The discrepancy between the log entries and the finds online

[garnercx]

As I mentioned in this post about wasting log book pages, I recently changed out the log book from my Melbourne CBD cache Welcome to Melbourne. It's kinda cool that it's happening so fast (with 179 finds since early Nov 2010).

I must say though, that the discrepancies between what's in the log book and what's logged at geocaching.com is quite amazing. I did the Good Cache Owner Thing™ and reconciled the log book with the on-line "found" entries. Previous log entries for other caches I have reconciled will have maybe one issue in 50+ entries over several months. However my reconciliation showed some pretty bad stats for this cache:

• There are 188 entries in the log book, of which only 166 entries match the on-line logs.
• There are an additional 22 entries in the log book that don't match any on-line log entry.
• There are 179 entries on-line of which 14 don't have a match in the log book.

Now I know that some of the log book entries might match some of the 14 un-accounted on-line entries due to people using a different name for the log and their on-line account, but still, that seems like quite a lot for a cache with only 179 finds.

What has been the experience of other people? I've not had this in any other cache before. Is this just a side effect of such a high traffic cache, or is this fairly typical?

[Philipp]

Hmmm

There are 188 entries in the log book, of which only 166 entries match the on-line logs.

So there are 166 valid online-logs

There are 179 entries on-line of which 14 don't have a match in the log book.

Shouldn't 179 minus 14 match the 166 above?

just curious ...

Anyway - especially with high-traffic caches I'd expect some fake-logs since the chance to get away with it is higher.

[caughtatwork]

I have never reconciled the log book with the online logs

[Big Matt and Shell]

Anyway - especially with high-traffic caches I'd expect some fake-logs since the chance to get away with it is higher.

That certainly hasn't been the case with the Remembrance Driveway Series. I have yet to have a false log for any of the logs I have replaced.

I have often checked my actual logs when I replaced then against the online version, after all we all agree to do it.

[Zalgariath]

http://coord.info/GC2ATAA... My Poison Cache I found a number of people who logged it in the Book... but not online None of my logs have filled up as I tend to put big books in and none of my caches have 100 finds yet so I havent checked the rest.

[fluffyfish]

I was uber excited when I went to do maintenance on my GCA cache which has only had two on-line logs and found that someone else had written in the book but not on-line. 50% increase! WOOT!

[aussie-O's]

Sometimes, when I find a cache, I get to see the previous logs, so I log if X has made an online log, but not on the paper log, I just note it in my online log.

[Yurt]

You often find logbook logs that aren't online. No problem with that. Often they are muggle finds or people who have geocached but don't do it much any more. Apparently there are experienced cachers who no longer log online at all. (I must have read that here.)

As for online logs not matching the logbook well you know what to do...

What about double logs online? I wonder if they double logged in the logbook too?

[blossom*]

Aaah, who cares. As long as we all have fun, just go with it

[team waldron]

And you need to allow for the increasing number of people who forget a pen and post a photo of the cache online.

(Most people dont mention the pencil is missing because they have a pen)

[Richary]

And you need to allow for the increasing number of people who forget a pen and post a photo of the cache online.

If I was reconciling a logbook with online logs (something I have only done once because the container went missing but the logbook was still there in it's ziplock so I retrieved it for repair) I would expect that if someone couldn't sign the book for lack of pen/wet logbook etc then they would note that in the online log. I've done that in the past if for whatever reason I couldn't sign it.

As a CO I would happily accept that. Luckily I haven't had any obviously bogus logs on my caches. But if I found consistently someone was logging all my caches and not writing in the book, I would want to know why.

[noikmeister]

Sometimes, when I find a cache, I get to see the previous logs, so I log if X has made an online log, but not on the paper log, I just note it in my online log.

I'm a dobber too. Especially on puzzles. After I've done the work to solve it, it s**ts me off that someone claims it without doing the work. I usually dob directly to the owner, rather than in my log.

[Mr Router]

Aaah, who cares. As long as we all have fun, just go with it

Bravo

[Alansee]

I have recently come across a couple of reasons why logs won't reconcile -

- the finders don't have a pen (despite it being in the GC requirements to mark the log, and being very clearly stated in the cache page). I had one interesting communication with a finder I contacted who clearly wasn't interested in carrying a pen/cil.

- they were with someone else at the time who did sign the log (and could substantiate it).

Ultimately I agree - its a game so don't stress over it - but it is interesting.

[the farmers 5]

I have recently come across a couple of reasons why logs won't reconcile -

- the finders don't have a pen (despite it being in the GC requirements to mark the log, and being very clearly stated in the cache page). I had one interesting communication with a finder I contacted who clearly wasn't interested in carrying a pen/cil.

- they were with someone else at the time who did sign the log (and could substantiate it).

Ultimately I agree - its a game so don't stress over it - but it is interesting.

We have come across some logs that dont tally up in log books too.
When we have done some maintenance on our own caches, we often check the last 20 to just see if all are correct. Every time we thought we found an 'online log find " , and no comment in the book it was usually this case.
1/ Alot of our caches are 200ml or 400ml and either have a full notebook with the perforated page top around the metal binders or the ' cut in half " book for the smaller 200ml size.
On checking , every time it was the wear and tear of use, that had seen one of the pages vanished and probaly thrown out and we new this was the case as there would be 4 penciled logs missing in a row.
We have never once found a dishonest find online and no log in the book on one of our caches.
99.9 % of cachers are very honest. As Alansee said, its just a game.