Found It = Didn't Find It

[+Goldenwattle]

19 minutes ago, on4bam said:

 

A very long time it seems.

Almost a year has gone by, many DNF's, many Found it logs where it's clear nothing was found.

 

After 6 NA, 246 DNF's and 126 NM there's NO ACTION whatsoever by the CO. What's the CHS of this one I wonder?

 

 

 

 

 

I visited Iceland a few years ago, and finding caches, I got the feeling that there was no reviewer watching the caches.

[+Goldenwattle]

2 hours ago, on4bam said:

Who publishes new caches then?

It's hard to know where the reviewer is from, because they use a mythical location as theirs.

[+L0ne.R]

The basic member, and the one with the least amount of finds did the right thing and logged a DNF:

 

 

Premium Member 2399 Found it 11/29/2019 The cache was gone but the green holder was still there.

Premium Member 6381 Found it 07/27/2019 I remember finding this one years back but just had forgot to log it..today when i came back and stopped to show a muggle friend while out riding i only saw the wire...tftc nice church here

Member 88 Didn't find it 07/20/2019 Well, we found a wire in the tree where it might have been, but no sign of the cache.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Found it

10/05/2018

I am guessing that the container is missing as i found a location consistant with the hint holding material likely to have been used for attachment.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Found it

01/11/2020

Looked all over, nothing in the area

[JASTA 11]

Found it

12/04/2018

Wasnt able to locate and I didnt bring a spare container, pity.

Logging because many caches here in PR are not maintained and nee ones are not common. Glad to be up here on the mountain, first time to the peak!

Signed as WAJ
3:08 PM

 

[+Seeker_Knight]

On 1/4/2020 at 11:23 AM, on4bam said:

Oh boy....

 

I found one that was inside a galvanized steel fence post. You had to remove the top cap, but then there was no string to retrieve the actual cache. Turns out there was a small hole at the ground level, and the bottom of the pipe was filled with concrete up to that level. You had to bring a gallon of water and plug the hole at the bottom. When you filled the pipe with water, the cache simply floated to the top. As soon as you unplug the hole (My daughters finger worked nicely), the water drained out and the cache just dropped back down to the bottom of the pipe where it stayed relatively dry. Brilliant idea! One of the best I have ever seen.

Seeker_Knight

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it  08/31/2019

Didn’t get the cache but located the cemetery...extremely overgrown area, thorns galore. Good luck

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it 12/22/2019

XXX and I gave a good search, but did not find the cache. We left a replacement log in a little plastic sleeve that has the geocaching symbol on it. Hide under a red flat rock.

Will claim a find, but if the CO checks and finds the original container, I will change to dnf.

TFTC SL

 

[+colleda]

Some just can't handle having to DNF.

 

Premium Member 

2770

Found it

08/12/2018

Found -- 2:00 pm -- Thanks for the hunt and Thanks for bringing us here to this location

Cache Condition:
Took: Nothing.
Left: Nothing.  [Throwdown]
Trackables:

The Cache
Coming here wasn't in my plans but was marked as a possibility. As it happens it was a good call. We were on a quick overnight caching trip to find a marked 53 caches - that would be a mean feat for us!! and I wasn't confident in finding that many. We left home later than I had intended and remarkably whipped through all our marked caches between xxxxxxx and xxxxx, arriving at our camping location and getting our tent pitched and setup just before daylight sunk. So this cache was an extra smiley I might not have acquired on this occasion and of course the cache can be tick off our map.

Searched around the obvious location and could not find. I couldn't leave with two DNF here especially as it hasn't been found in over a year. Placed a new container here albeit permanent or temporary with intentions to contacted the CO when home. That aside, this location is fantastic and I am giving it a favorite point but admittedly I didn't see the attractions here until I was driving away, I was considering the road was the focus. I will put it in my notes to return here again for a proper look as my main focus today was the cache.

The Day
OCW xx xxx xxxxxx xxxxxx and xxxxx xxxxx xxx for a quick weekend caching and cache maintenance, and WOW, what a weekend it was - Absolutely AMAZING !!! We had a fantastic time. A bit sunburnt on the drivers side arm, tired, exercised and very happy from a journeying through some amazing countryside. We found a bunny among bricks beside a cache , sheep running loose outside fencelines, fortunately No snakes . A hot day but a nice breeze is blowing.

