Geocache has disappeared from the inventory

[+The Reformed Druids]

On 8/15/2013 GC4JCE8 was published in Wisconsin by Bec. Since then I have logs showing that it was found 6 times, the last of those being on 9/9/13. Today (9/26) when I searched geocaching.com for the cache I received a response that the cache was never published. Is this just a bug?

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

GC4JCE8 is an unpublished cache.

 

It is possible that it was published by mistake and the reviewer "unpublished" it. Such things have happened before and it could be a number of reasons behind that.

 

The CO mistakenly enabled it, then corrected and made a note to the reviewer as such;

It could have been published, then the reviewer discovered an issue to be corrected or checked into;

....those are the usual reasons. I suppose there could be others, also.

 

Lastly... it could be a bug.

[+JJnTJ]

I found it in Google's cache. It looks like the FTFer discovered that the coordinates are bad, and added a partial corrected coordinate in his log. It also looks like the rest of the finders used the FTF log's corrected coordinates.

 

I bet $1 that the cache was "unpublished" by a reviewer so that the CO could fix the coordinates. Then the reviewer will have another look at the cache's placement, and see if there are any guideline violations. You'll probably see it re-published in a few days once everything is fixed up.

[+The Reformed Druids]

Thanks for the information. I was confused that it had been active and then just disappeared without a trace rather than archived. I am guessing that if republished it will come back with the same cache id. It will be interesting if the corrected coordinates violate the separation (or some other)rule and the cache remains forever unpublished. Then some people will have legitimately have found a cache that does not exist.

[Keystone]

The correct term is that the cache was "retracted." Tip: if you've signed up for instant notification of "published" logs, also ask to be notified of "retracted" logs, so you won't be confused if this ever happens again.

 

The coordinates were off by several miles and, when the owner didn't take any action, a geocacher logged a "needs archived" to bring the matter to a reviewer's attention. That log included an assertion that the corrected coordinates were too close to an existing cache. So, it's possible that the cache might never get published again.

 

When this happens, the "found it" logs for those who found the cache prior to retraction will not be affected and will still be included in their total find count and "My Finds" pocket query.

[jholly]

There is an unpublished cache in my found list. Turns out the cache had a proximity issue with an older multi that did not have the final coordinates listed as a hidden waypoint. So this cache was unpublished. I would have thought a simple archive with a note as to why would have done the job. But the song and dance I was given is that the API returns all logs and I might see some really juicy reviewer logs. I guess my feeling is that this a bug with the API and it should be fixed. The unpublished caches will not affect the Myfinds PQ but will affect API results and project-gc.com will not show your correct number of finds. Also if you do a search on the seek & find page and search on you name in the found by username you will also get the incorrect results.

[+The Reformed Druids]

Thanks for the note about "retracted"; I will add that to my notifications. Given how far off the "correct" coordinates, I am intrigued that it was found in the first place. A little mind meld, perhaps, with the CO?

[+larryc43230]

Given how far off the "correct" coordinates, I am intrigued that it was found in the first place. A little mind meld, perhaps, with the CO?

This sort of thing happened in my area a few years ago. A cache was published whose coordinates led everybody to an "island" in the middle of a suburban intersection. A good number of geocachers logged DNFs after fruitlessly digging through the bushes on that island.

 

Several weeks after the cache was published, another cacher, determined to be FTF, decided to project the published coordinates east and west, then north and south, to see if there were any locations that matched the few clues in the cache description and hint. He found a park more than three miles south of the coordinates, which was a perfect location if you assumed the cache owner had typed a "9" into the coordinates when it should have been a "6". Bingo. Cache found, FTF claimed.

 

Once the FTF cacher published the correct coordinates with his log, there was a steady stream of finders, myself included.

 

--Larry

[jholly]

Given how far off the "correct" coordinates, I am intrigued that it was found in the first place. A little mind meld, perhaps, with the CO?

This sort of thing happened in my area a few years ago. A cache was published whose coordinates led everybody to an "island" in the middle of a suburban intersection. A good number of geocachers logged DNFs after fruitlessly digging through the bushes on that island.

 

Several weeks after the cache was published, another cacher, determined to be FTF, decided to project the published coordinates east and west, then north and south, to see if there were any locations that matched the few clues in the cache description and hint. He found a park more than three miles south of the coordinates, which was a perfect location if you assumed the cache owner had typed a "9" into the coordinates when it should have been a "6". Bingo. Cache found, FTF claimed.

 

Once the FTF cacher published the correct coordinates with his log, there was a steady stream of finders, myself included.

 

--Larry

Had two like that. One the cache was out in the middle of a tree farm and I knew the hint did not match. Fired up Mapsource, loaded the cache and looked directly east and west. Bingo! West a couple miles was a highway and a gate into another part of the tree farm. I knew the hint would match there. Got it. Had another one I knew was in the middle of private property. Loaded that up and started looking south. Bingo! found an intersection with a trail on another tree farm. Someone else got the FTF before I got out there.

[+Don_J]

The correct term is that the cache was "retracted." Tip: if you've signed up for instant notification of "published" logs, also ask to be notified of "retracted" logs, so you won't be confused if this ever happens again.

 

The coordinates were off by several miles and, when the owner didn't take any action, a geocacher logged a "needs archived" to bring the matter to a reviewer's attention. That log included an assertion that the corrected coordinates were too close to an existing cache. So, it's possible that the cache might never get published again.

 

When this happens, the "found it" logs for those who found the cache prior to retraction will not be affected and will still be included in their total find count and "My Finds" pocket query.

 

If the cache had six finds logged and needed to be archived, then that's exactly what should have happened. If the cache never gets published it will never be available to the api and any third part program or website that tries to build statistics for those caches will have anomalies.

 

I don't understand why such a cache isn't simply disabled then archived if necessary.

[+Don_J]

Thanks for the note about "retracted"; I will add that to my notifications. Given how far off the "correct" coordinates, I am intrigued that it was found in the first place. A little mind meld, perhaps, with the CO?

 

One published last night by a brand new cacher. It mentioned the turtles in Caraway Park but the coordinates put it about four miles away in open space land. Anyone who has cached in the area knows about the concrete turtles that the kids can play on at Caraway Park so the FTF came early this morning and the area cachers are reaching out to the newbie on how to get the reviewer to update the coordinates. Luckily, there shouldn't be a proximity issue. Cachers are resourceful. If the hints don't give it away, just put the coordinates into Google Earth and start transposing the digits until you get something that makes sense, then go look.