False Log Information!!!!

January 23, 2005

Here is the scenario: I am after a cache that is listed as a micro and the hint is, "You don't have to leave the sidewalk to find this one". I get to the site, a bus stop, open the Palm and read the last few logs (all 'found' entries I might add). One says, left a golf ball and took nothing. The next log entry says "The cache is pretty full so I took the golf bal." Reading this I begin a search for a container large enough to handle a golf ball, in other words, I quit looking for a micro. That only leaves a bush and a light pole in arms distance from the sidewalk, that could house a cache that could house a golf ball. I didn't find it in either place. I left the area (we were in the area on a small vacation), and logged a DNF when we got home. Then I wrote to the cache owner for info about the cache, so I could learn from the experience. Nothing heard so I then wrote the last geocacher that found this cache. He wrote back, 'oh, that is our signature'. He went on to explain that the cacher before him was his wife and that is how they log caches they find, as two separate entries. She signs that she leaves a golf ball and he signs that he picks it up. Now my questions are:

1. Should I get over it?

2. Should the cache owner edit the log since it could NOT be true (the cache is a magnetic thimble?)

3. Should the husband and wife team be told not to do this?

4. Should this be allowed as a reverse spoiler, ha, ha got me!

5. Suggestions ___________________________

Thanks

38.2k · January 23, 2005

I'd go for 1.

January 23, 2005

Well, I don't think it's too cool to do, but they can do what they want and play the game how they want, so I agree with Briansnat, number 1 is probably your best bet.

1.6k · January 23, 2005

Well , I vote for #1 , you should probably just get over it , it is not uncommon for a husband and wife team to have two seperate accounts . And if that is how they choose to log as there "signature" then I see nothing wrong with it . You had a choice stick to what the discription on the cache page told you or to follow assumptions based on the log entries. Sometimes log entries are purposely deceptive. We all just hate to log a DNF but we all learn from the experience.

Star

January 23, 2005

I would make the husband aware that these logs can be misleading. Then it's up to them to decide whether they want to continue logging caches like this.

January 23, 2005

I agree, you'll probably have to resort to #1. But you know...it is downright deceiving to say she put a golf ball in it when she didn't. Signature or not. She should also not log that she found it if:

1) she helped hide it

2) he told her where it is.

Goes to show...people will do just about anything for a smiley. I see similar stuff in other hobbies I have where there is a tally to be made. Frustrating. You learn over time who the honest ones are.

I would make the husband aware that these logs can be misleading. Then it's up to them to decide whether they want to continue logging caches like this.

Very true. It just may never have dawned on them that someone would use that information to try to deduct the size of a cache.

Edited January 23, 2005 by Birdsong-n-Bud

January 23, 2005

Your only hope for sanity is to go with #1. But I'd be mighty tempted to send a note to the husband and wife politely suggesting they turn their "golf ball" into a personal TB.

January 23, 2005

The golf ball TB is a good idea.

As a cacher who has often used the posted logs to help in finding a difficult cache, I can understand your frustration. I don't think the team is malicious, but maybe directing them to this thread would help them understand how their logs can be misleading. And, they may not care - people play this game in all sorts of ways, and sometimes people hunt caches in ways that impact other cachers or the cache owners - and it really doesn't matter to them.

3k · January 23, 2005

I'd forget it and move on.

I understand your frustration, but don't really have strong feelings about the golf ball drop/take myself, so if it was me I wouldn't bother sending a note to the previous finders. I've seen lots of instances where somebody will drop a TB at a micro and somebody else will pick it up, and in most cases you can tell its just people caching together and swapping bugs at a cache without the TB ever really being left there. If you relied on the log entries and saw TB activity, you might be misled into thinking the cache was bigger than it actually was. I don't see anything wrong with this as long as they are being accurate with the TB logging.

edit: typos

Edited January 23, 2005 by cache_test_dummies

January 23, 2005

i would say that you should just not believe what other people put in logs unless its repeated several times (for example: other people b4 them saying they left or took something.)

