Vicariously Making a Find?

August 18, 2012

So I had this log posted as a find on my Cache Across America - Alaska cache recently:

We found this vicariously through our good friend and geocaching buddy. Vicariously because he was the only one who was actually at the cache. Since we don't have a plan to visit Alaska, we thought we could "find" this cache in absentia.

He has since extended an invitation to visit him there and we might accept. If we do, we'll find the cache for ourselves. Hope this counts in the meantime.

Needless to say I'm contacting them to let them know I'm deleting their log... At first I suspect they must be newbies, but they have 194 finds, and all of those look legit.

August 18, 2012

Oh, I agree completely. I helped a friend solve a puzzle in Virginia (I'm in Michigan), but I would never consider claiming a smiley until I drive to Virginia and find it & sign the log myself.

1.2k · August 18, 2012

I agree with you 100%.

Although shortly I 'spect you'll be hearing from the "let them log anyway they want, it is not hurting you, play your own game" crowd.

3.7k · August 18, 2012

LOL, well you have to give them credit for being honest. :unsure:

8k · August 18, 2012

Although shortly I 'spect you'll be hearing from the "let them log anyway they want, it is not hurting you, play your own game" crowd.

Well I was going to post something along those lines. But this log is strange even for my standards. Without hearing from the people who posted the log we can only speculate on why they thought a vicarious find was worth logging.

Most people will assume that someone is trying to inflate their find count. But that certainly doesn't appear to be the case here. Their other finds appear to be legitimate, and they were quite forthright in indicating that they were not at the cache site and are simply planning to find if if they visit their friend in Alaska. Maybe they are simply unaware the can log this with a Note instead of a find.

20.7k · August 18, 2012

I support your decision to delete the log. I would also support your decision if you let it stand. The reason that I would be cool with it standIng is because the find seems to pass the BS (briansnat) test. His typical take on this subject is that fake finds somehow trick people into looking for caches that might be missing while this particular 'fake' find wouldn't do that since someone did find it, just not the logger. Since it wouldn't trick anyone, there isn't really any harm in allowing it to remain.

Still, your decision to delete it is certainly valid and is well within the rights of a cache owner.

Edited August 18, 2012 by sbell111

1.1k · August 18, 2012

I would Email him, thank him for his log and tell him as he didn't sign the log he can either change his log to a note or delete it. If he fails to do so, I would delete the log without any futher notice.

2k · August 19, 2012

same reason I do not personally let logs stand that say "forgot a pen" unless they edit it at the minimum because it would tell others its okay to log my cache whether you sign or not.

definitely folks who are more honest in their logs like that will get noticed more than someone who just said TFTC from 2000 miles away.

3.6k · August 21, 2012

Boy that is worse the "I see the cache in the tree but can't reach it so I will log it as a find"

4.5k · August 21, 2012

And while we're here,,, This is something similar that i don't quite understand.

I think this is how it works. Two caches, two countries, find you a teammate in the other country. He/she finds a first stage and gets coordinates to send to you for finding of the final cache near you. You find the first stage near you, get the coordinates to the final near him so that he can get that one.

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

Really no big deal to me but i am curious as to what others think..

2.8k · August 21, 2012

I'd delete it in a heartbeat, turn the cache into a challenge cache with the rule that only people who never logged the cache vicariously can log it for real.

7.8k · August 21, 2012

...both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches.

That isn't how those caches are intended to work. You get assistance from another cacher so that you can log the cache in your area. If you haven't even found the other cache, why would you log it as found?

That being said, I have seen cachers that have legitimately found both caches.

1.1k · August 21, 2012

READ:

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=309

While (understood!=OK) goto READ

Go geocaching

6.1k · August 21, 2012

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

There have been various caches like that, I found http://coord.info/GC188J7 which allowed me to log 7 caches round the world. It was good fun finding other players, getting a team together, and helping each other with the various clues. In the end I got 6 finds on caches I hadn't "found", which kind of screws up my stats as it looks like I've cached in several countries I've never even been to, but so be it.

Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

1.1k · August 21, 2012

>Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

offcourse NOT..

see link in previous post, read the rules..

specially this line

Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.

