The website geocaching.com provides 3 options for logging visits. 

If you fail to find it, you can log it as a failure or just log it under
"Other"
- I do think it important you let people know via the logging system
what the
outcome of your visit is. There have been a few occasions where I have
visited
a cache site - but due to time constraints - I felt I did not give
myself 
sufficient time to do a proper search - I would file that under "Other"
- if 
I bothered to report anything at all. This is especially true if I
decide to 
return the following day.

I would like to see more use of the "Other" category - as a means of
discussing 
particular caches. Perhaps someone is familiar with an area and can give
commments that 
may be helpful to cache-seekers. 

For multi-part caches - I log a Find only if I get the final cache.

If I visit a cache twice (as I did with Canal Cache) - my second log is
not
a "Find" but "Other". I don't see the point of logging multiple Finds
against
the same cache - unless it is a moving cache. If one is trying to
inflate their
stats - then they are fooling noone except themselves.

That said - I don't really care what other people do. This whole system
that is in
place is open to abuse/misuse - if one chooses to go that path. We
cannot allow
ourselves to get upset about things like that - there is nothing you can
do - just
enjoy geocaching as a personal pursuit of satisfaction derived from
finding caches
in places you've never been to.


Teri Hall wrote:
> 
> Mike's question posted on 9/13/01:  A while back the subject of finding your
> own cache was brought up.  In a reply I made, I brought up people finding
> the same cache more than once and logging it as another find instead of a
> note.  What's the general feeling about this in the group?
> 

-- 
David Chapman