Question about "finding" a renamed cache

[+arakeit]

I'll get to the question straight away, after I mention that I am sorry if this is not the correct place for my question.

 

There is a power trail that I've done, but I've noticed that some of the caches have changed from (enter cache name here)#21, to (enter cache name here).21, after I made the find. There was even another version, I think it was (enter cache name here)21!.

 

My point is, I feel conflicted "finding" the new variation, but also feel like a find was taken away for no reason.

 

Thoughts?

[+kunarion]

Can you restate the question?

 

The "series" style caches often have identical long names, which cause issues with software and hardware. The extended character "#" creates even more problems. I'm glad when Cache Owners shorten the cache name so it fits a handheld GPSr screen ("Bugs 1" rather than "[This City] Geocache Cache Series Insects & Bugs Geocache Number#1: Red-Tailed Sand Fly"), but I'll attempt to log a find regardless.

Edited July 26, 2015 by kunarion

[+K13]

How was a find taken away? Was the old cache archived and re-listed? If so, go find the new listing and you will have another find. If the cache name was changed, your find is still there on the old archived one.

[+kunarion]

How was a find taken away? Was the old cache archived and re-listed? If so, go find the new listing and you will have another find.

Looks like these were archived and relisted. I see pages and pages of these things. In some cases, caches such as "#130" got archived and "#.130" was set in the exact place, with no explanation ("New container and hide style!" or whatever). It's a cool new find. It's kind of cheesy. Take your pick.

 

http://coord.info/GC3Y8KR

 

http://coord.info/GC41ZHF

 

For these particular power trails, there seems to be an issue of the containers suspiciously going missing. And there is a question of whether the caches are allowed in the area. Both issues may be relevant to this thread.

 

If the cache name was changed, your find is still there on the old archived one.

+1

 

It's still a smilie. But I see the OP's point... you found the cache, it was archived to make way for... the same thing, now with a dot in the name.

 

If I went to a Power Trail area, I'd find a cache or two on the Trail, then go find caches. Um... you know... non-Power-Trail ones...

 

I am impressed to see people make so many cache pages, and everyone else go find so many of them. Just wow.

Edited July 26, 2015 by kunarion

[+wmpastor]

Right now there's a thread in the main forum called "Replacing Old Caches."

[+The Cheeseheads]

Moving to the general discussion forum

[+cerberus1]

I'll get to the question straight away, after I mention that I am sorry if this is not the correct place for my question.

 

There is a power trail that I've done, but I've noticed that some of the caches have changed from (enter cache name here)#21, to (enter cache name here).21, after I made the find. There was even another version, I think it was (enter cache name here)21!.

 

My point is, I feel conflicted "finding" the new variation, but also feel like a find was taken away for no reason.

 

Thoughts?

If you were to log one of these newer versions, does it have that big "Found it !" smiley above "Log a new visit" on the cache page?

If it's a new cache, in the same location, with nothing changed, I'd have to pick kunarion's "cheesy".

If not, I don't understand how you'd feel conflicted in "re-finding" caches you've already found.

 

Please explain how a find was "taken away with no reason".

- You don't lose finds unless deleted by the CO.

[+on4bam]

The name of a cache is irrelevant. It's the GC***** code that's important. So there are two possibilities.

1. The cache was renamed. Your find remains a "found"

2. The original cache you found was archived and another one was placed in the same location. You can then go out a find that one as a new "found" but I fail to see the fun in picking up the same container at the same spot just to "earn" an extra point.

[+Mudfrog]

I'll get to the question straight away, after I mention that I am sorry if this is not the correct place for my question.

 

There is a power trail that I've done, but I've noticed that some of the caches have changed from (enter cache name here)#21, to (enter cache name here).21, after I made the find. There was even another version, I think it was (enter cache name here)21!.

 

My point is, I feel conflicted "finding" the new variation, but also feel like a find was taken away for no reason.

 

Thoughts?

If you were to log one of these newer versions, does it have that big "Found it !" smiley above "Log a new visit" on the cache page?

If it's a new cache, in the same location, with nothing changed, I'd have to pick kunarion's "cheesy".

If not, I don't understand how you'd feel conflicted in "re-finding" caches you've already found.

 

Please explain how a find was "taken away with no reason".

- You don't lose finds unless deleted by the CO.

 

The same cache description, then the line at the bottom pretty much asking for help with maintenance,,, cheesy for sure. The owners of the two examples? Archived and new on the same day? How about all those "puzzle" caches nearby? Solving them requires nothing more than adding two numbers together. Appears there is a lot of silliness is going on in that area.

 

As far as losing find count, the archiving of a cache won't cause a loss of a smiley. Your count should still be there but you do have to make sure you are looking at the same cache page that you initially logged. You won't find an archived cache in a general search but you can go to your profile, click "geocaches", "found it", then look for it in the list that comes up.

[+DanOCan]

It's still a smilie. But I see the OP's point... you found the cache, it was archived to make way for... the same thing, now with a dot in the name.

 

If I went to a Power Trail area, I'd find a cache or two on the Trail, then go find caches. Um... you know... non-Power-Trail ones...

Pretty much what I would do too. If the cache has a new GC number then it's fair game to be found again, even if the container hasn't changed. I'd pick off one or two when in the area but I certainly wouldn't make a special effort to go out and find them all again right away. Heck, that's how I deal with power trails anyway.

 

Never ceases to amaze me what people will do to inflate numbers.

