What do I do....

[+gingerbreadmen]

I have found a new cache, the owners have replaced an archived one with a new name, when I found it I realised it was in exactly the same place as the original (which I also found). Do I mark it as a find which I am reluctant to do (as I have already been there) or, if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

[SlytherinAlex]

I have found a new cache, the owners have replaced an archived one with a new name, when I found it I realised it was in exactly the same place as the original (which I also found). Do I mark it as a find which I am reluctant to do (as I have already been there) or, if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

But when you went out looking for it, you didn't KNOW that is was the same cache. So you used your GPSr and FOUND it. Legit find in my opinion.

 

Log it, and move on.

[+Malpas Wanderer]

I have found a new cache, the owners have replaced an archived one with a new name, when I found it I realised it was in exactly the same place as the original (which I also found). Do I mark it as a find which I am reluctant to do (as I have already been there) or, if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

 

Its a different cache.

 

Log it.

[Deego]

Yep log it and get it off your list.

 

You could delete the archived one if you feel really guilty, but I wouldnt

[NickPick]

It's a new cache, it's just that the owners decided to use the same location - they intended for you to log it.

[+stora]

I have found a new cache, the owners have replaced an archived one with a new name, when I found it I realised it was in exactly the same place as the original (which I also found). Do I mark it as a find which I am reluctant to do (as I have already been there) or, if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

 

Its a new cache log it.

[Deego]

if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

 

On the Top right of the cache page there is a "ignore listing" This will make it disappear, but its 5-0 for logging it

[+The Mars Bars]

Wuz there a coin in it per chance?

[+Simply Paul]

I've one local to me that's just the same sort of thing. Many folks who found the original cache have been back to get the new one (it's within feet of the first one) and logging it as a find, so if you do the same thing, you're not going to stand out.

 

New cache = New find = New Found log. Easy.

[+gingerbreadmen]

Wuz there a coin in it per chance?

 

ROFLOL...Nope, no coin, but it did have the original log book and my calling card from the first time, and... erm ... how shall I explain this. When I arrived at the cache I noticed a bloke in cycling gear looking at a nearby landmark. Now this cache is about 60 feet or so away from said landmark in woodland, I pretended not to have seen him due to the trees and bushes and leant on a wall near (that's near, not part of) the cache to pretend to be taking in the view. I assumed he'd seen me. After about a minute I looked back to find him in the process of lowering his shorts to err, well, put it this way, he didn't look like a bear so what was he doing s*****g in the woods?

Maybe this could start a new thread, "What I saw but didn't want to whilst out caching".

Think I'll log the find and try to put it all out of my mind.

[+dogastus]

what was he doing s*****g in the woods?

 

AFAIK there isn't an official GC cache type for that, so don't think you can log it

[+housefamily]

It's lucky he wasn't logging the cache.....

 

I'll get my coat...

[+The Bolas Heathens]

Log it as a find - I would.

[+currykev]

I have found a new cache, the owners have replaced an archived one with a new name, when I found it I realised it was in exactly the same place as the original (which I also found). Do I mark it as a find which I am reluctant to do (as I have already been there) or, if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

 

Message to Gingerbread men..

Your avatar scares me. Are you a 2006 version of the Cybermen? (but more biscuity!!)

[NickPick]

Message to Gingerbread men..

Your avatar scares me. Are you a 2006 version of the Cybermen? (but more biscuity!!)

 

 

You will be upgraded. With gumdrop buttons!

[Vanya1]

LOL You lot have had me in stitches.

 

[+gingerbreadmen]

Message to Gingerbread men..

Your avatar scares me. Are you a 2006 version of the Cybermen? (but more biscuity!!)

 

 

Much much scarier in real life.... but that's enough about Mrs gingerbreadman , I'm dead nice me.

[+dysdera]

Nah..... don't log it that would be cheating LOL

[+Family Hodge]

I was going to say that i would log it as a new find, but im not sure now as you say it has the old log book and even your calling card from your last visit.So has the owner just changed the name.

[+Brenin Tegeingl]

Log it as a find, you went out and found what you genuinely thought was a new cache. Put in your log that on reaching the location and finding the container you found out it was a re named cache, which you were not aware of when setting out. That covers both sides of the argument for you.

[+currykev]

Message to Gingerbread men..

Your avatar scares me. Are you a 2006 version of the Cybermen? (but more biscuity!!)

 

 

Much much scarier in real life.... but that's enough about Mrs gingerbreadman , I'm dead nice me.

 

Phew..now I can relax!.............................or can I???

[+currykev]

I have found a new cache, the owners have replaced an archived one with a new name, when I found it I realised it was in exactly the same place as the original (which I also found). Do I mark it as a find which I am reluctant to do (as I have already been there) or, if not, how do I get the log off my nearest to home list as it will drive me nuts seeing it pop up all the time.

 

So if anyone wants to "beef up" their numbers...all I need to do is archive all my caches,wait a while,then relist them under a new name.And I didn't even have to leave my house.

[+John Stead]

I still don't understand why this was made a new cache - surely it could have been explained to the owner that coordinates can be corrected which seems to have been the only problem. Now in spite of all the opinions to log it as a new find I am struggling with my conscience as to whether I should.

[+Alibags]

I had to change a cache of mine, after a couple of muggling incidents. I was just going to change the co-ords and then invite previous finders to re-log it, but it was suggested to me to archive the original cache and create a brand new cache. The argument was that people would not see that I had written that note, unless the cache was on their watchlist and by creating a new cache, they would get a notification, or else see a new cache without a tick against it when they ran queries. A new cache wwould supposedly excite them more than the chance to log an old one.

 

I decided to go with this suggestion and did release a replacement cache. The location was not a million miles from the original so I changed the cache from a trad to a multi (actually offset), with the addition of a numbers gathering exercise at the start point, and as the old one was muggled, all the contents were new.

 

I have done the local cache that I think SP is alluding to. The funny thing is that the replacement was a multi. I followed the waypoints along the trail, gathering in the numbers (and as we are not naming the cache, I can say that I found it hilarious that all the numbers you gather at different locations are all the same!). I did the maths, I followed the needle and came to... a stragelay familiar spot! I think the ammo box shaped depression from thje previous muggled cache was even still there. Did I log the new cache? Yes, I did... I didn't know the location was going to be the same until I arrived at ground zero and it was a separate GC number, so a different cache.