For What Reasons Can You Delete A Log

[+Ecylram]

This subject came up in another thread and has taken on a life of its own. Here are the issues being brought up...

 

Can you delete a log if the cacher violated a law in getting the smilie? The situations of speeding and 'after hours' access have been mentioned.

 

Can you delete a log if you ask a cacher to take a certain, more environmentally-friendly approach to the GZ and they don't follow the request?

 

Discuss among yourselves...

[+StarBrand]

See this knowledgebook entry - it is fairly comprehensive: http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=204

 

 

(I had a hand in writing some of it)

[4wheelin_fool]

This subject came up in another thread and has taken on a life of its own. Here are the issues being brought up...

 

Can you delete a log if the cacher violated a law in getting the smilie? The situations of speeding and 'after hours' access have been mentioned.

 

Can you delete a log if you ask a cacher to take a certain, more environmentally-friendly approach to the GZ and they don't follow the request?

 

Discuss among yourselves...

 

No to all.

 

It may be tempting though.

[+StarBrand]

The only scenario in OP that I would delete a log over is violation of the area's time limits. That would seem to violate the terms under which the cache was placed and is therefore a bogus log. But I would outline the problem in an email first.

Edited February 10, 2011 by StarBrand

[knowschad]

The only scenario in OP that I would delete a log over is violation of the area's time limits. That would seem to violate the terms under which the cache was placed and is therefore a bogus log. But I would outline the problem in an email first.

 

Would that be a permanent delete, or would you allow a relog as long as it didn't mention the violation?

 

 

Thanks for posting the link to the KB entry. I particularily found the last paragraph to be helpful:

 

 

Messy Situation?

 

We know that sometimes this issue can be contentious. If the other party is being stubborn, ask yourself, "Is this dispute really worth my time?" Try being the bigger person and conceding the point. You may discover that you feel better for doing so. At the very least, it will put the matter quickly behind you.

 

 

[+StarBrand]

The only scenario in OP that I would delete a log over is violation of the area's time limits. That would seem to violate the terms under which the cache was placed and is therefore a bogus log. But I would outline the problem in an email first.

 

Would that be a permanent delete, or would you allow a relog as long as it didn't mention the violation?

 

....

 

It strikes me that dlog deletions by cache owners should be an extraordinarly rare thing to happen.

 

However, bragging about breaking the terms under which the cache is placed really crosses the line.

 

To answer the question directly - I guess it would depend on the attitude and response of the cacher after my email as to whether I could view it as an innocent mistake or a diliberate and well thought out violation of the area rules. Either way - allowing the log to stay "as is" puts the cache in danger from the land manager.

Edited February 10, 2011 by StarBrand

[+M 5]

The only scenario in OP that I would delete a log over is violation of the area's time limits. That would seem to violate the terms under which the cache was placed and is therefore a bogus log. But I would outline the problem in an email first.

 

Would that be a permanent delete, or would you allow a relog as long as it didn't mention the violation?

 

 

Thanks for posting the link to the KB entry. I particularily found the last paragraph to be helpful:

 

 

Messy Situation?

 

We know that sometimes this issue can be contentious. If the other party is being stubborn, ask yourself, "Is this dispute really worth my time?" Try being the bigger person and conceding the point. You may discover that you feel better for doing so. At the very least, it will put the matter quickly behind you.

 

 

I actually agree with the last paragraph of the KB. There are some people on here that consistenly champion the don't delete a log cause. Quoting the ALR guideline. I find it funny that the same people that say the guidelines are just guidelines when it comes to signing the log, but are hard and fast rules when it comes to the deleting logs GUIDELINE. There is also always a limit to how far you go with anything. Some examples on here go to far in my book. Someone will say something is against the law, and a counterpoint will be "can you tell them not to speed" or some such nonsense. On the other side, if the pro power trail cacher could endorse preloading and throwdowns and the anti group could talk about just driving down the road and counting them. Those are extreme examles of two sides of the coin. So where is the limit. I'm not sure. That is why I think the guidelines should be more specific in many areas and be treated more as rules.

[knowschad]

It strikes me that dog deletions by cache owners should be an extraordinarly rare thing to happen.

This dog is very glad to hear that!

