FTF only after publish?

[+S.punkt B.punkt]

Hi,

I've found a cache accidently about seven days BEFORE publish

and singed the log book.

So I guess I'm the first to find it (FTF).

Now, the cacher who has found the cache fist AFTER the publish

claims the FTF.

How do you see this? Can one claim FTF only after the publish?

Cheers.

[+cerberus1]

Since there are no rules/guidelines on the FTF side-game, either/or both of you can claim it.

[+CanadianRockies]

I've found a cache accidently about seven days BEFORE publish

and singed the log book.

So I guess I'm the first to find it (FTF).

Yep.

 

Now, the cacher who has found the cache fist AFTER the publish

claims the FTF.

How do you see this? Can one claim FTF only after the publish?

Since there are no official rules for the FTF side game, different communities and different individuals come up with their own rules. For some, the FTF game only begins after publication on geocaching.com.

 

Some people claim co-FTF if they help hunt for the cache. Some claim co-FTF if they arrive at GZ before the cache is re-hid. What about someone who signs the empty log while the cache is on the owner's kitchen table? What about those people who "find" the cache that they helped the owner hide? What about people who tested the coordinates after it is hidden? What if a muggle finds the cache first and signs the physical log but never claims an online find? What if someone enters a park during its closed hours to find a cache first? Different people will set their own rules.

[+Great Scott!]

Fight to the death for your first to find claim.

It's worth it, isn't it?

[+wmpastor]

Fight to the death for your first to find claim.

It's worth it, isn't it?

Do you really need to ask??

[+irisisleuk]

You are First To Find a container with a piece of paper.

The container became a cache when it got published, so the one who signed the log first after the publication is First To Find the cache.

[+narcissa]

The container became a cache when it got published

 

No.

[+sbell111]

Everyone who logs that cache can call themsevles FTF, for all it matters.

Edited September 2, 2014 by sbell111

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Everyone who logs that cache can call themsevles FTF, for all it matters.

Agreed. FTF is in the mind. Nothing else matters.

[+wmpastor]

Hi,

I've found a cache accidently about seven days BEFORE publish

and singed the log book.

 

Which reviewer is that slow?? Fire them!

 

As others said, the FTF game doesn't have written rules.

 

This issue has come up before, & my own opinion is this. If you find a cache prepublication with no advance inside information whatsoever, that's a FTF. (It also a very rare event unless either it's a D1 or something, or unless you go randomly skirt-lifting everytime you park your car!) If you heard anything at all that's not available to all cachers, that's not a legitimate FTF. (Like if you know that another cacher is working on a fence cache in a certain park, & you walk along the fences everyday.)

 

Edit: but see post 6 for the opposing view.

Edited September 2, 2014 by wmpastor

[+wmpastor]

The container became a cache when it got published

 

No.

Yes.

 

Meaning correct, I agree.

 

With narcissa, in case it wasn't clear.

Edited September 2, 2014 by wmpastor

[+kunarion]

You are First To Find a container with a piece of paper.

The container became a cache when it got published, so the one who signed the log first after the publication is First To Find the cache.

So true, the one who's 2nd is first. That's how they do it in the Olympic Games.

 

Fight to the death for your first to find claim.

It's worth it, isn't it?

And whoever is first to die wins.

[+wmpastor]

Everyone who logs that cache can call themsevles FTF, for all it matters.

Agreed. FTF is in the mind. Nothing else matters.

Disagreed. I'm from the "objective school" of Ftf's.

 

Those in the "subjective school" tend to not have many FTF's, for some reason.

[+kunarion]

Can one claim FTF only after the publish?

Are you using stat software that requires a "claim" in the log? Some of those use a keyword like *FTF* to compile stats. If you're doing it manually, I'd suggest not claiming anything. The Cache Owner placed the container who knows how long ago. It's a good idea to place it well in advance, if there's any question about whether it may be found accidentally (and therefore could be muggled). Since it was found in advance, I'd think about a better hide style or a different spot, before activating it, but the CO had other ideas.

 

The sequence of finds is useful, if the Cache Owner intends to continue being a Cache Owner, even for determining cache condition, Trackables, etc. So it's good to know who finds a cache and when, in the actual timeline, regardless of who claims what.

 

Put the time and date in your online log (and include time and date on the cache log sheets) and leave it at that. If the Cache Owner invited friends and family to find it before you did, you were not the First person to find it. Leave it up to the Cache Owner on who gets the "Claim". But feel free to add it to your own stats in the consistently flawless way you always do.

Edited September 2, 2014 by kunarion

[+wmpastor]

You are First To Find a container with a piece of paper.

