Jump to content

Found It = Didn't Find It


Jamie Z
Followers 56

Recommended Posts

Needs Maintenance   Oct/21/2019   User-DNF=Find (1295)  
This geocacher reported that there is a problem with this cache.

Found it  Oct/21/2019 Use-rDNF=Find (1295)   
Logging this as found as I have not had a reply from the owner. I believe it is missing unless I hear different.

4 previous DNFs

Link to comment

logging a find on your own throwdown is bogus.;

 

There is cacher in SC PA who has over 4000 cachs, wonder how many he actually.found? In the past week I have seen at least two cache logs where he states he could not find anything and stating he left a container, and then saying TFTC. At least those following can read and know it is a throwdown. And he mentions that, I also wonder how many the does not mention.

 

I am tempted to go remove the  throwdown.-- I need to find that cache anyway, if I find the original....

Edited by Jayeffel
add info that help clarify.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
36 minutes ago, JohnCNA said:

Didn't find it

Had to take off my pants and my shirt and i am now only wearing underwear and socks WAY TOO MANY BURS

Not really a Found It = Didn't Find It, but funny anyway. I take it this person did not write this log from the field. LOL!

Link to comment

 
Didn't find it Oct/13/2019
Add me to the long list of dnfs
 
Needs Maintenance  Oct/12/2019
Has many dnfs although several logged a dnf as found
 
Found it Oct/09/2019
We dident find this??
 
Found it Oct/09/2019
Thanks for showing us this historic place. Didn’t find the cache.
 
Found it Oct/07/2019
Greetings from Norway! Thank you for this interesting historic spot! Was looking together with @c and @i  We did not find the cache but left a picture.

Didn't find it Aug/04/2019
Looked. Went back to my jeep. Went back and looked again. Had an nice law enforcement dude stop and say hello so I left :(

Found it Jul/29/2019     throwdown
We were not able to find a cache container, but we did leave one for the next crew to find. It would be a shame to lose this one after all this time and all of the favorite points. If is not acceptable to claim a find, then we will happily delete this log. Thanks for bringing us here, it is certainly unique.

Didn't find it Jul/28/2019
We are in town to do some caching from Charleston SC. We picked up these caches while doing a geoart and other caches while in the area. We are out with friends from SC making a power run, no luck today.
Thanks

Didn't find it Jul/24/2019
Cool historical place! Looked for a little bit but came up empty handed.

Didn't find it Jul/20/2019
Had a good look but could not see a cache.

Found it Jul/05/2019   really
TFTC! interessting place

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

Found it Jul/29/2019     throwdown
We were not able to find a cache container, but we did leave one for the next crew to find. It would be a shame to lose this one after all this time and all of the favorite points. If is not acceptable to claim a find, then we will happily delete this log. Thanks for bringing us here, it is certainly unique.

 

<Sigh>

 

I'd believe it was an altruistic throwdown if they didn't claim a find. The bolded part speaks volumes. 

 

Why do people who throwdown make it seem like no one will hide a cache at a wonderful location if the neglected cache were archived. I've removed and archived a few of our caches at nice locations and new caches were placed within the month of our archival. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment

A group of three people attempted to find this, but found only the plastic tube. While one only logged a note, but the other two logged finds.

As an extra comment, this cache was listed by the CO as a 1D/1T, while describing this cache as a sneaky little cache :rolleyes:.

 

 

icon_admin.gifReviewer  23/Nov/2019  ArchiveArchive

 

icon_admin.gifReviewer Temporarily Disable ListingTemporarily Disable Listing 22/Sep/2019

Needs ArchivedNeeds Archived 17/Sep/2019

Write noteWrite note   15/Sep/2019

The short plastic is here but log missing

 

Found itFound it 15/Sep/2019

Found the cache but the log was missing at the time of find. Didn't have paper on me to replace.

Found itFound it 15/Sep/2019 

Found with ..... and ..... . Log missing. Found plastic.

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance  02/Aug/2019

Didn't find itDidn't find it   02/Aug/2019

Didn't find itDidn't find it  19/Jul/2019

Found itFound it  17/Jul/2019

 

 

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

For this kind of logs, I get one kind more often than anything else:

 

(Found) I saw it but it is too high to climb!

 

Everytime that happens, I write back and ask them politely to change the log to "note", and explain the rules. Yes, they "found" it as in spotted it... a couple of meters up, didn't climb, didn't open (which is sometimes an issue), and never saw the log book.

 

I understand them, though. "Found" is a vague term, when it really means "logged".