January 23, 2005

Made me laugh tho'

January 23, 2005

I'd say #1 but I agree with others, you might just gently let them know that it kinda messed up your hunt. I don't think it's cool myself, but I try not to get too hung up on how others play the game. I think if you mean to put something facetious in your logs it ought to be REALLY obvious. Like this log for a micro smaller than a film canister:

"Took 42" LCD HDTV Left Pocket Lint & a can of Tomato Soup" I chided him for leaving food in a cache.

Or my log for a really tough, bushwacky hunt :

"Took beautifully landscaped moving sidewalk under enclosed mosquito netting and followed the neon Burma-shave signs to the day-glo yellow cache resting on a silver platter. Long hike, but the drink cart came by twice, driven by a 21 year old Hooters girl. The salted pork is particularly good!"

Edited January 23, 2005 by Spencersb

5.7k · January 23, 2005

She should also not log that she found it if:

1) she helped hide it

2) he told her where it is.

Why not? In case 1, she has no other recourse since the site doesn't allow you to ignore caches or allow multiple cache owners. In case 2, "the group caching" case, only one person generally finds a cache in a group but everybody signs the log and logs a find online. This is totally acceptible in my book.

As for the original poll, I'd say #1. Don't believe everything you read in logs. I thought the log entries were cute.

--Marky

Edited January 23, 2005 by Marky

January 23, 2005

Your only hope for sanity is to go with #1. But I'd be mighty tempted to send a note to the husband and wife politely suggesting they turn their "golf ball" into a personal TB.

If I was to receive a note suggesting that my log entries were somewhat deceptive, I might take offense at first, but then logic and reason would prevail and I'd reassess my methodology.

I might use an object for my "game" that didn't lend itself to size judgments - "I left a cog" or "I left a ball bearing" or even "I left a grommet".

Heck, a grommet can fit in even the smallest caches!

--Marc

January 23, 2005 @ 3:35 PM

N40°46.565' W073°58.756'

January 23, 2005

OOPS!!!!! I'm the wife and the offender. Just to clarify a few things....

My husband and I cache separately on occasion. I signed the log. He DID NOT tell me where it was.

The rest of the story is......

When I opened the car door, a golf ball fell out and was in the gutter. When we were leaving the location, my husband picked it up. That is what happened. This is not our signature. The cache is a micro. I wasn't trying to throw anybody off or ruin anyone's vacation.

The cacher e-mailed my husband and this is his reply to them.

Oops.......sorry about the golf ball thing. Shoebugs is my wife and anytime she logs finding the glow in the dark golf ball, I log that I took it. I'll tell her not to do that again, but she doesn't listen to me much.

Happy Caching,

Just to keep the peace. I deleted my find from this location. I don't have a numbers problem. We apologize again....publicaly.

By the way...

This all started when this cacher e-mailed both of us separatly, wanting to know where some caches are out here that they couldn't find. Not hints....just the details. THEN...they start this stuff AFTER he told them where it was. How kosher is that?????

I forwarded the inquiry that I received to the cache owner. He said that he had heard from these people before.

Thanks to those of you who have come to my rescue. This was not a malicious statement...just in fun.

3k · January 23, 2005

Just to keep the peace. I deleted my find from this location. I don't have a numbers problem.

Thanks for the post. Its clear that there was no intention of being misleading (as I mentioned before, I have no problem with this type of logging activity anyway). Even if you aren't into the numbers thing, I'd relog the find. You found it, you deserve it.

January 23, 2005

Oops again...

That previous log was written by me. Shoebugs...not Quadrod.

Thanks

Shoebugs

1k · January 23, 2005

I give you a lot of credit for coming clean and publicly apologizing, since wornout was kind enough not to identify you in his thread! And you certainly deserve to relog the find.

It's obvious from your post that there was no malicious intent, and that you learned something from the experience (that others may look to your logs for clues, so you should make it obvious when you're kidding around). I can see why wornout would have been frustrated that he was mislead by the logs, even though that's not what you intended.

