This Cache Makes No Sense

[+MysteryGuy1]

There is a cache near my place of work that I've failed to find on several occasions, and I'm not the only one. I'm beginning to think I know why. Apparently, I've never read the description in its entirety and all that does is confuses the heck out of me.

 

First off, the posted coordinates are in fact for the parking area. The actual coordinates are encrypted as part of the hint. And yet this is not listed as a puzzle cache, but a traditional.

 

Let me continue. To decrypt the coordinates, you need to follow a "simple letter substitution," which is only described in part, followed by the words "but what about the rest?" and then nothing.

 

What the heck? No wonder it has a slew of DNFs. I've PMed the last guy who found it to see if he can offer some insight. We'll see.

[+wmpastor]

Sounds like that cache is definitely not a traditional. If you need to calculate coords, that should not be listed as a traditional. Contact cache owner or reviewer.

[+narcissa]

That should not be a traditional. It may have been changed after publication. Post a note on it and use the "Cache should be archived" flag to get a reviewer's attention. Just say "this cache shouldn't be listed as a traditional" or something like that. The reviewer can help the cache owner change it to the correct type.

[+dprovan]

What the heck? No wonder it has a slew of DNFs. I've PMed the last guy who found it to see if he can offer some insight. We'll see.

Did you talk to the owner?

 

Anyway, obviously it's a puzzle cache, so approach it that way and solve the puzzle, or ignore it if that's what you normally do with puzzle caches.

 

This does sound really strange. Any chance it's an old cache? Puzzle caches were a later addition, and I've run into one or maybe two traditional caches which were really puzzle caches but published before the puzzle cache type was invented.

[+J Grouchy]

I was wondering about the age of this one. I've seen a couple 'Mystery' caches that were actually traditionals, so I assume the rules for categorizing them in the early years were a bit more relaxed.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

What the heck? No wonder it has a slew of DNFs. I've PMed the last guy who found it to see if he can offer some insight. We'll see.

Did you talk to the owner?

 

Anyway, obviously it's a puzzle cache, so approach it that way and solve the puzzle, or ignore it if that's what you normally do with puzzle caches.

 

This does sound really strange. Any chance it's an old cache? Puzzle caches were a later addition, and I've run into one or maybe two traditional caches which were really puzzle caches but published before the puzzle cache type was invented.

 

Good catch. From the OPs post it was pretty easy to discover which cache it is and it was published in 2002. It's also rated with a 2 for difficulty so the cipher shouldn't be that difficult. In the words that puzzle solvers everywhere dread, perhaps you're overthinking it.

[+The A-Team]

The reviewer can help the cache owner change it to the correct type.

They won't do this if anyone has found the cache. Some may not do it even if it hasn't been found yet.

 

There's a similar cache in my area (old puzzle listed as a Traditional) that causes a lot of confusion, but the reviewers and Lackeys won't change the cache type.

 

...it is a good way to test how many people read the description, though...

[+narcissa]

What the heck? No wonder it has a slew of DNFs. I've PMed the last guy who found it to see if he can offer some insight. We'll see.

Did you talk to the owner?

 

Anyway, obviously it's a puzzle cache, so approach it that way and solve the puzzle, or ignore it if that's what you normally do with puzzle caches.

 

This does sound really strange. Any chance it's an old cache? Puzzle caches were a later addition, and I've run into one or maybe two traditional caches which were really puzzle caches but published before the puzzle cache type was invented.

 

Oh, this is a good point. I was thinking it was a new cache, but it makes more sense if it's old and pre-dates the different cache types.

[+niraD]

From the OPs post it was pretty easy to discover which cache it is and it was published in 2002. It's also rated with a 2 for difficulty so the cipher shouldn't be that difficult. In the words that puzzle solvers everywhere dread, perhaps you're overthinking it.

Yeah, there's one around here that's like that. It's listed as a traditional, but it's really an on-site offset puzzle-like cache. Finders keep posting corrected coordinates, which short-circuits its clever design. But it's been listed as a traditional for far too long for the listing to be changed.

