+Criminal Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 June 5 by TEAMFAKER (1182 found) #1179 We made the climb this morning. Looked around a bit with no luck. Used the clue and found the hide but the container was missing. Left a wooden nickle. Will contact the CO. TFTC [view this log on a separate page] So what did you find exactly? Link to comment
+WalruZ Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 A fake rock-shell that held a plastic container underneath. I have two SF hides that are like this and frankly, considering the work that goes into the shell, I would rather lose the plastic container any day. I'm also told that in this case they also found the tupperware but no contents. In another more or less nearby case they just found the shell. Both locations are muggle-rific, and the rock shells have been doing a more or less good job of protecting caches that would otherwise disappear within days. The finders emailed me and appraised me of the situation. I'm cutting slack on these. Link to comment
+Isonzo Karst Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Finding Nemo, er Velcro June 6 by mmm(117 found) Found the velcro this one was attached to but there is NOT a cache container there...appears to have been muggled. I am guessing it is okay to count it as a FIND.... Link to comment
+Criminal Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Sheesh, I counted at least 40 fake finds on this one. Link to comment
vtmtnman Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 (edited) Sheesh, I counted at least 40 fake finds on this one. How rediculous! Buwhahahaha!!!! And I love the link posting on the cache page!.Yeah...we know... Wonder how many will change to notes? I'm thinking 0. Edited June 11, 2007 by vtmtnman Link to comment
+Wacka Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 Sheesh, I counted at least 40 fake finds on this one. Why do you care? Link to comment
+Criminal Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 Sheesh, I counted at least 40 fake finds on this one. Why do you care? What makes you think I do? Link to comment
+1208ZUNI Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Sheesh, I counted at least 40 fake finds on this one. Why do you care? What makes you think I do? In the spirit of the thread, NO CACHER NAMES OR LINKS were to be used. It stayed that way for years. The thread is to make fun of the logs and NOT TO BELITTLE fellow cachers. Link to comment
+GrateBear Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Glad I found this thread, as I saw this: I found this location. I didn't know if there was a log or not. I didn't find any such thing. Searched until I felt it was time to leave the area. I belive this guy ate it. Wish the bar was open needed refreshments. Oh well hit the Irish Pub on Xxxxxx (actual street deleted). I was trying to figure how this person could log a find. Now I see-very common. As for the log, it was in an obvious place in front of the object that was the reason for the hide. And, it was found by a later cacher. Link to comment
Neos2 Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Sheesh, I counted at least 40 (URL removed) fake finds on this one[/url]. Why do you care? What makes you think I do? In the spirit of the thread, NO CACHER NAMES OR LINKS were to be used. It stayed that way for years. The thread is to make fun of the logs and NOT TO BELITTLE fellow cachers. Frankly, I'm surprised this thread has been allowed to go on this long. There is at least one person who regularly posts here who frequently includes the name of the cachers involved in the body of the log, although s/he does remove the name from the top of the log. I keep hoping that this entire thread would either be closed or just fall off the page and be forgotten. If there was ever any real humor to the thread, it faded for me when it occurred to me that might be intentional. Perhaps it's time to let this one go? Link to comment
+Miragee Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 Okay, this person had "Found it" but they haven't figured out there is a "Write Note" function for dropping off Travel Bugs . . . June 16 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) DROPPED OFF LITTLE TIKES H2 June 16 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) Dropped off multiple bugs June 16 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) Dropped off TB June 16 by Finder (40 found) The "finders" (visit link) were out at XXXXXXXXX today. We made 8 for 8. TFTC! June 16 by Another finder (36 found) Great hide!!!! Lizzards and beatles shared the site. Left small duct tape roll. TFTC. June 14 by Yet Another Finder (26 found) what a fabulous cache! great job! fun to find! TNLN TFTC June 7 by Still a Different Finder (731 found) This put a big smile on my face. Thanks for your efforts to place such a unique cache. Nice job June 5 by Another cacher (11 found) TFTC t:TB l:toy football sl June 5 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) Very cool. Kid loved it. TFTC T:TB L: stuffed football. Sl Accompanied by