Slow-rolling or All at Once?

[+Ohiosiouxfan]

I have a couple of caches placed now and enjoy reading the logs as they come in. I have prepared a couple of new ones, and they are located near each other and have the same theme. Indeed, they are ultimately meant to be sought at the same time. But when it comes to releasing new caches, what is the best practice: release the caches one by one over time, or release them all at once?

 

My preference is to release them individually because I like to watch the first logs to make sure everything's going well with the new cache. But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

[+Lieblweb]

They're your caches and you can post them whenever you want!! There are no best practices....

 

Technically, they might not get published at the same time depending on the reviewer.

 

A small group of people here started a Battleship series - 100 caches and 5 puzzles. All 100 caches were published within a couple days. The local geocachers loved it - cuz it was an FTF frenzy!! People had never got so many emails all at once!!

Edited August 10, 2012 by Lieblweb

[+Mike & Jess]

It all depends on what you are looking for and how the local geocaching community will react.

A year or two ago, if I was to release a number of caches together, it would be a feeding frenzy by the FTF group (about 10 of us who competed against each other for the FTF).

Today, it would be probably one person coming through getting all the FTFs, and the rest of the community wondering through after the fact.

 

There really isn't a best practise as previously mentioned. If you want a specific release date or pattern, be sure to cordinate with the local reviewer(s). If there is a number of caches, give them up to 14 days to organize them and iron out any issues with you.

[knowschad]

But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

+1

[+SwineFlew]

The down side that if you release them all at once, it can draw too much attention in one area. The neighbors will take notice of extra traffic going through their area.

 

In my area, we got some remote area with hundreds of logging roads and its best if you release them all at once(Most cachers want the best bang for their bucks. (caches per gallon or mile)

[+T.D.M.22]

Depends. I think if it's in a city, to release 2 or 3 every week until you have all of them out. That way you will have some new caches to get and don't have to wait for another month to go by before any new caches. But I wouldn't release just one per week, that's a bit annoying. The idea is to spread them out, but not make it not worth it if you get what I'm saying.

[+The A-Team]

But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

+1

+1

A few caches from a single CO came out at the end of a long hike, but spread out over a couple of weeks. I went and got the first one, and then a new one came out nearby just a few days later. I went back out again to get that one. A week later, a new one came out nearby. I haven't gone for that one yet. I'm going to wait a while to see if any more will come out. The area is nice enough, but making that long hike many times, each for one cache, gets old quickly.

[+dprovan]

I think what you're describing is a perfect reason to release them as a pair. Try it: prehaps you'll also find it fun to follow them as a pair.

 

Around here, it's quite common for some COs to release hides one at a time specifically to avoid one person sweeping through and picking up all the FTFs in a single pass. People act annoyed -- and the COs act like they're trying to be annoying -- but everyone understands it's just a game. If I pick up a new cache only to have another one published nearby, as long as I enjoyed getting the first one, I celebrate having another reason to hike in for the second.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

+1

 

+1

 

However, if in the descriptions you state clearly that this just one in a series of caches along the same trail/in the same area, the above shouldn't be an issue - they can wait until you publish the last one (with a "Last of The Series" note in the listing).

 

But for the folks that "need" to find each new cache immediately, then they have been warned.

[AZcachemeister]

Around here, it's almost inevitable that a new cache will be placed in an area I have already visited...a week, a month or even a year later. The old caches get archived and someone puts a new one nearby.

 

I can see the reasoning to spread out the publications to help distribute the FTFs, and I wouldn't be above doing that to give the FTF hounds grief for being FTF hounds.

 

The OP doesn't say their caches would be along a trail, but if the hike on the trail was good the first time, why not go again? If you didn't enjoy it the first time, don't go again just because there is a new cache out there to be found!

[+SwineFlew]

I think what you're describing is a perfect reason to release them as a pair. Try it: prehaps you'll also find it fun to follow them as a pair.