[+hzoi]

Agree that this appears to be a grandfathered puzzle cache, from back before there was a separate cache type.

 

I was able to locate the cache in question as well. Once you look at the map and start plugging in numbers, there are only so many potential areas this could be; I think I have the right coordinates, though at 330+ miles from my house it's not exactly around the corner for me to check.

Edited May 5, 2017 by hzoi

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Agree that this appears to be a grandfathered puzzle cache, from back before there was a separate cache type.

 

I was able to locate the cache in question as well. Once you look at the map and start plugging in numbers, there are only so many potential areas this could be; I think I have the right coordinates, though at 330+ miles from my house it's not exactly around the corner for me to check.

 

This is one where a coordinate checker would come in handy, but I don't think any were available in 2002. It was also placed well before puzzle caches had to be within 2 miles of the published coordinates so getting the numbers for the first part of the minutes aren't as easy as they could be. I also get a set of coordinates that is near a spot that makes sense but not exactly where I was have expected.

 

[+MysteryGuy1]

Here's a follow-up. Apparently, as suggested above, the cache I referred to pre-dates the "puzzle" category. So, while it was not meant to confuse people, that's still going to happen.

 

I did manage to determine how to solve this puzzle, and confirmed my solution with a previous finder. I was initially thrown off because when I plugged my calculated coordinates into Google Maps, it was not showing the spot I expected. But it was correct all the same. I was also thrown by the use of the words "simple substitution" when in fact you need to really think about it to get the answer. I saw one log from a cacher with over 20000 finds who didn't bother because he couldn't solve the puzzle!

 

That all being said, I still ended up logging a DNF. I spent a good 15 minutes at the site and looked in as many places as I could think of.

[+thebruce0]

I did manage to determine how to solve this puzzle, and confirmed my solution with a previous finder. I was initially thrown off because when I plugged my calculated coordinates into Google Maps, it was not showing the spot I expected.

As in, the location was correct but not where you thought it'd be? Or google thought you meant, say, on the road nearby rather than the coordinates?

If you're unsure, you can force google to not assume a transportation method and merely pin the exact coordinates by adding loc: before the coordinates (eg loc:n## ##.###, w## ##.### )

[+WearyTraveler]

Agree that this appears to be a grandfathered puzzle cache, from back before there was a separate cache type.

 

I was able to locate the cache in question as well. Once you look at the map and start plugging in numbers, there are only so many potential areas this could be; I think I have the right coordinates, though at 330+ miles from my house it's not exactly around the corner for me to check.

 

This is one where a coordinate checker would come in handy, but I don't think any were available in 2002. It was also placed well before puzzle caches had to be within 2 miles of the published coordinates so getting the numbers for the first part of the minutes aren't as easy as they could be. I also get a set of coordinates that is near a spot that makes sense but not exactly where I was have expected.

 

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

[+narcissa]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

[+UnHoly453]

I did manage to determine how to solve this puzzle, and confirmed my solution with a previous finder. I was initially thrown off because when I plugged my calculated coordinates into Google Maps, it was not showing the spot I expected.

As in, the location was correct but not where you thought it'd be? Or google thought you meant, say, on the road nearby rather than the coordinates?

If you're unsure, you can force google to not assume a transportation method and merely pin the exact coordinates by adding loc: before the coordinates (eg loc:n## ##.###, w## ##.### )

 

Great tip! Thanks for that

[+WearyTraveler]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

 

Not talking about spoiling anything...

 

While I've never placed a puzzle and used a puzzle checker to provide cachers with a place to check, my suggestion was the if the CO hasn't provided a puzzle checker option, that a finder, who's determined the correct cords, went to the puzzle checking site and created an entry (or whatever they're called) where future finders can input the cords and get a yea or nay.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

[+niraD]

I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

In theory, you could create a solution checker for any puzzle cache you want. But the only way for you to publicize your checker for someone else's puzzle cache would be to post a Note on the cache page. And you'd need to keep posting the note to keep it at the top of the recent logs.