[+sbell111]

It strikes me that dog deletions by cache owners should be an extraordinarly rare thing to happen.

This dog is very glad to hear that!

[+Walts Hunting]

I have had three log deletions done to me

 

One was by a newbie who had messed up the coordinates (but the hint gave it away) and thought he had to do that when he reset the coords. That got straightened out with a couple of courteous emails. He contacted the reviewer who returned all the logs to the site and got it straight.

 

One was when I commented how far off the coordinates were and added mine to the log. Just relogged it with a Found It (not worth the hassle, bigger man sort of thing I guess).

 

The last one was a TB Hotel in Lake Havasu City where I took two of the travelers and didn't leave any. He deleted it because he had the trade equal requirement. I went back and conducted a jail break (three more TB's that I moved on their journey) and wrote a log commenting that it kept showing in my PQ's because it wasn't logged as find but once it was logged as find I had no reason to return. That one stayed.

[+Ike 13]

I just spoke to a friend who had his log deleted for giving a hint when another searcher called him.

 

The only reasons I can see to delete a log:

1) The finder did not sign the actual physical log AND has no way of proving they did in fact find the cache.

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

3) They post a spoiler pic AND would not delete it after you asked them

4) They logged a challange cache but did NOT meet the requirements.

5) The cacher posted a Found It log twice

6) The log contains "Obscene and threatening language "

[+StarBrand]

It strikes me that dog deletions by cache owners should be an extraordinarly rare thing to happen.

This dog is very glad to hear that!

I will learn to type. I will learn to type. I will learn to type. I will le..........................

[+geodarts]

Speeding Ticket? I just finished an online traffic school for a ticket I got, when rhe lights flashed at the same time that I arrived at rhe cache location. Back in the day I could have logged the ticket as a locationless cache.

 

Environmental Disregard? I might ask that a log be edited if it blatantly ignores things - like discussing bushwhacking in an area where the land managers ask that we remain on trails. But if environmental disregard is a broader problem, I would archive the cache. I have done so in the past.

 

Ignoring Laws or Rules? Same as above.

 

"Replacing" Lost Caches with Throw Downs? I would delete that because there was no cache to find. But I would temporarily disable the cache and check it out. I might let a log stand if it was replaced in the same spot with the same container. Or if it was a friend whose judgment I trusted - but they woukd have called me first.

 

I am easy. I have only deleted a couple of logs under special circumstances. The advice about messy situations is a good one. As I tell sime of my clients, you have to know when to pick a battle and then be sure that it is worth it.

[+Walts Hunting]

I just spoke to a friend who had his log deleted for giving a hint when another searcher called him.

 

The only reasons I can see to delete a log:

1) The finder did not sign the actual physical log AND has no way of proving they did in fact find the cache.

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

3) They post a spoiler pic AND would not delete it after you asked them

4) They logged a challange cache but did NOT meet the requirements.

5) The cacher posted a Found It log twice

6) The log contains "Obscene and threatening language "

 

1: OK

2: Not a valid delete would lose on appeal

3: OK

4: OK

5: Not a valid delete. There is nothing that prevents someone from logging the same cache multiple tiimes.

6: Definately

[+M 5]

I just spoke to a friend who had his log deleted for giving a hint when another searcher called him.

 

The only reasons I can see to delete a log:

1) The finder did not sign the actual physical log AND has no way of proving they did in fact find the cache.

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

3) They post a spoiler pic AND would not delete it after you asked them

4) They logged a challange cache but did NOT meet the requirements.

5) The cacher posted a Found It log twice

6) The log contains "Obscene and threatening language "

 

1: OK

2: Not a valid delete would lose on appeal

3: OK

4: OK

5: Not a valid delete. There is nothing that prevents someone from logging the same cache multiple tiimes.

6: Definately

 

I'm not convinced that #2 would lose an appeal. Groundspeak would be sending a very bad message if they encouraged this behavior by upholding an appeal

As for #5,it would be a re-find and there is no symbol for that. It is also not very refined. I have deleted several double logs, but left the original. I think most, not all, are mistakes anyway

[+the4dirtydogs]

I have deleted double logs before. Like M5 says they are usually a mistake. The other I have deleted was, I found the cache but can't get to it, but I will be back later to sign the log. That didn't go over to well with the cacher. Oh well. Bad language I would probably delete as well.

