Steve,
 
If you remember we correctly gave the answer to #5 but blew an earlier question...to bad I never learned to count...or write things down correctly.  (more probably I was distracted in what I was writing down as I was trying to pull my 2 y.o. out of the nearby water elements). 
 
Although I did say that I thought I counted the "correct" answer but I wrote down ____ I still got it wrong.  I could have easily corrected it since I knew intuitively what was the correct answer.  Maybe the difference is that I let you know that if you deemed the answer to be incorrect that I would delete the log myself and go get it some other time.  You told me that you knew that I visited the area, especially since I got #5 right and that it would be ok.
 
In the end it is your cache, and you can enforce or relax the "rules" for it any way you would like.  For me personally I wouldn't log a cache as a find if either didn't look for or just didn't find the answer for something which is what you describe is happening. 
 
For me personally, I don't really prescribe to the whole deleting finds issue.  One reason is that you are really not going to change the outlook of a person that logs a bogus find.  An example:  At the very beginning of my caching, I hid a cache that was a 4 part cache.  When I wrote down the numbers for the coordinates, I transposed one of them (really dyslexic person here).  It was reported to me.  At the time, I didn't know you could temporarily disable a cache, and trying to do the right thing (because I thought people would go out there and waste their time looking for it) I temporarily posted the coordinates for each of the stages (including the final cache coordinates) until I could get out there and straighten it out.  Now I gave those coordinates thinking that anyone finding the cache would do what I would have done, which was find each of the stages before going on to the next.  Well, it turns out that isn't what happened.  The team that found it just went to the final cache location.  Now let me get to the point.  I got uppity and anal, and threatened to delete their find.  (What a jerk).  I was WRONG.  It's just a GAME.  I GAVE them the coordinates.  I learned a valuable lesson at that time.
 
From that point on I have always tried to avoid playing CACHE COP and take people a face value.  If they forget or decide not to sign a log book ok that's their choice or mistake...everyone makes them.  If they make a bogus "find", or lie, or cheat, in the end, it really doesn't hurt me, and my deleting their log is not going to change their character.  In fact, Steve, I think you and I and TM & DV have learned that you can't change the outlook of people either, and you end up with the Tierra Blunder Sissy Cache...although I must say it is always nice to have something named after you...:) 
 
I can say that I have retrieved logs from some of our caches, and gone back and verified on line logs to them.  I have found some discrepencies...in fact on a couple of occasions the logs that were missing are from teams who are currently in the top 10 of the AZ stat page.  I have NO DOUBT that these individual teams visited the cache, however there is not an entry in the log to prove it.  Whatever the reason they did not log them.  Did I delete them?  No.
 
So Steve it's your choice.  In the end ask yourself if you gain anything by deleting an on line find.  This cache is a great one and is one that I would hate to see go by the new rules.  The true cachers will not log the find if they have not found the answer you are seeking.  The ones who log the finds without the correct information are the ones that are losing...they don't share in the satisfaction of the true find which is the spirit in which it was inteded to be found.  If someone is satisfied with making an incomplete find, you are never going to change their outlook.
 
Joe
TeamBlunder
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Team Tierra Buena
To: Arizona Geocaching
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 11:35 AM
Subject: [Az-Geocaching] Virtually Confounded

Many of you have done our “Informal Introductions” virtual cache (GCAB5C). For those of you that haven’t, it’s a very kid-friendly hunt that requires the seeker to provide us with the answers to five questions. Finding the answer to the fifth question is a little bit trickier than most virtuals, so we rated the difficulty at 2.

I’ve become surprised by the number of people who have sent emails that contain either an incorrect answer to question 5, or an admission that they were unable to find that answer; these cachers then log as “finds”. The cache page states “emailing incomplete or incorrect answers may result in our deleting your log entry without notice”.

On one hand, the purpose of answering the questions to a virtual is to prove that the seeker was in the right place. So if you get four out of five correct, it’s pretty obvious the seeker was there. And we did let one guy skate because he was visiting from out-of-state, and had already left town when he emailed his answers. But many people have returned a second time after being told that they got it wrong, and they were then able to find the correct answer.

So whaddya think? Should we strictly enforce our own rule out of fairness to those who have gotten all the right answers or have gone back to finish the hunt, or should we say “it’s only a game” and let them take the credit for the find? I should point out that finding the correct answer to the fifth question brings the seeker to a particularly clever aspect of this entire area, which is why we set the question we did.

We talked about using only that question instead of five, but we followed Highpointer’s approach to his museum cache series, where finding the answers to all the questions takes the seeker around the entire area, which is what we want them to do. We don’t want them just running in, finding one answer and taking off for the next cache.

We’ve also discussed raising the difficulty level to 3 and/or modifying the cache description to state specifically that the correct answer to question 5 must be submitted, but I’m afraid that making any modifications to the cache page might result in it’s being re-evaluated under the current guidelines for virtuals, and then we might be forced to archive a cache that always gets positive log comments.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, but please avoid posting anything that might be a spoiler. TIA.

Steve

Team Tierra Buena