Why Do People Cheat?

[+McDeHack]

A little while ago I placed a cache. A certain person who likes to be a FTF posted that he had found the cache. A few days later as I was passing this micro with magnets cache, I checked it and noticed that the claimed finder had not signed the log.

I mailed this person to ask why he did not sign the log? He did not give me an answer to the question but said that he would do so when passing again. He never did.

Lately I had two DNFs on this cache. I began to wonder why this was so, as this is an easy cache. There was talk of back gardens and alleys on the logs of the DNFs. But this cache is nowhere near any such places. I checked the Co-ords on Memory map. It was not where it was supposed to be. Some how, and I know now how it happened. West had changed to East. As this cache is close to N.000.00 it was a quite a lot of metres out. I have deleted the cheaters log. I have also informed the DNFs of the change of the location and why this was.

The cheater has been caught out in the past. But I will name no names.

[+derrylynne]

It really does seem rather sad and defeating the fun of caching to cheat. We would think it is very rare to find someone cheating on a find. Like all cachers it is a great feeling to find the cache that you are after. Of course no such fun for a cheat. Take heart though, you probably have about the only cheat in the country.

[+-Phoenix-]

A little while ago I placed a cache. A certain person who likes to be a FTF posted that he had found the cache. A few days later as I was passing this micro with magnets cache, I checked it and noticed that the claimed finder had not signed the log.

I mailed this person to ask why he did not sign the log? He did not give me an answer to the question but said that he would do so when passing again. He never did.

Lately I had two DNFs on this cache. I began to wonder why this was so, as this is an easy cache. There was talk of back gardens and alleys on the logs of the DNFs. But this cache is nowhere near any such places. I checked the Co-ords on Memory map. It was not where it was supposed to be. Some how, and I know now how it happened. West had changed to East. As this cache is close to N.000.00 it was a quite a lot of metres out. I have deleted the cheaters log. I have also informed the DNFs of the change of the location and why this was.

The cheater has been caught out in the past. But I will name no names.

Are you saying you placed the cache close to the equator?

[+klaus23]

Are you saying you placed the cache close to the equator?

N.000.00

 

Think Greenwich

Edited May 22, 2005 by klaus23

[+-Phoenix-]

I think you will find Grenwich is somewhere about N50ish

[markandlynn]

I think you will find Grenwich is somewhere about N50ish

I think Greenwich is somewhere around E 000 00.000 or W 000 00.000 I could be wrong though.

As an aside we check our log books to confirm who is FTF no problems yet in our neck of the woods. Sorry to hear you have this problem phantom loggers are a side effect of the trust system used on the web site.

[+-Phoenix-]

The cheater has been caught out in the past. But I will name no names.

 

Actually, given the weight of evidence Id say he should be named and shamed, and then everyone systematically delete all his logs

[+klaus23]

I think you will find Grenwich is somewhere about N50ish

Indeed

 

I guess that he must have meant W00.000 - there's a cache near the meridian on the East Sussex coast with the co-ords W 000° 00.091

[+Happy Humphrey]

then everyone systematically delete all his logs

Phoenix,

I wouldn't agree with that, as they may have logged some caches legitimately: but his/her ID should be identified so that other cache owners can be aware, and ensure that the logs for this person are verified.

 

It might not seem to matter, except that the FTF is valued by many cachers, and this person would appear to be denying satisfaction to deserving participants.

 

HH.

[+-Phoenix-]

As already said, geocaching works on a trust system, this guy is blatantly violating the trust so a formal peer action is well justified, none of his logs can be trusted, so unless he goes out of his way to proove otherwise they should all be deleted, end of story.

 

By setting an example and sending a strong message we make it clear that as a community we will not stand for this abuse of trust.

[+Messe]

What a waste of space....or is there a space where there should not be .......it would be good to know who.....could keep eye out...would send a strong message....cheats not excepted in this community and you will be found out.Anyway cheating on FTF is different to cheating on finding a cache.....ones selfish to the true FTF,the other selfless as there is nobody there!

[+third-degree-witch]

Great to see someone else getting hammered for a change . Isn't everyone taking this all a little seriously ? .Surely if someone wants to claim finding a little plastic / metal box first without actually finding it then whooppy feckin doo ! .

I like to get to a cache soon after its hidden, purely so that i dont have to follow the geocachers 'superhighway' straight to cache.

If indeed this is such a serious 'crime' then surely its best to name and shame instead of bleating about it from behind a keyboard.

 

bb

 

Third-Degree-Witch

[+klaus23]

We are back to the principle of a community policing itself - but before you do go and name the person who logged an FTF without visiting your cache, you must engage in dialogue with this cacher and be absolutely sure of your actions.

 

IMO the whole FTF thing is a bit overblown - but others take a lot of pride in getting there first. It all depends how competitive you are. Personally, I'd prefer someone else to find that the co-ords are waaay off or that you may be shot at/can't park/no pub/have to pay entry fee/ when finding a cache... or whatever else. But that's just my take on it. But if there really are people cheating, it is very unfortunate.

 

I did a detailed check on my cache in Portishead, near Bristol recently. I checked the logbook and compared it against the website. It took some detective work, but out of 41 finds nobody had cheated. Two visitors appear to not log online, but that's their choice. I was quite impressed that nobody had "cheated". But maybe this happens more at virtual caches where the answers can be Googled.

[+McDeHack]

As I said "Iwill not name names" As this person also places some many great caches in my area.

If any one wants to play the detective, ' Canary's only sing?'

 

As for my cache N.000.00.??? W51.36.??? would be getting near the mark.

 

All quesses as to whom or what. Email me.