2.8k · August 21, 2012

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

There have been various caches like that, I found http://coord.info/GC188J7 which allowed me to log 7 caches round the world. It was good fun finding other players, getting a team together, and helping each other with the various clues. In the end I got 6 finds on caches I hadn't "found", which kind of screws up my stats as it looks like I've cached in several countries I've never even been to, but so be it.

Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

3.7k · August 21, 2012

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

There have been various caches like that, I found http://coord.info/GC188J7 which allowed me to log 7 caches round the world. It was good fun finding other players, getting a team together, and helping each other with the various clues. In the end I got 6 finds on caches I hadn't "found", which kind of screws up my stats as it looks like I've cached in several countries I've never even been to, but so be it.

Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

So, you did the same thing as the vicarious logger x6. <_<

And Groundspeak has never condoned such finds, as I'm sure you know.

Edited August 21, 2012 by hydnsek

6.1k · August 21, 2012

So, you did the same thing as the vicarious logger x6.

Not exactly, in this case it was the intention of the cache owners that finders should do that. So the cache owners wanted it played that way, the cache finders wanted to play it that way, and GS were happy to publish the caches with that intention clearly stated on the cache pages so clearly they were happy for it to be played that way. Does that upset you for some reason?

And Groundspeak has never condoned such finds, as I'm sure you know.

No I didn't know, or I wouldn't have asked the question! GS have published lots of similar caches in the past which clearly stated that teaming up with a cacher somewhere else in the world would get you a find on 2 caches. As they were happy to publish them it seems to me they did condone the practice, but I don't know whether they would still publish similar caches - hence my question.

6.1k · August 21, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

Edited August 21, 2012 by MartyBartfast

10.2k · August 21, 2012

Although the vicarious logger has 194 finds, I'm quite sure they are very casual Geocachers, who've never visited this or any local Geocaching forums, nor interacted on a social basis with experienced cachers in their local Geocaching community. In other words, they're clueless of the community norms. Their honesty is very cute though. :anicute:

Oh, I agree completely. I helped a friend solve a puzzle in Virginia (I'm in Michigan), but I would never consider claiming a smiley until I drive to Virginia and find it & sign the log myself.

There are people who both claim the find in these cases. Lots of them. I remember hearing this is quite popular in some places in Texas. No, don't make me look up the thread, just believe me. I'm almost positive it was 9key saying that, and he hasn't posted here in years.

MartyBartFast: The main thing is, your finds were meant to be completed that way. There are several of these types of caches, and they get approved, don't they? I say you're good. I mean there are things listed on this website that some people think are lame, and don't do. That doesn't mean they are not legitimate to those that do do them.

The last statement makes perfect sense, if you consider Geocaching Challenges to be "listed on this website". :laughing:

14k · August 21, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

I think calling what you did "cheating" is bit harsh but, as I see it, because the statistics for every cacher are public (unless someone chooses not to show them) I think that they out to be accurate. My Statistics/Maps pages shows that I have found a cache in 14 different countries, and 23 U.S. States and I have, in fact, found a cache in every one of those locations. I don't have a huge number of finds, have only done 1 challenge cache (which only involved finding 10 local caches), and don't care about the FTF game. The one aspect of geocaching that I can be proud of is the number of different locations (and the distances I've traveled) in which I've found a cache so I want my stats page to accurately reflect that aspect of the game.

In a couple of weeks I'm hoping to add three more countries to my list (Malaysia, Singapore, and Japan), will increase the "Find Farthest from Home" by 1200 miles (to 9340 miles) and add about 20,000 miles to my cache-to-cache distance (which currently is just over 150000 miles).

6.1k · August 21, 2012

because the statistics for every cacher are public (unless someone chooses not to show them) I think that they out to be accurate.

Perhaps so, and I can see your point, but the stats tab didn't exist when I did that 'series' and I've never used any of the various GSAK macros/other sites to generate my stats, so that didn't come into it at the time.

1.2k · August 21, 2012

There...now that I have posted in this thread...I have vicariously found all the caches you all found...

Man...do I have a lot of logging to do!!! :laughing:

Sorry...I just wanted a reason to use "Vicariously" in my post. Either way, it is your cache...but I would send an email as well. Give them some time (a week or so) to delete it themselves...