The container became a cache when it got published, so the one who signed the log first after the publication is First To Find the cache.

This mystical, symbolic rite is called transmogrification, isn't it?

 

BTW, I'm pretty sure that GS speaks of placing the cache, not placing the container, prepublication. So this theory is actually "The Gospel According to Iris," is it not?

[+sbell111]

The guy that found it prior to being published anywhere is the FTF.

The guy that found it first after being published on GC.com is the FTF.

The guy that found it first among his group of racers is the FTF.

The guy who logged it first online is the FTF.

The guy who found it first today is the FTF.

 

Why does it matter?

Edited September 2, 2014 by sbell111

[+kunarion]

Those in the "subjective school" tend to not have many FTF's, for some reason.

Yeah. I once was on a little cache run and logged "First find of the day!", and the Subjective School showed up on my front lawn with pitchforks and torches to burn me at the stake for naively using the word "First" in any context in a cache log. No wait. That was the Figurative School, I guess.

[+kunarion]

Why does it matter?

If one guy logs that the container's lid is missing, another guy logs that the cache is fine, it matters. It doesn't even need to be a maintenance issue. The sequence matters.

 

"Claiming" various honors does not.

[+dprovan]

So I guess I'm the first to find it (FTF).

Yes.

 

Can one claim FTF only after the publish?

Yes.

 

I once claimed FTF after actually doing it as intended. There was a puzzle cache that was based on finding 10 other caches in a series and using information gleaned from them. But the puzzle had a bug, so it turned out you could solve it without visiting the other caches. My buddy went right for it and claimed FTF. Although I'd also solved it, I grabbed the last 2 in the series before I went to find the final the next day. Then I gave my buddy grief in my log about short circuiting the cache. And the CO gave us both credit for FTF in the description! Of course, another day and our two roles might have been reversed...

[4wheelin_fool]

It's pretty simple. The OP is FTF, and the other person is FTFAP (first to find after publishing). This is the traditional way that most geocachers handle this. Irisisleuk also has a good point, as if it was never published, it would be nothing.

Edited September 2, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[+JPreto]

You are First To Find a container with a piece of paper.

The container became a cache when it got published, so the one who signed the log first after the publication is First To Find the cache.

WOW!!! Someone that thinks like me.... I am not alone!!!!

 

But since the FTF side game is not officially managed by Groundspeak you can do whatever you want! Actually all players can clain to be the FTFs in a speacial way...

[+kunarion]

all players can clain to be the FTFs in a speacial way...

In that case, when I sign the blank page, I can claim "Second To Find"! I'm gonna do that, next chance I get.

 

On that day, I predict the Figurative School will show up again.

[+JPreto]

all players can clain to be the FTFs in a speacial way...

In that case, when I sign the blank page, I can claim "Second To Find"! I'm gonna do that, next chance I get.

 

On that day, I predict the Figurative School will show up again.

Actually you can say in your log: "FTF!!!! I was the first guy to get this cache with my 2 friends Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde"

 

NO ONE can say you are wrong so you got the FTF!!!! And of your log gets delete just file a complaint to Groundspeak and they will un-delete the log. FTF is not part of the geocaching game so you can do whatever you want!!!! REALLY!!!!!

 

Another thing is if you want to be honest or not about your FTFs...

[+narcissa]

if it was never published, it would be nothing

 

If it was never published on Geocaching.com, it wouldn't be a geocache listed on Geocaching.com. We don't know what else the owner intended for it, or where else it might be listed.

[+sbell111]

Why does it matter?

If one guy logs that the container's lid is missing, another guy logs that the cache is fine, it matters. It doesn't even need to be a maintenance issue. The sequence matters.

 

"Claiming" various honors does not.

I think that even that example is a push.

 

If you get two logs dated the same day and one of them reports the cache is fine and the other reports a problem, there's a fair chance that the problem happened between the two finds and that the cache needs attention.

[+irisisleuk]

I once put FTF above my log, since we were fifth to find the cache, it was just a little joke (over here in the Netherlands we also have STF and TTF by the way). The guy who "had" FTF then e-mailed me complaining about me stating I had FTF. That was really silly of him, but illustrates how some take these side-games a bit too serious.

 

But this was a published cache, if it was an unpublished container I might have found a paper that I logged as FTF (fifth to find), although I would never claim this find when the container got published on a site where I do not log my finds. Yes, there are other games that place containers, so you never can be sure if you have found a geocache or something else until it gets published as being a geocache (or something else).

 

Its location might even change between your find and the publication, since many "containers that want to become a geocache" are placed somewhere where they can't be a geocache because of the guidelines. Then the container might be moved to another place and get published eventually (or not).