XXXXXXXX Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 Okay, this person had "Found it" but they haven't figured out there is a "Write Note" function for dropping off Travel Bugs . . . June 16 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) DROPPED OFF LITTLE TIKES H2 June 16 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) Dropped off multiple bugs June 16 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) Dropped off TB June 16 by Finder (40 found) The "finders" (visit link) were out at XXXXXXXXX today. We made 8 for 8. TFTC! June 16 by Another finder (36 found) Great hide!!!! Lizzards and beatles shared the site. Left small duct tape roll. TFTC. June 14 by Yet Another Finder (26 found) what a fabulous cache! great job! fun to find! TNLN TFTC June 7 by Still a Different Finder (731 found) This put a big smile on my face. Thanks for your efforts to place such a unique cache. Nice job June 5 by Another cacher (11 found) TFTC t:TB l:toy football sl June 5 by Hasn't Found "Write Note" (75 found) Very cool. Kid loved it. TFTC T:TB L: stuffed football. Sl Accompanied by XXXXXXXX Ignorance means more smilies.... Link to comment
+Ed & Julie Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 June 14 by owner's buddy (1283 found) With the cache owner today, who confirmed it was missing. He gave me permission to log the find. (disabled) June 14 by owner (816 found) Cache is gone. Will either replace or archive in near future. Link to comment
+Ed & Julie Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 May 30 by xxx xxxxx (3600 found) Having watched this dreadful movie only to be the one to report the latest demise of the cache and, in this case, its location as well, I am, with owner's wife's permission, logging my find. Thanks for the cache placement. [view this log on a separate page] (disabled) May 29 by owner (4200 found) cache is missing again. will replace or archive soon. [view this log on a separate page] (DNF) May 27 by Honesy Cacher (5208 found) dnf Link to comment
+Ed & Julie Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 Hmmmmm.... June 5 by xxxxxx (36 found) Thanks. [view this log on a separate page] (disabled) June 5 by cache owner (1844 found) Two DNFs are enough so I checked on it today to find that the cache container has gone missing! I will replace it soon, sorry for any inconvience this may have caused anyone. [view this log on a separate page] (DNF) April 3 by honest cacher 2 (711 found) I too, could not find this cache but appreciated the acorn grinding holes. My two GPSr units were steady and reading the same but no find. Most of the poison oak could be avoided which is always a good thing. [view this log on a separate page] (DNF) March 28 by honest cacher 1 (105 found) Looked for it last Sunday, couldn't find it. Went out again today, and still...no find, but it's a really cool spot. Not giving up on this one! [view this log on a separate page] Link to comment
+Miragee Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 Uh . . . Interesting log on a long-Archived cache by our friend from my post above, "Hasn't Found "Write Note" June 16 by False Find Cacher (81 found) Followed the Coords rigth to it...easy peasy. TFTC TNL: Blue lizard February 10, 2005 by Helpful Cacher! (5830 found) Cache was located and removed. January 4, 2005 by SoCalAdmin (0 found) This cache was placed on private property without permission. The owner's of the property have asked for the cache to be removed. Link to comment
+Criminal Posted June 17, 2007 Share Posted June 17, 2007 June 17 by BOGUSFINDER (179 found) I know this was archived, but we did replace it with a new log and container for those who still may want to get it. [view this log on a separate page] Link to comment
+Miragee Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Interesting . . . since Archived caches don't show up in any searches, how do they think people will "get it?" Link to comment
+Right Wing Wacko Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 June 2 by <Didn't Find It> (1193 found) We looked and looked but didn't find it. Then we read past logs and relized it was gone. We took lots of pictures, here are some. May 28 by <Honest Noob> (16 found) Found a couple of likley hiding spots, but no luck. We spent quite some time looking.... I do think it's gone. [view this log on a separate page] May 28 by <Cache Owner> (312 found) It appears that since the last find in April that the cache was taken, so I will be replacing it between July 4 and July 8. Meanwhile, this place is too nice not to visit, so I will give CREDIT FOR THE FIND IF YOU SEND ME A PICTURE OF WHERE THE CACHE WAS until I replace it. [view this log on a separate page] May 27 by [some Milestone!] (402 found) #400 A very nice spot for the milestone 400th find. Only regret is it's kind of the virtual find since the cache was missing. Still, it was fun looking for it! There were a lot of places it could have been (and some signs of others having searched for it). There were even a few places behind the falls that would have been fun getting to! I even have the required photo, courtesy of <xxxxx> Looks like the only one that knows what he's doing is the Noob! Link to comment
