Wrong cache type listed

[+Spunkmeyer]

In the last month, I've come accross a few caches that werte listed incorrectly.

 

Of course one could say that I should carefully read the detailed description and cache logs before heading out. But, I think we should be able to depend on cache owners to have selected the correct category. I use pocket queries and cache electronically, so while I may have specifically prepared for some of the caches in an area, for others I am only pulling up the cache description as as I park and am getting out to find the cache. It is frustrating to go to what you think is a traditional cache and find out it is a puzzle cache many miles away.

 

I've left notes for a couple of cache owners (previous logs for those caches do the same), but haven't gotten a response or seen the cache type change.

 

I noticed that "cache type" is greyed out in the cache owner editing screen. Is it possible to have a cache type changed or do you have to archive and relist as a new cache?

[+StarBrand]

Many of the older caches may have existed before the current definitions found in the guidelines. No need to "correct" these. The guidelines have evolved over time and did not always read the same way.

 

Also, please consider that you will be changing the history of all previous finders once you change the type of cache. That could affect a lot of statitistics.

 

Do you have some examples?? Some caches are really a matter of opinion as to what type they should be listed as. Even if you find one that is listed wrong - the best you can do ask the owner for a change.

[+wimseyguy]

First send a polite email to the cache owner sharing your concerns.

It's possible that they are older caches that actually have ALR (additional logging requirements) but were published before those were added to the puzzle/mystery type definition.

 

Second contact the local reviewer and let them know what you are seeing.

It is possible, but not likely that the cache text was edited after it was published. And yes, only the reviewers and site admins can edit a cache type. Cache owners cannot.

 

Without specific examples it's really hard to give more definitive advice.

[+Moose Mob]

In the last month, I've come accross a few caches that werte listed incorrectly.

 

Of course one could say that I should carefully read the detailed description and cache logs before heading out. But, I think we should be able to depend on cache owners to have selected the correct category. I use pocket queries and cache electronically, so while I may have specifically prepared for some of the caches in an area, for others I am only pulling up the cache description as as I park and am getting out to find the cache. It is frustrating to go to what you think is a traditional cache and find out it is a puzzle cache many miles away.

 

I've left notes for a couple of cache owners (previous logs for those caches do the same), but haven't gotten a response or seen the cache type change.

 

I noticed that "cache type" is greyed out in the cache owner editing screen. Is it possible to have a cache type changed or do you have to archive and relist as a new cache?

If a traditional is actualy a puzzle and the cache owner has not responded, the contact the local reviewer to make the "correction". If you don't know the who reviewer is, feel free to send a note to contact@ to forward the request. The local Reviewer can evaluate the situation and either apply the correction. If the cache was originaly placed as a traditional then changed to include a puzzle and a new final locaction, then the "feel" of the cache has changed and should be archived and resubmirtted as a new cache.

 

Other options may be available, your local reviewer should be able to answer more questions.

[+joranda]

I have done one before that was supposed to be a multi cache but it ended up being a single stage. Oh well, got it done faster.

[+Spunkmeyer]

Here is the one I came accross this past weekend - "It's Thataway" GC667F.

 

The others I've come accross are like this - either puzzles that *are* at the coords listed - or traditionals that *are not* at the listed coords. The owners typically note in the description that the cache type is wrong, but that doesn't fix the problem. If the local reviewer can change it, that is an easy enough fix - I just don't think owners know that.

[+egami]

You'd of thought the reviewer would've caught that being that they designate it right at the top of the listing. Maybe they edited that in later though...

[+Markwell]

Whenever I've seen something like the example above, it's usually because the original cache went missing and people didn't want to mess with submitting a new cache or changing the existing cache (or just didn't know better). The worst ones are when someone takes a traditional cache and says "the box is no longer there, so e-mail me what's writting on the sign to the northwest" - essentially changing a traditional cache to a virtual.

 

E-mail the reviewer.

 

either puzzles that *are* at the coords listed - or traditionals that *are not* at the listed coords

Nothing says that puzzles (mystery caches) can't be at the listed coordinates. In fact...

Mystery or Puzzle Caches

...

Caches with mandatory requirements in addition to signing the logbook should be listed as mystery caches. Examples include sending the cache owner a verification codeword found inside the logbook, performing some task at the cache location and taking a photograph, or writing the online log in a format or with content that satisfies the cache requirements. The mystery cache designation assists finders in identifying that something extra is required in order to log a find.

