Logging "Find" and did not sign log

[+Take A Hike!]

Got a thorn in my side and need to vent. I'm sure this topic has been posted before, but I get no results in "search" because ya gotta use words with five letters or more. Anyway, seems to me one of the requirements of logging a find is YOU MUST SIGN THE LOG in order to claim it as a "find". I see too many logs that state "found cache, forgot pen, could not sign log." In my caching world, that is NOT a find, I did not complete requirements for a "find". If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"? If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"? If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"? If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas? To me it is so simple. If I don't find the cache, AND SIGN THE LOG, I log a DNF or a NOTE. I have not deleted anybody's log that said they could not sign, YET, but it burns me up when I read their log! Anybody else feel the same way? Or, should I just get over it.

[+J the Goat]

Ni!

[+Thornsten]

Got a thorn in my side and need to vent. I'm sure this topic has been posted before, but I get no results in "search" because ya gotta use words with five letters or more. Anyway, seems to me one of the requirements of logging a find is YOU MUST SIGN THE LOG in order to claim it as a "find". I see too many logs that state "found cache, forgot pen, could not sign log." In my caching world, that is NOT a find, I did not complete requirements for a "find". If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"? If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"? If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"? If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas? To me it is so simple. If I don't find the cache, AND SIGN THE LOG, I log a DNF or a NOTE. I have not deleted anybody's log that said they could not sign, YET, but it burns me up when I read their log! Anybody else feel the same way? Or, should I just get over it.

 

I agree with you about not having a pen. I disagree a little on some of the other scenarios. My take on it is if I as the cache seeker fulfill my side of the bargain but can't sign the log due to circumstances beyond my control, then I'll count it as a find. Specifically I'm talking about a missing log sheet or one that's so wet it can't be signed. The tweezers scenario can go either way. If the cache description says you need special equipment and you show up without it, then DNF. If the description mentions nothing about needing tweezers then I'll count it. The same for the cache being out of reach. If I can't reach it without special equipment and the description doesn't mention needing special equipment then I'll count it as a find if I'm 100% certain what I saw was the cache container.

[+narcissa]

You can delete online logs if there's no corresponding paper log.

 

It's up to the cache owner to decide how strict to be about that.

 

Sometimes fostering goodwill among fellow cachers is more valuable than being a complete hard-a** about logging.

 

Sometimes geocachers are lazy jerkwads who put stickers on the OUTSIDE of cache containers and deserve to have their logs deleted.

 

I look at it on a case-by-case basis with my caches.

[+atmospherium]

Yes, I feel the same way. And yes, you should just get over it. I wouldn't delete a log because of it. It's only a game.

[+LukeTrocity]

I honestly don't see what the big deal is. As others have said, sometimes the log is very wet or damaged. I have had trouble getting the log out of a nano and instead of ripping it did not sign the log. If someone wants to boost their stats by saying they found it when they didn't...I say let them. It doesn't effect me at all because I'll know my finds are legit and theirs are not. In the end this is all about the expierences of getting and finding the cache, not writing your name on a sheet of paper.

 

1st post ever btw.

[knowschad]

I had no good reason to write such a snarky post. I apologize.

Edited July 4, 2010 by knowschad

[+tozainamboku]

There is no rule that says you must sign the log in order to log a find. The only rule we have is meant to prevent owners from deleting logs because a cacher did not fulfill a requirement beyond signing the log, known as an additional logging requirement.

 

Because of this rule some cache owners infer that there is a requirement to sign the log since anything else is referred to as "additional". However, I do not believe there is a requirement to sign the log, only that a cache owner who believes that a log is bogus may use the presence or absence of a name in the physical log as evidence in making that determination.

 

Fortunately, most cache owners realize that this is a fun, light activity. We are not posting scores, there is no winner for finding the most caches. Online found logs are used because the cacher feels that they have indeed found the cache. If someone wants to claim a find on a cache, whether they signed the log or not, it has no effect on any one else. Only a total bogus log could possible have a negative effect such as making briansnats friends drive 100 miles to look for a cache. Therefore cache owner are told to delete bogus logs.

 

I personally don't believe anyone is hurt if someone doesn't bother to extract scrolls from nanos because they didn't bring a tweezer. But I can see that if the cache owner has intentionally provided a challenge such as climbing a tree or opening a combination lock, that one should meet that challenge (or be part of a team of geocachers who meet the challenge) in order to claim a find. The rule that many use of signing the log book is a good first approximation at ensuring that such challenges are met. Deleting logs because someone forgot a pen or because they found a logbook to wet to write in is absurd. But if you believe the log is bogus or that the cacher only found the container and didn't meet the challenge you provided of retrieving or opening it, then you may delete the found log.

