@greyhounder wrote:

Yep — I did it. Took out over 100 temp cache logs. I left them as notes.

Bec

About 200 deleted for me….hey is that a can of worms in your hands djwini ?

Do I really have to say it?

It’s your game, play it how you like.

Back to the original topic, I deleted around 90 temp finds as when I was between 1000 and 1100 finds. I kept my bonus logs and multiple logs when the caches as specifically designed to be logged multiple times, such as the old ? cache in Kenosha/Racine, so I have something like 10 “nonunique” logs. I did this so that my find totals are under the same basis as the majority of the geocachers in the country. In other words, I did it because I wanted to, not because it was a “rule”.

That said, logging a multicache once for each stage will probably result in your logs getting deleted by the owner, unless the cache was specifically designed for multiple logs.

How about the ever so popular 😀

@tyedyeskyguy wrote:

Do I really have to say it?

It’s your game, play it how you like.

Blah, blah.. Yackety smackety…. I’m keeping mine since I have no morals. I’m pure evil. My goal is to log one million event temps. That should crash the entire net. Then I can implement my plan to take over the world. Whaaaa Ha Haaaaa!! 😈 😈 😈

I’m not going to cave into the pressure from out of staters who have nothing better to do than trash others for doing nothing wrong. What next?? 😕

Go on, beat that dead horse some more.!! 👿

Ok, I can resurrect this horse long enough to beat it to death again…

This whole “ethical” argument against multiple logs on temps (also see related “Rock Island Getaway” thread) makes no sense. This is just a game and, for that matter, there aren’t even any winners or losers. Maybe some people with high numbers feel like “winners” but we’ve certainly never met any fellow cachers who’ve lorded their high finds over our meager numbers. Unless you’re impacting someone else by multiple-logging, why should anyone care? (Don’t even try to tell me they’re hogging server space by multi-posting…)

And again, from a purely philosophical standpoint of playing the game, is this any different than multiple logs on multi-waypoint caches where individual stages wouldn’t meet the requirements for standalone placement?

And what about multiple logs allowed on single-stage caches? The virtuals and (now archived) locationless caches were famous for this, it seems. Here’s a dandy: GC3D2A. Or found logs allowed where the “rules” aren’t followed–allowing “visual” finds instead of signing the log; founds allowed by the owner when the container has cone missing…the nerve of some scofflaws.

We probably won’t multi-log any more events just because it seems rather pointless. Then again, we might. But, we probably won’t delete our existing multi-logs because, again, what’s the point? But to question the ethics of those who do or don’t is really quite a stretch.

Short version, as said by others before: it’s your game, play it how you want.

There. Let the flames begin…

Here’s a new outlook on this … not that I care enough in either direction to bother, but I’m feeling creative today … setup TWO geonames … one for regular finds, another for event/temp finds … such as: EnergySaver and EnergySaverTEMPS ???

Who could complain about that? You have the opportunity to clearly identifiy finds that are temps … and still log them.