51 = 45 2 4 not attempted.

[+Goldenwattle]

3 hours ago, colleda said:

Some just can't handle having to DNF.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

On 1/20/2020 at 8:42 PM, 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. 

 

 

You might be right, but I don't cache that way.

For me, signing the log is the fulfillment of the contract between the CO and me.

If I can't put my mark on it, I don't claim it.

 

Again, that's just me. UBU.

[+colleda]

21 minutes ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

You might be right, but I don't cache that way.

For me, signing the log is the fulfillment of the contract between the CO and me.

If I can't put my mark on it, I don't claim it.

 

Again, that's just me. UBU.

And me.

[+Goldenwattle]

On 1/21/2020 at 12:04 PM, 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.  

I delete the logs of people who think this way, as there is no proof they did find the cache. Sign the log or be deleted. (I do make some exceptions, but contact me first.)

[+barefootjeff]

2 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

You might be right, but I don't cache that way.

For me, signing the log is the fulfillment of the contract between the CO and me.

If I can't put my mark on it, I don't claim it.

 

Again, that's just me. UBU.

 

And me. For me, I don't go caching just to visit GZ. Or to catch sight of the container. Or to have the container in my hot little hand. My goal is to put my signature in the logbook and sometimes either the CO or mother nature puts obstacles in my way right up to that final step. If I discover I don't have a pen with me, I'll put the cache back and go off to buy one, or if I'm out in the wilds I'll improvise with a gum nut, twig or lump of charcoal. If I can't get to the logbook, it's a DNF and, if appropriate, an NM.

[+CAVinoGal]

A recently archived cache in my area, the last few logs are perfect for this thread!

Premium Member 1458 Archive Feb/12/2020 Archiving.

Premium Member 4161 Found it Feb/02/2020 Received confirmation from the CO that this cache is missing & permission to log it as a find. Thanks XXXX!

Premium Member 2236 Found it Feb/01/2020 Received a note from the CO confirming that this one was gone and giving permission to log it as a find. Many thankx to XXXX. Giving it a FAV for his generosity.

Premium Member 1458 Temporarily Disable Listing Feb/01/2020 Seems to be missing. Will see what happens, but archival is the looking to be the main route.

Premium Member 2236 Didn't find it Jan/29/2020 Pretty sure this one is gone. An entire section of sidewalk at GZ has been recently replaced, along with any utility or light pole that used to be there. At the moment, only a pole mount bracket is installed in the new concrete. See the photo. I'm thinking this one needs to be archived.

Premium Member 5500 Found it Jan/28/2020 Caching with XXXX. Found new construction at GZ and no cache. XXXX received a note from the CO confirming that this one was gone and giving permission to log it as a find. Thanks XXXX!

Premium Member 6101 Found it Jan/28/2020 When we got there, the cupboard was bare. That is, the bit of sidewalk at GZ had been removed and replaced with a footer for what might be a light pole. The CO confirmed that the cache was gone and kindly offered to let us log a find. A Favorite for the generous act.

[+colleda]

10 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

A recently archived cache in my area, the last few logs are perfect for this thread!

Premium Member 1458 Archive Feb/12/2020 Archiving.

Premium Member 4161 Found it Feb/02/2020 Received confirmation from the CO that this cache is missing & permission to log it as a find. Thanks XXXX!

Premium Member 2236 Found it Feb/01/2020 Received a note from the CO confirming that this one was gone and giving permission to log it as a find. Many thankx to XXXX. Giving it a FAV for his generosity.

Premium Member 1458 Temporarily Disable Listing Feb/01/2020 Seems to be missing. Will see what happens, but archival is the looking to be the main route.

Premium Member 2236 Didn't find it Jan/29/2020 Pretty sure this one is gone. An entire section of sidewalk at GZ has been recently replaced, along with any utility or light pole that used to be there. At the moment, only a pole mount bracket is installed in the new concrete. See the photo. I'm thinking this one needs to be archived.

Premium Member 5500 Found it Jan/28/2020 Caching with XXXX. Found new construction at GZ and no cache. XXXX received a note from the CO confirming that this one was gone and giving permission to log it as a find. Thanks XXXX!

Premium Member 6101 Found it Jan/28/2020 When we got there, the cupboard was bare. That is, the bit of sidewalk at GZ had been removed and replaced with a footer for what might be a light pole. The CO confirmed that the cache was gone and kindly offered to let us log a find. A Favorite for the generous act.