[+dprovan]

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

There's not really a difference. In the end, your checker says "yes, those coordinates are correct", which is a spoiler. I agree it's not terrible, but I think the point being made was that if you set up a checker, you've crossed the line between a friendly confirmation of coordinates among friends -- which not all COs would be happy about, either, by the way -- and officially handing out the coordinates, even if your checker only confirms. Consider the case where the CO explicitly considered having a checker and decided not to because he thought the puzzle was better with the uncertainty.

 

In the end, I'd say that having a checker isn't so important that anyone but the CO should worry about it, so don't bother raising the ethical question to begin with by implementing an unauthorized checker.

[+The A-Team]

Adding a checker really wouldn't help the situation anyway. The cache would still be a puzzle listed as a Traditional, complete with all the associated confusion. Whether or not this puzzle-Traditional has a checker is a totally separate issue.

[+narcissa]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

 

Not talking about spoiling anything...

 

While I've never placed a puzzle and used a puzzle checker to provide cachers with a place to check, my suggestion was the if the CO hasn't provided a puzzle checker option, that a finder, who's determined the correct cords, went to the puzzle checking site and created an entry (or whatever they're called) where future finders can input the cords and get a yea or nay.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

It should be up to the cache owner to use or not use one of these third-party checking sites. If the cache owner has opted not to, respect his/her choice.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

 

Not talking about spoiling anything...

 

While I've never placed a puzzle and used a puzzle checker to provide cachers with a place to check, my suggestion was the if the CO hasn't provided a puzzle checker option, that a finder, who's determined the correct cords, went to the puzzle checking site and created an entry (or whatever they're called) where future finders can input the cords and get a yea or nay.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

 

It should be up to the cache owner to use or not use one of these third-party checking sites. If the cache owner has opted not to, respect his/her choice.

 

In this case, choosing to use a coordinate checker (or publishing it as a Mystery/Unknown) was not an choice available when the cache was published. I suppose, at some point to CO could have chosen to add a coordinate checker, assuming the CO was still in the game when one became available.

[+MysteryGuy1]

As in, the location was correct but not where you thought it'd be? Or google thought you meant, say, on the road nearby rather than the coordinates? If you're unsure, you can force google to not assume a transportation method and merely pin the exact coordinates by adding loc: before the coordinates (eg loc:n## ##.###, w## ##.### )

 

Mostly, it was my misinterpreting the area. The cache I referred to above is named in part after a trail system, but is not located directly on the trail. I'd forgotten that since my original visit. So, when I entered the coordinates into Google it pointed to a spot that not only appeared to be far from the trail, but also in a parking lot. (In reality, it's fairly close to a parking lot but is truly in the woods.) It was enough to make me doubt my calculations, which were indeed correct.

Edited May 10, 2017 by MysteryGuy1

[+NYPaddleCacher]

As in, the location was correct but not where you thought it'd be? Or google thought you meant, say, on the road nearby rather than the coordinates? If you're unsure, you can force google to not assume a transportation method and merely pin the exact coordinates by adding loc: before the coordinates (eg loc:n## ##.###, w## ##.### )

 

Mostly, it was my misinterpreting the area. The cache I referred to above is named in part after a trail system, but is not located directly on the trail. I'd forgotten that since my original visit. So, when I entered the coordinates into Google it pointed to a spot that not only appeared to be far from the trail, but also in a parking lot. (In reality, it's fairly close to a parking lot but is truly in the woods.) It was enough to make me doubt my calculations, which were indeed correct.

 

I thought I may have solved it as well, but was unsure based on the same reason. The coordinates I got were "close" to a trail around a pond with a name similar to the cache name but the published coordinates were actually closer to the trail. Given that the cache is 200 miles away, I'll unlikely every know if the coordinates I got were correct.