[+Walts Hunting]

There is no rule that says you must sign the log in order to log a find

 

I don't know what alternate universe you live in but the below is from the GC Guidelines.

 

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

If you don't sign the log you can't log the cache. It is that simple. I have deleted logs where the logger said I didn't sign the log for some invalid reason.

 

And just for good measure here is the quote from the knowledge book

 

You must sign the log

Edited July 4, 2010 by Walts Hunting

[+J the Goat]

There is no rule that says you must sign the log in order to log a find.

 

I think this is incorrect. As I am no good at links and whatnot, I can't prove it, but my recollection says it's something along the lines of "find cache, sign log, log online." Pretty clear cut...

 

As for not climbing trees or retrieving logs from nanos because it wasn't expected, that's just laziness. No, it doesn't affect anyone else, so whatever. Just realize that if you show up to a cache, see it 30 feet up in the tree, and say "well, it's up there. That's a find for me," you are incorrect. The purpose of the cache was to get you up that tree. You're cheating yourself and trivializing the owners attempts at a cache placement.

[aniyn]

There is no rule that says you must sign the log in order to log a find

 

I don't know what alternate universe you live in but the below is from the GC Guidelines.

 

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

Exactly. It doesn't say that they only be logged when you sign though. That entire bullet point deals with ALR's, and it's not unreasonable to interpret that line as being there simply to protect cachers from having their logs deleted on legit finds.

 

I don't understand why people get so wound up about this subject. Geocaching is supposed to be about getting out and exploring the world we live in, not about doing paperwork. Not everyone plays the game exactly the same, and that's something we as players have to accept. It's not a competition, and in the end the only thing that matters is the fun you have doing it.

 

I can understand your irritation about people claiming finds on non-retrieved caches though (underwater, up high), where the intention of the cache isn't completed. But I don't see how some letters on a paper make a difference once a someone has the cache in hand. It's geocaching, not a legal document (or a calligraphy class).

 

The other thing about geocaching is that it's best to tread lightly. You don't really want to PO someone who knows where you've hidden all your stuff. It's happened before, and it's pretty much always more trouble than it's worth.

Edited July 4, 2010 by aniyn

[+tozainamboku]

There is no rule that says you must sign the log in order to log a find

 

I don't know what alternate universe you live in but the below is from the GC Guidelines.

 

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

This sentence was added to the guidelines for one and only one purpose: to let cachers know that they do not have to follow any additional logging requirements that a cache owned imposed. For example, if the cache owner says "In order to log a find you must post a picture of yourself wearing a funny hat at the cache site", you in fact don't have post a picture of yourself wearing a funny hat at the cache site in order to log a find online. It says only that once you have signed the physical log you may log a find online. I believe it is written this way so that cache owner may say "You must climb a tree" or "you must open a lock" since these actions would be required in order to sign the log. Because requirements like the picture with a funny hat were commonly referred to as "additional logging requirements" I see where a cache owner may infer that they were in addition to some other requirement and that must be signing the log. However, prior to this guideline change there was never a requirement that a cache owner must delete logs where the physical log is unsigned and from what I read this is still the case. Log may be deleted if they physical log is unsigned, I simply argue that, unless the log is bogus, cache owners who do so are choosing to enforce a non-existent rule.

 

And just for good measure here is the quote from the knowledge book

 

You must sign the log

I don't see anything there about logging a find online. It seems to only deal with the etiquette of signing the log book when you find the cache. I can agree that proper etiquette is to sign the log and write something if there is room and you wish to. However, I wouldn't consider it a breach of etiquette if you are unable to sign the log because your pen stopped writing or because the log book was to wet to write in without tearing it up.

 

 

I think this is incorrect. As I am no good at links and whatnot, I can't prove it, but my recollection says it's something along the lines of "find cache, sign log, log online." Pretty clear cut...

 

There are a couple of places you may be refering to. One is the section of FAQ which provides the "rules" of geocaching

What are the rules in Geocaching?

1. If you take something from the cache, leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

Again it simply says log your experience. It doesn't talk about using a Find log or a DNF log. It is also a bit of a stretch to say you have to the steps order and that if you skip 2 you can't do 3. You certainly can log your experience even if you didn't sign the log. A puritan would use a DNF or a Note, but they would still log their experience.

 

The original version of these rules didn't even mention online logging at all.

 

The other place may be the Getting Started section which provides 8 easy steps to Geocaching

1. Register for a free Basic Membership.

2. Click "Hide & Seek a Cache."

3. Enter your postal code and click "search."

4. Choose any geocache from the list and click on its name.

5. Enter the coordinates of the geocache into your GPS Device.

6. Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache.

7. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

8. Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

This is a nice set of instructions when starting out. I would certainly tell someone going geocaching for the fist time to sign the log book and return the geocache to its original location. Again it is a stretch to imply that you must do all 8 steps and cannot skip any. Suppose the cache didn't a postal code search to select the geocaches to find? Cause if he didn't follow rule #3 he may be cheating. And there are people who claim to find geocaches without using their GPS device to assist in finding the hidden geocache. If they are logging Finds online they must be cheating too.

 

There is no rule stating you must sign the log in order to log an online find. There is no rule saying a cache owner must delete the online find if the physical log is not signed. The puritans have convinced themselves these rules exists. Fortunately for them there are no rules that say they cannot play that way. Feel free to not log a find online unless you sign the log. You are a permitted to play that way and no one can force you log a find online. If you are a cache owner, you have the ability to check the physical logs and delete find logs if you don't find a match in the physical log. This is based on the guideline that allows cache owner to delete bogus logs. Without the proof of a signature, a cacher may not have enough evidence to prevent a cache owner from declaring his online log bogus. (There have been a few forum threads that seem to indicate that if a cacher has some other evidence such as a picture of themselves holding the cache or leaving a particular TB or coin in the cache the owner can verify is there, that they might be able to get a deleted log restored. If these stories are true, then perhaps puritan owners have less power than I thought).

[+Crow-T-Robot]

If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"?

Yes.

 

If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"?

Yes.

 

If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"?

Yes.

 

If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas?

No.

 

A cacher doesn't have to do anything more than see your cache in its hiding spot and he/she can walk away without signing the log and it's still a find. You found the cache. Maybe you didn't touch the cache or open the cache but you still found it. Now, if you want to claim your find using the geocaching.com website, you'll have to sign the physical log or risk having your find deleted.

 

As others have said, it's up to you on how strict you want to be on this point. If you feel the cacher experienced finding your cache the way you intended, a name on a piece of paper isn't going to matter at all. If you feel that a cache can only be considered found once the log is signed, then delete the logs. As a cache owner, you have those options.

[+brslk]

If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"?

Yes.

 

If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"?

Yes.

 

If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"?

Yes.

 

If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas?

No.

 

A cacher doesn't have to do anything more than see your cache in its hiding spot and he/she can walk away without signing the log and it's still a find. You found the cache. Maybe you didn't touch the cache or open the cache but you still found it. Now, if you want to claim your find using the geocaching.com website, you'll have to sign the physical log or risk having your find deleted.

 

As others have said, it's up to you on how strict you want to be on this point. If you feel the cacher experienced finding your cache the way you intended, a name on a piece of paper isn't going to matter at all. If you feel that a cache can only be considered found once the log is signed, then delete the logs. As a cache owner, you have those options.

 

^ yup.

[+redsox_mark]

My view on this: I believe the intent of the guidelines implies one should sign the log, but they do not say you must. In practice, it depends, though it is something I generally won't get worked up about as a cache owner (unless I have reason to believe the logs are "bogus".)

 

In the case of no pen, where the finder has the log in their hands, I think it is OK to log a find.

 

In general, if the finder can not get the log in their hands due to part of the intended challenge of the cache (e.g. they can see it, but can't climb the tree), I do not think that should be a find.

 

In my 700 finds, twice I have claimed a find without signing the log. One was a no pen situation, I had the log in my hand, I could have signed in blood or mud, but decided to take a photo of the log instead. (Just the log, so it was not a spoiler at all). The second case was a recent one, and the only one in which I did not actually have the log in my hands. The cache was in a hole in a tree which was the home of a wasps nest; I tried to pull the cache out but wasps came flying out (and I'm allergic). If this had been just a normal traditional near my home I would have logged a DNF, maybe try again in the winter. But this was the last stage in an involved puzzle, and outside my normal area. I felt the wasps were outside my control (and not intended by the cache owner as part of the challenge). In this case I emailed the cache owner and explained, and asked if I could log it as a find. He said "of course you can", and I did. If he had said no, I would have accepted that and logged a DNF.

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

Words have meanings.

 

No matter what twisted logic or juvenile misguided interpretation some people may use for their own nefarious purposes, to make up their own disturbing fantasy about the written word, It does NOT alter reality for the rest of us who live in the real world, and live peaceably in a partnership of mutual respect and consideration of others and establish rules and laws to govern our behavior. .

 

Since the dawn of civilization , Men have initiated "rules" to govern life in the caves. Even tiny little children today adopt rules for the playground.

 

Whether it's the Constitution of the United States or Geocaching Rules, you can't make the words say something other than what they say.

 

Sign the Logbook. Period.

 

Rules are made for a reason. Thou shall not commit murder is a rule . Murder is not allowed and society punishes those who commit it.

 

Geocaching is VERY SERIOUS BIZNESS.

