Isn't there a Minimum Requirement?

195 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Yea, but that's a whole other bag of beans there in how those guidelines are interpreted and enforced.

Basically it's a choice of whether you want to be upset or not. After all it's just geocaching. That energy and angst could be directed at so many other worthy causes.

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!

I guess I'm gonna have to swap names on those two caches

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).

Not only did I see that cache up the pole from the boat I was in I hit it a couple of times with my pole.

Does that mean I can log it. I mean I didn't just see it.  >: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).

Not only did I see that cache up the pole from the boat I was in I hit it a couple of times with my pole.

Does that mean I can log it. I mean I didn't just see it.  >:D

Yea, well I swam/waded out there, climbed up the pole, touched it with my left hand before I fell off and had to be rushed to the emergency room, so if you are logging it so am I.

:)

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).

Not only did I see that cache up the pole from the boat I was in I hit it a couple of times with my pole.

Does that mean I can log it. I mean I didn't just see it.  >:D

Yea, well I swam/waded out there, climbed up the pole, touched it with my left hand before I fell off and had to be rushed to the emergency room, so if you are logging it so am I.

:)

I saw both of you touch it, thus I know exactly where it is and what it looks like so I'm logging it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I would agree with FamilieRyan. Before logging it i would contact the CO if I couldn't open the container. I know in the past we've seen the container and not been able to reach it so we haven't logged it, but in that case maybe a picture to prove you were actually there.... When it comes to seeing the tether I know for a fact we've seen a tether thought it was missing and then found out that it wasn't the cache.... you never know.......

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).

Not only did I see that cache up the pole from the boat I was in I hit it a couple of times with my pole.

Does that mean I can log it. I mean I didn't just see it.  >:D

Yea, well I swam/waded out there, climbed up the pole, touched it with my left hand before I fell off and had to be rushed to the emergency room, so if you are logging it so am I.

:)

I saw both of you touch it, thus I know exactly where it is and what it looks like so I'm logging it too.

We're logging it because we saw a thread on it here....  ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Just go ahead and log ALL the Soda Tube Trial caches.  I mean, it's not like the CO is going to actually revisit the cache to check the signatures.  He "placed" most of them by just standing back and throwing them anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I log caches as finds if I put my hands on the container and attempt to sign the log.  I include unsuccessfully searching for a pen in my pocket, fanny pack or Camelbak as an attempt.  :D

If I am with a group, then all I feel I have to do is see the cache as long as someone is signing for the group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I have to sign it. Not no ifs, ands, or buts. So if I ever go for the rest of the Soda Tube Trials, which I intend on doing sometime in the future, I'm going to sign them. If I don't then it's not a success. Call me an overachiever but that's how I roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

A cache without its container (muggled--all contents including logbook, swag, etc. dumped out and exposed)...I counted that as a find.

A cache, but the log was too wet...counted as found, though I'll try to put a new piece of paper in there.

Found some attachment method, like a lid, a screw, a string, Velcro...NOT a find. Didn't find a cache, just signs that one once might've been there. It's not Geo-stringing, after all.

Found where a cache should've been...NOT a find. Seriously, here's a log on a cache that we worked hard to get: "Going to post a find even though the space the cache was supposed to be was empty(we think) we will email a photo of the spot with us there. If owner says we are wrong. We will delete the find." C'mon now, you didn't find it! Log a DNF! You don't get a smiley for finding a good spot to put a cache!

Found nothing, but "worked for it"...NOT a find. Yes, I've see people claim a find with that criteria!

Throw-down finds... >:(  Okay, I know some people who do this think they're "helping," but I am totally against this practice.

If you can stand the tone over at the Groundspeak forums, they have a whole thread called, "Found It=Didn't find it," in "The Hunt / The Unusual" which makes for very entertaining reading.

I think the examples I've listed above are the "black or white" ones. I think there are some grey areas, too, like logging "extreme" caches if you didn't perform the physical challenge involved or solve the puzzle. Situations where I personally probably wouldn't log a find, but I would have no problem if someone else did it their way.

But to claim a find when you didn't in any way, shape, or form find a cache...that seems wrong to me.

Here, this might help:

logforce.jpg

--Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I'm not sure I understood this one:

Logging FIND on archived GC.com cache for found Non-GC.com cache. 

It this the unusual condition where a cache not listed on GC.com has been placed where a listed cache once was.  And, someone logs the unlisted cache as though he had found the listed one?

I have another case for you.  This cache was missing for a while.  Then somebody planted a real Letterbox nearby (withing 20 or so feet) of where the listed cache once was.  Now, cachers are logging the Letterbox as a find for the cache.  And GC, at least in the form of Prime Reviewer, finds this acceptable.

NOTE:  I've mentioned this situation before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

You can see this on the logs for the one in Memorial Park where people find the letterbox and not the cache, but are logging the cache as found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Just go ahead and log ALL the Soda Tube Trial caches.  I mean, it's not like the CO is going to actually revisit the cache to check the signatures.  He "placed" most of them by just standing back and throwing them anyway!