vtmtnman Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 (edited) June 21 by Note by integrity challenged charter member (1098 found) 11 out of 13 in this series are way off on the coordinates, ( WHY??),so I am sticking with my log! F a k e r Cacher [view this log on a separate page] June 21 by Actual first finder (844 found) Sorry FAKER the container has been found and we are FTF on this cache, signed logbook. Same is a distance away from the coords approx 169 ft. Will post the corrected coords. [view this log on a separate page] June 21 by Charter member with over 1000 finds... (1098 found) Claiming FTF! At ground zero with 2 gps' over alot of readings is a container with a slip of paper with my name. Without the LINKS WORKING!! to find out the rules, (their rules), and using $10.00 worth of gas and spending 1.5 hours looking under every leaf and stick on a acre of land and its not listed as a multi cache or puzzle so it SHOULD BE at the coordinates listed or close to them! F A K E R cacher [view this log on a separate page] Sad...just sad is all I have to say. Edited June 22, 2007 by vtmtnman Link to comment
+Indigo Parrish Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Yup. I agree with Wacko. I have a cache with a lock on it, as done another cacher out here. If you just went and held the cache, that wouldnt be a find, in my opinion. I think that depends on the cache. Clearly, the intent of that cache is to unlock the lock. For others, the intent is to find the cache in a very difficult situation. For example, I recently logged as a find a cache here in Austin that lay unfound for nearly a year hidden underwater in the muck of a large, popular natural swimming pool . I spent 45min diving over and over to the bottom holding my breath and digging up rocks from the muck. When I finally found the right rock it was like the Hallelujah Chorus went off. The cache hiders included a secret codeword on the outside of the rock that you had to use to verify a find log. The only hitch was that exposure to the elements meant the actual cache container in the rock could not be opened by hand. I tried as hard as I could to unscrew it, eventually cutting my hand, but I couldn't open that thing for the life of me. There were so many DNFs on that little rock in the past year it was quite a proud success to find it and verify that it still existed. I don't think the cache owners mind the logged find with no log signature. But if they do, I'll happily soldier on back, pliers and fresh log in hand, and stab a stake in its heart. I know exactly where it is now. I'm just pointing out that sometimes there are valid circumstances, legitimate gray areas, judgment calls and a larger context that may not always be seen in a terse log. -Indigo Parrish Link to comment
+Indigo Parrish Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Does the wall of shame cover hiding under a pseudonym and then FTFing as themselves : A cache by SockPuppet Hidden: 6/1/2007 Size: Size: Micro (Micro) Difficulty: 2.5 out of 5 Terrain: 1.5 out of 5 (1 is easiest, 5 is hardest) This was the immediate FTF log : June 3 by RealCacher (NNNN found) I was sure scratchin' my haid lookin' fer this un, but I got a hint from Condi. Thanx, girlfriend! Then, In a private e-mail later RealCacher admits SockPuppet = RealCacher Nothing like going to elaborate lengths just to unethically pump up a high 4 digit find count! -Indigo Parrish Link to comment
vtmtnman Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Sheesh, I counted at least 40 (URL removed) fake finds on this one[/url]. Why do you care? What makes you think I do? In the spirit of the thread, NO CACHER NAMES OR LINKS were to be used. It stayed that way for years. The thread is to make fun of the logs and NOT TO BELITTLE fellow cachers. Frankly, I'm surprised this thread has been allowed to go on this long. There is at least one person who regularly posts here who frequently includes the name of the cachers involved in the body of the log, although s/he does remove the name from the top of the log. I keep hoping that this entire thread would either be closed or just fall off the page and be forgotten. If there was ever any real humor to the thread, it faded for me when it occurred to me that might be intentional. Perhaps it's time to let this one go? Yeah,I'm thinkin' NO. This thread is the anonymous wall of shame for those that can't seem to cache with integrity.Honestly I'd love to see usernames.Then you know who the honest folks are,and not the find count padders.You'll never see one of my logs here.And realistically there should be no need for this thread if you think about it.Act with integrity.Either you found it or you didn't Plain and simple. Link to comment