The CO archived a virtual! Shame!!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

On 2/17/2020 at 6:26 PM, Goldenwattle said:

On 1/20/2020 at 8:04 PM, 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.  

I delete the logs of people who think this way, as there is no proof they did find the cache. Sign the log or be deleted. (I do make some exceptions, but contact me first.)

 

If that's what you got to do I am fine with that.  I really don't care if I get a +1 on my find count or not.  Deleting the log doesn't delete the experience and I'm not going to repeat that experience just to sign a log sheet so that my find count increments by one.

[+Goldenwattle]

35 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

If that's what you got to do I am fine with that.  I really don't care if I get a +1 on my find count or not.  Deleting the log doesn't delete the experience and I'm not going to repeat that experience just to sign a log sheet so that my find count increments by one.

Why do you have a problem with signing the log?

[+frostengel]

38 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Why do you have a problem with signing the log?

 

Pen doesn't work (empty, broken, lost in the woods).

The rusty can won't open.

The logbook is wet and I don't want to touch it.

...

 

In each of the cases I have the cache in my hand and have successfully fulfilled the task given by the owner.

 

Why do you have a problem with me not signing the log? Only because of the rules?

 

(I don't talk about "seen it up in the tree and could not reach it" or "could not open the trick lock" or ....)

[+CAVinoGal]

13 hours ago, on4bam said:

I was the next finder. Opened and signed the log.

 

Sounds familiar: (We were also the next finders - we managed to open the lid and sign the log,)

Found it

Quick find but could not open the lid. TFTC.

[+Gill & Tony]

14 hours ago, frostengel said:

 

Pen doesn't work (empty, broken, lost in the woods).  My fault - should have spare pen - DNF

The rusty can won't open.   Not my fault - but will probably still log a DNF and definitely an NM (or NA if there's already an outstanding NM)

The logbook is wet and I don't want to touch it.  Not my fault - Add a dry scrap of paper, Log found, definitely an NM (or NA if there's already an outstanding NM)

 

 

[+barefootjeff]

Pen doesn't work (empty, broken, lost in the woods).

- If it's an urban cache, there's usually a shop somewhere nearby that sells pens, otherwise a twig, tree nut or lump of charcoal can make an identifiable mark in the log.

 

The rusty can won't open.

- You just need the right TOOTs.

 

The logbook is wet and I don't want to touch it.

- Make some sort of mark with a pen or pencil, even if it's just poking a hole in the lump of paper mache, and include a photo with your log (and NM). If the CO questions it (unlikely), you can say "that's my hole there in the top right".

 

[+frostengel]

4 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

Pen doesn't work (empty, broken, lost in the woods).  My fault - should have spare pen - DNF

The rusty can won't open.   Not my fault - but will probably still log a DNF and definitely an NM (or NA if there's already an outstanding NM)

The logbook is wet and I don't want to touch it.  Not my fault - Add a dry scrap of paper, Log found, definitely an NM (or NA if there's already an outstanding NM)

 

In each of the cases the owner might delete my our your found log according to the guidelines.

You have to sign the logbook not any scrap of paper so why do you log a found it in case three?

 

As owner I wouldn't delete any of these logs, as cacher I might (not sure if I will in case 1) found log in any of these cases telling the owner what happens. And until now I haven't had problems. It's all about communication.

 

 

4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

otherwise a twig, tree nut or lump of charcoal can make an identifiable mark in the log.

 

I don't like that at all. I keep my logbooks and I like them tidy. So if someone uses twigs, mud, blood, ... to sign my book he destroys it. Better take a picture, explain what happens and everything is okay instead of making my nice logbook untidy. :-(

[+Gill & Tony]

4 minutes ago, frostengel said:

 

You have to sign the logbook not any scrap of paper so why do you log a found it in case three?

Because the logbook is unsignable.  If the CO doesn't care enough to maintain the cache, I will prove my visit by signing anything available.

[+frostengel]

1 hour ago, Gill & Tony said:

Because the logbook is unsignable.  If the CO doesn't care enough to maintain the cache, I will prove my visit by signing anything available.

 

I don't see the difference between wet unsignable logbook and rusty unopenable (is this a word?) cache box.

Both are "DNF" (or "did not sign") by the guidelines.