 

 

[+WearyTraveler]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

 

Not talking about spoiling anything...

 

While I've never placed a puzzle and used a puzzle checker to provide cachers with a place to check, my suggestion was the if the CO hasn't provided a puzzle checker option, that a finder, who's determined the correct cords, went to the puzzle checking site and created an entry (or whatever they're called) where future finders can input the cords and get a yea or nay.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

It should be up to the cache owner to use or not use one of these third-party checking sites. If the cache owner has opted not to, respect his/her choice.

 

Come on... not respecting the COs wishes? He didn't have _that_ choice when he planted it and from the thread I took it that the CO isn't active...

 

It was merely a suggestion in response to other cachers talking about determining the cords and the cache being placed before the checkers were around.

[+narcissa]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

 

Not talking about spoiling anything...

 

While I've never placed a puzzle and used a puzzle checker to provide cachers with a place to check, my suggestion was the if the CO hasn't provided a puzzle checker option, that a finder, who's determined the correct cords, went to the puzzle checking site and created an entry (or whatever they're called) where future finders can input the cords and get a yea or nay.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

It should be up to the cache owner to use or not use one of these third-party checking sites. If the cache owner has opted not to, respect his/her choice.

 

Come on... not respecting the COs wishes? He didn't have _that_ choice when he planted it and from the thread I took it that the CO isn't active...

 

It was merely a suggestion in response to other cachers talking about determining the cords and the cache being placed before the checkers were around.

 

Spoiling someone else's puzzle like that is pretty disrespectful. These third-party checking sites have been around for years now, and if the cache owner wanted to use one, he/she can update the page at any time. Don't mess with other people's cache set-ups.

[Moondoggie]

There is a cache near my place of work that I've failed to find on several occasions, and I'm not the only one. I'm beginning to think I know why. Apparently, I've never read the description in its entirety and all that does is confuses the heck out of me.

 

First off, the posted coordinates are in fact for the parking area. The actual coordinates are encrypted as part of the hint. And yet this is not listed as a puzzle cache, but a traditional.

 

Let me continue. To decrypt the coordinates, you need to follow a "simple letter substitution," which is only described in part, followed by the words "but what about the rest?" and then nothing.

 

What the heck? No wonder it has a slew of DNFs. I've PMed the last guy who found it to see if he can offer some insight. We'll see.

 

WOW!! this is going ot be awesome! Sorry, I am new, but your difficulty inspires me. This is no easy peasy game. and we are out and about eh! So cool!

Bit of a highjack, please nobody respond, I was just excited!!

[+WearyTraveler]

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

 

Spoiling other people's puzzles is a pretty big no-no.

 

Not talking about spoiling anything...

 

While I've never placed a puzzle and used a puzzle checker to provide cachers with a place to check, my suggestion was the if the CO hasn't provided a puzzle checker option, that a finder, who's determined the correct cords, went to the puzzle checking site and created an entry (or whatever they're called) where future finders can input the cords and get a yea or nay.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

It should be up to the cache owner to use or not use one of these third-party checking sites. If the cache owner has opted not to, respect his/her choice.

 

Come on... not respecting the COs wishes? He didn't have _that_ choice when he planted it and from the thread I took it that the CO isn't active...

 

It was merely a suggestion in response to other cachers talking about determining the cords and the cache being placed before the checkers were around.

 

Spoiling someone else's puzzle like that is pretty disrespectful. These third-party checking sites have been around for years now, and if the cache owner wanted to use one, he/she can update the page at any time. Don't mess with other people's cache set-ups.

 

First of all, you're the only person here is being anywhere close to disrespectful... so calm down...

 

If you've ever used one of those checkers, you'd know that the steps are something similar to:

 

1. 
    
   
2. Seeker comes up with solution / cords
   
3. Seeker types them into the checker
   
4. Checker says yes or no
   
5. Checker does NOT say - ahh, close, but here's the actual answer...
    
   

 

Or that's the way the ones I've used behaved...