[Clan Riffster]

I have not deleted any "Found It" logs from any of my caches. That's not to say I never will, I just haven't seen a violation gross enough, in my book, to warrant such a reaction. Ike's list seems pretty comprehensive to me, with # 6 being a definite cause, for me, to delete a log. Of the remaining five reasons, the one most likely to cause me ire is # 2, as I see that one having the greatest potential impact between me and land managers. Thankfully, the situation has yet to occur. I have a few night caches that get treated like event caches at times, with folks posting gobs of notes, setting up meet times, etc. I generally delete most of those notes once the gathering is done.

[+Ike 13]

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

5) The cacher posted a Found It log twice

 

2: Not a valid delete would lose on appeal

5: Not a valid delete. There is nothing that prevents someone from logging the same cache multiple tiimes.

 

2) I would agree IF they had not mentioned it in their log or IF they edited that part out. But the KB article clearly says that the CO can delete logs if they violate the TOU agreement which sat, "You and not Groundspeak, are entirely responsible for all content that you upload, post or otherwise transmit via the Site. You agree not to: (i) Violate any applicable local, state, national or international law."

I've not had any issues with this, most people who trespass don't admit to it in their log, and if they did they would probably edit that section out if asked

 

5)There are certain caches that you can log multiple visits on with the agreement of the CO. But most caches can only be found once. And as ClanRiffster said most double logs are a mistake. I did it once and I wish the owner had deleted my log right away. It took me a month to notice and then I had to correct it.

[+Sorarse]

I had a log deleted when I mentioned that the hint was rather unhelpful ('It's in the woods') and that the reason I was looking at the hint was because I was having trouble finding the cache. For some reason the CO took exception, saying that I had been rude, and that I should have sent such a note via message and not as part of my log. I just re-logged it as a find without comments, which was allowed to remain.

 

I did note, when I looked later, that the hint has been slightly amended to be a little more helpful though.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

This subject came up in another thread and has taken on a life of its own. Here are the issues being brought up...

 

Can you delete a log if the cacher violated a law in getting the smilie? The situations of speeding and 'after hours' access have been mentioned.

 

Can you delete a log if you ask a cacher to take a certain, more environmentally-friendly approach to the GZ and they don't follow the request?

 

Discuss among yourselves...

 

Thanks for starting this thread.

 

It seems to me that we can discuss this until we grow blue bows from our forehead and never come to a consensus on when a log can be deleted and when it can not. Obviously here are some exceptions at both ends of the spectrum but it's the middle ground where things are going to get contentious.

 

To me, M5 hit the nail on the head:

 

There is also always a limit to how far you go with anything. Some examples on here go to far in my book. Someone will say something is against the law, and a counterpoint will be "can you tell them not to speed" or some such nonsense. On the other side, if the pro power trail cacher could endorse preloading and throwdowns and the anti group could talk about just driving down the road and counting them. Those are extreme examles of two sides of the coin. So where is the limit. I'm not sure. That is why I think the guidelines should be more specific in many areas and be treated more as rules.

 

So where is the line drawn? Things get complicated in a hurry without a specific definition of what constitutes a find, and what constitutes "signing the log".

 

As we well know, many (probably most) geocachers doing caches along a power/numbers trail form adhoc teams, then create a stamp, sticker, or one person signs with the "team name" that is used to "sign the log", then everyone the "team" uses their individual account to log the find. Now, group caching is certainly not new, and I'm sure many of use have "found" geocaches because we happened to arrive at GZ while another cacher was in the process of signing the log sheet. However, even though "signing the log" is generally accepted as the basic criteria for logging a find on line, the definition of "signing the log" can be taken to an extreme that effectively makes the criteria meaningless. A cache owner that that accepts preloading and throwdowns as "finds" can't verify that a log was physically signed (or a sticker applied). Is it acceptable for a CO to allow anyone to post a TNLNSL log on every cache they own without question?

 

Methods such as leapfrogging, throwdown caches (even initially hiding) , container swapping, and splitting up to do different portions of a trail have all been employed as acceptable practices for "finding" a bunch of geocaches, and posting "Found it" logs.