+Criminal Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 (edited) April 4 by TRAVELING FAKER(1301 found) I had the same results as the previous person, I know I had good cords but it looks as though there was a party in the very place where I got GZ. I know I will never return to this spot from the USA, so with permission of the owner I would like to log this as a find. Have not heard from the owner so I will log this one as a vertual cache with pictures of the area that I took. He won the spelling bee as well. EDIT: BTW, this one was from Ireland Edited June 25, 2007 by Criminal Link to comment
+briansnat Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 Does the wall of shame cover hiding under a pseudonym and then FTFing as themselves : A cache by SockPuppet Hidden: 6/1/2007 Size: Size: Micro (Micro) Difficulty: 2.5 out of 5 Terrain: 1.5 out of 5 (1 is easiest, 5 is hardest) This was the immediate FTF log : June 3 by RealCacher (NNNN found) I was sure scratchin' my haid lookin' fer this un, but I got a hint from Condi. Thanx, girlfriend! Then, In a private e-mail later RealCacher admits SockPuppet = RealCacher Nothing like going to elaborate lengths just to unethically pump up a high 4 digit find count! -Indigo Parrish I'd say that would be a separate wall of shame. It is a practice that is not unheard of among some very high numbers cachers. Link to comment
+KoosKoos Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Ok, so this one is a tad off-topic, but it makes me feel good to see there are people out there who care to sign a log before they claim a smiley: June 24 by AAA (54 found) AAARRRGGGHHH ... had three fingers on the cache but still couldn't get my hands on it ... then I almost fell to my death. Really want to log it as found, but ... This cache is out on a little cliff which requires you to go out on the edge to lean over and retrieve the ammo can from an overhang. Gee, this cacher could see the ammo can...even touched the ammo can...but they couldn't retrieve it or sign the log, so they logged a DNF this time. Link to comment
+Criminal Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 June 28 by Pretenders (1055 found) #1055 Thanks to CACHEOWNER for allowing me to claim this cache, I had found the right place, and described where it should have been, so they generously allowed me to bag a smiley. Great hide guys . Two DNFs and then disabled, then this 'untruth'. I really like the 'Great hide' comment. Link to comment
+Criminal Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 June 8 by FAKER (152 found) Having solved the crossword, I thought I'd treat this as a virtual cache and visit it after NASA 6.1 (Is this allowed I ask myself?) I think I rooted out the correct spot - a multi-trunked tree on a bank between two ditches with a bit of rubbish nearby. [view this log on a separate page] Logging it as what? Link to comment
+wildchld97 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 (edited) Ok, so this one is a tad off-topic, but it makes me feel good to see there are people out there who care to sign a log before they claim a smiley: June 24 by AAA (54 found) AAARRRGGGHHH ... had three fingers on the cache but still couldn't get my hands on it ... then I almost fell to my death. Really want to log it as found, but ... This cache is out on a little cliff which requires you to go out on the edge to lean over and retrieve the ammo can from an overhang. Gee, this cacher could see the ammo can...even touched the ammo can...but they couldn't retrieve it or sign the log, so they logged a DNF this time. I'm one of (I guess the few) that choose to make sure that I have done the cache as the owner wanted it, retrieved the cache as the owner had planned, and signed the log as is the normal protocol. There was a cache in a southern state that I almost planned to log as a DNF. However, my determination, spite, and inherent wildness, compelled me to actually risk my life and limb to recover said cache. THERE WERE SHARKS DOWN THERE FOR GODS SAKE! I didn't fall off the boardwalk because I was being held upside down. In any case, if I couldn't retrieve the actual cache and sign the log...it's a DNF plain and simple. Enough drama. Play by the rules people and stop being so childish. If you didn't find the ACTUAL cache and pick it up in your ACTUAL hands and sign it with some type of rudimentary implement...you DID NOT FIND IT. Log deleted for stupidity. Sending pictures back. Edited June 28, 2007 by wildchld97 Link to comment
n0wae Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 July 10 by Reviewer (0 found) Hello, I am a volunteer for Geocaching.com and this cache has come to my attention during the course of my usual administrative duties. I appears that this cache was originally listed as a traditional cache but has recently been converted to a virtual cache. Since November, 2005, virtual caches are no longer accepted on the Geocaching.com website. You can list this cache, however, on the Waymarking.com website. The Geocaching.com guidelines require that all traditional caches need to have at a minimum a container and a logbook - (visit link) Please feel free to respond to this issue by sending me an e-mail at ***@.com. Please don’t forget to include the GCxxxx code for the cache. I will be happy to re-enable this listing once the issues with it have been