 

It's NOT Don't kill your neighbor unless you really want to. It's NOT Sign the logbook unless you really don't want to. It's NOT "the dog ate my homework".

 

SIGN THE LOGBOOK. Anything else is cheating.

 

No rules, or allowing rulebreakers to reign free makes us little better than beasts in the forest.

[Earthdog Patrick]

 

 

"the dog ate my homework".

 

 

Brilliant post. Nobody with an ounce of sense will attempt to attack it. However, I REALLY wish people would quit using this annoying phrase. In order for comedy to work, it has to have an element of truth. There is NO evidence of a healthy grey wolf ever making an unprovoked attack on humans in North America. Ever!

 

As long as I'm up on my soapbox, what's this snarky reference to "beasts in the forest"? huh??

[+Pork King]

I agree with the OP wholeheartedly. I have signed the log with improvised materials sometimes, though! There have been a couple of times where I completed a fairly difficult cache only to realize I had no pen. after deciding I couldn't make an improvised mark, I sucked it up and trekked back to the truck to grab a pen and return (the cache was so well hidden that I had to search for it again upon my return, even after temporarily marking the location). Sign THE log (not the box, not a scrap of paper at the site) or don't claim a find.

 

/standing on soapbox

[+power69]

Got a thorn in my side and need to vent. I'm sure this topic has been posted before, but I get no results in "search" because ya gotta use words with five letters or more. Anyway, seems to me one of the requirements of logging a find is YOU MUST SIGN THE LOG in order to claim it as a "find". I see too many logs that state "found cache, forgot pen, could not sign log." In my caching world, that is NOT a find, I did not complete requirements for a "find". If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"? If you see the cache, but can't quite reach it, is that a "find"? If it's a submerged cache, but it's too cold and you don't want to get wet, but you see it down in the water, is that a "Find"? If you set out for a cache, but run out if gas before you get there, is that a "find" cause you meant to get it, and would have got it if you hadn't run out of gas? To me it is so simple. If I don't find the cache, AND SIGN THE LOG, I log a DNF or a NOTE. I have not deleted anybody's log that said they could not sign, YET, but it burns me up when I read their log! Anybody else feel the same way? Or, should I just get over it.

if its a easy cache i'll let it slide but theres no free passes on my 4* and above hides.

as far as tweezers go, theres many things you can use to get log out e.g. cactus spine, small twig. . .

if they themselves didn't find it and logging anyway they know in their heart they really didn't find it.

[+chasclifton]

 

 

Brilliant post. Nobody with an ounce of sense will attempt to attack it. However, I REALLY wish people would quit using this annoying phrase. In order for comedy to work, it has to have an element of truth. There is NO evidence of a healthy grey wolf ever making an unprovoked attack on humans in North America. Ever!

 

That fact has achieved urban-legend status. Here is your evidence.

 

Sorry for going off-topic.

[+Team Cotati]

Since I do not audit nor care whether or not a finder signs one of my log books, I'd do nothing.

[+Ralfcoder]

It's just a game. My opinion is that you need to just get over it, and save your ire and fury for something more important, like global warming, nuclear terrorism, or the quality of World Cup referees.

 

I've had a situation like one you posed. I found a micro cache that was a small container tucked into a knothole in a tree. I found it in January, and it was frozen in solid. I wouldn't have got it out without sawing it free, or using a torch to melt it out. I claimed the find, but noted the circumstances in the log, and said I couldn't sign. The cache owner deleted the find on the grounds that I didn't sign. This was his right, so I didn't challenge it. It seems nit-picking to me, however.

 

If I put out a cache with additional logging requirements, and someone doesn't follow them, I'd probably let the log stand. I can't know if the person didn't dive down in the water to retrieve the cache because it would short out their wheelchair, or soak the bandage covering the sutures on that cut on their arm, or something as far-fetched as that.

 

Different people have different abilities, and get their enjoyment in different ways. I'm not going to stand up and say, "You MUST have fun in only the manner that I as cache owner specify". Why not let them enjoy the game as works best for them? And if it's obvious to me that the person is just padding their count with bogus finds, then I would expect that it's pretty obvious to others as well. The caching community will have a good idea about that "finder" in due course.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

[4wheelin_fool]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

 

 

Quit playing around. Does it really say that?

[+thedeadpirate]

Ni!

[+uxorious]

If a cache owner can delete any on line log because the finder did not sign the log in the cache, then signing the log is required. It sounds like most COs don't really care, we have more importaint things to worry about. That does not change the rule.

[+JL_HSTRE]

This topic seems to come up only slightly less often than "Bring Back Virtuals!"

 

My opinion:

 

If you need to figure out a combination lock, climb a tree, retrieve the cache from underwater, or find the log inside one of a hundred film canisters in ammo box then you need to do that task to claim a find.