1.1k · August 21, 2012

what kind of wierd word is "Vicariously"

vi·car·i·ous

adjective

1.

performed, exercised, received, or suffered in place of another: vicarious punishment.

2.

taking the place of another person or thing; acting or serving as a substitute.

3.

felt or enjoyed through imagined participation in the experience of others: a vicarious thrill.

4.

Physiology . noting or pertaining to a situation in which one organ performs part of the functions normally performed by another.

August 21, 2012

I agree with you 100%.

Although shortly I 'spect you'll be hearing from the "let them log anyway they want, it is not hurting you, play your own game" crowd.

I figure the CO is playing the game the way they choose! Personally I would delete and suggest they make a note instead of a found-it on the log.

2.7k · August 22, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

No wonder I occasionally get asked if I have found caches outside of my country even tho they clearly show on my statistics. Having to defend my stats because someone else doesn't play by the rules isn't what I consider fun.

2.8k · August 22, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

Just by posting "kind of screws up my stats" shows that you know it's wrong logging the cache, anything you add is personal justification. I really don't care wether you log it or not I'm just pointing out that you know it's wrong.

Now as for would I log it? Absolutely not, never.

22k · August 22, 2012

So I had this log posted as a find on my Cache Across America - Alaska cache recently:

We found this vicariously through our good friend and geocaching buddy. Vicariously because he was the only one who was actually at the cache. Since we don't have a plan to visit Alaska, we thought we could "find" this cache in absentia.

He has since extended an invitation to visit him there and we might accept. If we do, we'll find the cache for ourselves. Hope this counts in the meantime.

Needless to say I'm contacting them to let them know I'm deleting their log... At first I suspect they must be newbies, but they have 194 finds, and all of those look legit.

Delete.

If they complained I'd send them to the forums.

4.5k · August 22, 2012

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

There have been various caches like that, I found http://coord.info/GC188J7 which allowed me to log 7 caches round the world. It was good fun finding other players, getting a team together, and helping each other with the various clues. In the end I got 6 finds on caches I hadn't "found", <b>which kind of screws up my stats as it looks like I've cached in several countries I've never even been to,</b> but so be it.

Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

Doesn't bother me in the least how other people play, as long as their playing doesn't affect me. I'm not in it for the numbers but i do want my stats to be accurate on the numbers that i have. Logging a cache that i had never been to would bug me too much because it would, in my mind, cause my stats to be "screwed up".

22k · August 22, 2012

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

There have been various caches like that, I found http://coord.info/GC188J7 which allowed me to log 7 caches round the world. It was good fun finding other players, getting a team together, and helping each other with the various clues. In the end I got 6 finds on caches I hadn't "found", <b>which kind of screws up my stats as it looks like I've cached in several countries I've never even been to,</b> but so be it.

Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

Doesn't bother me in the least how other people play, as long as their playing doesn't affect me. I'm not in it for the numbers but i do want my stats to be accurate on the numbers that i have. Logging a cache that i had never been to would bug me too much because it would, in my mind, cause my stats to be "screwed up".

I think it does matter and to step aside under the guise of "let people do what they will" is wrong.

Edit for clarification

Edited August 22, 2012 by BlueDeuce

6.1k · August 22, 2012

Yes, but by deleting the log you are punishing the cacher for being truthful. They could have logged a TFTC, and with their name in the logbook there would be nothing you could do about it.

I also wanted to add that 4wheelin_fool is currently busy, but he has paid me to fill in for him on his forum duties. My name is Jaspal, and I'm posting from Vikarabad, India.

Edited August 22, 2012 by 4wheelin_fool

2.8k · August 22, 2012

Yes, but by deleting the log you are punishing the cacher for being truthful. They could have logged a TFTC, and with their name in the logbook there would be nothing you could do about it.

Ah, but they are not being truthful, they are claiming a find on a cache they never found.

Wait, I see, they are being truthful about their untruthfulness.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Roman!

5.6k · August 22, 2012

>Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

offcourse NOT..

see link in previous post, read the rules..

specially this line

Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed.

This doesn't say what you think it does. Nowhere in that statement does it limit the logging online ONLY if the log has been signed. Nor does say who has to sign the log for you to log online.