Of course your name is on the log, so according to the official rules of geocaching you can claim a find on this site, but did you really find the cache or something else in such a situation? And did you first find that cache that was published or did you find something that just might become (part of ) a geocache in the future?

To me a geocache is more than just a container with a piece of paper, there is more to it, like for instance a webpage. But of course that's a matter of which definition you prefer to use. Very similar to which definition of FTF you like to use.

[+narcissa]

I once put FTF above my log, since we were fifth to find the cache, it was just a little joke (over here in the Netherlands we also have STF and TTF by the way). The guy who "had" FTF then e-mailed me complaining about me stating I had FTF. That was really silly of him, but illustrates how some take these side-games a bit too serious.

 

But this was a published cache, if it was an unpublished container I might have found a paper that I logged as FTF (fifth to find), although I would never claim this find when the container got published on a site where I do not log my finds. Yes, there are other games that place containers, so you never can be sure if you have found a geocache or something else until it gets published as being a geocache (or something else).

 

Its location might even change between your find and the publication, since many "containers that want to become a geocache" are placed somewhere where they can't be a geocache because of the guidelines. Then the container might be moved to another place and get published eventually (or not).

Of course your name is on the log, so according to the official rules of geocaching you can claim a find on this site, but did you really find the cache or something else in such a situation? And did you first find that cache that was published or did you find something that just might become (part of ) a geocache in the future?

To me a geocache is more than just a container with a piece of paper, there is more to it, like for instance a webpage. But of course that's a matter of which definition you prefer to use. Very similar to which definition of FTF you like to use.

 

You are conflating Groundspeak's proprietary geocache listing service with geocaching in general and that is simply incorrect.

[+kunarion]

I once put FTF above my log, since we were fifth to find the cache, it was just a little joke (over here in the Netherlands we also have STF and TTF by the way). The guy who "had" FTF then e-mailed me complaining about me stating I had FTF. That was really silly of him, but illustrates how some take these side-games a bit too serious.

Yikes! I get a little nervous when I do sign a blank cache log. When I find the cache and sign the log, I kind of think I simply found the cache and signed the log, but every local thinks I'm stirring the pot. I sometimes wait for others to show up so they can sign it and take some of the heat, but they never do. Maybe I should just come back later, like everybody else.

 

did you really find the cache or something else in such a situation? And did you first find that cache that was published or did you find something that just might become (part of ) a geocache in the future?

To me a geocache is more than just a container with a piece of paper, there is more to it, like for instance a webpage. But of course that's a matter of which definition you prefer to use. Very similar to which definition of FTF you like to use.

I just log that I found it, and let everyone else be First To Fight over it.

Edited September 2, 2014 by kunarion

[+lamoracke]

yeah, whatever, I personally think you are the real FTF but would not be worried if someone wants to claim FTF after publication or FTF in the dark (especially if its a night cache and the people who found it first found it in the day), or whatever. Not worth worrying about. Too much angst can happen on FTFs so just claim what you want to.

[+JPreto]

Too much angst can happen on FTFs so just claim what you want to.

Yeahhh... lay low for a while and be afraid of what might happen... people in this game tend to be vengeful and you never know what might happen!

[+niraD]

It's pretty simple. The OP is FTF, and the other person is FTFAP (first to find after publishing). This is the traditional way that most geocachers handle this.

I agree with this.

 

Irisisleuk also has a good point, as if it was never published, it would be nothing.

Groundspeak does not own geocaching. It can be a geocache without being listed on the geocaching.com site.

[+T.D.M.22]

You are First To Find a container with a piece of paper.

The container became a cache when it got published, so the one who signed the log first after the publication is First To Find the cache.

 

Well, by that logic, anything on other websites is not a geocache. Anything for a private game is not a geocache. That's like saying it's only football if it's the NFL, otherwise it's just a game with a ball and a big field. (And anyway CFL is better)

 

If he finds it before anyone else, he is FTF. FTF is a fact. You're first, or you're not.

[4wheelin_fool]

Irisisleuk also has a good point, as if it was never published, it would be nothing.

Groundspeak does not own geocaching. It can be a geocache without being listed on the geocaching.com site.

 

It could be. However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache. I was FTF on a toolbox geocache that never was listed. Essentially that means I was the only one to sign the logsheet inside a piece of garbage. If it ever gets listed anywhere, then I am FTF, but until then it means nothing.

[+narcissa]

However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache.

 

It's unlikely that you could determine that for certain. I could hide a cache and "publish" it by emailing my friends. It's still a geocache.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Everyone who logs that cache can call themsevles FTF, for all it matters.