 

I would say found log them both or don't do in both cases - but that's only my opinion. In the end the cache owner must be okay with me doing what I did.

If anyone postet a DNF showing my rusty box or wet logbook I'd apologize and ask if they wanted to log it as found. If they don't want to that's completely okay. :-)

 

(Keep your boxes and logbooks intact and nothing like this will make problems!)

[+barefootjeff]

3 hours ago, frostengel said:

7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

otherwise a twig, tree nut or lump of charcoal can make an identifiable mark in the log.

 

I don't like that at all. I keep my logbooks and I like them tidy. So if someone uses twigs, mud, blood, ... to sign my book he destroys it. Better take a picture, explain what happens and everything is okay instead of making my nice logbook untidy. :-(

 

If a CO doesn't want their logbook destroyed by my twig or gum nut signatures, they should leave a pencil in the cache, especially when it's a tough 5km hike back to the car to then drive to the nearest sizeable town to buy a pen.

 

[+cerberus1]

3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

If a CO doesn't want their logbook destroyed by my twig or gum nut signatures, they should leave a pencil in the cache, especially when it's a tough 5km hike back to the car to then drive to the nearest sizeable town to buy a pen.

 

To be fair, every ammo can hide we ever had had no pencils left, or even their sharpeners remaining every...single...time we did maintenance.

After numerous "no pen in cache" logs (something we've never been required to have...) I finally had to mention I wasn't the pencil bank on a cache page. 

One "cacher" thought he'd be a smart (expletive deleted) alec and dumped an entire box of pencils into one.   A 24-pk IIRC...  

 - "This is to help the CO who apparently can't afford a couple pencils..."           

"Affordability" not the issue., as he found out when stopping with friends to see all were again gone less than six months later .      

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it  10/05/2018

I am guessing that the container is missing as i found a location consistant with the hint holding material likely to have been used for attachment.

 

[+Ry Dawg]

 

Going through some of my archives for inspiration, and found this gem. 

unfortunately, stuff like this is getting far more common around here; almost as bad as throw downs. 

Edited February 22, 2020 by Ry Dawg

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it     12/26/2019

Found the spot where it would be. But it seems as if it may be burried under the parking lot.

 

[+Ry Dawg]

“I think it’s its in this photo but I did not go any farther due to scorpions”.
This is clearly a DNF, logged as found. 
 

Side note, it’s easy to carry your own pen with you. I have one every where I go.. 

 

 

 

[+colleda]

I deleted this one today.

 

Premium Member

1090

Found it

28/02/2020

We are logging this as a 'find' as we located the black twine still tied in the mangrove but the cache is missing. There was a clear 750ml bottle of water with white nylon cord directly under the black twine. Had a search a few metres around for the 'log' with no luck.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it

08/31/2019

Didn’t get the cache but located the cemetery...extremely overgrown area, thorns galore. Good luck

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it

12/23/2019

Mid 50's in December?!? Time to do a cache run on my way home! I was able to find 8 caches with only 1 DNF on my way home today. A great big thank you to all of the CO's for placing and maintaining these caches for everyone to enjoy!

Assuming this one is a LP hide, it seemed like this one needed a little help so I replaced it. If it's actually elsewhere, feel free to delete my log and keep the replacement cache. TFTC!

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

Found it

01/11/2020

Looked all over, nothing in the area

 

[+MNTA]

3 hours ago, colleda said:

I deleted this one today.

 

Premium Member

1090

Found it

28/02/2020

We are logging this as a 'find' as we located the black twine still tied in the mangrove but the cache is missing. There was a clear 750ml bottle of water with white nylon cord directly under the black twine. Had a search a few metres around for the 'log' with no luck.

 

Would you have preferred a simple TFTC or the notice of a problem with your cache? Had they signed tftc you never would have known because the log was missing.

 

For my caches if the problem was on my end I give them the option to make the find. Just the other day a CO contacted me about a DNF/NM I had filed a few weeks back and offered the same thing and thanked me for letting him know of the problem. 

 

Remember this is supposed to be fun. Whats the harm they made an effort they noticed a problem and helped someone in the future. I've done the same.  Would you have preferred a throw down cache or a piece of paper tied to the string? Or from the sounds of it add a piece of paper to the water bottle? I've seen all of the above.