ETA: This off topic, do a search and see all the other thread discussing this.

Edited August 22, 2012 by The Jester

5.6k · August 22, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

No wonder I occasionally get asked if I have found caches outside of my country even tho they clearly show on my statistics. Having to defend my stats because someone else doesn't play by the rules isn't what I consider fun.

What rules "aren't they playing by"? Read the cache page linked, the "rules" of those caches allow logs on all 7 by the 'team' that works to find them all.

3.3k · August 22, 2012

For me it is easy. If I did not personally retrieve the cache or was personally in attendance when the cache was found I do not log a find. In addition, if I am not personally willing to do what is necessary to retrieve a cache container I do not log a find even if I am standing next to a cacher who did retrieve the cache. See Crazy Monkey Tripod. This is but a glimpse into my caching rules. Other cachers can log finds as they believe to be appropriate.

2.7k · August 22, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

No wonder I occasionally get asked if I have found caches outside of my country even tho they clearly show on my statistics. Having to defend my stats because someone else doesn't play by the rules isn't what I consider fun.

What rules "aren't they playing by"? Read the cache page linked, the "rules" of those caches allow logs on all 7 by the 'team' that works to find them all.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. I did say anything about "rules" or anyone not playing by them. Let me rephrase what I did say. I wondered why I would sometimes get questioned if I actually visited the countries that are listed in my statistics. Before reading this topic the question seemed ludicrous to me. I didn't know why someone would log a find on a cache that didn't physically visit. Now I know why I sometimes get asked if I actually found the caches that I logged that are outside of my home country. Because some people think that if it's fun for them then it must be fun for everyone else. While logging caches that you never visited may be fun for some. I don't think it is fun being asked if I actually found the caches that log finds on.

Since you brought it up. If you are looking for rules you can go to http://www.geocaching.com/guide/ and click on "What are the Rules of Geocaching?". You will find the rules that I and may others follow.

6.1k · August 22, 2012

Just by posting "kind of screws up my stats" shows that you know it's wrong logging the cache,

No it shows that the stats are pretty pointless and a waste of time, and having been brought in long after Geocaching started they're not really very representative which is why I don't bother with them.

I've also found The Rock that rolls - a moving geocache, I had that cache in my hands, and signed my name in the log book. It was in Northern England at the time, however the stats think it's in Texas, so they show a Texas find on my stats page, and I've got a Texas souvenir too, never been to Texas and I doubt I'll ever go.

2.8k · August 22, 2012

Just by posting "kind of screws up my stats" shows that you know it's wrong logging the cache,

No it shows that the stats are pretty pointless and a waste of time, and having been brought in long after Geocaching started they're not really very representative which is why I don't bother with them.

I've also found The Rock that rolls - a moving geocache, I had that cache in my hands, and signed my name in the log book. It was in Northern England at the time, however the stats think it's in Texas, so they show a Texas find on my stats page, and I've got a Texas souvenir too, never been to Texas and I doubt I'll ever go.

Justify it anyway you want but we both know the more you try the wronger you are;)

Edited August 22, 2012 by Roman!

6.1k · August 22, 2012

Justify it anyway you want but we both know the more you try the wronger you are;)

OK I give up, it's wrong, I'm going to go out into the woods and flagellate myself with stinging nettles, meanwhile here's a ladder for you to climb down off that high horse of yours

2.8k · August 22, 2012

Justify it anyway you want but we both know the more you try the wronger you are;)

OK I give up, it's wrong, I'm going to go out into the woods and flagellate myself with stinging nettles, meanwhile here's a ladder for you to climb down off that high horse of yours

Don't blame the messenger, I'm just pointing out what you've been subconsciously posting.

1.1k · August 22, 2012

you now know you are wrong, great good move, why not just delete your wrong found-it log,

and move into the fair play leaque of honost people with a clean mind ?

I welcome you, there is plenty of space for one more.

6.1k · August 22, 2012

OZ2CPU & Roman!

I did what the cache owner required to find their caches and I logged them in the way they wanted, GS accepted it, I (and everyone round the world who logged those caches) accepted it.

Why does it upset you both so much?

1.3k · August 22, 2012

So you admit you cheated but still try to justify it?

