Move/fix/modify an existing cache or create a new hide?

[+kingsting]

Just wondering what people's thoughts on this are.

 

If you have an old cache out there and want to try something new at that location, would it be better to change the cache and writeup or to make it a new hide?

Edited January 5, 2008 by kingsting

[+robert]

Is the "feel" of the cache changing?

 

Is it a small container at the roots of a tree but now going to a large, camo'd container suspended by a rope of some sort a few feet away?

 

If you're just replacing a container (even changing in size), I'd probably keep it the same. Anything changing the feel of the cache itself I'd probably go with a new one, but I'd need more info on what you're thinking before giving a better answer.

[+Miragee]

If you are going to significantly change the type of container and the location, you should Archive the old cache and submit a new one. However, keeping older caches alive is a cool thing to do, IMHO.

[+trainlove]

If it's different enough you should say something like "Refinds are allowed on this cache".

 

But unless you change it drastically, most people who have already found it will never revisit your cache page to see that statement.

[+Trucker Lee]

I concur with Robert, post #2.

[+StarBrand]

New container and new location (more than 50 feet or so) is a whole new cache with a new GC number. Archive the old and start fresh.

[+Glenn]

If it's different enough you should say something like "Refinds are allowed on this cache".

 

But unless you change it drastically, most people who have already found it will never revisit your cache page to see that statement.

 

Agreed. If the cache is different enough for you to allow multiple logs on the cache page then it is better to archive the old cache page and publish a new cache page. This makes sense in a number of different way. Like trainlove said it lets the geocachers that have already found the old cache know that there is a new cache there now. It also allows someone who has found the old cache but hasn't logged it yet log the old cache and it allows them to find and log the new cache when they do that without everyone getting confused if they are making a late log on the old cache or a current log on the new cache. It also keeps the number truthers from picking apart someones finds and finding what looks like the same cache logged more than once.

[Mag Magician]

I have to agree with the consensus that archiving old and starting new would alleviate any questions about double logging. If your new cache is different enough in construction and location, archive the old, start new. We have archived a few this fall in favour of making new beginnings in the spring for a great location that has been compromised.