addressed provided that it meets the listing guidelines at that time. Thank you for your understanding and for your contributions to the sport! Reviewer Volunteer Cache Reviewer July 4 by I Want My Smillie 5 (1914 found) We spent a little time looking without the description before we called for help. Answer sent. TFTC! July 4 by I Want My Smillie 4 (2056 found) Neat old bridge with a great history. Email sent July 4 by I Want My Smillie 3 (3699 found) interesting history of the bridge. email sent. TFTC DNF July 2 by Honest Cacher (2499 found) Thanks for bringing us to this interesting area! We enjoyed the history but didn't find your cache. Since your cache has been reviewed and published as a traditional cache we will be logging it as a DNF. Thanks for the cache. June 24 by I Want My Smilie 2 (661 found) Nice little park. E mailed owner ans. after looking for cache and then seeing it is MIA. Thanks for the history. June 23 by Cache Owner (86 found) Went to check on status of the cache. I Want My Smilie 1 was correct. The cache is indeed missing. I'll replace the cache soon but until then treat this as a ghost cache - see instructions above. But on a brighter note, this gave me a chance to plant another cache. June 19 by I Want My Smilie 1 (5788 found) What we found and what was the previous reality were very different. The cache owner says log it, so I will Link to comment
+Criminal Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 July 5 by GARY GROWINGNOSE (599 found) I am logging a courtesy find since it was indeed missing. [view this log on a separate page] July 5 by GARY GROWINGNOSE (599 found) I was with PETER PANTSAFIRE and we could not find it. This was our only DNF for today. [view this log on a separate page] July 5 by PETER PANTSAFIRE (804 found) We are logging a courtesy find since it was not there. [view this log on a separate page] July 5 by PETER PANTSAFIRE(804 found) This was our only DNF on our whole vacation and now we see that it was indeed missing. [view this log on a separate page] July 4 by CACHEOWNER (131 found) A CACHER reported this one missing - we took a look and couldn't locate the container... Link to comment
+Wadcutter Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 A log from a cache we found in Door Co, WI. 170 other cachers never had trouble finding it. Only 1 no find. It was a simple key holder stuck to a sign in plain sight. Maybe they were overwhelmed by the view( ) which was OK but nothing spectacular. July 1 by PhonyFinder (20 found) Didn't find the actual cache "box", but found the view, and that is obviously the most important part of this cache. Great view and some access to water. Thanks. Link to comment
n0wae Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 July 19 by Reviewer (0 found)Published [view this log on a separate page] July 18 by Cache Owner (186 found) Should you get credit for finding the cache that you hid? Why sure! and FTF too!!! Link to comment
n0wae Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 July 25 by aaaaa (10101 found)Container was gone again so I left a 35mm with a sheet of paper in it. Maybe it will last??? Big numbers don't seem to mean much under these circumstances. July 25 by aaaaa (10101 found)No joy as cache was gone. Thanks for the virtual find ;-) Same cacher different cache. Sigh. Link to comment
+briansnat Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 February 17, 2006 by Phony Baloney (455 found) I'll claim this one. The cache is still active, and I hiked a ways to get here, but I'm not enthusiastic about raking through several inches of snow to find a soggy log book. Thanks for bringing us here. That IS "n urpxhin gerr" and it is a delightful place in the newly fallen snow. Thanks. Link to comment
+GeoJunkie Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 OK - time for some confession, and maybe someone can give me some insight as to why I think one of these is OK, but the other one is not. First, the cache I DNFed last week. Here's a series of logs: Archive Request August 4 by BooBear (307 found)No real finds since April and apparently no attempts by the owner to correct the situation. If the owner won't do any maintenance, it needs to be archived. DNF August 4 by BooBear (307 found) Looked for a while with no luck, then went back and checked on old logs. I think this needs to either be checked on by the owner or archived. NOTE July 29 by I Need my Finds (10101 found) I think someone took the cache container and dumped the stuff out on the ground and it is now scattered about as I did not find the remains of a lock and lock but of what appeared to be the remains of what once was a cache. I don't know why Pointing out the obvious thinks I did not sign the log book, but if there is a lock and lock there with another log book I would be glad to change my log to a DNF. I found what was available to find and signed what was available to sign. DNF July 29 by Pointing out the obvious (4277 found) It is quite obvious this one needs maintenance. It has not been found since April. I have never seen "remains" of a loc'n'loc. A