Edited by Ragnemalm
Link to comment
14/11/2019

Good Day,

This geocache was brought to my attention as being in need of an owner maintenance visit. The cache owner needs to check on this cache ASAP and either replace it or archive it, after picking up any geo-litter. See the maintenance section of the Geocache Listing Requirements/Guidelines.

I've added this cache to my watchlist, and I will check back in four weeks to be sure that the maintenance has been done. In the meantime, I have temporarily disabled this listing. When the maintenance is completed, the owner can enable the listing by clicking on the link below the cache name to return it to active status.

Whatever your intentions, please post a note here on the cache page (not email) to let us know that you are still active and maintaining the cache. If a month passes without seeing a response, then I'll assume that this listing should be archived.

Looking forward to hearing from you,

GeoCrater
Geocaching.com Community Volunteer Reviewer

Buen día,

Este geocaché me llamó la atención sobre la necesidad de una visita de mantenimiento del propietario. El propietario de la memoria caché debe verificar esta memoria caché lo antes posible y reemplazarla o archivarla, después de recoger cualquier geo-basura. Consulte la sección de mantenimiento de los Requisitos / Pautas del listado de Geocache.

He agregado este caché a mi lista de seguimiento, y volveré a verificar en cuatro semanas para asegurarme de que se haya realizado el mantenimiento. Mientras tanto, he desactivado temporalmente esta lista. Cuando se completa el mantenimiento, el propietario puede habilitar la lista haciendo clic en el enlace debajo del nombre de la memoria caché para devolverlo al estado activo.

Sean cuales sean sus intenciones, publique una nota aquí en la página del caché (no en el correo electrónico) para informarnos que todavía está activo y manteniendo el caché. Si transcurre un mes sin ver una respuesta, supongo que esta lista debe archivarse.

A la espera de saber de ti,

GeoCrater

Geocaching.com Community Volunteer Reviewer

Premium Member

2.png6722

Needs ArchivedNeeds Archived

14/11/2019

No activity here. Business is closed

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png3237

Found itFound it

11/11/2019

Greetings from the UK. Hadn't checked anything on line till after the I logged the cache, so like other found the rsturanr is n ow up for sale so attached a photograph

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png550

Found itFound it

03/11/2019

I located the gz but there were ‘for sale’ signs on the actual entry and the other doors, as well. I knocked-hoping that someone would answer but to no avail. There are locks in the doors

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png5860

Found itFound it

24/10/2019

Estabamos aqui 5 vecez en los ultimos 4 dias y todavia esta cerrado...
La indication que se vende no significa algo bien para esta cache..

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png36827

Found itFound it

17/10/2019

I was on a Panama Canal Cruise with my family. I stopped by here to take a look and my results were the same as the last few cachers. It's locked up with for sale signs on the door. I did enjoy my walk to here seeing the city. TFTC

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png1359

Found itFound it

21/09/2019

We found the location on friday, there was a man and woman with a small booking store. They told us to come back tomorrow. Today (saturday) the location was closed. See picture. We are leaving tomorrow in the morning. We did our bes

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png28042

Write noteWrite note

20/09/2019

So sad that this place isn't open mornings. I wanted to drop off a trackable and had to take it home with me again.

Maybe the restaurant hours should be noted on the cache page.

prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png1405

Found itFound it

19/09/2019

Ok. We found the guy but he said it was too late so come back tomorrow. We retuned and we’re told that he isn’t there today. We consider it a find due to the confirmation but never got to touch the cache. As we are leaving tomorrow early it’s the best we can do

 
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
23 hours ago, colleda said:
prem_user.gifPremium Member

2.png1405

Found itFound it

19/09/2019

Ok. We found the guy but he said it was too late so come back tomorrow. We retuned and we’re told that he isn’t there today. We consider it a find due to the confirmation but never got to touch the cache. As we are leaving tomorrow early it’s the best we can do

 

Wow, no less than six obviously false "found" in a row! What are they thinking? "We consider it a find". :wacko: How about "can we please log this as a find despite not having been near the cache?" or something like that? A photo log of the log book is OK with me, maybe even the last broken remains of a ruined cache, but "didn't find it so we think we found it"...?

Link to comment
Quote

Found itFound it

11/24/2013

I believe XXXX and I were the last ones to hold the famed cryptex in our hands. Sadly, we never got to sign the log because the cache went missing, but in communicating with the CO, he confirmed we stood directly in front of, and thoroughly investigated, the container's hiding spot. I waited to log this, hoping he would get around to replacing the final ammo can, but to no avail. Such a shame...this was a fun series.

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

 

Wow, no less than six obviously false "found" in a row! What are they thinking? "We consider it a find". :wacko: How about "can we please log this as a find despite not having been near the cache?" or something like that? A photo log of the log book is OK with me, maybe even the last broken remains of a ruined cache, but "didn't find it so we think we found it"...?