 

If the log is soaked, the PVC container wont open (and this is a flaw in the container not an intended part of the challenge), or you can't get the log out of the nano container it's still a find. Your not signing the log is do to a design flaw or maintenance issue of the cache itself that is beyond the intended challenge of the cache.

 

And yes the "I forgot a pen" thing is lame, especially if you're not a newbie. Newbies will learn.

 

At the end of the day, you have set out a goal for your fellow cachers. The signing of the log is merely a way of proving they have completed the goal. Unless you have reason to believe the cacher claiming the find did not complete the goal of finding the cache and solving the intended challenges associated with that goal, I don't think their log needs to be removed.

 

Relax: it's not only just a game, it's a game where there isn't really even a winner.

[+tozainamboku]

Words have meanings.

 

No matter what twisted logic or juvenile misguided interpretation some people may use for their own nefarious purposes, to make up their own disturbing fantasy about the written word, It does NOT alter reality for the rest of us who live in the real world, and live peaceably in a partnership of mutual respect and consideration of others and establish rules and laws to govern our behavior. .

 

Since the dawn of civilization , Men have initiated "rules" to govern life in the caves. Even tiny little children today adopt rules for the playground.

 

Whether it's the Constitution of the United States or Geocaching Rules, you can't make the words say something other than what they say.

 

Sign the Logbook. Period.

 

Rules are made for a reason. Thou shall not commit murder is a rule . Murder is not allowed and society punishes those who commit it.

 

Geocaching is VERY SERIOUS BIZNESS.

 

It's NOT Don't kill your neighbor unless you really want to. It's NOT Sign the logbook unless you really don't want to. It's NOT "the dog ate my homework".

 

SIGN THE LOGBOOK. Anything else is cheating.

 

No rules, or allowing rulebreakers to reign free makes us little better than beasts in the forest.

Words have meaning. Therefore show me the words - In order to log a find online you must have signed the log book. These words do not exist in any place that could be construed as rules for geocaching. You cannot derive them using sound logic from the words that do exist. "Once you have signed the log you may log a find online" means that a cache owner may not put additional requirements such as wearing a funny hat as a condition for logging a find online. It may mean that a cache owner may require the log to be signed but it certainly does not required the cache owner to require it. The guidelines only say to delete logs which are bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. I don't know what "stated requirements" are any more - perhaps if a cache owner states that the log must be signed they can delete the find?

 

Geocaching is not a VERY SERIOUS BIZNESS (sic). Geocaching is a light, fun activity. There is no score or winner. The object is to enjoy yourself. Some people no doubt enjoy themselves by getting lots of finds and even by comparing their find count to other people's. They need to understand that the find count is simply a count of the number of Found, Attended, and Photo Taken logs that someone has and not necessarily a representation of the number of finds you would have according to some rule a puritan made up. Truly bogus logs are not allowed because they can effect the game. Use of the found log to share your experience of finding the cache, even if you could not sign the log for some reason, is not a violation of any rule, although a puritan cache owner may decide your log looks bogus and will delete it because there is not a signature in the log to prove otherwise.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

If you are trying to infer from this that a geocache may not be logged on line unless the physical log has been signed, you are making a logically fallacy know as denying the antecedent. Perhaps an example from the World Cup would help explain this:

 

A goal is scored when the ball crosses the goal line If the ball hits the goal post and does not go in it is not a goal. However if the referee says the ball went in, then it is a goal. If the ball clearly went in, but the referee says the shot was offside, then the goal is not scored even though the ball went in the net. Some people didn't like the offside rule (ALRs) so the rules were changed so that there is no offside. If the ball is in the net, it counts as a goal no matter how it got there. There was no change made however to the ability of a referee to rule that a ball that hit the goal post is a goal. (The puritans will of course point out that the referee is wrong in allowing a goal when the ball did not cross the goal line. This does not change the fact that the goal will count.)

Edited July 4, 2010 by tozainamboku

[GOF and Bacall]

First off this is not a competition so the goal analogy has limited relevance. However, to continue along hose lines do you really want to be the winner by error? Would it not be more satisfying to win by your own hard work? If your smilie count is your goal then would you not want it to actually mean that you completed the caches it is supposedly representative of?

 

I don't really care how you play. If you wish to be that guy or gal that's fine by me.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

 

If Groundspeak wanted this guideline to have actual teeth, they could have implemented a verification system for caches, much like tracking numbers for travel bugs/geocoins. When a cache is submitted, the owner is given a code that they put inside the cache container and when a cacher goes to log the find, they would have to fill in the correct verification code before the log would be valid. Again, much like the way a TB is logged. You could post notes/NM/NA's without the code but you couldn't claim the find without it.

