Filled log books

For all your general chit chat, caching or not.
Post Reply

What should you do with filled log books.

Add some more pages
0
No votes
Put a new book in the cache, leave the old one.
38
72%
Put a new book in the cache, take the old one.
15
28%
 
Total votes: 53

User avatar
Freddo
Posts: 667
Joined: 16 June 03 2:49 pm
Location: South Australia

Filled log books

Post by Freddo » 23 July 06 9:24 pm

A poll to see what I should do with filled log books.

User avatar
CraigRat
850 or more found!!!
850 or more found!!!
Posts: 6984
Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
Twitter: CraigRat
Facebook: http://facebook.com/CraigRat
Location: Launceston, TAS
Contact:

Post by CraigRat » 23 July 06 9:33 pm

In my opinion, the logbook is the heart of the cache... the rest is just temporary stuff...(including the container, after all, they get damaged and replaced over time)

I picked option 2 to reflect this.

User avatar
Grank
Posts: 483
Joined: 15 January 05 1:26 pm
Location: ....

Post by Grank » 23 July 06 9:33 pm

B$%er Fredo. I never thought about what I was doing - I usually grab the old and place it in a display cabinet ane replace it witha new one But maybe I should be leaving the old one in the cache as well ... but in many cases this usually has only applied to micros, so maybe if my etiqette is not corrcet technically due to the size of the cache I may be forgiven.

smerrall
1500 or more caches found
1500 or more caches found
Posts: 58
Joined: 18 January 06 12:08 pm
Location: Cammeray

Post by smerrall » 23 July 06 9:41 pm

As a cache finder, I always carry spare logbooks to add to the cache if the old one is filled or too wet. I've always thought the logbook belonged to the owner of the cache to replace or keep as he chose. It is, after all, the record of all those that took part in the hunt and wanted to share stories of the hunt with the owner.
What I write in the logbook is different to what I log online, as its not possible to leave spoilers in a logbook as subsequent finders must have found the cache in orde to see it.

User avatar
Cached
2500 or more caches found
2500 or more caches found
Posts: 3087
Joined: 24 March 04 4:32 pm
Location: Launceston, Tasmania
Contact:

Post by Cached » 23 July 06 9:45 pm

I think you should take the log, but arrange to have it back to the owner.

Better to change the logbooks than have it later muggled and lose all that history.

LazyLeopard
250 or more caches found
250 or more caches found
Posts: 51
Joined: 09 April 03 4:15 am
Location: UK, and Perth, WA from time to time
Contact:

Post by LazyLeopard » 23 July 06 10:07 pm

I figure if it's not your own cache then leave the old log book there.

If it is your own cache then you may wish to remove the old log book, or not, but if the cache is big enough then it's more interesting for subsequent finders if they can read the old log entries.

User avatar
Shifter Brains
5000 or more caches found
5000 or more caches found
Posts: 124
Joined: 04 September 05 5:57 pm
Location: Gosford

Post by Shifter Brains » 23 July 06 10:21 pm

LazyLeopard wrote:I figure if it's not your own cache then leave the old log book there.

If it is your own cache then you may wish to remove the old log book, or not, but if the cache is big enough then it's more interesting for subsequent finders if they can read the old log entries.
We are of the same opinion. with our own caches it depends on the size of the cache.

president & 1st lady
1250 or more geocaches found
1250 or more geocaches found
Posts: 482
Joined: 17 March 05 9:29 pm
Location: Dubbo, NSW

Post by president & 1st lady » 23 July 06 10:40 pm

LazyLeopard wrote:I figure if it's not your own cache then leave the old log book there.

If it is your own cache then you may wish to remove the old log book, or not, but if the cache is big enough then it's more interesting for subsequent finders if they can read the old log entries.
What he said.

1st lady

User avatar
Cached
2500 or more caches found
2500 or more caches found
Posts: 3087
Joined: 24 March 04 4:32 pm
Location: Launceston, Tasmania
Contact:

Post by Cached » 23 July 06 10:57 pm

rereading what i said before, i was a little quick off the mark,

depending on the location of the cache, the condition of the cache, I would judge each case on its merits.

Pity there isn't some sort of museum to put the old logs in so they can be preserved.

Bunya
Posts: 418
Joined: 10 May 05 5:51 pm
Location: South Australia

Post by Bunya » 24 July 06 11:04 am

president & 1st lady wrote:
LazyLeopard wrote:I figure if it's not your own cache then leave the old log book there.

If it is your own cache then you may wish to remove the old log book, or not, but if the cache is big enough then it's more interesting for subsequent finders if they can read the old log entries.
What he said.

1st lady
What they said :)

So I didn't vote :wink:

User avatar
juzmac
500 or more caches logged
500 or more caches logged
Posts: 220
Joined: 07 December 03 9:33 pm
Location: Tarneit, Victoria
Contact:

Post by juzmac » 24 July 06 3:29 pm

LazyLeopard wrote:I figure if it's not your own cache then leave the old log book there.

If it is your own cache then you may wish to remove the old log book, or not, but if the cache is big enough then it's more interesting for subsequent finders if they can read the old log entries.
Agreed

User avatar
J_&_J
Posts: 1263
Joined: 12 May 05 7:58 pm
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000016368307
Location: Morphett Vale
Contact:

Post by J_&_J » 24 July 06 6:36 pm

I agree that the log book is the heart of the cache, and should be preserved for posterity's sake. One thing that bugs me a bit is reading online that a logbook has been disposed of because it is waterlogged and unuseable. I think that disposal of a log book is up to the cache owner, but at least an attempt made at extracting the previous logs from the pages before throwing all that history away.

Bunya
Posts: 418
Joined: 10 May 05 5:51 pm
Location: South Australia

Post by Bunya » 24 July 06 7:33 pm

J_&_J wrote:I agree that the log book is the heart of the cache, and should be preserved for posterity's sake. One thing that bugs me a bit is reading online that a logbook has been disposed of because it is waterlogged and unuseable. I think that disposal of a log book is up to the cache owner, but at least an attempt made at extracting the previous logs from the pages before throwing all that history away.
IÂ’ve only faced this question twice in practice.

Firstly was when I replaced a damaged cache box (which happened to be FreddoÂ’s!) and found the log book was both full and damaged.
I put a new one in but didnÂ’t think twice before leaving the old one there. :)

The second time I found the book in one of my own caches was wet and mouldy.
I did remove it when I put in a new one because the cache was too small for both of them plus swaps.
However the main thing I wondered was this: should I post photos of the log pages from the old book?
Do finders think that their log entries as something that only the cache owner and other finders should see?
I may be worrying about something quite inconsequential but I didnÂ’t want to upset anyone so I didnÂ’t post the photos. :?

zigolphin
150 or more caches found
150 or more caches found
Posts: 26
Joined: 13 August 05 10:08 pm
Location: perth

Post by zigolphin » 24 July 06 9:56 pm

if it isnt my cache i would let them know in my log or if i know them personally i would take it with me, but if my cache had a full log i would take it and scan all the logs and post the pics on the cache page for all to see the prevoius finders logs if they wanted too.

Post Reply