Whether or not the numbers are relevant shouldn’t have a part in the
conversation, even though the numbers are directly affected.  Nobody said
this was a mathematical question, but rather an ethics question initiated
by someone in the community concerned about the issue.  Why should there
be anger for merely posing the question?  The Geocaching community is a
self-policing one, as stated in an e-mail to me by the Geocaching.com
admins (specifically, hydee).  Therefore, a question regarding the ethics
of a particular decision is without a doubt, relevant.

This has been addressed from both sides of the proverbial fence, which is
healthy in such a discussion.  As a cache owner, I would delete false
logs, which is why I checked Stasis after the 100+ find day by a team
months ago.  I checked because as the cache owner, I will not allow finds
that weren’t.  Am I concerned about the numbers in this case?  Nope. 
Instead, I’m concerned about the legitimate logs of a cache I took the
time to design/implement.  As a cacher, it’s my job, as well as everyone
else’s to help police the community we are all a part of, at least to an
extent that doesn’t border unreasonable (i.e., following a cacher to make
sure they’re properly finding caches).  Discussing volatile issues is one
way of doing so.  There is a chance that an offending party might be
reading the listserv, but to this I say:  You can’t please everyone all
the time.  If they are offended, maybe it’s their conscience speaking, or
perhaps the fact that they are going to renegade their caching life, and
do whatever the hell they want to without regard for how the community as
a whole feels…kind of like the federal government.

Brian
Team A.I.

> I am finally going to speak up,
> The ethical question only comes about because people are too worried
> about the stupid numbers and not the actual enjoyment of finding the
> cache.  I admit I was one of those, but if you don't look at the
> numbers, does it really matter whether or not you find the cache.  I can
> be a challenge on ones that are very difficult to reach or to grab due
> to high traffic or difficulty where it takes you three or four times to
> sign the log.  I agree the DNF should be left in tact and quit worrying
> about the numbers and just enjoy the journey.
>
>
> recovering GEOholic
>
> Tres Hombres
> Denny
>
>   _____
>
> From: az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com
> [mailto:az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of
> SSpackeen@aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:34 PM
> To: listserv@azgeocaching.com
> Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] If It's Not a Find, What Is It Then?
>
>
> I'm new to this (chatty) group, having only found it a couple of weeks
> ago, and this ethical question is amusing.
>
> DNF's should be left intact.  Subsequent successes should be logged but
> previous DNFs should remain.
>
> I log all DNFs as they occur.  If I find the right spot but encounter a
> specific problem (lost or destroyed cache, no log book, missing
> identifiers, etc.) that prevents me from claiming a find, I will just
> post a note in this case wait for a response.
>
> Several weeks ago I found a spot and I found the piece of wood that was
> supposed to direct me to the second stage.  The writing on the wood was
> washed-out, so this was not really a DNF.  I posted a note and the owner
> has not responded, so I haven't returned either.
>
>
> In a message dated 12/9/2004 3:13:49 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
> scott@myblueheaven.com writes:
>
> At 06:09 AM 12/8/2004, you wrote:
>>This is my log from "AurorArborealis", which you just finished.  It
>> started out as a DNF and became a found log, while still retaining the
>> history of the cache.
>>
>>I agree with your point of view about not erasing logs 100%  I just
>> handle  it a little differently, and if a cache owner wanted me to have
>> my find  and my DNF on his page, I'd cheerfully comply.
>>
>
> I think you handled that just fine.  What I have seen a lot of people do
> is  completely wipe out their DNF or Note log and replace it with the
> find one  once they did find it.  I think that both logs should stay in
> place.
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv@azgeocaching.com
> To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
> http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
> Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> http://www.azgeocaching.com
>
>
>