[+third-degree-witch]

My point was this..You obviously got miffed enough to vent your spleen on the forum. You wanted agreement and support ,Something that was freely given by all it seems , myself included .But you failed to name the cacher concerned. How can we improve the situation if only half the information is given ? . Obviously the cacher concerned will know he / shes being referred to , Surely they should be given the right to reply ? . Only fair in my view.

[+-Phoenix-]

Your initial question was why do people cheat, well, the simple answer is becasue they can, and can get away with it.

 

Therefore, the only way to deter people from cheating is to make sure the consequences are not worth the effort.

[+third-degree-witch]

Is it really worth it ? surely 'FTF' is not that valuable. Nice to find a fresh cache it has to be said but not enough to cheat.

[+webscouter.]

I like to get FTF for two reasons.

 

First I am the only person who gets to see the cache exactly like the hider intended it, hidden where it it suppose to be and filled with only the type swag he or she intended it to be filled with.

 

Second, I want to keep GuitarNutz from getting the FTF.

Edited May 23, 2005 by webscouter.

[+Happy Humphrey]

As for my cache N.000.00.??? W51.36.??? would be getting near the mark

Well, GCMPVB is not at those coordinates, but similar ones (N<-->W), and has been changed from E to W recently, so it looks the likely candidate. Only 2 attempts in over three months though? Perhaps hardly anyone logs a DNF around there...

 

All quesses as to whom or what. Email me.

As the controversial log has been deleted, I don't think there's any need to keep the cache name secret - obviously it could benefit from the advertising! Anyone up for a FTF on an easy micro?

 

HH

[nobby.nobbs]

thing is that's not cheating. it's just plain daft. the whole point of the sport is to use gps to visit caches. if you're not going to visit then why are you on the website???

 

dadgum odd behaviour really, go on tell us who it is. they bought it on themselves. i don't agree with carte blanche deletion of all logs but cache owners can check their own just to see if the individual has actually visited.

 

the individual concerned can try to justify their actions at any time........

[+Kitty Hawk]

I like to get FTF for two reasons as well, sometimes the fun wears off and FTF bagging seems to liven things up a bit.

 

Secondly there is a league table on G:UK. I'd be pretty miffed if I found I was on a table with someone who cheats above me.

[+Chris n Maria]

Only 2 attempts in over three months though? Perhaps hardly anyone logs a DNF around there...

Well we attempted the cache but (unusually for us) didn't log a failed to find.

 

The previous (wrong) location matched the, really scant, description well. On arrival at the location we thought "why on earth would anyone place a cache there" the location had absolutley nothing going for it. We didn't bother to get out of the car as we just couldn't see the point in the cache.

 

Rather than log it we just added it to our ignore list. Perhaps we should have logged it as a failed to find saying "what a rubbish place to put a cache...etc, etc" but we didn't as who are we to define what others should get out of the game? Perhaps it was logged as a find by the person in question to get it off their nearest cache list.

 

It looks like we have done McDeHack a disservice - for which we appologise. The problem is basically the cache description - if it dosn't tell you roughly where you should be...how would know if you are there?

 

Chris

[+Alibags]

I think the answer for McDeHack is to delete the false log, as the cacher in question has not provided enough evidence as to why it should stand. I don't think this should lead to some McCarthy style witch hunt and summary deletion of all their logs on other caches. I am not interested in seeing them named and shamed. I think this would set a dangerous precident for 'trial by mob' on the forums that I would personally deplore.

 

Why do people cheat? I have no idea. I see it as really quite pointless. I have seen logs where the cacher has stated that thay located the cache but has not actually retrieved it and signed the log, for whatever reason. I would personally delete these on my own caches, and invite the cacher to return and sign the log, but I would not describe them as 'cheating'.

 

The bottom line is, even though the cacher has obviously missed the point (never put down to malicious intent something that could equally be ascribed to stupidity), there is something McDeHack can do (delete the log) and the rest of us should just chill out.

Edited May 23, 2005 by Alibags

[+Happy Humphrey]

Alibags - agreed - and the log has already been deleted (if I was looking at the correct cache!).

[+Nellies Knackers]

Surely it's a simple solution, if you are into ftf's and find a blank logbook, sign it and contact the cache if it's been logged online, most cache owners will check the logbook and agree with you.

I left this log in wind in the willow with no claim of ftf as the logbook is the critical bit of a geocache not the website.

[+third-degree-witch]

Totally agree with the above,the book counts first,Online second

[+McDeHack]

GCMPVB is not at those coordinates, but similar ones (N<-->W), and has been changed from E to W recently, so it looks the likely candidate. Only 2 attempts in over three months though? Perhaps hardly anyone logs a DNF around there...

 

HH

10 out of 10 for HH. Yes that is the cache.

 

The strange thing is the cacher in question has in the past logged DNFs on some of my other caches. On one he went back four times and finaly found it.

I suppose realy it is my fault that this came about for the wrong co-ords.

What happened was when submitting the details of the cache, I entered it as 'west' and as I scrolled down the page with my mouse wheel it changed the 'west' to 'east'

So It was my fault for not checking when the cache was aproved.

As I stated, it was only when the DNFs came that made me wonder and checked, and found the error.

 

I shall email this person again and explain my error and ask if he also has made an error.

[+Roberts-tribe]

/me checks GSAK db for deleted log

 

 

Playing devil's advocate: A possible explanation is one of simple error. The OP has a number of caches in that locality ( the original incorrect one ). Depending on how the logger searches for caches to log online, he/she may have merely selected the wrong one. One of the three others in the area was logged before and two others were subsequently logged.

 

Human error? Just a thought..

Edited May 23, 2005 by Roberts-tribe

[Beer Monster]

Maybe the cacher went to the published incorrect co-ordinates, found a small container there and logged themselves as FTF a piece of litter!