Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
RufusClupea

Changing/Modifying One's Own Caches

42 posts in this topic

Is there anything in the "rules" or intent/spirit to bar/dissuade a CO from changing/modifying a cache?

It's difficult for me to get around (sometimes more difficult than others)  SPOZE... I build a gadget cache and get it approved as, say... D=3, T=1.  Then after a while (several months?) I come up with another gadget cache of similar difficulty.  Can I switch them out?  Can I keep doing that, using the same location (someplace I can readily access & maintain).  Would this be considered a Lab Cache?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

No, not a lab cache...

Most "gadget" caches we see are mystery/puzzle.

The problem with "switching it out" is it isn't the same cache.  Most we know of have spares of the same.

If I give you a favorite for an awesome idea, to find later it's now replaced with a piecea carp I could care less about, that favorite's gone.

It's not the same as swapping a lock n lock for an ammo can.  If you're gonna replace a gadget for another completely different, archive it and replace with a new cache (in that same  fabulous spot).

Edited by cerberus1
alles klar...
3

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

It's not the same as swapping a lock n lock for an ammo can.  If you're gonna replace a gadget for another completely different, archive it and replace with a new cache (in that same  fabulous spot).

To the OP: Look at it from the perspective of the cache finder.  If a cacher finds the cache with your original gadget, then they aren't going to look at that cache listing again.  If you change the gadget to another gadget, then the cacher is going to miss out on the new gadget.  If your goal is to provide cachers with a fun/interesting/cool/etc experience, then place that new gadget* as a separate cache.  Whether it's in the same location or a different one, the new gadget* should be a separate cache listing.

*By "new gadget", I mean a different gadget experience, not just a re-creation of the original gadget.  If the same gadget is repaired/replaced with another that works the same way, then that's not what I mean about a "new gadget".

1

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

If I give you a favorite for an awesome idea, to find later it's now replaced with a piecea carp I could care less about, that favorite's gone.

Good point.  (A little besulted you'd think I'd build/put up a piecea carp, :lol: but I won't take it personally... ;))

17 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

It's not the same as swapping a lock n lock for an ammo can.  If you're gonna replace a gadget for another completely different, archive it and replace with a new cache (in that same  fabulous spot).

I spoze that'd work for my purpose... If allowed periodically.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Keep in mind the "cache permanence" section of the listing guidelines.  Geocaches are intended to be listed for the long term.  A repeated cycle of "hide new gadget cache, wait for the locals to find it, then archive and replace with a new gadget in the same spot" could be called "cache churning" which is one of the behaviors intended to be curbed by that guideline section.  There is a bare minimum presumption of three months, and some reviewers will make the cache owner wait that full three months before publishing a new cache in the same immediate area.

0

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, noncentric said:

*By "new gadget", I mean a different gadget experience, not just a re-creation of the original gadget.  If the same gadget is repaired/replaced with another that works the same way, then that's not what I mean about a "new gadget".

Yeah, thanks--I got that.  My main concern is my mobility issues.  I've no shortage of ideas, and can well-maintain one or two easy sites, but realistically can't trudge through the woods to place/maintain many.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Some changes are prevented by the system. For example, the CO cannot change the cache type, and the CO cannot make large changes to the cache's coordinates. But in general, a cache owner is free to change the container, the hide style, the difficulty and terrain ratings, the name, the description, the hint, and most other details about about the cache.

That's the letter of the law. But as cerberus1 indicated, the spirit of the law is different. As the Help Center article linked above puts it, "If the nature of the hide and hunt has fundamentally changed, submit a new cache page."

So what is a "fundamental change"? With very few exceptions, that's up to the CO to determine.

As a general guideline, I recommend considering someone who found the previous version of the cache. If they look at the cache page and return to the cache site, will they see something familiar? If not, then it would be better to archive the listing and submit a new cache page.

0

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Keystone said:

Keep in mind the "cache permanence" section of the listing guidelines.  Geocaches are intended to be listed for the long term.  A repeated cycle of "hide new gadget cache, wait for the locals to find it, then archive and replace with a new gadget in the same spot" could be called "cache churning" which is one of the behaviors intended to be curbed by that guideline section. 

That's why I asked.

3 minutes ago, Keystone said:

There is a bare minimum presumption of three months, and some reviewers will make the cache owner wait that full three months before publishing a new cache in the same immediate area.

Didn't I say "several months"?  I thought I did.

I'd be upfront about this, describing what I'm doing in the listing, and changing the listing as necessary/warranted.  The reviewers would be aware; I wouldn't be trying to conceal anything, and if there's a problem, I'm sure it could/would be worked out.  If not, I just don't do it.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:

Yeah, thanks--I got that.  My main concern is my mobility issues.  I've no shortage of ideas, and can well-maintain one or two easy sites, but realistically can't trudge through the woods to place/maintain many.

What about partnering with another cacher that is local to you?  You could build the gadgets and the other cacher could place/maintain it.  You'd have to agree whose account the cache is listed under. Whichever cacher account 'owns' the listing will automatically get an email for every log on the cache page, but the other cacher could "watch" the cache to get email alerts. Of course, only the 'owner' account will be able to submit some log types (Owner Maintenance, Temp Disable, etc).  Assuming the partnership is on good terms, then that shouldn't be a big issue.

The 'placed by' line of a cache listing doesn't have to be the cache owner. It can be something else, like 'RufusClupea and CacherA'.  When someone clicks on that name, then they'll be taken to the profile of the official cache owner.

Might be one way to go, if you know other cachers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, niraD said:

Some changes are prevented by the system. For example, the CO cannot change the cache type, and the CO cannot make large changes to the cache's coordinates.

Was I not clear about that in my OP?  Cache type would be the same--gadget for gadget.  Coordinates would be the same; same tree or post, or whatever...

