Partial Finds?

[+mzmtg]

I've seen more than one "Found It" for a multi where the person did not find all the legs. "I found parts 1 and 2, but for the life of me I couldn't find the third." That kind of thing.

 

There's no way this should count, right?

[+Cardinal Red]

I personally agree with you.

 

But the Cache Owner has total discretion.

 

Since this is NOT a competition, we are not harmed when someone else doesn't play by the same "rules" we set for ourselves.

[+StarBrand]

IMHO - I would delete a log for anybody that didn't complete all stages of a multi. It would be like logging a find that read: "I found the parking area but it was raining so I went no further"

 

[+Moose Mob]

It's like cheating at solitaire. Who's really getting hurt?

 

Side note: We had a guy come through town and the logs said "saw where the coords would have taken us to" while they were driving down the interstate. They probably probably had 60 finds per hour and arrived at thier destination on schedule. Sometimes you just have to sit back and chuckle.

[HIPS-meister]

I agree. If someone posts a "found it" and didn't find stage-three, who cares? Some people really get caught-up in "numbers" and might therefore feel that those other folks are "cheating," but... not everyone out there is competitive. The beauty of this game is that it's strictly a one-on-one personal challenge between you and the puzzle. Log it as you choose. Just don't spoil the fun for the next seeker.

[+StarBrand]

I agree. If someone posts a "found it" and didn't find stage-three, who cares?

I do. Just the moral concept I guess......

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I agree. If someone posts a "found it" and didn't find stage-three, who cares? Some people really get caught-up in "numbers" and might therefore feel that those other folks are "cheating," but... not everyone out there is competitive. The beauty of this game is that it's strictly a one-on-one personal challenge between you and the puzzle. Log it as you choose. Just don't spoil the fun for the next seeker.

Have you ever seen those RV's that have a map of the states on them? The owners put the state stickers on the map for the states they have visited. Does it really hurt anyone if they put on a state they haven't actually visited? Probably not, but it's the principle behind it.

[+Miragee]

I agree.  If someone posts a "found it" and didn't find stage-three, who cares?

I do. Just the moral concept I guess......

I agree. I did a multi-stage "Multi" the other day that took a return trip to the beginning and a return to the last two stages to finally finish.

 

There is a lot of satisfaction knowing I perservered to get to the final cache location. However, if I met up with a fellow Geocacher who said they logged that one as a "Found It" after completing only the first three waypoints, I wouldn't be upset . . . but it sure would be a clear window into their own "moral compass."

 

I don't know if I would trust them in other situations if they would "cheat" like that.

[+AtoZ]

Unless you find the final find and sign the log book it is NOT a find. I have thought done multies where I/we have figured where the final might be after doing tow or three of the waypoints and found the final cache. Is this cheating, no I don't think so it is must cache that allows some lattituce. I am dealing with one of these i.e. folks are finding the final with out doing it the way in invisioned. Does it still count why not.

O'well it is only a game.

cheers

[adampierson]

Unless you find the final find and sign the log book it is NOT a find. I have thought done multies where I/we have figured where the final might be after doing tow or three of the waypoints and found the final cache. Is this cheating, no I don't think so it is must cache that allows some lattituce. I am dealing with one of these i.e. folks are finding the final with out doing it the way in invisioned. Does it still count why not.

O'well it is only a game.

cheers

I've faced a simliar situation. One cacher had a two stage multi. Several previous finders had problems finding WP1 to do the calculations to get to WP2 (the cache). But a couple of people who have done his caches before and along with the clue were able to find the cache without doing the calculations.

 

The cache has changed to so cachers no longer have to do the calculations (Object used for WP1 ended up getting torn down).

 

I would say a find is only a find if you are able to sign the logbook or at least leave a note in the cache to prove you are there.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I would say a find is only a find if you are able to sign the logbook or at least leave a note in the cache to prove you are there.

That seems to say it all. Sign the log book, log the cache.