 

As it stands now, with so few owners wanting to actively police the logs (I certainly don't blame them), it comes down to the honor system. Most cachers are honest..if they say they found the cache, no doubt they found the cache. But, if I wanted to, I could search for caches in Australia and just start logging them as finds. Or New Zealand. Or Brazil. Or Norway. Eventually, it'll look like I've found a cache in every country that has one. Nothing in the system would prevent me from doing so...just my honor and the diligence of the cache owners.

[GOF and Bacall]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

 

If Groundspeak wanted this guideline to have actual teeth, they could have implemented a verification system for caches, much like tracking numbers for travel bugs/geocoins. When a cache is submitted, the owner is given a code that they put inside the cache container and when a cacher goes to log the find, they would have to fill in the correct verification code before the log would be valid. Again, much like the way a TB is logged. You could post notes/NM/NA's without the code but you couldn't claim the find without it.

 

As it stands now, with so few owners wanting to actively police the logs (I certainly don't blame them), it comes down to the honor system. Most cachers are honest..if they say they found the cache, no doubt they found the cache. But, if I wanted to, I could search for caches in Australia and just start logging them as finds. Or New Zealand. Or Brazil. Or Norway. Eventually, it'll look like I've found a cache in every country that has one. Nothing in the system would prevent me from doing so...just my honor and the diligence of the cache owners.

 

Sure you could. And we would all point and laugh at you.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

 

If Groundspeak wanted this guideline to have actual teeth, they could have implemented a verification system for caches, much like tracking numbers for travel bugs/geocoins. When a cache is submitted, the owner is given a code that they put inside the cache container and when a cacher goes to log the find, they would have to fill in the correct verification code before the log would be valid. Again, much like the way a TB is logged. You could post notes/NM/NA's without the code but you couldn't claim the find without it.

 

As it stands now, with so few owners wanting to actively police the logs (I certainly don't blame them), it comes down to the honor system. Most cachers are honest..if they say they found the cache, no doubt they found the cache. But, if I wanted to, I could search for caches in Australia and just start logging them as finds. Or New Zealand. Or Brazil. Or Norway. Eventually, it'll look like I've found a cache in every country that has one. Nothing in the system would prevent me from doing so...just my honor and the diligence of the cache owners.

 

Sure you could. And we would all point and laugh at you.

Well, there is also that

[+slukster]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

I was not around when this was placed in the guidelines but some say it was placed solely in reference to the new ALR guideline. Some even reference quotes from lackeys who have confirmed this to be the case. That may be the case but let's look at this from the average, non forum reading cacher who does not have a degree in English and reads things as they see them. This guideline is titled "Logging of All Physical Caches" and states that "geocaches can be logged online as found once the physical log has been signed" The ALR guideline comes AFTER this statement. If the first statment is in direct reference to ALR's then the title of this guidlines should have been "Logging ALR's". To people who have never dealt with ALR's it seems cut and dry. This is how I see it. But if a cacher logs saying that they couldn't sign because the log was wet, container was there but log missing, container was frozen in place, etc. I would accept these as legitimate finds. But this is just my humble opinion.

Edited July 5, 2010 by slukster

[+BulldogBlitz]

i say scorched earth! go retrieve your log... and match up all the names.

 

delete all the non-matching names, including the illegible!

 

burn 'em all up!!!

[+Take A Hike!]

So, after weeding out the useless, juvenile, "waste of my time" posts, I have deduced that signing the log is a "rule" and requirement only if I, as the CO, wish to make it a requirement. And to do so, I will put the requirement in cache description. And personally, I will continue to hike a mile back to my cache-mobile to get a writing stick if I don't have one with me. For me, it's part of the "FUN!", to follow the rules and complete the challenge completely. Personal Responsibility.

[Dinoprophet]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

I was not around when this was placed in the guidelines but some say it was placed solely in reference to the new ALR guideline. Some even reference quotes from lackeys who have confirmed this to be the case. That may be the case but let's look at this from the average, non forum reading cacher who does not have a degree in English and reads things as they see them. This guideline is titled "Logging of All Physical Caches" and states that "geocaches can be logged online as found once the physical log has been signed" The ALR guideline comes AFTER this statement. If the first statment is in direct reference to ALR's then the title of this guidlines should have been "Logging ALR's". To people who have never dealt with ALR's it seems cut and dry. This is how I see it. But if a cacher logs saying that they couldn't sign because the log was wet, container was there but log missing, container was frozen in place, etc. I would accept these as legitimate finds. But this is just my humble opinion.

Except the entire page is for hiders not finders. A newbie looking for the rules on logging wouldn't look at that page.

[+EscapeFromFlatland]

My mystery cache requires you find a TB to get the coordinates of the cache, which has a log you need to sign.

