+two left feet Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 I am asking about the mechanics of the system NOT the ethics or philosophy. So I just want to know if you post a found on a cache more than once if the software counts both. I have adopted a cache and am planning to rework it into a new cache and want to know if those who found it before can log it again and get credit for it. The option is to archive it and make a new one, but this is an old cache and I would like to keep it's history intact.
+Cardinal Red Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 (edited) Yes. A cache can be logged as often as the owner and the finders conscience will allow. With an incremented find count every time. Edited April 20, 2006 by Cardinal Red
+Isonzo Karst Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Yes. But note that if you keep the original GC number most folks will NOT hunt it again, because they'll have it as already found.
+two left feet Posted April 20, 2006 Author Posted April 20, 2006 Yes. But note that if you keep the original GC number most folks will NOT hunt it again, because they'll have it as already found. Yes, I thought about that too. A possible work around could be to place a new cache nearby and add a note telling them to find this one again. Or, place some information in this cache that would be required to find the new cache. But you are correct, the cache does miss out on getting the attention of being a NEW listing for the FTF hounds, and for those (like me) who download PQ without our found caches.
+The Leprechauns Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Why did you adopt a cache, only to turn around and create a new cache? I would have let the old hider keep their count intact in the "hidden" column, worked to get the old cache archived, then hidden my "reworked" cache nearby using a new cache page. Everyone would see the new cache as new, because it is. It sounds like you wanted to adopt a spot, not a geocache.
Jeremy Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 I also don't understand why you adopted this cache. If you just wanted to create a new one, ask the previous owner to archive it so you can create your own. Problem solved.
+two left feet Posted April 20, 2006 Author Posted April 20, 2006 I also don't understand why you adopted this cache. If you just wanted to create a new one, ask the previous owner to archive it so you can create your own. Problem solved. There is a lot I like about the existing cache. Part of the reason I adopted it is that the placer is out of state and the cache needs some attention. I thought about replacing the container at the start point and hiding it differently. So it is the same basic cache but not identical. I assume if it stays the same that it has always been that nobody would be interested in finding it again. Major objective is to preserve the history of this cache which has been there since 2002 but still attract people back to it. I am not set on any one way to do that. I am open to other suggestions also, but prefer not to archive it just to get a new one listed in the same place. There is enough space for me to place a new cache nearby and still be .1 mi away. So I don't have a compelling reason to just take this location. Maybe I should have posed the question differently to be more broad and get ideas. How do I fix up an existing cache and attract previous finders back to it? Or is that possible? Can it be done? Should it be done? If none of this is possible I will just replace worn out parts, clean it up and let it go. It will still be a cool cache.
+Semper Questio Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 Major objective is to preserve the history of this cache which has been there since 2002 but still attract people back to it. As previous posters have pointed out, that ain't likely to happen ubless folks jsut happen to stumble upon the change when looking over previously found caches. How do I fix up an existing cache and attract previous finders back to it? Or is that possible? Can it be done? Should it be done? IMO you are choices are either archive it and start a new (and significantly different) one or rebuild it as is for new cachers to find. Don't worry about previous finders coming back. If the cache has been there a while and has been popular for that time, I'd vote for fixing it and keeping it going.
Jeremy Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 I also don't understand why you adopted this cache. If you just wanted to create a new one, ask the previous owner to archive it so you can create your own. Problem solved. Major objective is to preserve the history of this cache which has been there since 2002 but still attract people back to it. You could easily preserve the history by creating a new cache listing and linking to the older, archived listing. This would accomplish what you want. Even the original geocache now just has a plaque, with a nearby unoriginal cache which is more of a traditional.
+Wander Lost Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 People will go back to a cache multiple times if the cache is good enough to warrant multiple trips. I've done one local cache three times now. What's signifigant is that this cache requires a day trip outside my normal caching area and it's a much longer walk than my out of shape old body is happy with. (It kills my knees every time) But everytime we have visiting cachers in town that is the first place we suggest taking them and I'd go again tomorrow if I could. I've only logged that cache as found once, I've logged notes with pictures the other two trips. I don't need an extra smilie to bring me back to that cache. If this cache has that same effect on people, they'll want to come back once you clean it up a bit.
+tozainamboku Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 You can log a find on a cache more than once and get credit for each find. You as the cache owner can post that you've made changes to the cache and welcome previous finders back. The system will not stop them from logging a find a second time. However, some people, whom I shall call puritans, believe that logging a find on the same GC number more than once is a mortal sin. They will not only not log the cache a second time but will not look kindly on those that do. They will not think much of the cache owner who updated a cache for some reason and invited people to revisit and log a second find. Such a cache owner is in league with Satan. It would be better for your soul to archive the original cache and create a new cache. Mention the original cache on the new cache page to let finders know of the history.
+TheAprilFools Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 However, some people, whom I shall call puritans, believe that logging a find on the same GC number more than once is a mortal sin. They will not only not log the cache a second time but will not look kindly on those that do. They will not think much of the cache owner who updated a cache for some reason and invited people to revisit and log a second find. Such a cache owner is in league with Satan. To say that someone has logged the same cache twice has committed a mortal sin and is in league with Satan grossly understates the seriousness of this offence. (Sorry I could not resist)
+budd-rdc Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 There's an alternate solution for trying to make people visit your adopted cache - put Geocoins and Travel Bugs in it. I appreciate an old cache hidden the way it was originally hidden. Nice bonus is to have the original log book still inside. I really enjoyed this when I went caching out of state. If history is the main objective, preserve the hide style and upgrade the container only if it's worn, and scrap the "new hide, increase find count" idea. I've visited caches more than once on many occasions without increasing my find count - maybe people who truly appreciate the location and the history don't need to be bribed.
Recommended Posts