Blatant False Logging Finds

[gerboa]

I can't imagine that this is a new topic, and am indifferent to "The Numbers".

 

The false logs even crib comments from other finders to suggest they have really been there.

 

Generally we (Thailand) are happy to allow finds where circumstances prohibit signing the log, if requested.

 

However false logs confuse the next cachers and screw up "the books"

 

We have politely asked the culprits to reconsider their logs, no response, so have deleted the finds.

 

These are cachers from another country, now gone back, so we can't do any kick a**.

 

How do other cachers deal with this please. ?

[+StarBrand]

Obviously bogus logs get deleted. Sometimes invite them to re-log as a DNF or note.

 

Suspicious logs - I email and ask a few polite questions. Leave or Delete as needed.

[+BlueDeuce]

The cache owner can take care of most situations. Someone abusing the system should be reported to gc.com.

[gerboa]

The cache owner can take care of most situations. Someone abusing the system should be reported to gc.com.

 

What action/s might GC take ?

[+BlueDeuce]

The cache owner can take care of most situations. Someone abusing the system should be reported to gc.com.

 

What action/s might GC take ?

 

Keep in mind the emphasis is on the cache owner to take care of bogus logs. gc.com expects the owner to manage their own cache.

 

I only added the abusing system part in the rare case that someone has gone beyond what the owner can handle. Deleting logs is well within the owner's ability.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Most likely none.

[gerboa]

The cache owner can take care of most situations. Someone abusing the system should be reported to gc.com.

 

What action/s might GC take ?

 

Keep in mind the emphasis is on the cache owner to take care of bogus logs. gc.com expects the owner to manage their own cache.

 

I only added the abusing system part in the rare case that someone has gone beyond what the owner can handle. Deleting logs is well within the owner's ability.

 

While our caching is a labour of love, the recent false logging has caused us to visit (still ongoing), the suspect caches, as we won't delete logs without checking.

 

Since it is pushbiking and scrambling in adverse conditions, we might prefer other activities.The "Besotted Wretch A'Go Go" has interesting diversions.

 

We can handle it but maybe a cautionary email from PTB ????

Edited September 23, 2008 by gerboa

[+BlueDeuce]

We can handle it but maybe a cautionary email from PTB ????

 

You can ask but it's been my experience they don't get involved with issuing warnings for this type of behavior. Eventually the cacher will move on to other caches and then get bored with logging a cache they never found or enjoyed searching for.

 

If you start giving them ultimatums then they have something fun to do, like antagonize the cache owner and reviewer.

Edited September 23, 2008 by BlueDeuce

[gerboa]

We can handle it but maybe a cautionary email from PTB ????

 

You can ask but it's been my experience they don't get involved with issuing warnings for this type of behavior. Eventually the cacher will move on to other caches and then get bored with logging a cache they never found or enjoyed searching for.

 

If you start giving them ultimatums then they have something fun to do, like antagonize the cache owner and reviewer.

 

You are so right, I'm outta here before I get flamed (bitter experience).

Edited September 23, 2008 by gerboa

[+Harry Dolphin]

As many here will tell you, there are no cut and dried rules as to what constitutes a 'find'. This is a listing service. The guidelines mention that it is the responsibility of the cache owner to delete bogus logs. But what constitutes 'bogus' is between the cache owner and the cache logger. TPTB do not seem to wish to get involved. As is their prerogataives as a Listing Service.

There is the notorious cross-continent traveller who has logged over 1400 caches in two countries. Of the many who have checked the logs, no one has come forth and said "There is a signature in the log!", or "A photo on the webcam". Many logs have been deleted. No new logs in over a month now!

If a log looks bogus to me, I'll check the log for a signature. No signature = Delete. That's your prerogative as cache owner.

[+traildad]

I can't imagine that this is a new topic,

 

I think I have read about it somewhere before.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I can't imagine that this is a new topic, and am indifferent to "The Numbers".

The false logs even crib comments from other finders to suggest they have really been there.

Generally we (Thailand) are happy to allow finds where circumstances prohibit signing the log, if requested.

 

However false logs confuse the next cachers and screw up "the books"

We have politely asked the culprits to reconsider their logs, no response, so have deleted the finds.

These are cachers from another country, now gone back, so we can't do any kick a**.

How do other cachers deal with this please. ?

Well, first, this topic of false find logs and how to deal with them has been covered in a GREAT MANY recent threads, so this is nothing new, and you are simply attempting to repave a road which has been paved many times over the past couple of years, and even over the past few months.

 

My own feeling about the matter, as I have stated many times before, is to feel free to be very firm and clear about the matter, and to simply delete any online find log that is not backed up by a corresponding entry in the logbook, or, if for some reason you feel that the bogus find log is one which would contribute at all significantly to the history of the cache (for example, perhaps the bogus log was filed by a particularly infamous hoax account, or perhaps there is a legend behind the caper) then you might choose to leave the bogus log in place, but to insert a note from the owner immediately adjacent (i.e., above or below) to it, stating that the online find log by account XXXXXX was a bogus log, but that you are leaving it in place as part of the colorful and variegated history of the cache.