 

At what point does a liberal cacher owner that will allow anyone to log any of their caches, no matter what the method used for "finding" the cache someone might decide to use, get to the point where they're failing to meet their maintenance guides which stipulate that they are required to "Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements."?

[+hzoi]

We have a pretty vitriolic log on one of our caches that I briefly considered deleting. I may still ask the cacher to edit it, but I'm tempted to leave it to see how long it takes until the cacher comes back and edits it (or if the cacher will at all).

 

This was a worthy Cache. I have lived in this area for 35 years. There were Soccer playes when we arrived. We heard no English on the field. When we came out of the woods (we took a hike down the sewer right of way) the Soccer folks were gone. But all their water bottles ,the packing and cardboard for the bottled water and food wrappers were still there. Lets pass the laws and get these [minor profanity deleted] out of my country! Ohh wait we already have laws - Lets enforce them!. Thanks for the cache!! Cache is in perfect shape. Supprised its not seen more visitors.

[+Isonzo Karst]

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

 

Frankly, if I were going to do anything, it would be to delete the log, and not allow it to be reposted with edits.

But post it again AFTER they return and sign the log again, without coming in after hours, or by climbing the darn fence.

 

I've had a run of this lately - after hours finds referenced in the log, and "climbed fence".

 

I've deleted no logs.

 

I've removed and archived a perfectly nice cache on the trail where a lot of cachers would rather climb the fence than walk the distance to the walk through. It's about 300 feet from where they're climbing it.

The coords for the walk through are on the cache page. The fence has "do not climb" signs. Nice land managers on both sides of the that fence. They deserve better from geocachers.

 

But I'm not doing anything about it at all, except remove the cache(s).

[+briansnat]

I just spoke to a friend who had his log deleted for giving a hint when another searcher called him.

 

The only reasons I can see to delete a log:

1) The finder did not sign the actual physical log AND has no way of proving they did in fact find the cache.

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

3) They post a spoiler pic AND would not delete it after you asked them

4) They logged a challange cache but did NOT meet the requirements.

5) The cacher posted a Found It log twice

6) The log contains "Obscene and threatening language "

 

That pretty much would be my list. My only change would be to #1 where I would add "...and I have a reasonable cause to believe that he did not find it."

[+niraD]

The advice about messy situations is a good one. As I tell sime of my clients, you have to know when to pick a battle and then be sure that it is worth it.

Yep. As a practical matter, do you really want to anger people who have demonstrated both that they know where your cache is and that they have a strong disregard for laws, regulations, and basic courtesy?

 

The only log I've had to delete was one of the spambots that hit caches in our area. But I have pointed out to after-hours cachers that the cache site had restricted hours, and asked them to edit their logs so they don't encourage others to violate the hours the site is available. They edited their logs quickly.

Edited February 10, 2011 by niraD

[+Cindyj2]

 

Am actually rather afraid to state my opinion since this person said I did not read all the posts basically calling me a lier. I just chose to ignore their rudness.

 

Hope this person isn't as nice to all new people as they treated me for stating my opinions or no new people will be coming here for help!

[+IBcrashen]

Talking about making it stick, on another forum post about PM caches I asked a question about deletes and whether it would stick and before anyone answered I e-mailed a reviewer. Don’t have the e-mail now and cant remember exactly how it was worded but roughly it said the key was the physical logbook, that GC would back that, the online log only reflects what the physical logbook says, and GC would reinstate/allow a find log. That is the policy on PM caches, does the signing of the physical log book apply to all kinds of caches? Granted I can see making them getting rid of hints, pictures, obscene and threatening language.

[AZcachemeister]

The last one was a TB Hotel in Lake Havasu City where I took two of the travelers and didn't leave any. He deleted it because he had the trade equal requirement. I went back and conducted a jail break (three more TB's that I moved on their journey) and wrote a log commenting that it kept showing in my PQ's because it wasn't logged as find but once it was logged as find I had no reason to return. That one stayed.

 

GOOD SHOW! <applause>

[+TerraViators]

This subject came up in another thread and has taken on a life of its own. Here are the issues being brought up...

 

Can you delete a log if the cacher violated a law in getting the smilie? The situations of speeding and 'after hours' access have been mentioned.

 

Can you delete a log if you ask a cacher to take a certain, more environmentally-friendly approach to the GZ and they don't follow the request?

