Return to Project-GC

Welcome to Project-GC Q&A. Ask questions and get answers from other Project-GC users.

If you get a good answer, click the checkbox on the left to select it as the best answer.

Upvote answers or questions that have helped you.

If you don't get clear answers, edit your question to make it clearer.

Group logging under common nick

+2 votes
254 views
What do you think about group logs - I mean group of people go for hunt and makes one common nick for logging (in most cases names shortcut etc.) to be quicker. Sometimes powertrail owners allow this due space saving in logbook and then people from that group log individually on gc.com. But I know about cases where geocachers make own shorten nick and just tells cache owners this are we, who loggend so.
In my opinion is this way of logging at least discutable as geocaching rules says that geocacher should left his/her signature in logbook and then online on gc.com...
asked Jan 7, 2017 in Miscellaneous by drobec (4,130 points)
No proble. As long it is explained in the online logs, fo me it's o.k.

12 Answers

+4 votes
I don't mind if people do this and I've done it myself occasionally (usually when I'm with a group of cachers on a trip logging lots of caches on the same day and we don't want to keep writing a whole list of long names repeatedly). I try to state in my log what we actually logged as, if it's not a complete list of names.
answered Jan 7, 2017 by pinkunicorn (Moderator) (125,360 points)
+6 votes
I've done this when caching as a group and had this done on my caches as well. No issues at all with it from a cache owner point of view as it saves space in the logs, and as a finder I'll always say in my online log what the physical log was signed as. If you've got a decent sized group of people all caching together, then signing everything individually is going to add significant amounts of time onto every find!
answered Jan 8, 2017 by Molemon (1,530 points)
+2 votes
I have no problem with a group log in the log book as long as it is explained in the logs online. Sometimes its necessary like in nano caches.
answered Jan 8, 2017 by NSCR (4,540 points)
+2 votes
My point of view is it isn't a problème if there is paper for that ... if there is lutter paper i prefere  use team name like even name for the day of the even ...
However, the owner answer there autorisation
answered Jan 12, 2017 by Chup'a (11,130 points)
+2 votes
I agree with pinkunicorn and Molemon - when on tour as a group we do this as well understanding the online log clarifies what we did. (So far it did not happen to me that any one of our group objected to saying who actually participated ie to give a full list of nicks.) As pointed out already this not only saves room in the logbooks (we usually use only a single space even with 4 or 5 of us) but also reduces the time needed to log and therefore also the risk to get spotted by muggles.
answered Jan 12, 2017 by Domino_67 (5,890 points)
+3 votes
No problem as long as is traceable who has logged where and when
answered Jan 13, 2017 by Sportsofa (2,290 points)
+5 votes
We have no problem with this in any of our owned caches, especially if the log is small and narrow. Most teams let you know in their logs that they are together, and if the weather is wet, the least time the log stays open to the elements, the better its survival (if it is not a waterproof paper type). We sometimes form parts of teams, but we always write full names if the logbook is big enough, relying only on an acronym if it is a micro log.
answered Jan 13, 2017 by GCZ Team (16,670 points)
+3 votes
To answer, as others, it's not a problem and can even be a good thing for the log durability when big groups found a cache.

But, for going farther, it should be a great idea if groundspeak permitted to create "Team Account" which merged datas from GC personnals accounts and allowed real team logging. Of course, it's probably out of the GS projects...

(Thinking... I wonder if this concept could be use on Project-GC... not for logging but to create "Team Stat Pages"...)
answered Jan 13, 2017 by DaneteYaourth (2,970 points)
+2 votes

I'm not sure if it matters how the log is signed as long as it's signed and you were present. Do we then state that each individual must sign there own name on every cache?

answered Jan 13, 2017 by Mike Fitz (4,440 points)
+1 vote
For my caches I don't mind it as long as every person claiming the find was actually at the cache at the time of the group log.
answered Dec 5, 2017 by DARKSIDEDAN (3,630 points)
+1 vote
For physical caches, as long as it's clearly indicated what group name cachers have used, I'm fine with it.  I don't have any high terrain caches anymore, so it's not a question of one person climbing a tree to sign for a group.  If I did, I would feel differently for that cache.

For earthcaches, the whole point is to teach (and learn) an earth science lesson.  If a group stops by and only one person submits answers, I have to wonder how much learning went on, but I still allow it.

I typically don't cache with more than one or two other cachers, so I don't bother signing logs with a group name.  Our usual caching buddies BWB3 have a 4-character name too, so it's easy to squeeze us on the log.
answered Dec 5, 2017 by hzoi (7,400 points)
0 votes
I have no problem with this in any of the caches I own, especially if the log is small and narrow. Most teams let you know in their logs that they are together. It dose not matter how the log is signed as long as it's signed and you were present when it was being signed.
answered Dec 10, 2017 by DARKSIDEDAN (3,630 points)
...