 

The person that found the cache after publication can still add the cache to the personal list of FTFs (because there isn't an official list kept anywhere else). The drama happens because someone else has the gall to also claim FTF.

 

It's all pretty silly, if you ask me.

[4wheelin_fool]

However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache.

 

It's unlikely that you could determine that for certain. I could hide a cache and "publish" it by emailing my friends. It's still a geocache.

 

According to Dictionary.com, it has to be posted on the internet. The Oxford dictionary stipulates that it has to be on a website.

[+narcissa]

However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache.

 

It's unlikely that you could determine that for certain. I could hide a cache and "publish" it by emailing my friends. It's still a geocache.

 

According to Dictionary.com, it has to be posted on the internet. The Oxford dictionary stipulates that it has to be on a website.

 

So if a Scout leader hides a container for his Scout troop, lends them a GPS and gives them coordinates to find it, it's not a geocache?

[+dprovan]

However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache.

It's unlikely that you could determine that for certain. I could hide a cache and "publish" it by emailing my friends. It's still a geocache.

I go even further and say you don't have to lift a finger: it's a geocache if you think it's a geocache, whether you tell anyone about it or not.

 

Of course, all this hair splitting isn't really interesting, since the OP wouldn't have cared about this cache and whether he was FTF unless it had been published on geocaching.com eventually, so all these other far fetched alternatives are beside the point.

 

The bottom line is really simple: if you think it would be fun to say you're FTF, then say you're FTF.

 

If you think it will get you into a fight that you don't want to be in, then that's probably not fun.

 

If you think it will get you into a competition for the most ridiculous justification for FTF, and that sounds like fun to you, then do it.

 

In a case like this, I think it's fun to claim FTF specifically because I lucked out in a way that doesn't actually reflect on me or my talents. And I'd probably crow all the louder because of it. But that's because I try hard to make sure no one takes anything about geocaching too seriously.

[4wheelin_fool]

However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache.

 

It's unlikely that you could determine that for certain. I could hide a cache and "publish" it by emailing my friends. It's still a geocache.

 

According to Dictionary.com, it has to be posted on the internet. The Oxford dictionary stipulates that it has to be on a website.

 

So if a Scout leader hides a container for his Scout troop, lends them a GPS and gives them coordinates to find it, it's not a geocache?

 

The question is does the dictionary definition reflect us, or do we define the dictionary?

 

The scout leader can call it whatever he wishes, but I don't think it's a geocache. It's a cache of some form, likely to be a ziplock container, hence garbage.

Edited September 2, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[Andronicus]

I define a geocache as a container hidden with the intent that others will find it using gps coordinates. publishing on a website is irrelevent.

[4wheelin_fool]

I define a geocache as a container hidden with the intent that others will find it using gps coordinates. publishing on a website is irrelevent.

 

And if nobody finds it, it's garbage. If one person finds it accidentally without GPS usage, it's not really a geocache.

[Andronicus]

I define a geocache as a container hidden with the intent that others will find it using gps coordinates. publishing on a website is irrelevent.

 

And if nobody finds it, it's garbage. If one person finds it accidentally without GPS usage, it's not really a geocache.

No, notice the word "intent" in my defenition.

[+J Grouchy]

It's funny that all that "it doesn't matter"-ing took forty responses...

 

A couple of situations I've seen or been involved in:

1 - I placed several caches and had them published. Another cacher placed several caches along the same stretch of trail on the same day, yet she was too slow to publish them. We worked on shifting one of mine to allow another of hers to stay in place, meaning I had the coordinates prior to publication. I went out and signed the log. All I had were the coordinates...same as anyone else might have...and I signed in the FTF spot.

2 - I arrived at GZ of a new cache and was waiting for a muggle to leave the area where I suspected the cache might be. In the meantime another cacher arrived and after greetings he looked around and said it might be in a different spot. I walked over and spotted it in the spot he suggested...so I had no problem claiming a "joint FTF" since I found it due to his suggestion.

3 - One that was published DURING my commute this morning was apparently found by a group, all claiming FTF. Now...I explained above how two folks might claim FTF, but to me a group of folks didn't really "find" it together...they just all happened to be there at the time it was first found. Add to that the person who actually hid the cache was part of this group FTF.

 

So my "rules" on claiming FTF are my own and fairly loose...but to me that third example is just getting ridiculous. If I were in the group and I was actually the person who found it, I'd probably take issue with others trying to claim FTF...but I probably wouldn't really MAKE an issue of it. It's one thing to think a certain way about it...another thing entirely to get in a debate or argument about which one of you can put those three letters in their log. All this is to say that no, it does not really matter...but don't be surprised when you discover that it really DOES matter to some people.

