Another what would you do question…..

[rtrezrsnhvn]

I know there was a recent discussion about “to log or not to log” so I’m asking for advice on this one. We recently finished up a local series of traditionals that ended with a final puzzle. Each traditional had a clue to the coordinates that led you to the final.

Last night, we made a second run at finding the final. RT10 found the cover laying on the ground. It’s clearly marked/labeled and the container matches the other 11 in the series so we know we found the leftovers.

I know a purist answer is that we didn’t sign the log (although gc doesn’t require it) and the cache isn’t in tact. Do you log it as found or not? I think I’m more concerned about the disappointment of the boys vs the # being added. I did put a NM on it and did log it as found (in case the owners archive it right away, making the answer a moot point.) These owners have posted that they aren’t “playing” anymore, so I don’t think it will be replaced. If I thought it would be, I’d probably wait. (am also thinking of asking Mr. RT if we want to extend the offer to adopt the caches)

Any general consensus/thoughts on this?

Thanks for the input!

[Team Black-Cat]

That wiould be a not found and needs maint. for me, but I’m really not a purist. If I know the CO personally, I would probably send them and email instead of the NM.

[CodeJunkie]

I saw the notes on this one as I have the final on my watch list. I think I would have done the following (but it’s just my way and I know others would do it very differently – and there’s no right answer).

1) Log it as a note, but describing it pretty much as you did.
2) PM the CO and explain any additional details and offer to send a photo of the piece(s) I found. In the PM I would ask permission to claim it as a “found”.
3) Hopefully the PM would allow the “Find” and then repair / archive the cache. A “Found” can be logged even after an archive so that’s not a big deal (from a technical standpoint).
4) I’ve logged very few “Needs Maintenance” logs and generally reserve them for situations where I’ve done 1 & 2 but hear no response from the owner in a day or two.

As for the adoption? I’m cold/lukewarm warm about the whole series and actually denied (as did at least one other local cacher) to adopt this series already when asked by the CO. I know they’ve had some “issues” with there caches, but so it goes when you place caches in very public areas.

[hack1of2]

You could just place a new cache container there for the CO so the series could continue, since the CO has stopped caching.

[huffinpuffin2]

@rtrezrsnhvn wrote:

. . . we didn’t sign the log (although gc doesn’t require it)

Just a side comment/question, but isn’t ‘signing the log’ the only thing groundspeak does require? Simply meaning: no sign, no smile?

[cheezehead]

@huffinpuffin2 wrote:

@rtrezrsnhvn wrote:

. . . we didn’t sign the log (although gc doesn’t require it)

Just a side comment/question, but isn’t ‘signing the log’ the only thing groundspeak does require? Simply meaning: no sign, no smile?

3.1. Logging of All Physical Geocaches
This page is an extension of our Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

Physical geocaches can be logged online as “Found” once the physical log has been signed. An exception is Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the challenge requirements have been met and documented to the cache owner’s satisfaction.

Yes, you need to sign a log according to GC.com to claim a find. This last winter I was caching with some friends and we found a cache but it was frozen in place. One of my friends said, well, we found it and I said ya we found the cache, but did not find the log. That the whole goal of the game is signing the log book. If there is a cache that has a lock on it and you either beed to find a key or combo to open it and don’t have either, how do you log the fine?

[rtrezrsnhvn]

I appreciate the feedback. I didn’t mention that I had pm’d the CO in the last week so they knew we were on the hunt. In spite of my email and several others finding the traditionals, they haven’t logged into gc in a while and did not respond to my pm. I knew the NM would force it to be archived at some point if they don’t get involved. I don’t do a NM unless I know for certain that something is amiss and it clearly is with this one.

I don’t know the original location of the hide as gz has several potential locations that look appropriate but don’t go with the clue in the write up.

I will talk it over with Mr. RT at this point based on the feedback and go from there.

I did get the impression from one of the other convos about logging that “signing” has gone by the wayside in spite of the verbiage. I think I also read this in the GC forums.

Thanks again!

[cheezehead]

Food for thought then and a whole new can of worms, If you walk, run, bike, hike or drive by where GC.com say a cache is listed, Did you find it?You spot the Inter. Nat. Space Station flying over head. Did you find the cache that has been placed on it? You solved a puzzle to get the coords for a cache that a 500 miles away, does that earn you a smiley? Everyone plays the game they want. Who of any of the playes has the right to tell you if your right or wrong. If I were you, shoot a email to someone at the Lilly PAd and see what ya get back for an answer.

[Team Northwoods]

I would have to post that as a find. If I worked really hard to find a cache and it was laying strewn across the ground I would do my best to put it back together. Log what you did online under found. I have been to caches were the log is so wet you can’t write on it. If you find the container after a mile hike up here in the northwoods you found it but you must at least find the container. You should not have to come back just because a bear or little critter ate holes in a cache.

***Opinions expressed are mine alone and will change based upon new information. ***

[Author]

Posts