Most people would say it's not kosher to ask for the details on exactly how to find a cache, however, wornout said he'd left the area and asked just to learn from his experience. Assuming that he won't be returning to "find" these caches, I don't see a problem with asking. Of course, with nearly 2 years experience and 692 finds, I'm surpised wornout felt the need to ask - he seems like he's pretty experienced already. But even if he does return and claim those finds, he's only cheating himself (it shouldn't matter to anyone else how many finds he has).

Which brings me to what most people have recommended in this thread: time for everyone to get over it and get back to having fun geocaching!

24.7k · January 23, 2005

My vote is number 1. Now you know the logging style of a team. You also know to take a log with a grain of salt. Which is what you should do.

No way no how would I want to give up logs like those mentioned in this thread just for the sake of having to tell it exactly like it is. We would soon live in a world of TSLS or TNLN. Both of which are true enough and boring as hell.

Edited January 23, 2005 by Renegade Knight

January 23, 2005

Even if you aren't into the numbers thing, I'd relog the find. You found it, you deserve it.

Agreed. How nice she came here to clarify and apologize. There was a lesson learned in the end.

January 23, 2005

1

5....sorry I can't write that here!

Edited January 23, 2005 by Clan X-Man

20.7k · January 24, 2005

I think you should get over it. If they want to log in this manner, I don't see the harm.

2k · January 24, 2005

1.

January 24, 2005

I think it's funny - if you read the logs in advance of searching for a cache - you've got to take the good with the bad.

One cache I hid - I mentioned I was leaving a "shirt" for a FTF prize. It was a micro and the shirt was actually a WG$ folded up to look like a shirt (I wish I still had that website where I found the instructions for folding it like that!).

You don't want to be mislead? Don't read the logs before you find the cache!

20.7k · January 24, 2005

... It was a micro and the shirt was actually a WG$ folded up to look like a shirt (I wish I still had that website where I found the instructions for folding it like that!)....

Try this site.

38.2k · January 24, 2005

I think it's funny - if you read the logs in advance of searching for a cache - you've got to take the good with the bad.

One cache I hid - I mentioned I was leaving a "shirt" for a FTF prize. It was a micro and the shirt was actually a WG$ folded up to look like a shirt (I wish I still had that website where I found the instructions for folding it like that!).

You don't want to be mislead? Don't read the logs before you find the cache!

Don't forget Lep's hilarious log for a reststop micro where he camps out and has to ski to get to the cache, then gets run over. That'll throw off people!

Edited January 24, 2005 by briansnat

2k · January 24, 2005

... It was a micro and the shirt was actually a WG$ folded up to look like a shirt (I wish I still had that website where I found the instructions for folding it like that!)....

Try this site.

The shirts are preaty cool.

thanks for the link.

My son is taking one to school for show n' tell Monday.

Just to stay on topic, I'm still going with #1

January 24, 2005

I would suggest getting over it for your own sake, but I would certainly email the couple as well as the cache owner and inform all parties that the bogus logs caused you an inconvenience.

If it were my cache I would delete their entries and their find from my cache just to cause them some irritation.

It's a karma thing, not that I believe in karma.

9.4k · January 24, 2005

I've logged that I needed a rope and grappling hook for a cache. Was that wrong?

The cache was just hard to find, it didn't really need the "specialized equipment", but in context with the cache page it's funny.

January 24, 2005

Hunt them down and pelt them with the blasted golf balls!!!!!

January 24, 2005

I've logged that I needed a rope and grappling hook for a cache. Was that wrong?

The cache was just hard to find, it didn't really need the "specialized equipment", but in context with the cache page it's funny.

This is funny too...but only if you can find the cache. The log is a paper shred (like from a shredder!)

January 24, 2005

Hunt them down and pelt them with the blasted golf balls!!!!!

this is better advice than I gave. I would just say that if you intend to do this, go the extra mile and shove those balls where the sun doesn't shine. Make them feel your pain!

6.5k · January 24, 2005

1. Posting a little extraneous info in some logs is normal practice in these parts. Just remember-you can't believe everything you read, and if it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.

January 24, 2005

I suggest you guys read the entire thread before posting, not just the opening post. (Well, provided you read this post...)