If that's the case then AB owes me $100 as I was the first to see them all in one day....show me the money !!! yep saw them all ..  I did I did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I'm not sure I understood this one:

Logging FIND on archived GC.com cache for found Non-GC.com cache. 

It this the unusual condition where a cache not listed on GC.com has been placed where a listed cache once was.  And, someone logs the unlisted cache as though he had found the listed one?

I have another case for you.  This cache was missing for a while.  Then somebody planted a real Letterbox nearby (withing 20 or so feet) of where the listed cache once was.  Now, cachers are logging the Letterbox as a find for the cache.  And GC, at least in the form of Prime Reviewer, finds this acceptable.

NOTE:  I've mentioned this situation before.

I don't "get" that one either...like maybe people are finding a Terracache (isn't that "the other site"?) and logging a find on an archived cache to boost their number of finds on GC.com, the "official" site?

And what the heck is a "Pocket cache"? Obviously some of the items on this little graph refer to things that don't seem to be so epidemic these days...but I still thought it was pretty funny!  ;D

--Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

A cache without its container (muggled--all contents including logbook, swag, etc. dumped out and exposed)...I counted that as a find.

A cache, but the log was too wet...counted as found, though I'll try to put a new piece of paper in there.

Found some attachment method, like a lid, a screw, a string, Velcro...NOT a find. Didn't find a cache, just signs that one once might've been there. It's not Geo-stringing, after all.

Found where a cache should've been...NOT a find. Seriously, here's a log on a cache that we worked hard to get: "Going to post a find even though the space the cache was supposed to be was empty(we think) we will email a photo of the spot with us there. If owner says we are wrong. We will delete the find." C'mon now, you didn't find it! Log a DNF! You don't get a smiley for finding a good spot to put a cache!

Found nothing, but "worked for it"...NOT a find. Yes, I've see people claim a find with that criteria!

Throw-down finds... >:(  Okay, I know some people who do this think they're "helping," but I am totally against this practice.

If you can stand the tone over at the Groundspeak forums, they have a whole thread called, "Found It=Didn't find it," in "The Hunt / The Unusual" which makes for very entertaining reading.

I think the examples I've listed above are the "black or white" ones. I think there are some grey areas, too, like logging "extreme" caches if you didn't perform the physical challenge involved or solve the puzzle. Situations where I personally probably wouldn't log a find, but I would have no problem if someone else did it their way.

But to claim a find when you didn't in any way, shape, or form find a cache...that seems wrong to me.

I agree with all of that basically.... what is a "throw-down find" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

what is a "throw-down find" ?

I'm guessing it's when you think a cache is missing, so you replace it with one your brought with you then claim that as a find

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

....And what the heck is a "Pocket cache"?...

A "pocket cache" is where someone brings their cache or cache log to an event (in their pocket) and let's you log it.  There was a lot of that going on at GeoWoodstock IV a few years ago -- sort of as an icebreaker.  Trouble was, folks were bringing their unique cache containers from home -- and home might be on another continent.  If you logged the cache it belonged to, it might show that you had found a cache in Timbuktu when you in fact hadn't been there.  When the reviewers got wind of it, they archived the caches and locked them.  It was a big stink.  I haven't heard of any of that kind of thing recently.

...Well, not counting Neal's "Picture This" cache.  It's sort of been grandfathered.  ::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

what is a "throw-down find" ?

I'm guessing it's when you think a cache is missing, so you replace it with one your brought with you then claim that as a find

Exactly. If that thread I mentioned from the GS forums is any indication, it's rampant in some areas / with some cachers.

Like, say I tried to find this really hard cache, like, oh...say it was called "ICTOACNOTLLSS," f'instance. And let's just say I couldn't find it. So, I just throw down a film canister and log a find, saying something like, "This one seems to be missing, so I replaced it."  >:D

Not a good idea, for so many reasons!

HC, thanks for that explanation of Pocket Caches. Now it makes sense...and yeah, it doesn't sound like a good idea, really.

--Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Like, say I tried to find this really hard cache, like, oh...say it was called "ICTOACNOTLLSS," f'instance. And let's just say I couldn't find it. So, I just throw down a film canister and log a find, saying something like, "This one seems to be missing, so I replaced it."  >:D

Given the discussion here, wouldn't it just be better to say you saw where it should have been and log it as a find?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Like, say I tried to find this really hard cache, like, oh...say it was called "ICTOACNOTLLSS," f'instance. And let's just say I couldn't find it. So, I just throw down a film canister and log a find, saying something like, "This one seems to be missing, so I replaced it."  >:D

Given the discussion here, wouldn't it just be better to say you saw where it should have been and log it as a find?

Hey, yeah...!  O0

Or I could take a picture of where it should have been!  :notme:

--Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

That'd might end up being evidence you were wrong.  Better my way.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This is true! I see many more found caches in my future!  :2funny:

--Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

You can just see where they are (or should be) on GoogleEarth.  No more going out and getting all hot and worrying about chiggers or poison ivy.  Come on folks, think outside of the box!  O0

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