loc'n'loc would float away intact. The last recorded find should be a DNF since no logbook was signed. FIND June 12 by I Need my Finds (10101 found) Visiting from Denver. Found some remains about 40-50 feet downriver after a long search so the owner definitely needs to check on this one. DNF May 29 by Good DNFer3 (329 found) Didn't find this guy today, hope it's not in Nebraska City by now due to high water. DNF May 8 by Good DNFer2 (139 found) Recommend maintenance visit as the owner of the closest house said the creek raised 10 the other day and anything in its path is gone. Enjoyed looking for it though. DNF May 8 by Good DNFer (0 found) GPS kept alternating, we think it is near the creek edge, but when we would get close it would tell us to go the opposite way. Ground was too wet and saturated to explore creek side too much. FOUND April 9 by GoodGuy (807 found) One of 11 today. TNLNSL TFTC Now, to me this is obvious. You looked, signed something, but didn't find the cache. To me, it's a DNF. Now - my cache. I have a 5 difficulty puzzle cache that requires a ton of work. The shortest find was in a week, and that was phenomenal. Next finder took several weeks, some nudges, and a lot of work. When he got to the final location, he found all the contents scattered - my ammo can and log book had been muggled. He collected all the contents together in the baggie that was still there and emailed me. When he dropped off the contents at my house, he asked if that was enough to credit the find. It really was the whole cache, minus the container and log book. At that point, I didn't see any reason to make him wait and go back later just to sign a book - he had done all the work, so I allowed him to log the find. Here's the find log: FIND July 16 by Good Finder (2191 found)I brought the remaining contents of the final cache to the owner this evening... Therefore claiming this find... First off, I want to thank Fellow Cacher for helping me find this final cache... Towards last, he was the guy on the computer figuring out the best possibilities, and I was the gopher... That system worked really good for us... I would think a team of cachers could do this one in a day, if part of the team was at home doing the computer work and the other part of the team being the gophers... For all of Fellow Cacher's hard work he has the final coords to sign the log when the cache gets reactivated... If a cacher can get past the rock pile, the rest of the cache finds were easy for me... Lots of time and effort was put into getting this cache implemented, and the rating on this cache is right on... Excel, Google Earth, GPSr, and a cell phone work the best in completing this cache... The tricky part of this is the fact that some coords could be a good place for the next cache, but you need to choose the best place, and that could be tough... So the gopher side of the team could be on a wild goose chase once in a while... Thanks for this cache, Boo Bear... Hope it doesn't turn into a maintanence bear for you... So...why do I feel so differently about this cache? Is it because it's so much harder? To give you an idea, this cache has been online since early May and only 3 people have found it. It is not easy, so in this case I didn't feel a reason to impose an arbitrary signing of the log, especially since he had obviously found the right spot for something that could be hidden in a hundred different locations in our Metro area. Link to comment
+woofiegrrl Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 Quick question - if you forgot a pen, can you definitely not get a find? I did a boat-required cache a while back and I forgot a pen, of all things. I did have my camera phone with me and I took a picture of the cache container and the logbook. Should I not have logged this as a find? Link to comment
+27E_20 Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 Quick question - if you forgot a pen, can you definitely not get a find? I did a boat-required cache a while back and I forgot a pen, of all things. I did have my camera phone with me and I took a picture of the cache container and the logbook. Should I not have logged this as a find? I'd say youre good on that one, just tell all about it in your log. I know we're talking caches here, but as far as benchmarks go, it would be all too easy to just say you found it, so I always take pics of the marks I find as proof. I think I only forgot my camera on one instance. But, Im not going to get all fired up about calling someone out on faking it- unless it's just blatently obvious. Link to comment
n0wae Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 Quick question - if you forgot a pen, can you definitely not get a find? I did a boat-required cache a while back and I forgot a pen, of all things. I did have my camera phone with me and I took a picture of the cache container and the logbook. Should I not have logged this as a find? Yes, I too have forgotten my pen on occasion. This is how I solved my problem one time: August 18, 2006 by n0wae (2563 found)Very cool name for this cache. I almost never forget my Geocaching gel pen... Wouldn't you know it... no pen or pencil in the cache. Well I could sign the logbook in blood... Umm, no... used the golf tee in the cache to punch three holes in the next space in the logbook. 3 holes = n0wae. TNL a Sac $ coin. TFTC, Eric Link to comment