There are exceptions approved by owners. "You're right. The cache is missing. Thanks for reporting it. You may log it as found." Logged one. Didn't log the other.

[+JMBella]

Aren't you supposed to count ALL the legs of a multi as a find?

[+Tidalflame]

JMBella: To my knowledge, not unless the owner specifies that that should be done.

 

Anyway, the issue I have with this is that incorrectly logging things (otherwise known as lying) does make the game less enjoyable for others. How? Say the last leg of the multi is missing, but a Geocacher is too lazy to actually go to the last part, so he just reports it as a find. Now the cache page has incorrect information on it.

 

Lying about your finds is worse than just pathetic showmanship and narcissism: it's discourteous because it means that other cachers cannot rely on the information provided to them.

[+carleenp]

I haven't seen many people logging multiple finds for each leg of a multi-cache much, but I know it happens. I also have never seen a person log finds for stages where they never found the final cache, but I figure it must happen. I find it distasteful and if I owned a multi-cache, I would delete duplicate finds or a failure to find the final cache with a polite note explaining why. But in the end it is up to the cache owner. I don't get concerned about those on other people's caches since this isn't a competition and people tend to play their own game. Although I will likely privately roll my eyes and think it is tacky when I see such things.

Edited April 5, 2005 by carleenp

[+JMBella]

Good Lord, I can understand Tidalflame taking my comment seriously, but Carleen, you should know better.

[+carleenp]

Good Lord, I can understand Tidalflame taking my comment seriously, but Carleen, you should know better.   

Nope, I saw your comment as sarcasim! I was just replying in general to the OP!

Edited April 5, 2005 by carleenp

[+carleenp]

Good Lord, I can understand Tidalflame taking my comment seriously, but Carleen, you should know better.   

Nope, I saw your comment as sarcasim! I was just replying in general to the OP!

You know what, just for that now I am going to falsely "take you seriously" in another thread. I hope it doesn't get me trouble!

[+Mopar]

I agree. If someone posts a "found it" and didn't find stage-three, who cares? Some people really get caught-up in "numbers" and might therefore feel that those other folks are "cheating," but... not everyone out there is competitive. The beauty of this game is that it's strictly a one-on-one personal challenge between you and the puzzle. Log it as you choose. Just don't spoil the fun for the next seeker.

As has been discussed MANY times before, the "cheating at solitaire" analogy is not correct. Unlike cheating at solitaire, cheating on cache logs can effect many people.

In the case here of a multi, what if the final is really missing? A faked find log provides false feedback to other cache seekers as well as the cache owner.

People see that the cache was just found so they don't expect a problem.

People who may have DNFed the cache see the find and think the cache has been replaced.

The cache owner sees a find so he knows he doesn't need to check on his cache.

In the case of locationless caches, a fake find deprives a legitimate cacher a chance to log that location.

[+Moose Mob]

I agree.  If someone posts a "found it" and didn't find stage-three, who cares?  Some people really get caught-up in "numbers" and might therefore feel that those other folks are "cheating," but... not everyone out there is competitive.  The beauty of this game is that it's strictly a one-on-one personal challenge between you and the puzzle.  Log it as you choose.  Just don't spoil the fun for the next seeker.

As has been discussed MANY times before, the "cheating at solitaire" analogy is not correct. Unlike cheating at solitaire, cheating on cache logs can effect many people.

In the case here of a multi, what if the final is really missing? A faked find log provides false feedback to other cache seekers as well as the cache owner.

People see that the cache was just found so they don't expect a problem.

People who may have DNFed the cache see the find and think the cache has been replaced.

The cache owner sees a find so he knows he doesn't need to check on his cache.

In the case of locationless caches, a fake find deprives a legitimate cacher a chance to log that location.

True, taking that into account, would you also agree that people who do not log thier legitimate finds in a timely manner also can present problems? Particularly if a cache had a recent DNF and the next cacher did not log it stating that it was actually still in place? Then the owner temp archives thier cache and takes a day off of finding other caches only to find thier cache was still in place.