 

So - basically, if you get the cords wrong, it saves you a trip to the wrong zip code.

 

It does NOT spoil anyone's cache set up.. it does not give you the answer. It does not disrespect the COs desires (unless he want to send people on wild goose chases).

 

And - if rather than champing at the bit to throw darts, you read my previous post, you'd see that my understanding was that this cache was placed before the checkers were available and that the CO isn't active.

[+cerberus1]

Agree that this appears to be a grandfathered puzzle cache, from back before there was a separate cache type.

 

I was able to locate the cache in question as well. Once you look at the map and start plugging in numbers, there are only so many potential areas this could be; I think I have the right coordinates, though at 330+ miles from my house it's not exactly around the corner for me to check.

 

This is one where a coordinate checker would come in handy, but I don't think any were available in 2002. It was also placed well before puzzle caches had to be within 2 miles of the published coordinates so getting the numbers for the first part of the minutes aren't as easy as they could be. I also get a set of coordinates that is near a spot that makes sense but not exactly where I was have expected.

 

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

This would be a great question for Groundspeak in their Help Center.

I was sorta thinking it may be an issue with the Terms of Use, but seems the best thing to do is ask those who should know.

[+redsox_mark]

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

I would say no. I have a checker on all my puzzles but many COs purposely do not want them. Some of the reasons are:

 

1. There are sites which spoil puzzles. These sites will advertise that the answer is "geochecker confirmed". And it seems that a cache is more likely to be spoilt in this way if a checker is used.

 

2. A checker can be used to brute force an answer, if the solver has partially solved it. E.g I've solved all but one digit. I can use a checker 10 times to solve the last one.

 

3. Some are concerned about the security of the data, could it be hacked.

[+WearyTraveler]

Agree that this appears to be a grandfathered puzzle cache, from back before there was a separate cache type.

 

I was able to locate the cache in question as well. Once you look at the map and start plugging in numbers, there are only so many potential areas this could be; I think I have the right coordinates, though at 330+ miles from my house it's not exactly around the corner for me to check.

 

This is one where a coordinate checker would come in handy, but I don't think any were available in 2002. It was also placed well before puzzle caches had to be within 2 miles of the published coordinates so getting the numbers for the first part of the minutes aren't as easy as they could be. I also get a set of coordinates that is near a spot that makes sense but not exactly where I was have expected.

 

Is there any way that a previous finder could open (?) an entry on a puzzle checking site for subsequent cachers to try? Or do you have to be the CO to open the checker instance?

This would be a great question for Groundspeak in their Help Center.

I was sorta thinking it may be an issue with the Terms of Use, but seems the best thing to do is ask those who should know.

 

Thank you!

[+WearyTraveler]

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

I would say no. I have a checker on all my puzzles but many COs purposely do not want them. Some of the reasons are:

 

1. There are sites which spoil puzzles. These sites will advertise that the answer is "geochecker confirmed". And it seems that a cache is more likely to be spoilt in this way if a checker is used.

 

2. A checker can be used to brute force an answer, if the solver has partially solved it. E.g I've solved all but one digit. I can use a checker 10 times to solve the last one.

 

3. Some are concerned about the security of the data, could it be hacked.

Thank you too!

[+narcissa]

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone publish the cords. I'm asking if someone other than the CO can create the coord checker.

 

I would say no. I have a checker on all my puzzles but many COs purposely do not want them. Some of the reasons are:

 

1. There are sites which spoil puzzles. These sites will advertise that the answer is "geochecker confirmed". And it seems that a cache is more likely to be spoilt in this way if a checker is used.

 

2. A checker can be used to brute force an answer, if the solver has partially solved it. E.g I've solved all but one digit. I can use a checker 10 times to solve the last one.

 

3. Some are concerned about the security of the data, could it be hacked.

 

4. Some cache owners just don't want to add a third-party link to their cache page and don't feel it's necessary to hold everyone's hand through a puzzle.