forged logs

[peach107]

this subject has probably been beat to death already, but i don’t have time to search the archives. how does one go about handling a cacher that you know for sure is logging smileys on caches that you know they haven’t found? do you let it go? do you delete their entries? just wondering.

[Lostby7]

Have seen it happen…..known for a fact the cacher whose name was on the log hadn’t visited….I let it slide…it wasn’t my cache and the actual person did show up a few weeks later to sign the log. It was telling of the kind of cacher he and the person who signed his name are / were. They rarely if ever visit these forums anymore as the generally accepted geocaching “rules” are lost on them and they no longer wanted to hear about their “bad behaviors.”

[CodeJunkie]

AHHHHH – The million dollar judgement call. I’d like to think I’d let 1 slide, but if it’s multiples I’d probably send them an email asking for an explanation. Based on the response they give you’d have to make a decision. I’d try and error on the side of being generous, but each situaiton is unique.

[Todd300]

Sometimes I wonder that when someone logs a cache as “TFTC”, did they really visit that cache or are they just armchair logging for the smileys? I have no proof of that unless I visit the cache to see if that cacher actually signed the log.

I’m not saying that every “TFTC” log is a fake log, but I do have the feeling that some are.

As for the “TFTC”‘s themselves, that’s a discussion for another day.

[The Yinnies]

I do not know what you mean by TFTC? I always log that.
Thanks

[Todd300]

TFTC – Thanks for the cache.

I dislike those logs. Not very original.

Always write about something that you liked about each cache. Doesn’t have to be an essay. Something like “Loved the view here. Awesome hiding spot” will do.

To me, “TFTC” logs show disrespect to the cache owner as they would spend hours placing the cache and all they get is a “TFTC” for their efforts.

Thankfully not every cacher does the “TFTC” thing. I enjoy reading logs by cachers saying how much they loved the cache and what fun they had finding it.

Cut and paste logs are another annoyance, but that’s another subject for another day.

[The Yinnies]

I am sorry, I always end my log with TFTC.
Thanks

[Lostby7]

@The Yinnie’s wrote:

I am sorry, I always end my log with TFTC.
Thanks

…folks are talking about people whose full log is “TFTC”

Using TFTC is totally fine in addition to other words about the hunt.

[glorkar]

@peach107 wrote:

this subject has probably been beat to death already, but i don’t have time to search the archives. how does one go about handling a cacher that you know for sure is logging smileys on caches that you know they haven’t found? do you let it go? do you delete their entries? just wondering.

Honestly, I think I would just leave it. Sure, it would bother me, but if that’s the way they want to play, well, then I guess it’s on their conscience. It really defeats the whole purpose of caching, but I suppose some people really are in it for the numbers.
The only time I think I would go through the process of deleting the log would be if the hide was really difficult and had a low number of finds logged. Random smileys may make it seem easier than it really is.

On a related note, are you positive they haven’t found the cache. A lot of people sign the paper log with a different name than their GC user name.

[-cheeto-]

@glorkar wrote:

A lot of people sign the paper log with a different name than their GC user name.

Many people don’t sign the paper log at all…

(I’m not one, just pointing out a known fact)

[labrat_wr]

@-cheeto- wrote:

@glorkar wrote:

A lot of people sign the paper log with a different name than their GC user name.

Many people don’t sign the paper log at all…

(I’m not one, just pointing out a known fact)

some will also use a conglomeration of team initials if caching in a group.
sometimes known as a BAG depending on the number.

Disclaimer : Always answering to a higher power.

[Lostby7]

yes there are all kinds of variables when folks sign in at a cache…or apparently decide not to sign at all…I believe GC says if you want to delete an unsigned log so be it.

Still I saw a person sign two names and the second person was not with him. 🙄

Everyone plays by their own rules and will continue to do so….

[neonride93]

Since I am not a prolific hider, and all my hides are easy 1/1’s I really dont care or know if anyone spoofed a log. However, Peach you have great hides and the few puzzles I have done were pretty cool. So if you have evidence or know for a concrete fact that it was an armchair log. Delete it. Its not fair to those who have found that cache ( do not want to start the puzzle solved debate all over again so PLEASE do not comment on that ). So I would delete it.

[koolma_k]

I actually visited one of my caches yesterday and photo’d the logs, there are names on there that haven’t even posted on GC.. you know they are most likely in it for the fun and that is fine with me.. but, I do prefer at least a little something in my logs, more then only “TFTC” . (Especially when I ask finders to include something extra right in the cache description!!)
I could make my caching so easy if I just plugged my gps into the computer and downloaded my finds from my gps to gc.com, I have an option to “type” in descriptions on my find log in my gps, but really, who wants to arrow through all that out in the field?? I prefer to type in everything later that day reliving the experience. I wonder if that is where the TFTC logs come from… just downloads straight from gps’s.

If a cache is a simple park and go or really has nothing of interest or in hiding style I give the TFTC, quick find.. or something similiar… but the more elaborate the cache set up, the more difficult D or T, or the more interesting cache site gets a much more interesting log from me. Some fun examples:
GC1PQPF
GC1TPZA (April 6th)
GC28K69
there are many more… and I have gotten quite a few emails and messages of appreciation from the cache owners… which also helps promote keeping up with the fun logs. And, even more than that… I can look back over my old logs and relive the experience… it is like an online diary for me… :). Imagine… 10-20-30yrs from now… reading my logs to my grandchildren and letting them know what their parents did when they were kids 🙂 Priceless 🙂
(ok, sorry, babbled long enough!!)

[-cheeto-]

@koolma_k wrote:

I actually visited one of my caches yesterday and photo’d the logs, there are names on there that haven’t even posted on GC.. you know they are most likely in it for the fun and that is fine with me.. but, I do prefer at least a little something in my logs, more then only “TFTC” . (Especially when I ask finders to include something extra right in the cache description!!)
I could make my caching so easy if I just plugged my gps into the computer and downloaded my finds from my gps to gc.com, I have an option to “type” in descriptions on my find log in my gps, but really, who wants to arrow through all that out in the field?? I prefer to type in everything later that day reliving the experience. I wonder if that is where the TFTC logs come from… just downloads straight from gps’s.

If a cache is a simple park and go or really has nothing of interest or in hiding style I give the TFTC, quick find.. or something similiar… but the more elaborate the cache set up, the more difficult D or T, or the more interesting cache site gets a much more interesting log from me. Some fun examples:
GC1PQPF
GC1TPZA (April 6th)
GC28K69
there are many more… and I have gotten quite a few emails and messages of appreciation from the cache owners… which also helps promote keeping up with the fun logs. And, even more than that… I can look back over my old logs and relive the experience… it is like an online diary for me… :). Imagine… 10-20-30yrs from now… reading my logs to my grandchildren and letting them know what their parents did when they were kids 🙂 Priceless 🙂
(ok, sorry, babbled long enough!!)

I believe you are referring to the field notes functionality… Using this to track “Found it’s” is an awesome feature but I would never think to type out anything into it on my Oregon. I just use it to track finds and exact order of finds and ease inserting logs because you can go through a list. I don’t necessarily think this functionality necessarily “leads to” non-expressive logs.

I do believe that smart phones allowing to log a cache “from the field” probably do lead to non-expressive logs for the lazy type. I’ve also seen cacher’s use this well also where they log a quick found and then come back and edit it later so it’s really just about the person and what they want to log.

[Author]

Posts