 

Having said that, I should also point out that while I personally dislike bogus find logs and deal with them in the manner that I have outlined above, I do not get bent out of shape over them, that is, I do not feel that bogus are a major or even significant threat to this sport, but, on the other hand, I do not condone them, as noted earlier (and elsewhere on this forum!)

 

By the way, I was, at times, within 15 miles of Thailand during my recent 3-week consulting trip to Malaysia, hen I made some side excursions to palm plantations in the northern part of the country, but I did not have a chance to try to enter Thailand and seek any Thai geocaches! So close, and yet so far! Maybe next time!

Edited September 24, 2008 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

As many here will tell you, there are no cut and dried rules as to what constitutes a 'find'. This is a listing service. The guidelines mention that it is the responsibility of the cache owner to delete bogus logs. But what constitutes 'bogus' is between the cache owner and the cache logger. TPTB do not seem to wish to get involved. As is their prerogataives as a Listing Service.

There is the notorious cross-continent traveller who has logged over 1400 caches in two countries. Of the many who have checked the logs, no one has come forth and said "There is a signature in the log!", or "A photo on the webcam". Many logs have been deleted. No new logs in over a month now!

If a log looks bogus to me, I'll check the log for a signature. No signature = Delete. That's your prerogative as cache owner.

Wow! I have been doing a bit of research on this guy and his logs, and he sure seems to cut a swath through the states that he traverses! Only problem is that a number of cache owners have discovered that he never signed the logbook! And, I note that he claims to be ex-career military; local cachers here in Maryland had a similar issue with a long string of false find logs -- one that was widely discussed at the time on our local MGS forum -- a couple of years ago with a then-active duty North Carolina career military guy who did a 4-day "weekend geocaching trip" to Maryland, and the only problem was that he did not sign the logbook on the vast majority of the caches and his online logs were meaningless and cryptic cut-and-paste logs.

 

There was also a recent mention, elsewhere on the Groundspeak forum, of another (active duty at the time) military guy who did much the same thing in some of the mid-Atlantic states. What is it, I wonder, about some career military and ex-career military personnel that makes this kinda thing so attractive to them?

Edited September 26, 2008 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+tozainamboku]

As many here will tell you, there are no cut and dried rules as to what constitutes a 'find'. This is a listing service. The guidelines mention that it is the responsibility of the cache owner to delete bogus logs. But what constitutes 'bogus' is between the cache owner and the cache logger. TPTB do not seem to wish to get involved. As is their prerogataives as a Listing Service.

There is the notorious cross-continent traveller who has logged over 1400 caches in two countries. Of the many who have checked the logs, no one has come forth and said "There is a signature in the log!", or "A photo on the webcam". Many logs have been deleted. No new logs in over a month now!

If a log looks bogus to me, I'll check the log for a signature. No signature = Delete. That's your prerogative as cache owner.

Wow! I have been doing a bit of research on this guy and his logs, and he sure seems to cut a swath through the states that he traverses! Only problem is that a number of cache owners have discovered that he never signed the logbook! And, I note that he claims to be ex-career military; we had a similar issue with a long string of false find logs -- one that was widely discussed at the time on our local MGS forum -- a couple of years ago with a then-active duty North Carolina career military guy who did a 4-day "geoaching trip" to Maryland, and the only problem was that he did not sign the logbook on the vast majority of the caches and his online logs were meaningless cryptic cut-and-past logs.

 

There was also a recent mention, elsewhere on the Groundspeak forum, of another (active duty at the time) military guy who did much the same thing in some of the mid-Atlantic states. What is it, I wonder, about some career military and ex-career military personnel that makes this kinda thing so attractive to them?

Operational Security (OPSEC) measures generally include tactics to hide information about your whereabouts and maneuvers from enemy intelligence. These active and retired military personnel are simple taking the approved OPSEC measures to counter enemy intelligence gathering efforts by not leaving evidence of their presence in the caches they have visited or by logging online caches which they have not visited. I may have already said too much

[Clan Riffster]

The "Besotted Wretch A'Go Go"

Somewhat off topic, I know, but that would be a really kewl caching name.

[+Renegade Knight]

...

How do other cachers deal with this please. ?

About like you do.

 

The only real sanction is that an account can be banned. However there has to be malicious intent behind the logging. To get a cache archived that's ok for example.

[Mushtang]

How do other cachers deal with this please. ?

When someone asks my opinion I tell them the best thing to do is to delete the false log and then forget about it. Nothing was harmed and you're still able to enjoy the game.

[+traildad]

How do other cachers deal with this please. ?

When someone asks my opinion I tell them the best thing to do is to delete the false log and then forget about it. Nothing was harmed and you're still able to enjoy the game.

Well said.

[+Guinness70]

-//-, I'll check the log for a signature. No signature = Delete. That's your prerogative as cache owner.

+1

cant get any simpler..