 

Around here, it's quite common for some COs to release hides one at a time specifically to avoid one person sweeping through and picking up all the FTFs in a single pass. People act annoyed -- and the COs act like they're trying to be annoying -- but everyone understands it's just a game. If I pick up a new cache only to have another one published nearby, as long as I enjoyed getting the first one, I celebrate having another reason to hike in for the second.

 

LOL...same here. We got some cachers that wont release anymore caches because they dont want other to get ahead of them. Yes...its annoying. Just a game!

[+Ohiosiouxfan]

Great replies - thanks very much! I'm not too concerned about the FTF races - as I don't think those who shoot for FTF would mind making two trips to an area. But if I have both caches ready to go, I'll probably release them concurrently.

Edited August 11, 2012 by Ohiosiouxfan

[+Ohiosiouxfan]

The OP doesn't say their caches would be along a trail, but if the hike on the trail was good the first time, why not go again? If you didn't enjoy it the first time, don't go again just because there is a new cache out there to be found!

 

These are in an area where I think people would like to walk on a regular basis. A fairly small park with a looped walking path with connections to other paths. Plus, it's dog-friendly.

[+timbee&suebee]

We placed five caches within a state park at one time. Since it's a little out of the way we decided to have them published all on the same day so that someone seeing the listings/checking out the map would have more incentive to come find them since there were five to find. To make sure they would all be published at the same time I wrote a note to the reviewer on each listing letting him know that I would like them all published at the same time and I noted which other caches I wanted to have published. It took and extra day since he had to verify the coordinates of one of them but I think it was worth while. Of course, one person got FTF on all of them which we were figuring might happen. Funny thing is, even though they are all close by there are only a few people who have bothered to get all five in one day. Most of the logs have indicated that some people found one or two but not the others. But they are of different types (puzzle, multi's traditional, short walk, longer walk, etc) so I guess some people prefer some types and avoid others.

 

To the OP, I think that if your caches all have the same theme and are on the same trail I would have them published at one time. One thing I dislike is when I go get a cache and find that another one (or more) is published in almost the same spot a day or so later. I'm a lot less likely to take the trip back to look for the other one(s) unless they are very close by.

[+JL_HSTRE]

I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

 

This. I for one like caching to take new places not old ones.

[+slukster]

I used to release my caches one at a time, even if I had several lined up to be published. There are a group of about 8 FTF hounds in my area and I liked to give everyone a fair shot at the FTF on each cache. Often, if the caches were all in the same park, I would put a note on the cache page saying that I would be releasing others shortly and if you weren't coming for the FTF then you should wait a couple of days for all of them to be released. After having cached for a while and realized what a pain it can be to have to come back to the same area over and over again, I began releasing them at the same time. I would release a cache series at the same time if they were all placed or put in the description that there were going to be x number of caches placed so cachers can decide whether to come out or wait.

Edited August 13, 2012 by slukster

[knowschad]

But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

+1

 

+1

 

Wait... can I do that?

[+Walts Hunting]

I placed four along a trail (the furthest being about two miles from the parking lot ). I activated them one at a time after a FTF was logged. I got some good natured grumbling but most thought it was fine. I figure FTFs should be earned one at a time. One guy did get two FTFs.

[+The A-Team]

But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

+1

 

+1

 

Wait... can I do that?

Is that like logging a find on your own cache?

 

[knowschad]

But on the other hand, I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

+1

 

+1

 

Wait... can I do that?

Is that like logging a find on your own cache?

 

Hey, if I don't agree with myself, how can I ever expect others to agree with me?

[+Harry Dolphin]

I can see it could be annoying to finders who might come 10 miles to find a cache, only to have another one published close to it a week or two later.

 

This. I for one like caching to take new places not old ones.

 

I'll agree. Of course, I'm running out of new places to visit. But we have a local who will arhive all the caches in each area 'to bring cachers back to the park.' Especially for events. Nice park. But I've been there several times. Can't you find a new park???