Isn't there a Minimum Requirement?

195 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

I've noticed an increasing number of people posting Found :) logs like this one

I've begun to see find logs saying things like "It must be missing because I didn't find it, but I'm sure I was looking in the right place. "  Or,  "I could see it, but I was on the wrong side of the creek, so I couldn't sign the log."  Or, "I never could figure out how to open the container." Or, "I know I must have been standing near it."

I've always thought a minimum requirement was that you sign the log.  I know the standard mantra is "Everybody plays the game their own way," but is there really no minimum requirement?  Is "I saw it on Google Earth" really enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Good point and I can only speak for myself, but the only time I record a find is if I actually find the cache and make every attempt to sign the log.  If the log is so wet I can't sign it, I do indeed record it as a find and leave a note it needs maintenance.  I also try to be considerate of the CO and leave an interesting log, or at least a funny one.  ::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I've seen quite a few like that lately, but almost all from relatively new cachers.  Have to admit I accidentally posted one log which clearly said that I didn't find it, but then I clicked the "found it" drop down.  The CO called me on that one quickly enough.  Unfortunately I don't think most of these are accidental finds, rather that there are many new cachers out there who are not familiar with how the game is played.

I've noticed an increasing number of people posting Found :) logs like this one

I've begun to see find logs saying things like "It must be missing because I didn't find it, but I'm sure I was looking in the right place. "  Or,  "I could see it, but I was on the wrong side of the creek, so I couldn't sign the log."  Or, "I never could figure out how to open the container." Or, "I know I must have been standing near it."

I've always thought a minimum requirement was that you sign the log.  I know the standard mantra is "Everybody plays the game their own way," but is there really no minimum requirement?  Is "I saw it on Google Earth" really enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Right!  I newbies post what they think is a note and it's a found.  See it all the time.  Of course, ahem, I've never done that.  :angel:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Pet peeve of mine is when I see a cache where the difficulty is not in finding it but in getting TO it.  "Saw it but couldn't sign the log" is a common online log.  Well, then, JHMO, you don't get to claim it as a find.  A little creativity and you'd have it, but people don't want to spend the time with it.  I see it as mostly with newer cachers.

If the log is too wet, or the cache rusted shut (think altoids, nanos, 35mm film container), but otherwise it would have been a nonissue, yeah, I too will log the find and send CO a note of the circumstances.  But I think Thot's main issue is general laziness, noob or otherwise.  I, too, have seen the “saw it across the ditch/creek/wherever but couldn’t get to it” logged as found.  Nope. 

Agree – I just don’t get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Have to admit I accidentally posted one log which clearly said that I didn't find it, but then I clicked the "found it" drop down.  The CO called me on that one quickly enough.

Yes, I've made that mistake too -- hopefully all of them were found and corrected.  I also claim a find if the log is too wet to sign (usually I replace the log and sign the replacement), and I've claimed a (maybe more but I only remember one) finds where the container could not be opened.  In the case I remember it was a wide tin screw top container about the size of a snuff can that had been cross threaded.  I knew the owner so I took it home tried to open it with a vice and large channellock pliers.  It would not yield.  I delivered the container to the owner and claimed a find.  I have also signed a container when the log was too wet to sign.  I'm not talking about this kind of situation.  I'm talking about where the person doesn't hold the container in their hands -- doesn't actually find it or can't get to it when it is obviously where the owner put it.  Or, can't figure out how to open the container (not can't open it because of damage). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

One additional thought:  As cache owners, we are expected to police our hides.  There is no reason that an inappropriate log type cannot and should not be deleted by the CO (as was done to my log that I mentioned earlier) with a note to the finder explaining the reason for the deletion.  I've done it any number of times with logs posted on my virtuals that did not provide the required proof of the visit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

There is no reason that an inappropriate log type cannot and should not be deleted by the CO (as was done to my log that I mentioned earlier) with a note to the finder explaining the reason for the deletion. 

The problem with this is it often leads to conflict and hostility so most people aren't going to do it.  I've never had someone claim a find when I knew they didn't.  I would probably delete it but I wouldn't like doing it because of the chance of making an enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The minimum requirement is that there is a container and logbook. I don't think it's necessarily a requirement to sign the logbook because obviously there are many situations where that's not possible.

I don't really care if they sign the log or not and honestly if I had the option of using a code-word to log the cache online.. I wouldn't even be putting logs in my caches. Unless the cache is special due to it's creative container then I'm fine with cachers at the very least provide proof they were there and saw or laid hands on the container. Too often than not the logbooks are usually messed up in some way. I have more frustrations due to logbooks than actually finding the caches. Nanos come to mind. There is nothing more I hate about caching than trying to retrieve or replace a log from a nano.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Unless the cache is special due to it's creative container then I'm fine with cachers at the very least provide proof they were there and saw or laid hands on the container.