 

Discuss among yourselves...

How would you know if someone was speeding? Is that really an issue?

[+TerraViators]

I've had a DNF log deleted. I never did know why. I relogged it and it stayed.

 

I had a found log deleted on a liar's cache because I didn't write the liar's story in a timely manner. So, I logged it again with a story about reporting a cache with an ALR and it stayed.

[+Sagefox]

I just spoke to a friend who had his log deleted for giving a hint when another searcher called him.

 

The only reasons I can see to delete a log:

1) The finder did not sign the actual physical log AND has no way of proving they did in fact find the cache.

2) They went after park hours AND made it apparent in the log AND would not edit their log after you asked them

3) They post a spoiler pic AND would not delete it after you asked them

4) They logged a challange cache but did NOT meet the requirements.

5) The cacher posted a Found It log twice

6) The log contains "Obscene and threatening language "

 

That pretty much would be my list. My only change would be to #1 where I would add "...and I have a reasonable cause to believe that he did not find it."

 

Yep. Me too, especially Brian's added language.

 

And... giving a hint, as noted above, is NOT a valid reason to delete a log. Having the cache in hand and signing the log is a find.

[+WolfCoug]

I just encountered a situation where a couple cachers on 8-26-10 could not find the official cache. Since previous dnf logs commented on recent brush clearing in the area they apparently presumed the cache was lost and took it upon themselves to "place a cache" and log a find. A couple recent finds indicated a soaked log. My check of the cache found it dry and containing log entries back to 2008. Followup assistance from the most recent finder of the fake allowed to me locate and remove.

 

My conclusion is they are lazy hunters and placed a fake cache to log a find. Is this a good delete reason? It is disturbing that some numbers hunters resort to such tactics.

 

Good hunting. WolfCoug

[+M 5]

I think the CO is well within his rights to delete a log containing hints. Not sure why some cachers think it is alright to put hints in their logs. That being said, I would and have asked them to modify it first. I try to make caches with all different ratings, logs can and do change the difficulty rating.

[+AlohaBra and MaksMom]

I have deleted double logs before. Like M5 says they are usually a mistake. The other I have deleted was, I found the cache but can't get to it, but I will be back later to sign the log. That didn't go over to well with the cacher. Oh well. Bad language I would probably delete as well.

The iPhone guys do that....cause the phone hangs and does not complete it...

[+Isonzo Karst]

placed a fake cache to log a find. Is this a good delete reason?

 

If you're quite confident of who placed the cache and logged a find on their replacement, yes, I'd say that's a log deletion. Email them and explain that the cache you placed is present, they DNFed it.

 

I would NOT delete logs of any later finders of the throwdown cache. They were hunting for a cache, and found one.

 

On only one occasion did I have someone admit to throwing down a replacement cache while hunting one of mine.

I immediately disabled the cache, and emailed them. I asked them to consider deleting a find of a cache they placed, which couldn't possibly have the same GC Code as a cache I placed and they did.

 

It took several weeks before I was able to get to the cache, remove their throwdown, and replace my missing cache.

 

Apparently they were watching the cache. Once I confirmed that the cache had been missing - they relogged their "find"!

I once again, emailed and explained that they hadn't found my cache, it was MISSING. And if they wanted to log a find on their own cache, they needed to place it somewhere, and get it published under its own listing.....they never did delete that find. And neither did I. I didn't offer to return their film can to them either.

 

Does anybody ever throwdown ammo cans?

[+hukilaulau]

We have a pretty vitriolic log on one of our caches that I briefly considered deleting. I may still ask the cacher to edit it, but I'm tempted to leave it to see how long it takes until the cacher comes back and edits it (or if the cacher will at all).

 

This was a worthy Cache. I have lived in this area for 35 years. There were Soccer playes when we arrived. We heard no English on the field. When we came out of the woods (we took a hike down the sewer right of way) the Soccer folks were gone. But all their water bottles ,the packing and cardboard for the bottled water and food wrappers were still there. Lets pass the laws and get these [minor profanity deleted] out of my country! Ohh wait we already have laws - Lets enforce them!. Thanks for the cache!! Cache is in perfect shape. Supprised its not seen more visitors.

I would send this one along to GS. The account holder should be banninated.