 

I tend to also lose pens specially in brush country. I'll take a picture of a log as proof of a find any day. The beauty of this game is that it is not a competition it is for personal entertainment so if a guy arm chair logs my cache no skin off my back, and I have found a prolific finder of challenges not sign my cache. I do it for the logs that I got today on one of my challenge caches:

 

Yay, completed! We found and signed the log on January 24, 2019, at the beginning of our 25-day road trip from Seattle to the Mega in Yuma, AZ. On the trip we linked a chain of counties from Canada ?? to ?? Mexico, and got 28 more CA counties. You really gave us extra encouragement with your challenge - thank you

 

 

[+barefootjeff]

42 minutes ago, MNTA said:

Would you have preferred a simple TFTC or the notice of a problem with your cache? Had they signed tftc you never would have known because the log was missing.

 

For my caches if the problem was on my end I give them the option to make the find. Just the other day a CO contacted me about a DNF/NM I had filed a few weeks back and offered the same thing and thanked me for letting him know of the problem. 

 

Remember this is supposed to be fun. Whats the harm they made an effort they noticed a problem and helped someone in the future. I've done the same.  Would you have preferred a throw down cache or a piece of paper tied to the string? Or from the sounds of it add a piece of paper to the water bottle? I've seen all of the above.

 

I'll let colleda provide the definitive answer on this, but I found that cache in 2017 and it wasn't a water bottle. There's nothing in the logs about the container being changed since then so I suspect the thing the "finder" found wasn't the cache at all but just a piece of litter.

[+colleda]

1 hour ago, MNTA said:

 

Would you have preferred a simple TFTC or the notice of a problem with your cache? Had they signed tftc you never would have known because the log was missing.

 

For my caches if the problem was on my end I give them the option to make the find. Just the other day a CO contacted me about a DNF/NM I had filed a few weeks back and offered the same thing and thanked me for letting him know of the problem. 

 

Remember this is supposed to be fun. Whats the harm they made an effort they noticed a problem and helped someone in the future. I've done the same.  Would you have preferred a throw down cache or a piece of paper tied to the string? Or from the sounds of it add a piece of paper to the water bottle? I've seen all of the above.

 

I tend to also lose pens specially in brush country. I'll take a picture of a log as proof of a find any day. The beauty of this game is that it is not a competition it is for personal entertainment so if a guy arm chair logs my cache no skin off my back, and I have found a prolific finder of challenges not sign my cache. I do it for the logs that I got today on one of my challenge caches:

 

Yay, completed! We found and signed the log on January 24, 2019, at the beginning of our 25-day road trip from Seattle to the Mega in Yuma, AZ. On the trip we linked a chain of counties from Canada ?? to ?? Mexico, and got 28 more CA counties. You really gave us extra encouragement with your challenge - thank you

 

 

The cache was not found. The log was not signed. The container was not a bottle. Correct log should have been DNF with, possibly, NM. The cacher has since logged a DNF.

[+Goldenwattle]

On 2/19/2020 at 10:54 PM, frostengel said:

 

Pen doesn't work (empty, broken, lost in the woods).

The rusty can won't open.

The logbook is wet and I don't want to touch it.

...

 

In each of the cases I have the cache in my hand and have successfully fulfilled the task given by the owner.

cany do you have a problem with me not signing the log? Only because of the rules?

 

(I don't talk about "seen it up in the tree and could not reach it" or "could not open the trick lock" or ....)

There are aways the occasional problem, such as the container won't open, but they are only very few caches. Most caches can be opened and the log signed, or attempted to sign. I found two soaked logs today, but still I signed them. I photographed the pale mark and included the photograph to prove I did sign. Very few excuses not to sign and I delete logs without an excuse and proof. I also carry two or three pens in case one runs out of ink. Today BOTH the pens ran out of ink, but I didn't use that excuse not to sign. I found a shop that sold pens and bought one.

If people don't sign there is no proof they found the cache. Yes, other proof can be give. A photograph or a very good description, but gees, it's a lot quicker and easier to sign.

[+frostengel]

58 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

If people don't sign there is no proof they found the cache. Yes, other proof can be give.

 

Other way round: if a nickname is signed into a logbook this does not proof that the person found the cache. Someone found the cache and wrote the name in the logbook (or used a stamp with different names).

We have some "special cachers" here (and I am sure there are several "special cachers" world wide) cheating - other persons logging caches for you is the simplest way.