This was a cache I found myself a few years ago. It had, then, a heap of trackables in it.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, CHEZRASCALS said:

 

image.png

 

 

This looks like a classic case of the default log types in action, where the logger probably intended it to be a DNF but forgot to change the default from Found It. I really wish someone, anyone, in HQ would take note of all the problems these default log types are causing and get rid of them!

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment

I saw a log where someone actually accused a geocacher for lying that she found the cache. This was last year so I won't be able to quote it but the cacher posted "Found it but forgot to sign the log". Well, this lead to this person traveling a distance to find it, thinking it was still there after a string of DNFs. It was still missing and he was very upset (you could tell by reading his log). But the geocache owner scolded this person for the accusation and mean log and said that geocaching is suppose to be a fun activity and not mean-spirited.

Link to comment

Gotta head to this area next week.   Will use my handheld metal detector JIC, and if gone 8+ months,  it'll get an NA.

 - One honest cacher in the bunch, the last "finder's" log ending a classic... 

 

Premium Member

2.png55547    Found it Found it

12/08/2019

Caching with BFF XXXXX. We headed to XXXXXXXX to do the caches in and around the park. But the snow and ice, that we did not expect to find, hindered our searching and cache retrieval. So we packed it in and headed south to do some caching on the way home. The best laid plans of mice and men........

Found the hanger and top of the container but the bottom and log are long gone. Need TLC. Thanks xxxxxx for placing and maintaining this cache.

 

Premium Member

2.png2888   Needs Maintenance

12/08/2019

This geocacher reported that the cache might be missing. 

 

Premium Member

2.png2888  Didn't find it Didn't find it

12/08/2019

Saw the various logs previously stating that container/log were missing, looked anyway and was not able to even find the piece that people had photographed as being at GZ. Container really needs to be replaced.  

 

Premium Member 

2.png330   Found it Found it

06/10/2019

Not sure if the cache was intact, missing pieces or just couldn’t see the log once I opened it. So we didn’t sign log but can provide photo. Again thanks to XXXXX for his persistence and amazing geo-sense. 

 

Premium Member

2.png276   Found it Found it

06/09/2019

Found it wth my bf and caching buddy after looking at photos for a clue and LOTS of looking. Cache was in fact broken and log missing but we have a photo if proof is needed. Tiny!! 

 

Premium Member

2.png2191   Found it Found it

04/03/2019

Cache is broken and log is missing.  

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 
Edited by cerberus1
  • Funny 1
Link to comment
On ‎12‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 4:53 PM, cerberus1 said:

Gotta head to this area next week.   Will use my handheld metal detector JIC, and if gone 8+ months,  it'll get an NA.

 - One honest cacher in the bunch, the last "finder's" log ending a classic... 

 

"CO" archived it himself after the Reviewer put his  " This cache appears to be..." notice on the cache page...

Said, "Archived. Feel free to take any container/items that remain. "  

Yeah ... thanks....     Heading there again this coming week, and will snip the cap to their "cache"  off the tree branch.  

 - I won't be going to all the other "caches" they archived in bulk with the same message.  Sheesh...

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
16 minutes ago, fuzziebear3 said:

 Sounds like a non PMO finding a PMO cache and logging it -- that is perfectly allowed.

 

More of a non-geocache member finding a basic cache with a member and then joined geocaching.com and logged it. I found an old thread about this. Seems there are backdoor codes for basis members to log premium caches.  lol

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

More of a non-geocache member finding a basic cache with a member and then joined geocaching.com and logged it. I found an old thread about this. Seems there are backdoor codes for basis members to log premium caches.  lol

 

That is not unusual at all.  Many geocachers make their first find(s) before they have an account.  Especially if another geocacher introduces them to the game.

 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I do have a question though. If it's okay to log the cache when becoming a new member (that was found when you were a non-member) why is it not okay to log a cache that a member found but didn't have a pen to sign the cache log? Both did not sign the log but it's okay for one and not the other? Asking for a friend. :rolleyes:

 

We take new folks out time-to-time to find larger hides with swag, and longer walks than 50' from parking.

Very few ever logged a geocaching name (not a member yet), but signed their real name. 

Every new person signed along with us. They were there.  Guess I don't understand how putting your real name in a log isn't signing... 

When/if they join, they can back-date and log that they "Found it with cerberus1, and logged it as  XXXX".

 - Any CO that looks at logs should be able to spot that real name from the others.    :)

It's similar to a kid who's grown, finally has his own account, and backdates logs with "found 12/12/12 with the gertalyertals, now have my own account, star commander III".