[+JPreto]

So my "rules" on claiming FTF are my own and fairly loose...but to me that third example is just getting ridiculous. If I were in the group and I was actually the person who found it, I'd probably take issue with others trying to claim FTF...but I probably wouldn't really MAKE an issue of it. It's one thing to think a certain way about it...another thing entirely to get in a debate or argument about which one of you can put those three letters in their log. All this is to say that no, it does not really matter...but don't be surprised when you discover that it really DOES matter to some people.

 

I know people taht go with the hiders, when they are hidding, and claim the FTF.

I know people that don´t even go with the hider, just sign the logbook at home before placing, and they claim FTF.

I know people that have a stamp from other geocachers and stamp the logbook before placing, and they claim the FTF.

 

So... Put your own rules or guidelines in your profile so others know how do you geocache because the FTF game is not part of the Geocaching.com game!

[+dprovan]

So my "rules" on claiming FTF are my own and fairly loose...but to me that third example is just getting ridiculous. If I were in the group and I was actually the person who found it, I'd probably take issue with others trying to claim FTF...but I probably wouldn't really MAKE an issue of it.

This is interesting. So to you, part of being FTF is that someone else is NOT FTF. To me, if I'm FTF, I'm more interested in who else COULD be considered FTF along with me. In a group find, particularly, I consider looking in the wrong place and not finding it to be just as much a part of the process as looking in the right place and finding it, so why should the latter be the only individual that can be considered participating in the find?

 

But we both agree that talking about this is for fun, not because we think it matters, or that one way of looking at it is superior to another.

 

I don't consider the CO's presence important one way or the other, but in the local culture in my area, COs typically avoid "causing" the FTF -- i.e., leading someone to GZ before it's published or telling them where it's hidden when they get there -- although, at the same time, no one much cares if the CO wants to do something special. (And, in reality, if a group decided to go for an FTF with the CO in tow, the cache is going to be found, of course.)

[4wheelin_fool]

However if it's not published anywhere, it's not a geocache.

 

It's unlikely that you could determine that for certain. I could hide a cache and "publish" it by emailing my friends. It's still a geocache.

 

According to Dictionary.com, it has to be posted on the internet. The Oxford dictionary stipulates that it has to be on a website.

 

So if a Scout leader hides a container for his Scout troop, lends them a GPS and gives them coordinates to find it, it's not a geocache?

 

The question is does the dictionary definition reflect us, or do we define the dictionary?

 

The scout leader can call it whatever he wishes, but I don't think it's a geocache. It's a cache of some form, likely to be a ziplock container, hence garbage.

 

And to expand this further, there are quite a few scouts that list geocaches clearly where they shouldn't be, only to get them published and immediately archived. The point of this is that the archived listing is still logable for the scouts. Even to them, it isn't a geocache unless there is a page somewhere.

Edited September 2, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[+J Grouchy]

So my "rules" on claiming FTF are my own and fairly loose...but to me that third example is just getting ridiculous. If I were in the group and I was actually the person who found it, I'd probably take issue with others trying to claim FTF...but I probably wouldn't really MAKE an issue of it.

This is interesting. So to you, part of being FTF is that someone else is NOT FTF. To me, if I'm FTF, I'm more interested in who else COULD be considered FTF along with me. In a group find, particularly, I consider looking in the wrong place and not finding it to be just as much a part of the process as looking in the right place and finding it, so why should the latter be the only individual that can be considered participating in the find?

 

I guess what would maybe slightly bother me is if I spent the effort, made a find where nobody else was even looking and then five other people wrote in their log that they were FTF. It's kind of why I don't have an interest in geocaching as part of group. I like my finds to be mine. Even if I had help...even if it was spoiled in a message from someone...there is no way to argue that I personally did not locate the cache and reach down (or up, or over, or under...) and grab it and open it. It's my own personal "rule" or "principle" or whatever you want to call it. I guess I would wonder why others would feel the intense NEED to claim an FTF on something they didn't even find. Not even necessarily just an FTF...but any find at all.

[+JPreto]

I guess I would wonder why others would feel the intense NEED to claim an FTF on something they didn't even find. Not even necessarily just an FTF...but any find at all.

Because they care about numbers more than they care about being called cheaters?

[+narcissa]

The scout leader can call it whatever he wishes, but I don't think it's a geocache.

 

If it's meant to be found with GPS coordinates, why isn't it a geocache?

[+sbell111]

It's funny that all that "it doesn't matter"-ing took forty responses...

That's what I was going for in post #8.