Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Logging "Finds" for Non-existent Caches

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Conway, AR
    Posts
    1,392

    Logging "Finds" for Non-existent Caches

    This month, we had a find on one of our caches that had been not only disabled, but REMOVED a week prior!. Here's the log entry in question:

    "Found the spot where the cache is and wasps come flying out every where. Saw a snake crossing the path to it as well. So could not sign the log. Now that I am home and logging my finds I see that you already no about the wasps and have dis-abled the cache. But going to try and log since I was there."

    Should this bother me as much as it does?
    I get my directions from above.
    View my profile

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    134

    Re: Logging "Finds" for Non-existent Caches

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaddiel
    This month, we had a find on one of our caches that had been not only disabled, but REMOVED a week prior!. Here's the log entry in question:

    "Found the spot where the cache is, lifted up the thing and wasps come flying out every where. Saw a snake crossing the path to it as well. So could not sign the log. Now that I am home and logging my finds I see that you already no about the wasps and have dis-abled the cache. But going to try and log since I was there."

    Should this bother me as much as it does?
    In this case I would send a polite email to them telling them that the cache had already been removed, so it was impossible to log. Then delete their log of the cache. Being there does not equal finding the cache in my book.

    --RuffRidr

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Flint Rock Hills,MO.
    Posts
    339

    I agree

    I agree if it was disabled,I would e-mail them,politely, and then delete it as well.

    jokingly in this log GEO*Trailblazer 1 says
    Otherwise I will get those over yonder that I walked by but they were gone,but thought I would try to log it anyhow .
    found(did not ) find a few of those .

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fort Smith, AR
    Posts
    846
    I agree with everyone If its not there its not a find. If that was the case I would have alot more finds.
    If your not living life on the edge your taking up too much space!!!!!!


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Rolling Fork, MS
    Posts
    111
    It's more than possible that they found the cache while it was still there and just now got around to logging the find. If you're not used to logging finds AFTER the fact you may not notice that the GC.com website automatically selects "todays" date.

    I'm not saying that's definetly the reason why, but it's a possiblity.

    Where their any signs of wasps or a wasp nest?

    sd

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Conway, AR
    Posts
    1,392
    Quote Originally Posted by southdeltan
    It's more than possible that they found the cache while it was still there and just now got around to logging the find. If you're not used to logging finds AFTER the fact you may not notice that the GC.com website automatically selects "todays" date.

    I'm not saying that's definetly the reason why, but it's a possiblity.

    Where their any signs of wasps or a wasp nest?

    sd
    Well, they logged several other caches in the area on the same date, so I have my doubts that this was a simple oversight. And, yes, the wasps were the reason that we disabled the cache in the first place.

    Now, our philosophy on logging finds is simple, and (I think) most people would agree: If you don't sign the logbook, you can't claim it as a find. Yeah, I know it's just a game, and all that, but if we have people going around logging finds that they didn't really find, it gives the cache owners a false report of the status of the cache. (The same, I might add, is true for NOT logging a DNF when you DON'T find the cache, but that's a discussion for a different thread on a different day... )
    I get my directions from above.
    View my profile

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Clarksville, AR
    Posts
    563
    I certainly agree that they did not find it. Additionally that looks like cheating to us, but the only ones hurt is them.

    We have found caches we could not log due to wet logs but if we did not touch it knowing it was the cache it was not a find for us.

    It is your cache and your decision.

    The call is yours....poppy
    May those who love us, love us. And those that don't love us, may God turn their hearts; and if he doesn't turn their hearts may he turn their ankle so we may know them by their limp.... An Old Gaelic Blessing

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fort Smith, AR
    Posts
    846
    In the case of a wet log I always leave my sticker somewhere in the cache so it shows that I was there this way I can log it as a find.
    If your not living life on the edge your taking up too much space!!!!!!


  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Conway, AR
    Posts
    1,392
    Problem solved!

    I sent a cordial email and the cacher changed their log to a note.
    I get my directions from above.
    View my profile

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bentonville
    Posts
    2
    Hello everyone,

    This is my first post on the wesite......So am just going to jump in here and say that I think you did the right thing by telling them to change it.

    I agree that if you don't touch/sign the log....then you didn't actually find it.

    That would be like saying....Well I was in the area, so I will log it because I was close by.

    That would bother me as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •