FTF, again?

[+MaplessInSeattle]

I have a question regarding FTFs

 

I placed a cache, it was destroyed shortly after placement.(less than 48 hours)

 

I have since changed the size, and the location of the cache.

Since it is a new cache technically, couldn't the next to find claim FTF?

 

No one has found the new cache, I wanted to say that FTF is up for grabs, since technically, it's a new cache, new log, new location, but the same name as the old one, and the same gc#.

 

What is the general consensus on this?

 

Has anyone been in this situation, what did you do if you were?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

It's your cache, your decision!

 

If it's in a different place then I say it's a new find.

[knowschad]

If you changed the size and the location, you should have created a completely new cache with a new waypoint. I'm surprised that your local reviewer allowed you to NOT do that. Its a new cache. First one to find it is FTF.

[+TrailGators]

I agree with the others that you should have just made it into a new cache.

[+MaplessInSeattle]

I agree with the others that you should have just made it into a new cache.

I hated the idea of an archived cache, when all of the rest of it made sense. It's less than 100ft from old location, but it's a new size as well.

[+joranda]

We had a cache that they did the same thing here, changed the cache type and location a little but it keep the same GC number.

[+Isonzo Karst]

couldn't the next to find claim FTF?

 

Anybody can "claim" FTF. Whether they really are FTF is another question. If you really wanted your cache to have a new FTF, you should have archived the original and submitted a new cache. Although a move of only 100 feet, I can certainly see just updating the description.

 

Personally, I wouldn't claim FTF on a cache with a previous finder, regardless of a change in coords or container. Caches get shifted and replaced all the time.

 

I've moved and replaced many of mine. If someone wants to make a FTF claim on being the first to sign the new log in the new container, fine by me.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Like everything else to do with geocaching, each individual plays by their own rules. I would never consider this an FTF for myself, but wouldn't care if someone else did.

 

In my opinion, the real challenge of an FTF is the race once the cache has been published. Because you re-used the cache GC#, then nothing new got published.

[+Jeep_Dog]

couldn't the next to find claim FTF?

 

Personally, I wouldn't claim FTF on a cache with a previous finder, regardless of a change in coords or container. Caches get shifted and replaced all the time.

 

I've moved and replaced many of mine. If someone wants to make a FTF claim on being the first to sign the new log in the new container, fine by me.

 

Second that motion.

 

I wouldn't claim an FTF on a previously found cache. For me, I keep track of caches where I was indeed the first to find it - without previous hiders. If someone else claims an 'FTF' on one of those same caches, I could still care a less. The logbook shows the truth.

 

I could care a less who claims "FTF" on any of my caches, wither it is the actual first finder or the 100th finder. On one of my caches a couple of years ago had a family log the cache, where the adults had separate accounts, the children had no accounts. This family had a nice habit of saying "XYZ in party was FTF on this one," meaning that person in the group was the one to find it first (they all looked away or walked away until others in the group also found it).

 

Now, some folks got all ansgty over these "FTF" logs, and got irritated at me for not deleting it. First, I could care a less who claims an FTF on my caches, second - even if I did, this log made sense. There was nothing "bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements" for the cache.

 

Now, if the guidelines ever add an "official" FTF log/icon, with guidelines outlining this (sheesh, I sure hope this does NOT happen), then I'll begrudginly care about the FTF side of cache maintenance.

 

In the case of OP's hide - I agree with countless others. If it is a new hide, then re-list it. If it is the same hide (same spirit, general location), I wouldn't consider a new "FTF," so would not offer that up as a "bonus," but neither would a delete an FTF log on it. Like others have said - it is your cache, do with it as you like.

[+ArcherDragoon]

Hey,

 

With a cache like that...if I haven't already found it before you replaced it...I would write soemthing like...

 

FTRF-First To Re-Find!!!

 

...but, that is just me and my sense of humor...

 

Later,

ArcherDragoon

 

PS...once your do an archive for the first time...it isn't so bad after that

[+Renegade Knight]

...Since it is a new cache technically, couldn't the next to find claim FTF?...

 

If it's a new cache expereince, list a new cache. No problem.

If it's a new container but essentially the same cache as before. Use the orginal listing. There is no new FTF.

[+briansnat]

First to find is not something to be claimed or awarded. It's a simple fact. Was the person the first to find that cache? If yes, then FTF.

[+CM-14]

I'd say that if the GC number is the same, then the FTF is already gone.