Make changes to my cache... should I archive and publish a new one?

[+Darren V]

I have a puzzle cache that was muggled and I want to replace it. However I want to change the original hide (under a rock in the middle of a field) and move the cache into the bush where it won't be muggled. I also want to make the puzzle bigger and harder as it is quite easy right now. Should I archive the current cache and publish a new listing in the same area or just make changes to my current listing?

opinions?

[+Touchstone]

I would vote for a new Listing with that major of a change.

[Keystone]

If the existing puzzle is less than three months old, you may bump into the Cache Permanence section of the listing guidelines. One goal of this guideline is to encourage careful planning of your hiding place, cache listing, etc.

[+GeoBain]

If the existing puzzle is less than three months old, you may bump into the Cache Permanence section of the listing guidelines. One goal of this guideline is to encourage careful planning of your hiding place, cache listing, etc.

 

It appears to be a little over a year old.

 

I think if it is a major change, especially if you are changing the actual puzzle, that I would go with archival and create a new listing.

[+WarNinjas]

Is there a way to change the cordnants after publishing a cache if you decide to move it a few feet? I don't want to add it in the description as that would make it harder for the phone users but want to move one about 10' out of the poison oak area. I would rather leave it then do that. Sorry for the hijack just a quick question and might hopefully also be helpful for you.

[+niraD]

Yes, you can change the coordinates for small changes. See the knowledge books article:

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=61

 

To answer the original question: How much does the change affect the overall experience? I've seen puzzle caches move a few miles (with the reviewer's help) because the puzzle was the heart of the experience, and the puzzle remained the same (except for minor changes for the new coordinates). But in that case, the puzzle was the core of the cache experience.

 

If you're changing both the hide and the puzzle, then I agree with those who recommend archiving the cache and submitting a new listing. Past finders should be able to return to the cache page and see something familiar. If you change both the location and the puzzle, then what is left of the original puzzle cache?

 

[edit: clarity]

Edited August 13, 2011 by niraD

[+DanOCan]

My normal rule of thumb is "If you are making a change that you can do yourself then leave it alone. If it is something that requires a reviewer then you may as well archive and start fresh."

 

However, this is why it is only a rule of thumb -- I think if you are completely reworking the puzzle then it should likely be a new listing.

[+briansnat]

If you are significantly changing the nature of the hunt, then it should be a new cache. If it's just a minor tweak then stick with the old listing.

[+hukilaulau]

If the existing puzzle is less than three months old, you may bump into the Cache Permanence section of the listing guidelines. One goal of this guideline is to encourage careful planning of your hiding place, cache listing, etc.

I don't understand. A reviewer might say, "No you can't archive the cache because it hasn't been there long enough"? The OP clearly did not intentionally place a short-term cache, which is what this guideline is aimed at preventing. (I know, I "bumped into" this guideline when I commented that I didn't expect one of my early caches to last very long. I took out that comment and it was published and is going strong after 6 years.)

 

On topic, I vote for archive and replace.

[Keystone]

A reviewer cannot control the archival of an ill-conceived shortlived cache, but he or she can refuse to publish a replacement for it until three months after the date on which the first cache was hidden. I've sometimes found this to be a useful tool to encourage better cache planning and to discourage short term caches.

[+Cardinal Red]

A reviewer cannot control the archival of an ill-conceived shortlived cache, but he or she can refuse to publish a replacement for it until three months after the date on which the first cache was hidden. I've sometimes found this to be a useful tool to encourage better cache planning and to discourage short term caches.

I read the forums a lot and this "useful tool" info is news to me. The next addition needing to be included in the Reviewer toolbox is the hammer that says "you can't publish new caches if you can't/won't maintain the existing ones". That tool would be my favorite.

[+Darren V]

That nature of the puzzle is a word search. Right now the word search is 8 by 8. I want to make the puzzle 20 by 20 and move the cache 50meters into the bush rather than in the middle of a field.

[+Touchstone]

That nature of the puzzle is a word search. Right now the word search is 8 by 8. I want to make the puzzle 20 by 20 and move the cache 50meters into the bush rather than in the middle of a field.

 

So what happens to those folks that are working on the puzzle still, or who have solved it but haven't had the chance to get over to log it yet?

[+Darren V]

That nature of the puzzle is a word search. Right now the word search is 8 by 8. I want to make the puzzle 20 by 20 and move the cache 50meters into the bush rather than in the middle of a field.

 

So what happens to those folks that are working on the puzzle still, or who have solved it but haven't had the chance to get over to log it yet?

The cache is disabled right now because it was muggled recently... that's why I want to make these changes

[+Team Shiney]

Leave the puzzle alone. Unless a small location change will change the puzzle. Rehide it better to keep it safe. Then hide another cache with your new puzzle somewere else. You have learned to make a better hide now so take advantage of that. The community gets another cache and you get the best of both. You may even get known as "that cool guy that makes the puzzles".

[+Don_J]

If the existing puzzle is less than three months old, you may bump into the Cache Permanence section of the listing guidelines. One goal of this guideline is to encourage careful planning of your hiding place, cache listing, etc.

 

It appears to be a little over a year old.

 

I think if it is a major change, especially if you are changing the actual puzzle, that I would go with archival and create a new listing.

 

A Year old, puzzle changed, location changed. Sounds like a new cache.

 

I understand Keystone's concern, but hopefully, we get at least one mulligan.

[+Don_J]

That nature of the puzzle is a word search. Right now the word search is 8 by 8. I want to make the puzzle 20 by 20 and move the cache 50meters into the bush rather than in the middle of a field.

 

So what happens to those folks that are working on the puzzle still, or who have solved it but haven't had the chance to get over to log it yet?

 

Caches that I meant to grab get archived all the time. How is this an different?

[+wimseyguy]

I doubt the people who muggled the cache solved the puzzle first.

I'd suggest tweaking the existing puzzle, or post an offset for the original solution that leads to the new one. Save the new concept for your next hide.

[Mr.Yuck]

A reviewer cannot control the archival of an ill-conceived shortlived cache, but he or she can refuse to publish a replacement for it until three months after the date on which the first cache was hidden. I've sometimes found this to be a useful tool to encourage better cache planning and to discourage short term caches.

I read the forums a lot and this "useful tool" info is news to me. The next addition needing to be included in the Reviewer toolbox is the hammer that says "you can't publish new caches if you can't/won't maintain the existing ones". That tool would be my favorite.

 

Whoa boy, would that be a favorite of mine too! Especially for members of the "50 find a week who have had their own hides involuntarily archived by a reviewer" club. There are quite a few members, too.

[+Frank Broughton]

Whoa boy, would that be a favorite of mine too! Especially for members of the "50 find a week who have had their own hides involuntarily archived by a reviewer" club. There are quite a few members, too.

 

Indeed.... the mysterious one by your work comes to mind. Ya know, severed hand?