I had someone (with a few thousand finds!) at Geowoodstock claim to find it in between logging caches around the Geowoodstock area.

Got back down to Oregon today- nope, her signature wasnt on it. Emailed her to let her know I was deleting the log.

Come on, do you really need to blatantly lie to get a smiley when you have a few thousand already?

[Clan Riffster]

Anybody else feel the same way?

Judging from the threads resembling yours that pop up roughly once every 8.2 days, I'd say "Yes".

 

Or, should I just get over it.

That would be my advice.

I have two totally contradictory, self imposed rules I follow regarding cache logging:

1 ) For caches I hunt, I will not log a "Found It", unless my name is in the logbook. No exceptions.

2 ) For caches I own, I will allow whatever interpretation other cachers choose to use for the word "Find".

 

Many folks seem to strive on stress, so much so that they are perfectly willing to intentionally incorporate it into their daily activities, even those activities that are designed and promoted as fun, light hearted hobbies. One of their more common battle cries is worded to the effect of, "He broke the rules! That dirty rotten cheater!". Is this the group you want to associate with? If so, by all means, get angry. Demand justice. Rant and rave from the mountaintops. If you'd rather not be part of that group, then learn to accept that your definition of "Find" (locate the cache, acquire the cache, open the cache, extract the log, sign the log) doesn't work for everybody. Tolerance isn't really as bad as some folks make it out to be.

 

[+EscapeFromFlatland]

*nod*

I did cache maintenance the other week and thought about auditing the logs, but decided going to happy hour was a better use of my time.

I only care that the correct FTF is honored on my caches.

[+geodarts]

And personally, I will continue to hike a mile back to my cache-mobile to get a writing stick if I don't have one with me. For me, it's part of the "FUN!"

 

I figure that god invented green leaves to allow log books to be signed when a pen is missing. It's at least as legible as my signature which tends to be different than my online name.

[+42at42]

If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"?

 

In this scenario, I refuse to remove log sheets I don't think I will be able to put back in properly. I am talking about those pesky nano's. I don't want to wreck the cache.

 

If a log owner wants to delete my find in this case, I will go out attempt to remove, sign and replace the log. If unsuccessful I will relog my find. I signed the log. If I cannot replace the log properly I will also post a Needs Maintenance log.

 

I certainly hope most "Nano hiders" would rather have the log in place than have to go out and fix their cache.

[+needaxeo]

Anyway, seems to me one of the requirements of logging a find is YOU MUST SIGN THE LOG in order to claim it as a "find".

 

"Found cache" and "Signed log" seem fairly easy to distinguish as different things.

 

Not the least that you're reading a log in the first place to know that they haven't signed a different log.

 

What if someone found a cache and didn't sign the log online or off? Maybe he's telling people he found it. Or his GPSr says he has. You should be absolutely apoplectic with rage but wouldn't actually know that you should be. Sounds to me like you should jump up and down shouting and shaking a stick for 30 minutes. Just in case.

 

If it's signed at all that's merely proof that it was found and since there are other ways to prove you found it (taking a photo holding it for example) I don't see any reason to require signing the log, especially when there are valid reasons for not signing it.

 

But, if you feel some have been dishonest about finding it when they haven't, then maybe you have a point with those logs.

Edited July 5, 2010 by needaxeo

[+slukster]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

"Logging of All Physical Caches

 

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

I was not around when this was placed in the guidelines but some say it was placed solely in reference to the new ALR guideline. Some even reference quotes from lackeys who have confirmed this to be the case. That may be the case but let's look at this from the average, non forum reading cacher who does not have a degree in English and reads things as they see them. This guideline is titled "Logging of All Physical Caches" and states that "geocaches can be logged online as found once the physical log has been signed" The ALR guideline comes AFTER this statement. If the first statment is in direct reference to ALR's then the title of this guidlines should have been "Logging ALR's". To people who have never dealt with ALR's it seems cut and dry. This is how I see it. But if a cacher logs saying that they couldn't sign because the log was wet, container was there but log missing, container was frozen in place, etc. I would accept these as legitimate finds. But this is just my humble opinion.

Except the entire page is for hiders not finders. A newbie looking for the rules on logging wouldn't look at that page.

This may be true but hiders are getting labeled as puritans for following this guideline. As for finders, aside from the sound logic tozainamboku uses to point out that the 8 steps on the getting started page are not proof that you must sign the log, I again go to the average everyday cacher who would look to this "getting started page" or the knowledge base page and say that this is a requirement.

Edited July 5, 2010 by slukster

[+brslk]

If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"?

 

In this scenario, I refuse to remove log sheets I don't think I will be able to put back in properly. I am talking about those pesky nano's. I don't want to wreck the cache.