+willox96 Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 REALLY PEOPLE!!! If you can't be honest about whether you found the cache or not, who is really getting the short end of the stick? Personally, I think it's PATHETIC that these people can't follow the rules of the game! I didn't start geocaching to "get great stats"- I'm in it for the hunt! I've climbed up a few gnarly mountains and have been "skunked" on hunts. I'm not ashamed of logging a DNF on my statistics; it just gives me that much more drive to find the next one! Link to comment
+deafnut Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Gee .... if i know where their address and i will bump them and say This is Geo-Offier ... I would like to speak with u and ask them why you flse stat in it ... they will freak out ( ofc it not true stories ) Link to comment
+Stunod Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 I saw a watchlist email come in yesterday... Location: Illinois, United StatesXXXXXX posted a note for ARCHIVED VIRTUAL CACHE (Archived) (Virtual Cache) at 8/6/2007 Log Date: 8/6/2007 drop virt. pers coin Later the log was changed to a FOUND IT Illinois Friday, January 06, 2006 XXXXXX found ARCHIVED VIRTUAL CACHE (Virtual Cache) A quick one... tftc XXXXXX Nice... Make it look like a personal TB "dip" in the notification email, then change it to a find backdated enough that nobody will see it. Link to comment
+Keruso Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 got this one in my email Location: Pennsylvania, United States August 5 by AAAAAAAA(256 found) stopped by to sign the log but too many people here. stopped back and forgot-was busy looking at the old morgan diner! but-I was here honest! Link to comment
+~Hylife~ Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Order of logs in which, I must amit, I am culprit.. ------- August 3 by The DD (44 found)Found cache site but not the cache. Noticed in logs that it has been muggled and apparently not replaced yet? August 3 CC (56 found)Searched several times for this one -- once before eating ice cream, and once after. DNF, but will try again the next time I am in the area. July 30 by BB (22 found)Found the site although it was muggled. Will return after replacement posting. With ~Hylife~ July 30 by ~Hylife~ (49 found)Found with BB (guess I found that lid thing, just didn't know it was supposed to be the geocache..pretty obvious that we found the site judging by the name..) Huh, guess we don't have to post need maintanince.. If it gets fixed while we're still up here I'll go and sign the log.. TFTC!! July 28 by AA (17 found)Found the cache site...too bad it was muggled. Kids enjoyed the "Open Wide" aspect of the cache since it was 90+ degrees. July 26 by OWNER (355 found)Cache has been muggled. We will replace it. ---- I thought it was common practice to log a cache if you found the remnants of the site. To give a little background, the cache site is a water fountain (or bubbler if you live in Wisconsin) in the likeness of a lion, the cache was hidden under its "butt".. We were staying with BB in BLANK Wisconsin, about 280 mi. from where we live in Milwaukee. This cache was in a very active part of downtown BLANK, across from a local tavern, so we did this one at night around 10:30 P.M. or so.. Using the mapping system available on the cache page, BB had determined the intersection that the cache in question was on. Unaware of previous maintanance logs (or perhaps they found the cache page before it was muggled, a muggling that most likely occured durring the county fair or the local festival), like I said, we searched out the cache. We discovered the top to a tupperware container and a piece of swag under the lion's "butt" (which is where the clue indicates it should be, though it wasn't there at the time..).. So anyways, I got back to BB's house, read the OWNER's note and AA's log, and assumed it was appropriate to log and encouraged BB to do the same. Were our actions inappropriate?? Or would you consider this an acceptable find?? (I mean, like BB said, as soon as a logbook is available, they'll sign it. And we would have, too, but the OWNER didn't, at least as far as I know, replace the cache by August 7th, the day we left..)..?? Link to comment
+briansnat Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 I thought it was common practice to log a cache if you found the remnants of the site. If what you find are the verifiable remains of a cache, then I don't think most people would give you grief if you log a find. By verifiable I mean a logbook on the ground, an empty container that says "geocache" on it or something of that sort. Ironclad evidence that it was the cache. It's considered pretty cheesy to log a find if you find nothing, or where you are "pretty sure the cache was" or, a few trinkets on the ground. Judging from this thread though it's far from unheard of. Were our actions inappropriate?? It probably would have made this thread had someone noticed it. Appropriate? That is for you and the cache owner to decide. Or would you consider this an acceptable find?? If it was my cache, no. If I were the searcher, no. Link to comment