I'm not trying to justify anything, just telling you what I did, it seems you don't like it. I played that cache how it was intended to be played so how is that "cheating" anyone? As I said in the last reply GS were happy to publish that series with the intention that everone got to log all 7 caches, and you know what? it was fun and I'd do it again if such caches were still published.

I don't care that it "kind of screws up my stats" because I don't do this game for stats, or numbers, or souvenirs (I've now got souvenirs for those countries too). I play this game to have FUN, and it was FUN.

You worry about your own stats and let me worry (not) about mine

Don't let the forum purists try to poo-poo your fun. I've taken part in a helper cache as well and it was a neat experience and I had no qualms whatsoever claiming a find on a cache in Germany. Let the purists call me a cheater, call me lame, call me whatever the flavor of the month is...I don't care. I enjoyed the experience. I'm just glad I don't get my undies all bundled up over every little thing that other geocachers do differently than I do. And come and trumpet about it in the forums, of course.

While logging caches that you never visited may be fun for some. I don't think it is fun being asked if I actually found the caches that log finds on.

It isn't the cachers logging "false finds" that is causing you grief. It's the nosy busybodies who live with the haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be having fun and doing it in a way that they don't approve of. Are you saying that other cachers you meet look up your stats and then race over to cross examine you? That sort of person, I would have no trouble telling to flake off.

2.6k · August 22, 2012

Ok so far except,,, both names are put into the logs of both caches so that both cachers can claim a find on both caches. It does sound like fun and promotes the social aspect of geocaching but, would you feel like you should log a find on the cache that you never even got close to in the other country?

There have been various caches like that, I found http://coord.info/GC188J7 which allowed me to log 7 caches round the world. It was good fun finding other players, getting a team together, and helping each other with the various clues. In the end I got 6 finds on caches I hadn't "found", which kind of screws up my stats as it looks like I've cached in several countries I've never even been to, but so be it.

Do GS still accept these kind of caches?

Well I know it depends on individual reviewer judgement and there is no precedence but Kilometro Cero is a recent example of that type of teamwork cache.

14k · August 22, 2012

Just by posting "kind of screws up my stats" shows that you know it's wrong logging the cache,

No it shows that the stats are pretty pointless and a waste of time, and having been brought in long after Geocaching started they're not really very representative which is why I don't bother with them.

I've also found The Rock that rolls - a moving geocache, I had that cache in my hands, and signed my name in the log book. It was in Northern England at the time, however the stats think it's in Texas, so they show a Texas find on my stats page, and I've got a Texas souvenir too, never been to Texas and I doubt I'll ever go.

Yes, there are some corner cases such as moving caches that can play havoc on how stats represent your actual experience. I see instances like moving caches as an unavoidable anomaly that, for someone that has been playing the game a long time, has an insignificant on the overall numbers. I don't see how moving caches (a type that most cachers have likely never found) renders all of the stats as pointless and as a justification for logging practices that make stats less representative.

I think you do make an important point in another post that does provide a reasonable justification for logging that 7 cache series the way you did. In this case, the CO for that cache creating the series such that they would allow logging of all of the caches if someone is part of a team. As long as the "rules" set by the CO don't conflict with the "rules" set by GS anyone logging those caches as part of a team is playing the game according to how the CO wants the game played for that particular series of caches. Since geocaching would not exist with cache owners, to me, how the CO wants the game played for their particular cache trumps how someone else thinks the game should be played. In the grand scheme, logging 7 caches that you did not physically find creates only a negligible bump it the total find count of someone that might have a few thousand finds. However, if someone finds a loophole like this and start trying to find all the other caches like it in order to have a stats pages with many countries fill in they are *intentionally* misrepresenting their actual geocaching experience.

1.1k · August 22, 2012

a CO can not make up their entire OWN rules

and as long as a (sleeping) reviewer accept it, or fail to ban it,

then it is suttently ok ??

all honost players I know, say the rules are clear to them,

you find - you sign, then log it as found online..

anything else is just poor game play..

and it ruin the game of others, why ?

I feel, I compare my results to others, at least if it is the SAME cache,

IF others "found" it by just looking at it..

why should I bother risking life to climb up after the same cache ?

it is just not fair at all.

just due to a CO dont care, or simply accept any kinds of logs..