 

If I make a cache that is at the coordinates with a log book, and I make an ADDITIONAL requirement that you must submit a video tape of yourself doing the hokey-pokey at the cache site - it would be a mystery/puzzle/unknown cache.

 

I do agree that a cache at the coordinates with no extra requirements should be labelled as a Traditional (however cleverly it's hidden or disguised).

Edited January 21, 2008 by Markwell

[+nikcap]

...

 

Also, please consider that you will be changing the history of all previous finders once you change the type of cache. That could affect a lot of statitistics.

 

...

 

I'm dense. How does changing the cache type from a traditional to mystery or multi effect stats?

 

I've had a reviewer deney changing a cache listing that I mark wrong for this reason, but I guess I don't understand the rational. If a cache type is change, do all finds on that cache get negated?

 

It's not like the logs get deleted, do they?

 

Thanks

[+egami]

I'm dense. How does changing the cache type from a traditional to mystery or multi effect stats?

 

Because on your profile it breaks down your find count by type.

 

Profile > Geocaches (tab)

[+StarBrand]

I'm dense. How does changing the cache type from a traditional to mystery or multi effect stats?

 

Because on your profile it breaks down your find count by type.

 

Profile > Geocaches (tab)

Yes - it would switch the categories. One day I have 12 total finds. 10 regulars 1 multi 1 puzzle. next day I have 12 total 9 regulars 1 multi and 2 puzzles. Could get confusing.

[+Spunkmeyer]

Cool... Sent a message to the local reviewer and he's already fixed it!

[+Uncopyrighted]

Some challenge caches have strange requirements for example, you must have a day where you find 10 caches, one must be a puzzle. If that puzzle were to change to a traditional and you were using that "puzzle" to meet the requirement of some challenge cache, then you (and anyone else) would no longer meet that requirement... then what? The whole universe could implode in a sequence of contradictions!

Edited January 21, 2008 by Uncopyrighted

[+egami]

Some challenge caches have strange requirements for example, you must have a day where you find 10 caches, one must be a puzzle. If that puzzle were to change to a traditional and you were using that "puzzle" to meet the requirement of some challenge cache, then you (and anyone else) would no longer meet that requirement... then what? The whole universe could implode in a sequence of contradictions!

 

As the great prophet Dr. Egon Spengler once said: Don't cross the streams.

[Mushtang]

I have done one before that was supposed to be a multi cache but it ended up being a single stage. Oh well, got it done faster.

I did one of those recently too. The description said it was a 5 part multi but when I got to the first stage I could tell there was supposed to have been a cache container there and assumed it was muggled. So I was a good cacher and put a new micro container and log at the place that the old one must have been in, and logged a find.

 

None of the logs previous to mine mentioned the fact that it wasn't really a multi, but the ones after mine all did. I guess people are afraid to speak up until someone else does.

 

[Totally kidding]

[+Spunkmeyer]

 

either puzzles that *are* at the coords listed - or traditionals that *are not* at the listed coords

Nothing says that puzzles (mystery caches) can't be at the listed coordinates. In fact...

Mystery or Puzzle Caches

...

Caches with mandatory requirements in addition to signing the logbook should be listed as mystery caches. Examples include sending the cache owner a verification codeword found inside the logbook, performing some task at the cache location and taking a photograph, or writing the online log in a format or with content that satisfies the cache requirements. The mystery cache designation assists finders in identifying that something extra is required in order to log a find.

 

Interesting... Those are indeed from the "official" guidelines. I had gotten my understanding from the Cache types page that comes up when you click on the cache type icon at the top of a listing. That page says -

 

Mystery or puzzle caches

The “catch-all” of cache types, this form of cache can involve complicated puzzles you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. The only commonality of this cache type is that the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point, such as a nearby parking location.

 

I thought Additional Logging Requirements were discouraged or no longer allowed. I can't find anything that says that, but vaguely remember someone saying that somewhere.

 

Meh... make no mistake, the distinction doesn't make me passionate one way or another, I just find the discrepancy interesting.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

What Markwell quoted is, indeed, the place that indicates that if a cache has an ALR, it's a Mystery type.

 

Caches with mandatory requirements in addition to signing the logbook should be listed as mystery caches.

[+Markwell]

The guidelines were updated more frequently than the cache type page. I'll pass it on to the site programmers to update the cache type page. THANKS FOR CATCHING THAT!