+D@nim@l Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 (edited) I saw this on one cache page.....Four count, 'em four smilies, but not one of them found the final stage of this two part multi. July 24 by (name removed) (2 found) Found this while camping. Only our second cache. Beware, it was kind of thick and our little mo caught poison ivy. Pants recommended! Didn't have time to get to part 2 but we've got the coordinates for next time. Nice hide though! Thanks! July 21 by (name removed) (2 found) Had to go through quite a lot of woods to get to. It was off the trail as the description said. I haven't gotten to the second cache yet because I didn't have time. July 14 by (name removed) (8 found) We found part one and after a very long hike for part two we had to turn back because we had children with us. TFTF July 2 by (name removed) (142 found) Only attempted stang one. Did not have time for Stage 2. TNLNSL The owner of the cache posted a note and called them on it, but did not delete them. That seems more disappointing. Edited August 14, 2007 by D@nim@l Link to comment
+Wadcutter Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 Even tho you don't find it looks like some think it is a find as long as you touch spots where it might have been. April 13, 2003 by (phony) (3749 found) April 13, 2003 Found the place easily--but not the cache! 4 of us searched and searched-you must have done a super job of hiding it! April 20, 2003 Going to count this as a find as we have touched virtually every spot on it-and it is missing Link to comment
+bumblingbs Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 (edited) I've followed this thread, and generally agree with the prevailing thought; but if I may offer another perspective? I went with a small group to one of my caches. It was a 6 mile RT. Not hard, but more than most bother with. The cache had only been found once. I watched my companions look for the cache, and they looked exactly where it was supposed to be. Most unfortunately for me and them, it was gone. I said it was up to them, they could log it, and it would be fine with me. My reasoning was that I had placed the cache *so that they could have the experience I was offering*, a 6 mile beach hike with beautiful views. On the log page I'd pretty much said where to find the cache - the cache was intended as a bonus at the end, not the be-all and end-all. Let's look at another cache. I wrote the cache page, asking people to walk two miles round trip, and discover a trail. I got log after log suggesting shortcuts, which were indeed possible, so there were a lot of people who logged the smiley without having the experience that I had invited them for. One more~ a cache with what is supposed to be a thought-provoking cache page; the cache itself is meaningless unless you are thinking about what you are seeing, in my opinion. And somebody logged something that basically said, "skip the write-up, make the quick grab" (Don't go looking for that log, it's the only one I have ever asked someone to change.) But which of these deserve the smiley? I will say that none of the group on the 6 mile hike logged the cache. I think they deserved it the most. Edited to say "Ooops, I'm sorry, if I remember the beginning of this thread, it should just be stories, not an discussion of what is and isn't OK. I apologize, I didn't go back to the beginning. If my question is a valid one, I can take it to another thread, if not, carry on. Edited August 15, 2007 by bumblingbs Link to comment
+Wadcutter Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 So is logging a find about the physical exertion and difficulty involved or is it about finding the container? Isn't that what the D/T rating system for, to allow a person to select which levels and how much difficulty they care to experience? Otherwise, everyone could "find" all the 5/5 caches simply by going to the general area. Link to comment
+bumblingbs Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 (edited) Well yes I know, but I'm pointing out that they had the experience that I placed the cache for them to have, which is of high importance to me, and I saw with my own eyes they went to exact spot where it should have been hidden. None of them logged the cache; I wouldn't have, either. I certainly would have allowed it, if they had wished to. They could have signed my arm. As a cache owner, I value their effort so much. The *number* of smileys in one's record really doesn't tell the tale at all. Edited to say that the cache was replaced, moved .2 miles, listed as a new one, and is now dedicated to Workerofwood, Tamara Williams, and Lee Ofsted. That makes me feel better. Edited August 15, 2007 by bumblingbs Link to comment
Recommended Posts