2.8k · January 24, 2005

I suggest you guys read the entire thread before posting, not just the opening post. (Well, provided you read this post...)

A good suggestion indeed.

Deleting logs 'cause you don't like 'em? Bizarre. Changing your search methods based on the size of the container inferred by a finder's log and not the hider's explicit information. Foolish. There are many virtual caches that have had TBs pass through them - Impossible :wub: Actually not - people pass things hand-to-hand quite often.

Besides, the information on the cache page says the logs may contain spoilers. For you this was more literal than anyone could have ever expected. :wub:

The apology, although quite classy, was entirely unnecessary. Write what you want.

You're now a more experienced cacher. Maybe you should send a thank you note.

Edited January 24, 2005 by pdxmarathonman

3.9k · January 24, 2005

I actually thought the log was amusing. I normally don't read the logs before I hunt a cache, unless I'm having problems. If the owner listed it as a Micro...that's what I'm looking for, even if someone said the left a football in there.

El Diablo

Edited January 24, 2005 by El Diablo

3.8k · January 24, 2005

Often, I read the last few logs before I search. I think it is hilarious. :wub:

Maybe I'll think up some kind of cache where, when you find it, there are instructions to write misleading logs! :wub: :wub:

24.7k · January 24, 2005

I suggest you guys read the entire thread before posting, not just the opening post. (Well, provided you read this post...)

I stopped one post short of the one I needed to read.

5.3k · January 24, 2005

Go with number one.

But heres and idea.

What if someone was using miniture golf balls, like ones that might be made for a doll house. I saw all types of miniture stuff in a local hobby shop that would fit into a micro.

Edited January 24, 2005 by JohnnyVegas

1.8k · January 24, 2005

Wht would you do if someone logged their t.b. in and out as a way of mapping their travels...you should read more carefully, and notice the date of the logs...I think YOU failed to notice.

22k · January 24, 2005

The apology, although quite classy, was entirely unnecessary. Write what you want.

Agreed.

Caching at your own risk includes inferring things posted in notes. Stick with the formally posted information on the cache page and stop blaming others when looking for extra hints from previous cachers.

1.1k · January 24, 2005

I would say get over it and learn a leason. The logs are not an offical part of the cache and what ever someone says is up to them. I drop and then retived a 19 inche tall gnome from a cache. Would he fit in the contaier NO but I could have give folks the impression it was a large contaier when it was not. Yes the logs are helpful sometimes but dont really up on them. The main part of this sport is how devious folks can be in placing a find.

cheers

4.5k · January 24, 2005

Maybe i missed where this has been brought up above but on the cache page it states right above the logs that there may be "spoilers" present in the logs. Seems to me that could go both ways, making it either easier or harder to find the cache. In other words, dont depend on the logs for totally reliable information. :wub:

The reliable source of information was in the cache description where the owner stated that it was a micro. Yes, the owner could be offbase with his description but i would think that most people would call it right about the size of the container they had placed!

Number 1 is your best bet,, you're definitely taking this stuff too seriously!!!

January 24, 2005

get over it or get a new sport.

7.2k · January 24, 2005

5. Suggestions ___________________________

Be careful of misdirection.

January 24, 2005

I think we've beaten this to death.

January 24, 2005

Maybe I'll think up some kind of cache where, when you find it, there are instructions to write misleading logs!

Please, please do this!!

January 24, 2005

I know of one in Georgia, of course I can't tell you which one since that would mess it up.

5.7k · January 24, 2005

This (now archived) cache had a requirement that you tell a lie in both the physical log book and the online find log. It was a lot of fun.

--Marky

3k · January 24, 2005

This (now archived) cache had a requirement that you tell a lie in both the physical log book and the online find log. It was a lot of fun.

So you are required to lie, and you are saying it was a lot of fun. Are you really saying that it wasn't a lot of fun? :sad:

edit: typos. No, no typos. I didn't edit anything. Or did I?

Edited January 24, 2005 by cache_test_dummies

False Log Information!!!!

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment