Jump to content


Photo

Newbies double, triple logging caches


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#21 RRM10

RRM10

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • LocationSplendora, TX

Posted 17 September 2014 - 05:07 AM

We don't have many caches placed, but did get the first double log on one of them a couple of weeks ago. We sent a courtesy email, hoping they'd delete the extra found it log, they didn't delete it after 3-4 days so we did.

 

What I'm unsure of is how to deal with the ones that log a find but when I've done maintenance their name isn't on the log. Makes you wonder if it was just arm-chaired or what. Of course it was on a cache with a harder D/T rating...


img.aspx?txt=View+my+profile&uid=f9f9e7a


#22 Mr. ZHR

Mr. ZHR

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 654 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 05:13 AM

If you actually check logs to see if they were really signed, be sure to look EVERYWHERE.  If the log is mushy, or the mossies are terrible, we sometimes initial it whererever we can, and just put initials.   A better plan would be to look at their profile and see if they have found other caches in the area, or read their log to see if it indicates they were there.


  • cachestacker and Baytown Bert like this

Still trying to figure out  don't like this new forum style.
img.aspx?txt=Zoot!&uid=fb1d81b0-8f1c-4ac;GeocacherLocations.pl?Language=EN&Image=


#23 cachestacker

cachestacker

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,043 posts
  • LocationClear Lake

Posted 17 September 2014 - 05:45 AM

I ditto ZHR's comment about initial or sign wherever and bail due to mossies, rain, etc.  Depending upon size/style of log (and condition of log) you may have to look for it.


  • ATMA likes this
Posted Image

#24 TheNorman

TheNorman

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 597 posts
  • LocationHuntsville, Texas

Posted 17 September 2014 - 06:06 AM

Remember that it's a game and different people play differently.  Since there is no prize at the end (other than one's own feeling of accomplishment) who cares if people armchair your caches?  The armchair cacher's are only displaying that they don't play the game the way that I do.  Perhaps they are of limited mobility, are virtual caching, and something about the title of the cache intrigued them.

 

However, I don't think that is any excuse for multiple logs.


Edited by TheNorman, 17 September 2014 - 06:07 AM.


#25 cachestacker

cachestacker

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,043 posts
  • LocationClear Lake

Posted 17 September 2014 - 06:25 AM

Remember that it's a game and different people play differently.  Since there is no prize at the end (other than one's own feeling of accomplishment) who cares if people armchair your caches?  The armchair cacher's are only displaying that they don't play the game the way that I do.  Perhaps they are of limited mobility, are virtual caching, and something about the title of the cache intrigued them.

 

However, I don't think that is any excuse for multiple logs.

 

Wait.  Maybe they liked the cache a lot so the went and virtually found it a few times.  Maybe they like their find count going up with multiple finds.  If we all play differently.....

 

We DO all play by different rules.  So you can't like armchair caching and not like multiple logs.

 

But I see a distinction with a CO deleting logs. The CO can delete any logs that don't have signatures on the cache log.  That is based on a RULE.

 

Armchair caching / seeing but not signing -- that's a playing style/choice.  And, at least theoretically, you risk your smileys if you have not signed the log.  A CO choosing to delete a log -- that's enforcing an actual rule.  The playing style for the CO is whether the CO chooses to do that or not.  But deleting is based on a rule, not just a random playing style.


Posted Image

#26 CANINE QUEEN

CANINE QUEEN

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 857 posts
  • LocationRichmond, Tx

Posted 17 September 2014 - 07:16 AM

Since my caches all have fairly low d/t ratings I don't care if someone logs a find that didn't actually find it.  If they don't care if their number are skewed I certainly don't.  That said, if I had caches with high d/t ratings and the whole point of placing the cache in that place or manner was for the finder to overcome the difficulties involved I would absolutely delete a find if there was not a corresponding signature on the actual log.


img.aspx?txt=Cache+Happy!&uid=ba9998b9-e


#27 TheNorman

TheNorman

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 597 posts
  • LocationHuntsville, Texas

Posted 17 September 2014 - 12:48 PM

Wait.  Maybe they liked the cache a lot so the went and virtually found it a few times.  Maybe they like their find count going up with multiple finds.  If we all play differently.....

 

The only multiple logs that I have seen on our caches appear to fall into the cases that people have described above--newbies and people logging from the field with what they think is an errant connection.

 

Has anyone seen multiple virtual logs?

 

I have deleted multiple logs, and I think I might have deleted a virtual log once--normally I wouldn't notice but someone called it to my attention.

 

I forgot to include the :stirpot:  earlier.  :angel:



#28 cachestacker

cachestacker

    Senior Member

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,043 posts
  • LocationClear Lake

Posted 17 September 2014 - 12:54 PM

I forgot to include the :stirpot:  earlier.  :angel:

 

 

I know.  And I've only seen multiple from the app / newbies, too.  My point was simply that people who don't mind how others play (recognizing we all play differently) shouldn't worry too much if their caches have multiple logs by someone.  Especially if they've e-mailed some advice and they take no action.  In the end, it's no biggie.


Posted Image

#29 TravelingGeek

TravelingGeek

    TravelingGeek

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,483 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 01:28 PM

I rarely use the Android and never the iPhone and never ever the new free versions of the apps... I wonder if the User Interface or performance of those apps makes this more prone to happen?   I did notice Groundspeak has a UX artist and UX Team Manager position open.


Posted Image

#30 Baytown Bert

Baytown Bert

    Short fat dude with good hygiene

  • Senior Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,358 posts
  • LocationBaytown, Texas

Posted 17 September 2014 - 02:35 PM

Many of these folks do not have a verified email address making it hard to explain why you deleted their log.


  • ATMA likes this

TXGA SETX Representative


#31 RRM10

RRM10

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • LocationSplendora, TX

Posted 17 September 2014 - 03:53 PM

If they don't have a verified email I would assume they aren't too concerned about it... Just my $.02
  • Baytown Bert likes this

img.aspx?txt=View+my+profile&uid=f9f9e7a


#32 ~windknot~

~windknot~

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 146 posts
  • LocationMissouri City

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:01 AM

I rarely use the Android and never the iPhone and never ever the new free versions of the apps... I wonder if the User Interface or performance of those apps makes this more prone to happen?   I did notice Groundspeak has a UX artist and UX Team Manager position open.

A lot of my finds have been on an Android phone using the c:geo app.  There was one time that the app was acting funny and the "send log" wouldn't take, then multiple logs went through at once.  I remember that there was an app update that came out soon after fixing the problem explaining that the geocaching.com API had changed.  Since then, I just assume that multiple logs in succession from one person means it was an accident or they didn't realize they did it. 


img.aspx?txt=View+my+profile&uid=d30725e





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users