If you had a terrain 4.5 cache thirty feet up in a tree, would it be alright with you for a person to log it by saying they saw it from the ground?

edited to fix the quote problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

If you had a terrain 4.5 cache thirty feet up in a tree, would it be alright with you for a person to log it by saying they saw it from the ground?

In reality, these are usually done team approach, and one 'lucky' soul gets to climb the tree for all to find.  So I guess there really isn't much of a difference.

I guess I feel no because I would climb it myself.  But owning a few of such hides, that's what happens.  And I don't mind it.  But I wouldn't log it if I didn't do it msyelf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

If you had a terrain 4.5 cache thirty feet up in a tree, would it be alright with you for a person to log it by saying they saw it from the ground?

In reality, these are usually done team approach, and one 'lucky' soul gets to climb the tree for all to find.  So I guess there really isn't much of a difference.

I guess I feel no because I would climb it myself.  But owning a few of such hides, that's what happens.  And I don't mind it.  But I wouldn't log it if I didn't do it msyelf.

And what it no one climbs the tree.  Just see it from the ground?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Unless the cache is special due to it's creative container then I'm fine with cachers at the very least provide proof they were there and saw or laid hands on the container.

If you had a terrain 4.5 cache thirty feet up in a tree, would it be alright with you for a person to log it by saying they saw it from the ground?

edited to fix the quote problem

Yes, that would be fine because I'm a nice guy and realize that not everyone can climb trees. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Unless the cache is special due to it's creative container then I'm fine with cachers at the very least provide proof they were there and saw or laid hands on the container.

If you had a terrain 4.5 cache thirty feet up in a tree, would it be alright with you for a person to log it by saying they saw it from the ground?

edited to fix the quote problem

Yes, that would be fine because I'm a nice guy and realize that not everyone can climb trees. :)

Where's the tongue in cheek icon?

If they're too lazy to try and play the game then they shouldn't get a smiley....

We haven't had it happen but like Thot said, it usually isn't worth the hassle of making an "enemy" in this game....  chances are, people will read the log for what it is and the offender's reputation will suffer, not ours....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

OSC, I guess that's more to the point.. It's their conscious not mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

For the most part it should be black and white - the terrain and difficulty ratings should give you an idea of the complexity of the hunt involved and you should sign the log even those dreaded nanos  :).  The gray part comes in when you find a tether but no cache and it is in a tough place to get to or a place you don't frequent.  Or if the container cover is extremely difficult to remove because of corrosion, etc.  We always contact the CO before logging a find on those and let them decide on what we should do. 

What I really want is a more obvious hint on "A Hard Mystery Cache".... >:D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

My personal belief as a CO is if the person obviously didn't find it in the nature it was intended, their log gets deleted.  I'll mail them first and let them know why it's getting deleted, then I do it.

Had a guy claim my light pole cache because "I got there, could see it, but couldn't climb up there and get it."

Well, I replied to the guy and said the nature of the Soda Tube Trials is to do the extra work to sign the log and that I had to delete his entry.  Deleted it and haven't heard from him since (actually, I forget who he is).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's all about integrity and if a person stays with this hobby long enough, their reputation speaks for itslf.  I'm with Thot on this one all the way, but I don't care if a person signs the log or not also, except in FTF.  It's their reputation and integrity on the line, not mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The minimum requirement is that there is a container and logbook. I don't think it's necessarily a requirement to sign the logbook . . .

From the gc.com guidelines:

Logging of All Physical Caches

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

I felt sure I'd seen that somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

well barbee then the guy that got the final soda tube trials shouldnt have gotten ftf before me since he didnt get the cache how it was designed to be gotten right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What I really want is a more obvious hint on "A Hard Mystery Cache".... >:D

Yea, I am thinking about just going ahead and logging it. I saw the gazebo, but couldn't sign the log is good enough for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The minimum requirement is that there is a container and logbook. I don't think it's necessarily a requirement to sign the logbook . . .

From the gc.com guidelines:

Logging of All Physical Caches

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

I felt sure I'd seen that somewhere.

As PR has said before.. they're guidelines.. not rules..  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

As PR has said before.. they're guidelines.. not rules..  ;)

Yeah, well . . .

That "guideline" goes on to say:

Cache owners may not delete the cache seeker's log based solely on optional tasks.

Whacha wanna bet if you delete a log because the cacher didn't post a picture in the crazy hat it you will soon come to think of it as a rule?  :knuppel2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What I really want is a more obvious hint on "A Hard Mystery Cache".... >:D

Yea, I am thinking about just going ahead and logging it. I saw the gazebo, but couldn't sign the log is good enough for me.

Me too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now