 

If a log owner wants to delete my find in this case, I will go out attempt to remove, sign and replace the log. If unsuccessful I will relog my find. I signed the log. If I cannot replace the log properly I will also post a Needs Maintenance log.

 

I certainly hope most "Nano hiders" would rather have the log in place than have to go out and fix their cache.

 

If you cannot remove and replace the log of a nano them you really shouldn't look for them.

If you do find a nano because you did not know you were searching for a nano, sign the log and put it back in properly or do not log it.

[+gnjeepn]

The only times I have logged a find that I didn't sign was in the case where the log was soaked and unsignable, the log was degraded to shreaded paper and a couple of times where the log was so full there was no room for us to sign without signing over other finders logs. In all of these cases I contacted the co by either e-mail of a needs maintenance log. I feel if I was able to get the log out It was a find. If we can't get to it but can see it we log a dnf. Not having a writing utensel is no excuse in my book. We allway have a couple of pens or pencils with us. I have never had a co delete a find log in these cases. If they did I would probaly put their caches on my ignor list. Here is a thought maybe the co's should check on their caches more frequently to make sure they are signable. This seams to be the biggest gripe I have is that there are a lot of caches out there that have a lack of maintanence as for logs go. Too many cachers are unwilling to post needs maintanence logs as well. All in all it's about getting out for us and we don't let what others do get to us.

Edited July 5, 2010 by gnjeepn

[+42at42]

If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"?

 

In this scenario, I refuse to remove log sheets I don't think I will be able to put back in properly. I am talking about those pesky nano's. I don't want to wreck the cache.

 

If a log owner wants to delete my find in this case, I will go out attempt to remove, sign and replace the log. If unsuccessful I will relog my find. I signed the log. If I cannot replace the log properly I will also post a Needs Maintenance log.

 

I certainly hope most "Nano hiders" would rather have the log in place than have to go out and fix their cache.

 

If you cannot remove and replace the log of a nano them you really shouldn't look for them.

If you do find a nano because you did not know you were searching for a nano, sign the log and put it back in properly or do not log it.

 

After looking for 1/2 hour or more for what turned out to be a fake piece of gum, I realized that if I tried to remove it may not get replaced properly. I emailed the CO and logged the find. He was very appreciative for the email and the fact that I didn't accidentally destroy his cache.

 

As I said If the CO demands I sign the log I will attempt to replace log properly.

[+DragonflyTotem]

If you can't retrieve the logbook because you need tweezers, is that a "find"?

 

In this scenario, I refuse to remove log sheets I don't think I will be able to put back in properly. I am talking about those pesky nano's. I don't want to wreck the cache.

 

If a log owner wants to delete my find in this case, I will go out attempt to remove, sign and replace the log. If unsuccessful I will relog my find. I signed the log. If I cannot replace the log properly I will also post a Needs Maintenance log.

 

I certainly hope most "Nano hiders" would rather have the log in place than have to go out and fix their cache.

 

My suggestion is that you invest $1 in a TOTT -- a log rolling tool. Easily found on ebay.

[+power69]

And personally, I will continue to hike a mile back to my cache-mobile to get a writing stick if I don't have one with me. For me, it's part of the "FUN!"

 

I figure that god invented green leaves to allow log books to be signed when a pen is missing. It's at least as legible as my signature which tends to be different than my online name.

Cactus spines can be used on those times you forget a pen in the desert.

[+fizzymagic]

I made my first and only exception to my own rule that I don't log finds unless I have solved the logbook this weekend. It's a cache I will likely never return to, since it's in Washington and I am in California. It was a puzzle cache that I solved correctly on my own. I had the cache container in my hands. Then the swarm of wasps that had made the cache hiding spot their home attacked. Needless to say, I didn't stick around. In fact, I confess that I didn't even return the container to its hiding spot. But to my mind, it counts as a find. So I logged it as one.

 

You can read our logs here.

 

It was a good lesson for me. I will be less absolutist in the future.

[Earthdog Patrick]

 

 

Brilliant post. Nobody with an ounce of sense will attempt to attack it. However, I REALLY wish people would quit using this annoying phrase. In order for comedy to work, it has to have an element of truth. There is NO evidence of a healthy grey wolf ever making an unprovoked attack on humans in North America. Ever!

 

That fact has achieved urban-legend status. Here is your evidence.

 

Sorry for going off-topic.

 

Actually the article states there is no evidence to support either the wolf THEORY of the Bear THEORY. The experts disagree. No witnesses. For all we know, he fell and hit his head and died, then a whole slew of various scavengers fed on him...The headline is suspect "documented"? Nope.

 

Most all accounts of unexpected encounters with wolves in the wild state that the animals were shy and withdrew. Not so with Bears.