 

So in the end even a name in a logbook doesn't prove anything. In my eyes usually the log will tell if people did my caches as intended. That is another thing: going directly to a multi final (after you got the coordinates from a friend) makes you sign the logbook but not solve the cache.

 

And ....?

[+TriciaG]

On 3/12/2004 at 1:10 PM, Jamie Z said:

This thread is for all those smiley-faced logs that admit that the hunters did not really find the cache.

 

Let's not start a debate, or accuse people of cheating or any of that. No names, no links, just the log.

 

[+JL_HSTRE]

A certain statue, and everything associated with it (pedestal, sign, landscaping, etc) has been removed temporarily due to a construction project. The statue is going to be replaced when the work is done (lasting about a year).

 

Since the statue was removed (and thus nothing to log until it's replaced), the associated Virtual has received 18 Finds and 3 DNFs. Of the 18 false finds, only 2 are by people with less than 1000 lifetime Finds. On the contrary, 7 are by cachers with more than 10,000.

 

If I didn't know the town was going to put the statue back, probably later this year, I would have posted a NA on it.

[+Max and 99]

2 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

A certain statue, and everything associated with it (pedestal, sign, landscaping, etc) has been removed temporarily due to a construction project. The statue is going to be replaced when the work is done (lasting about a year).

 

Since the statue was removed (and thus nothing to log until it's replaced), the associated Virtual has received 18 Finds and 3 DNFs. Of the 18 false finds, only 2 are by people with less than 1000 lifetime Finds. On the contrary, 7 are by cachers with more than 10,000.

 

If I didn't know the town was going to put the statue back, probably later this year, I would have posted a NA on it.

I will never forget the embarrassment when I logged a DNF on a virtual. I felt like an idiot. I think it was later that day that someone else logged a DNF. Turns out that the info for the Virtual was no longer there, so everyone figured it was a super easy Find and kept logging Found Its even though there was nothing there. 

[+Max and 99]

I was wondering why a cache was archived, when the last person logged a Found It. Until I read the log:

 

(Found it)

Gave this one another go this morning, found the spot, but the cache container was now missing. Placed a new micro under the rock at GZ, all should be good to go now. Thanks for the cache!

[+papu66]

On 3/3/2020 at 5:47 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

A certain statue, and everything associated with it (pedestal, sign, landscaping, etc) has been removed temporarily due to a construction project. The statue is going to be replaced when the work is done (lasting about a year).

 

Since the statue was removed (and thus nothing to log until it's replaced), the associated Virtual has received 18 Finds and 3 DNFs. Of the 18 false finds, only 2 are by people with less than 1000 lifetime Finds. On the contrary, 7 are by cachers with more than 10,000.

 

If I didn't know the town was going to put the statue back, probably later this year, I would have posted a NA on it.

Is the cache disabled? If it wasn't, I don't see any problem with the dnf's, unless they faked photos of the statue being there. 

[+barefootjeff]

53 minutes ago, papu66 said:

Is the cache disabled? If it wasn't, I don't see any problem with the dnf's, unless they faked photos of the statue being there. 

 

Why would someone logging a DNF want to fake a photo of the statue being there? Or are you suggesting the statue's really there but they Photoshopped it out of their photos to prove they couldn't find it? Bizarre.

[+papu66]

4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Why would someone logging a DNF want to fake a photo of the statue being there? Or are you suggesting the statue's really there but they Photoshopped it out of their photos to prove they couldn't find it? Bizarre.

Sorry, my bad. I meant to say I have no problem with the found it logs.

I understand that the purpose is to visit the coordinates and picture of the statue is only necessary as a proof.

[+JL_HSTRE]

12 hours ago, papu66 said:

Is the cache disabled? If it wasn't, I don't see any problem with the dnf's, unless they faked photos of the statue being there. 

 

Cache isn't disabled because of an inactive CO.

 

People are posting photos of the construction as proof of their "Find." The construction isn't preventing access to the statue; the statue is not there at all during the construction. The Virtual is specifically about the statue.

Edited March 5, 2020 by JL_HSTRE

[+Harry Dolphin]

Quote

XXX and I gave a good search, but did not find the cache. We left a replacement log in a little plastic sleeve that has the geocaching symbol on it. Hide under a red flat rock.

Will claim a find, but if the CO checks and finds the original container, I will change to dnf.

TFTC SL