6.1k · August 22, 2012

a CO can not make up their entire OWN rules

and as long as a (sleeping) reviewer accept it, or fail to ban it,

then it is suttently ok ??

all honost players I know, say the rules are clear to them,

you find - you sign, then log it as found online..

anything else is just poor game play..

and it ruin the game of others, why ?

The 7 caches I've been referring to were not published by a "sleeping" reviewer, they were published in the full knowledge and with the acceptance of Groundspeak, here's the published log from http://coord.info/GC18DGA (my bold)

Publish Listing Publish Listing

27/Feb/2008

Published

Published with a special exception from Groundspeak.

Anyone who has been playing this game for long knows that the 'rules' are changed from time to time, the link you posted some time ago pointed to a requirement to sign the log before logging a find, that requirement wasn't in the 'rules' back in 2008 when this series was published.

As for:

I feel, I compare my results to others, at least if it is the SAME cache,

IF others "found" it by just looking at it..

why should I bother risking life to climb up after the same cache ?

it is just not fair at all.

just due to a CO dont care, or simply accept any kinds of logs..

This does not apply to the 7 caches I have been discussing/defending, did you look at the cache I linked to in my first post in this thread? Those caches are MEANT to be logged in the way I did them, and everyone who logged them has only found the cache in their own country, but logged all 7 caches around the world (although I do know of at least 1 cacher who has physically found at least three of them).

For what it's worth I agree with what you have said here, and I think the CO in the original post would be right to delete that vicarious log, and I also agree that if a cache requires a significant effort to find then only those who made that effort should claim the find; e.g. I wouldn't stand at the bottom of a tree and let someone climb it and throw the cache down to me to sign, I'd want to climb the tree myself before claiming it.

Edited August 22, 2012 by MartyBartfast

2.7k · August 22, 2012

The 7 caches I've been referring to were not published by a "sleeping" reviewer, they were published in the full knowledge and with the acceptance of Groundspeak, here's the published log from http://coord.info/GC18DGA (my bold)

I see the problem now. While the OP and the rest of us have been talking about http://coord.info/GC2YDRF. You have talking about some other caches. Your argument has merit but if we aren't discussing the same cache then it's like comparing apples to oranges. Maybe you should start your topic instead of trying to hijack this one.

6.8k · August 22, 2012

anything else is just poor game play..

and it ruin the game of others, why ?

I feel, I compare my results to others, at least if it is the SAME cache,

IF others "found" it by just looking at it..

why should I bother risking life to climb up after the same cache ?

it is just not fair at all.

I neither visit caches nor do I log them to compare myself with others or offer them a chance to compare with me.

That's ridiculous. There are caches that are trivial for me and no achievement at all while others might have to work hard for the same cache

and it might happen that I have to push my limits extremely to accomplish something which is trivial for others.

Personally, I think no one should risk one's life to climb up after a cache at least not more than risking one's life when leaving home, driving a car etc.

What I really wonder about is however why many people feel so differently about intellectual and physical achievements in geocaching. The big majority does not

bother to visit puzzle caches they would never be able to solve on their own, but many among them complain about people that e.g. do not climb up a tree to get down the cache in person. These two actions are however at the very same level. The same type of argument you apply for the climbing also applies to dealing with mysteries. Why should one bother to spend hours to solve a puzzle if others just get the coordinates from someone else? In both cases, I'd say that the main drive to do a cache should be a personal one. Either you climb up a tree because you want to do so or stay on the ground. Geocaching is not a competition.

Cezanne

6.8k · August 22, 2012

While the OP and the rest of us have been talking about http://coord.info/GC2YDRF

I need to admit that I did not quite get the intention behind the first post. It neither contains a question nor really invites for discussion. Many cachers with 194 finds nowadays are esentially beginners with not much experience. Why to start a thread before the loggers can even react to the log deletion and attached explanation?

Moreover, quite a number of posts in this thread are very general and do not discuss a specific cache.

The term honesty is occuring definitely too often in this thread as my taste is concerned.

Cezanne

Edited August 22, 2012 by cezanne

Vicariously Making a Find?

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