Re: [Az-Geocaching] RE: people "Finding" a cache that wasn't…

Top Page
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Scott Wood
Date:  
To: listserv
New-Topics: [Az-Geocaching] Galileo
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] RE: people "Finding" a cache that wasn't there
At 10:06 AM 12/7/2004, you wrote:

>It does mention that the Taking and Leaving part of the rules are optional
>elsewhere in the FAQ, but nowhere does it say that signing the log is
>optional. Signing the log book is the only reward that the people placing
>the caches get. If it wasn't for the log book, the cache would just be
>trash in the desert that people keep looking for.


You bring up a good point, but there is still something wrong with that. I
am sure that most of us have found real caches, not virtuals, that don't
have a log book. To claim the find, you email some specific information
about something that was in the container. In this case, you are not
signing a log book, and if it is as you claim, the only hard and fast rule
of geocachine, is that cache then not a valid cache?