out on a different twist on caching. (multi's) And they might get the idea that nobody's minding false finds.

 

But, of course, it's your cache so it's your call. Let us know what you decided.

 

Og

[+planetrobert]

i would just let them know what happened and leave it at that.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

i would just let them know what happened and leave it at that.

Ditto. No money or trophies on the line here. I'm in this for fun and if someone makes a mistake I'll let them decide if they want to correct it or not.

[martmann]

is there anyway to make it impossible to log at the first waypoint? Is there a log sheet in it, or are people writing on the sheet with the next WP coords on it? If so laminate that puppy. or write NOT THE FINAL on it.

 

Yet another reason NOT to cache without the cache description handy.

 

I wonder if all the false finds are from people who load their GPSr up with waypoints and go caching with just that info.

[+evergreenhiker!]

is there anyway to make it impossible to log at the first waypoint? Is there a log sheet in it, or are people writing on the sheet with the next WP coords on it? If so laminate that puppy. or write NOT THE FINAL on it.

 

Yet another reason NOT to cache without the cache description handy.

 

I wonder if all the false finds are from people who load their GPSr up with waypoints and go caching with just that info.

good point martmann. sometimes I just load the waypoints and not have the sheets with me

[+WeightMan]

The problem with Martmann's point is that the sheet in the micro at wp1 clearly gives the final coordinates. Did they sign on the same side of the paper with the coords or did the first one sign on the other side and the rest followed suit?

 

Edit: spelling

Edited February 27, 2004 by WeightMan

[+CachinCin]

Did you doublecheck it against the log at the final micro, to make sure that people didn't sign both places? I've seen that happen before (cachers who sign every slip of paper along the way).

 

I think it's probably a mistake by most of the finders -- they found a log that had signatures, so they thought they had the final. I'd contact them, let them know, and ask them to change their find to a note until they can come back to complete the multicache. Betcha most slap their foreheads, say D'oh!, and come back to finish it off.

 

Cin

[+Criminal]

Archive the cache w/o deleting anything. Then rebuild it, changing it enough to prevent that from happening again, and then everybody has another cache to hunt.

[+CachinCin]

Archive the cache w/o deleting anything. Then rebuild it, changing it enough to prevent that from happening again, and then everybody has another cache to hunt.

Criminal's suggestion is the nicest one.

 

One way to keep people from signing the first waypoint is to place it on something that won't work for pens/pencils -- use a marker on a piece of plastic, cover the slip of paper with clear tape, or laminate it.

 

Cin

[+travisl]

Although I haven't come across a situation where I've had to delete a log yet, I'm fairly sure I'd be much more of a stickler than most of the folks who've spoken up so far. I'd e-mail the finders, point out what I understood to be their error, and ask them to verify that they'd signed the final log book, or else change their smilie to a note. One week later... deletion.

 

I'd probably go check the logbook first, and only e-mail those who I was more certain messed up.

 

Last week, for my Kalaloch national park virtual, I was afraid I was going to have to, because I didn't get the required information from the most recent finder. I e-mailed him, and as days passed, it gnawed at me, and I'm sure I'd have deleted the log by now if he hadn't e-mailed the answer to me three days later (it had gotten stuck in his outbox for three days). I have requested that other finders for that virtual edit their logs to meet the cache requirements.

 

I've always believed that cache owners are the ultimate gatekeepers to find counts, and their word is law as to whether a cacher gets a smilie or a note. It's the cache owner's responsibility -- perhaps it's even their duty to the geocaching community -- to maintain the integrity of the logs on their caches.

[+Sparky-Watts]

Although I haven't come across a situation where I've had to delete a log yet, I'm fairly sure I'd be much more of a stickler than most of the folks who've spoken up so far. I'd e-mail the finders, point out what I understood to be their error, and ask them to verify that they'd signed the final log book, or else change their smilie to a note. One week later... deletion.

 

I'd probably go check the logbook first, and only e-mail those who I was more certain messed up.

 

Last week, for my Kalaloch national park virtual, I was afraid I was going to have to, because I didn't get the required information from the most recent finder. I e-mailed him, and as days passed, it gnawed at me, and I'm sure I'd have deleted the log by now if he hadn't e-mailed the answer to me three days later (it had gotten stuck in his outbox for three days). I have requested that other finders for that virtual edit their logs to meet the cache requirements.

 

I've always believed that cache owners are the ultimate gatekeepers to find counts, and their word is law as to whether a cacher gets a smilie or a note. It's the cache owner's responsibility -- perhaps it's even their duty to the geocaching community -- to maintain the integrity of the logs on their caches.

At last, someone who agrees with me!! I like the last part of your post, too....I agree that it's the owner's responsibility to keep things on the up and up.....

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

It is the cache owner who gets to decide. But all you need is one rogue cacher who's upset to end up with some plundered caches. It's happened in our area.

 

I won't delete a log. I might ask the cacher to delete his own but I won't delete it, if they want to be a cheater then I"ll leave it up to them.

 

One cacher logged one of my hides 3 times. He has maybe 30 or 40 finds now. I'm not going to worry about it.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I realize that your cache is listed as a multicache, but it doesn't really say that on the page except for the little icon at the top. Perhaps you could put something in the short-description about it being a multi, then use the long description for your "cache story"

[+The Jester]

I've had a similar situation. One of my micro's for a multi ended up less than 50 feet from a micro cache (mine went in first, the other hider offered to re-locate but I didn't ask him too). Many people logged his with a comment that there wasn't a log so they signed the back of the stash note. I'd check every once in a while and e-mail those that I could read that they had the wrong cache. Finally when I switched to waterproof paper, I wrote - in large letters - "This is not <such and such cache> it is part of <my cache>" on the backside of the paper I used. Maybe that's all you need in the first micro.

 

BTW, I've never had to delete a log, but I did encrypt one for plainly stating where the cache was exactly! Added a note to explain why I did it.

[+Seattle Seekers]

I actually agree with Travisl. If they can't read the description before they go out then I'm sorry to say, too bad for them. I would definately email them with a nice note and then if no response within a reasonable time, the log would be deleted.

[+Jamie Z]

It's the cache owner's responsibility -- perhaps it's even their duty to the geocaching community -- to maintain the integrity of the logs on their caches.

I wish more people felt this way.

 

My vote is to email the cachers and explain that they have not completed the cache, and that they need to change their logs to a note or it will be deleted since it did not meet the requirements for a find.

 

I think it's the owners' job to keep this from being a free-for-all. Yesterday I hunted a well-known difficult micro in my area. I didn't read the logs beforehand, but I saw numerous frownies. After my hunt, I had to add my own frownie, and then I read the logs. Of the 20 or so people who have logged finds, 2 or 3 admitted in their log that they didn't find the container. It surprises me that owners don't seem to care about this type of logging.

 

Jamie

[nolenator]

I thought it was weird when the cache was listed as a multi when I found the log at the first waypoint. The log was so soaked I didn't even bother to try and read it. Now, I will have to go back and finish it when it is back up and running again. I think that maybe Uplink could e-mail the second waypoint to the previous loggers of the first waypoint and let them use their honor. I know I get great satisfaction of finding caches of all types. Peace, Nolenator