 

Either way, I would think that a whether person either enjoys caching, or does not enjoy caching is purely based on thier own attitude. We all need to adjust with the game. These illegitimate finds are pretty rare if you view them statistically.

[+Tidalflame]

Not noticing sarcasm is always embarassing... >_>

 

Anyway, I would agree that people who don't log their finds in a timely manner are a bit problematic, but in my opinion being too busy to log your finds or whatever just doesn't seem the same as lying about your finds or even logging caches you haven't found while openly admitting such.

[+carleenp]

Not noticing sarcasm is always embarassing... >_>

 

Anyway, I would agree that people who don't log their finds in a timely manner are a bit problematic, but in my opinion being too busy to log your finds or whatever just doesn't seem the same as lying about your finds or even logging caches you haven't found while openly admitting such.

Don't be embarassed. The wonderful (or awful maybe) internet makes things hard to read at times. Apparently JMB also thought I took him/her seriously! Or maybe JMB knew that I didn't and was messing with me!?!?! Soooo hard to tell at times!

Edited April 5, 2005 by carleenp

[+fly46]

Not to hinder discussion by getting back on topic, but if someone found one and two but not three, I'd delete their log. After all, if you don't find the end container how is that different than saying you've pulled into the parking lot and didn't bother to check the light pole?

 

However, if they found three but not one and two, I'd let the log stand.

[+Tidalflame]

That's how I'd handle it as well.

[+carleenp]

Not to hinder discussion by getting back on topic, but if someone found one and two but not three, I'd delete their log. After all, if you don't find the end container how is that different than saying you've pulled into the parking lot and didn't bother to check the light pole?

 

However, if they found three but not one and two, I'd let the log stand.

Yes, I agree there. If they found the end and signed the log then they found it. Maybe not the way they should have, but they did. Also that shouldn't happen much and if it did, the owner should re-think the cache to avoid that. That signals a loophole that likely should be closed.

[+Moose Mob]

Off topic? Naw... we were just adding a little life to this horse so we could continue beating on it.

 

Actually, the morality is an issue. I have had cache owners tell me I could claim a cache that they had removed that morning, missing caches etc., and I turned them down each and every time. I have found duplicate "found it" logs for caches when I forgot to drop a TB and went back and mistakenly duplicate the "found it" instead of a note. I have found 2 so far Perhaps I will find more. Never intentionaly done it though.

 

So... claiming a find when they din't find the log book, to me that is not how the game is played. I will not let it worry me though, I have and will address it with my fellow cachers when/if it arises... it's a fun game, let's keep it that way. I get enough gray hairs from my kids/grandkids.

[+Ladybug Kids]

I travel between Fairbanks and Anchorage quite a bit. Sometimes I start a multi-cache only to discover that I can't finish it on that particular trip due to having to attend a meeting or catch a plane rather than drive all the way across town to the next stage. I'll post a note to the cache page reporting which stages I completed, but don't post the "Found It" log until I actually find the final stage. Sometimes a month passes between the note log and the found it log.

[+Sagefox]

It is, in fact, common practice to log a find on a multi if you find the final stage (or wherever the main logbook is) but don't find one or more intermediate stages.

 

Some of these posts and some on other similar topics indicate that owners sometime expect that all stages must be found in order to qualify for a find. This expectation can lead to hard feelings between local caches. Why make life hard when it can be fun?

 

People consider it good clean fun when they sus out a final prior to completing all stages or when accidentally finding a final stage.

 

I often say here that I don't care if people lie, cheat or steal to find my caches. If they physically handle the logbook and sign it or find enough of the container to verify they were at the site then I consider it a find. This too is common practice out in the geocaching world.

 

But I agree that finding intermediate stages but not the final (if that is where the main logbook is) is not a cache find.