[+badger10]

I wonder if the OP is looking at the geocache map page and notices that his smiley is gone and a new unfound cache is in the same spot. I use the map page to see what caches I have not found yet in my area. I would wonder why my smiley is gone.

[+wandillup wanderer]

I have a question in a similar vein.

A cacher who was with a group of cachers and found one of mine which was duly logged as a found cache has subsequently left the group to start caching under a different name.

The renamed cacher is now logging on line "found it " logs for caches found previously when attached to the group.

What is the protocol here for this activity.

I feel that this is not in the spirit of Geocaching and allowing this type of virtual log just serves to artificially inflate a cachers find count.

It is my belief that if you haven,t physically found the cache and signed the log(if applicable)then no found it log should be recorded

Just seeking some feedback from other cachers

Thanks

[+TriciaG]

I have a question in a similar vein.

A cacher who was with a group of cachers and found one of mine which was duly logged as a found cache has subsequently left the group to start caching under a different name.

The renamed cacher is now logging on line "found it " logs for caches found previously when attached to the group.

What is the protocol here for this activity.

I feel that this is not in the spirit of Geocaching and allowing this type of virtual log just serves to artificially inflate a cachers find count.

It is my belief that if you haven,t physically found the cache and signed the log(if applicable)then no found it log should be recorded

Just seeking some feedback from other cachers

Thanks

This is allowed. The cacher found the cache and signed in as part of the group. Now they're separating out their finds to a new account. It's perfectly legitimate, and is not artificially inflating their found count because they DID find the cache.

[+niraD]

I have a question in a similar vein.

A cacher who was with a group of cachers and found one of mine which was duly logged as a found cache has subsequently left the group to start caching under a different name.

The renamed cacher is now logging on line "found it " logs for caches found previously when attached to the group.

What is the protocol here for this activity.

I feel that this is not in the spirit of Geocaching and allowing this type of virtual log just serves to artificially inflate a cachers find count.

It is my belief that if you haven,t physically found the cache and signed the log(if applicable)then no found it log should be recorded

Just seeking some feedback from other cachers

Thanks

This is allowed. The cacher found the cache and signed in as part of the group. Now they're separating out their finds to a new account. It's perfectly legitimate, and is not artificially inflating their found count because they DID find the cache.

Ditto what TriciaG said. It's perfectly legitimate. This person now has an individual account, and is logging his/her past finds with that individual account.

 

It really isn't that different from someone who goes geocaching with a geocaching friend, and then later creates an account and logs those finds using the new account.

[+wandillup wanderer]

I have a question in a similar vein.

A cacher who was with a group of cachers and found one of mine which was duly logged as a found cache has subsequently left the group to start caching under a different name.

The renamed cacher is now logging on line "found it " logs for caches found previously when attached to the group.

What is the protocol here for this activity.

I feel that this is not in the spirit of Geocaching and allowing this type of virtual log just serves to artificially inflate a cachers find count.

It is my belief that if you haven,t physically found the cache and signed the log(if applicable)then no found it log should be recorded

Just seeking some feedback from other cachers

Thanks

This is allowed. The cacher found the cache and signed in as part of the group. Now they're separating out their finds to a new account. It's perfectly legitimate, and is not artificially inflating their found count because they DID find the cache.

Ditto what TriciaG said. It's perfectly legitimate. This person now has an individual account, and is logging his/her past finds with that individual account.

 

It really isn't that different from someone who goes geocaching with a geocaching friend, and then later creates an account and logs those finds using the new account.

[+wandillup wanderer]

Ok

Thanks for the feedback.

would the same reasoning apply if a cache was taken over by a new owner and you had logged a find with the original owner could you then register another find on the same cache?

[+edscott]

Ok

Thanks for the feedback.

would the same reasoning apply if a cache was taken over by a new owner and you had logged a find with the original owner could you then register another find on the same cache?

 

"Back in the day" the answer to most of the questions posed above would be if the GC number is the same it is the same cache, so logging it again would be frowned upon and the log might be deleted by the owner. If the GC number has changed it is now a different cache and it can be logged again. Now with triple and quadruple logs being made on the same cache over a 2 minute time span these "rules" seem to be passé.

[+colleda]

Ok

Thanks for the feedback.

would the same reasoning apply if a cache was taken over by a new owner and you had logged a find with the original owner could you then register another find on the same cache?

Not if the GC number is unchanged.

[+jellis]

Can you restate the question?

 

The "series" style caches often have identical long names, which cause issues with software and hardware. The extended character "#" creates even more problems. I'm glad when Cache Owners shorten the cache name so it fits a handheld GPSr screen ("Bugs 1" rather than "[This City] Geocache Cache Series Insects & Bugs Geocache Number#1: Red-Tailed Sand Fly"), but I'll attempt to log a find regardless.

Sometimes it's easier to abbreviate the title and add the number to either the beginning or the end.

We have a series that is along the Contra Costa Canal Trail. We just call it CCCT

[+jellis]

I'll get to the question straight away, after I mention that I am sorry if this is not the correct place for my question.

 

There is a power trail that I've done, but I've noticed that some of the caches have changed from (enter cache name here)#21, to (enter cache name here).21, after I made the find. There was even another version, I think it was (enter cache name here)21!.

 

My point is, I feel conflicted "finding" the new variation, but also feel like a find was taken away for no reason.

 

Thoughts?

But also I kinda know what you are talking about. We do a rally every year in Los Banos, some of the caches are temporary and some will be published. They start off with letters and numbers for the rally with something like LB-000. After the event/rally then the host may change the cache names to something that may qualify for some challenges.