 

No signature on a log isn't the same...

 

Edited by cerberus1
addification ;)
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
38 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I do have a question though. If it's okay to log the cache when becoming a new member (that was found when you were a non-member) why is it not okay to log a cache that a member found but didn't have a pen to sign the cache log? Both did not sign the log but it's okay for one and not the other? Asking for a friend. :rolleyes:

"Rules of the Game" state you sign the log then log online.  It doesn't require you to have an account prior to finding a cache.

 

 

UGH!  I just realized the last few posts and my reply are all way off topic of this thread.  Mea Culpa.

Edited by K13
Link to comment
On 12/30/2019 at 12:47 PM, on4bam said:

:ph34r:

 

On 12/30/2019 at 12:47 PM, on4bam said:

Better start a new thread as this one is for posting (obvious) fake Found it logs, not for discussing certain situations. ;)

I think I saw one today that looked suspicious.  You guys have me on the lookout now. lol What made me suspicious was that the log said the same thing another log stated after a long list of DNFs. 

"Hard to find but we found it! Forgot to bring a pen. Try looking at a different set of trees as the coordinates are off

"
Link to comment
53 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

"Hard to find but we found it! Forgot to bring a pen. Try looking at a different set of trees as the coordinates are off

"

Sounds like they 'might' have found it, but if I were the CO I would be sending a message to ask for a good description or photographic evidence. Although if a person forgot/lost their pen, they should send this other proof to the CO before logging and wait for permission to log. Not just go ahead and log. As a CO I am flexible enough to accept this, but I do need proof. I recently sent messages to six people whose signatures I couldn't find. (For two caches.) Only one got back to me, saying they didn't know they had to sign:rolleyes:, but supplied no more proof. I deleted all six logs.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
On 12/31/2019 at 6:05 PM, Goldenwattle said:

As a CO I am flexible enough to accept this, but I do need proof. I recently sent messages to six people whose signatures I couldn't find. (For two caches.) Only one got back to me, saying they didn't know they had to sign:rolleyes:, but supplied no more proof. I deleted all six logs.

When you deleted their logs, does it also bring down their log find totals? 

Link to comment
On 3/16/2004 at 7:22 PM, SBPhishy said:

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.

 

With that sort of cache it's clearly obvious that the cache owner intends to have everyone open the lock to access the contents of the cache.   For most caches, once one has navigated to GZ,  and located the container, that's pretty much what the cache owner intended.   Personally, I think geocaching is more about finding hidden containers, not a game about collecting signatures on a log sheet.  

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 2
Link to comment
15 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

With that sort of cache it's clearly obvious that the cache owner intends to have everyone open the lock to access the contents of the cache.   For most caches, once one has navigated to GZ,  and located the container, that's pretty much what the cache owner intended.   Personally, I think geocaching is more about finding hidden containers, not a game about collecting signatures on a log sheet.  

 

Sometimes getting to where you can see the hiding place or the cache itself is the easy bit and the real challenge the CO has created is in reaching it. Tree climbs obviously fall into that category but there have been others where I've had to abandon my attempt and come back another day better prepared, maybe with a ladder, some rope, a grabbing tool or even a borrowed child.

 

e557002e-de4e-4c80-82b8-197933daf8fd_l.j

 

On one of colleda's caches, on my first attempt I was pretty sure I could see where it was hidden in a mangrove tree but the tide was right up and I didn't really want to have to wade out through the oozy mud not knowing what might be lurking in there (razor clams for a start in those waters). So I came back another day at low tide and it was an easy find.

 

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Sometimes getting to where you can see the hiding place or the cache itself is the easy bit and the real challenge the CO has created is in reaching it. Tree climbs obviously fall into that category but there have been others where I've had to abandon my attempt and come back another day better prepared, maybe with a ladder, some rope, a grabbing tool or even a borrowed child.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with you, but my point is that these types of caches are the exception.  Although signing the cache is considered a requirement, I suspect that for most, it's just an obligatory step that doesn't add anything to the experience but is required in order to get credit for the find. 

 

Edited by NYPaddleCacher
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
15 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

I don't disagree with you, but my point is that these types of caches are the exception.  Although signing the cache is considered a requirement, I suspect that for most, it's just an obligatory step that doesn't add anything to the experience but is required in order to get credit for the find. 

 

 

I think it'd become even more confusing if there were separate rules for "seeing it is good enough" caches and those where getting to the logbook and signing it is required, particularly with the way the app is now set up as just click go and follow the arrow, where it's tough enough getting anyone to look at the description let alone any attributes.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 56
×
×
  • Create New...