7 minutes ago, niraD said:

But in general, a cache owner is free to change the container, the hide style, the difficulty and terrain ratings, the name, the description, the hint, and most other details about about the cache.

That's the letter of the law. But as cerberus1 indicated, the spirit of the law is different. As the Help Center article linked above puts it, "If the nature of the hide and hunt has fundamentally changed, submit a new cache page."

So what is a "fundamental change"? With very few exceptions, that's up to the CO to determine.

As a general guideline, I recommend considering someone who found the previous version of the cache. If they look at the cache page and return to the cache site, will they see something familiar? If not, then it would be better to archive the listing and submit a new cache page.

Well, that contradicts much of what's been said by previous respondents.  

I've no problem with submitting new cache pages; I considered that part of the process.

Last  ¶:  Yes, they'll see a familiar place, tree or post, and a gadget cache right where the last one was.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, noncentric said:

Might be one way to go, if you know other cachers.

Partnering has always been part of the plan, but so far, no takers, and a good plan always accounts for contingencies.  Personally, in my years on this planet, I've learned to hope for the best, but plan for the worst, and have a Plan A.  If/when Plan A fails, there are 25 more letters.... :D

0

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

28 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:

Well, that contradicts much of what's been said by previous respondents.  

Hmm... I'm not sure I see as much contradiction as you do.

28 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:

Last  ¶:  Yes, they'll see a familiar place, tree or post, and a gadget cache right where the last one was.

But if the gadget cache is the whole point, then wouldn't swapping one gadget for another be a "fundamental change"? If I take a friend to the cache so I can show him the really cool slider puzzle gadget cache, and instead there is a pinball gadget cache, then is it still really "something familiar"?

But ultimately, it's up to you as the CO to decide what the point of your cache is, and whether a change warrants a new listing.

Edited by niraD
0

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

No, not a lab cache...

Most "gadget" caches we see are mystery/puzzle.

The problem with "switching it out" is it isn't the same cache.  Most we know of have spares of the same.

If I give you a favorite for an awesome idea, to find later it's now replaced with a piecea carp I could care less about, that favorite's gone.

It's not the same as swapping a lock n lock for an ammo can.  If you're gonna replace a gadget for another completely different, archive it and replace with a new cache (in that same  fabulous spot).

+1

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think the bottom line is that if you change the essential nature of the cache and make it an entirely different experience, you should archive the old listing and create a new one.   But I suspect you are asking about using the same spot  over and over again.   I think the spirit cache permanence guideline says no.  The general minimum is at least three months, but consider that a minimum. It should not be a goal.  If you are continually reusing the same spot every three months, your reviewer may refuse to list your cache.

You mention mobility issues, but there are numerous cool places for caches that don't require a trek through the woods. One of cooler caches I found was a regular sized cache hidden in a guard rail at an overlook with a 100 mile view on clear days.   The walk was about 30 seconds from  parking. Historic sites, museums, roadside oddities are all fodder for placing caches.  And most don't require a trek through the woods.  They may require that you work with the management or owner of the site to place it. A lot of managers of historic sites and similar places embrace anything that will bring more people to that location,  so a geocache is often an easy sell. They may allow you do do things that are generally against the guidelines, such as sinking a pole in the ground. 

So when you come up with an idea for a new gadget cache, look for a new place to put it instead of reusing the same old site. As a cache hider imagination doesn't always mean a cool gadget, it can also mean a cool new place.  Seek those out.

1

Share this post


Link to post

The plan to revamp a gadget cache every few months is probably not the best plan. Cachers who have already found the original likely won't go back to check out the new version. Making too big a change in the cache makes it a different cache all together, even if the location stays the same, and as such, should become a whole new listing. But as briansnat stated, a reviewer may not be on board with an archive old/submit new every few months idea since it goes against a guideline that's been in place a lonngggg time.

If you have the physical ability, then the suggestion to find new interesting spots to place good caches is a great one. It's a win win for everyone if you get the combination right because finders will enjoy the caches and you'll end up receiving more good quality found it logs. 

0

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

On 8/3/2017 at 3:18 PM, RufusClupea said:

It's difficult for me to get around (sometimes more difficult than others)

 

On 8/3/2017 at 4:02 PM, RufusClupea said:

My main concern is my mobility issues.

 

2 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

If you have the physical ability,....

I don't, and that's the crux of the matter.

As I read (and re-read) through the responses in this thread, I can't help but think that while this is not (IMO--IANAL) a Title III (ADA) issue, I don't think it would be the end of the world to allow a little reasonable accommodation, especially since I'd be trying to work within the guidelines to the best of my ability.

And I would remind that they are guidelines--not laws--which does imply some judicious flexibility.

Edited by RufusClupea
Added link
0

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RufusClupea said:

And I would remind that they are guidelines--not laws--which does imply some judicious flexibility.

Yes, they are guidelines. But from what I've seen, those who approach the volunteer reviewers expecting an exception for their caches are often disappointed. To you, your cache is special and unique and worthy of any exceptions that may be required. To the volunteer reviewer, your cache is just one of the dozens that they have to review for compliance with the guidelines.

With that said, there is some flexibility. Some areas of the guidelines (e.g., the 528ft/161m saturation guideline) have less flexibility than others, but there is some flexibility. Work with your local volunteer reviewer. Everything written here is just chatter. It's your local volunteer reviewer who can give you a real answer.

 

3 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

Cachers who have already found the original likely won't go back to check out the new version.

I've taken people to caches that I've found before, but in that case, I'm specifically taking them to a cache that I'm familiar with, expecting their experience to be very similar to my own when I found the cache. I haven't returned to any previously found but updated-since-then caches to experience the "new improved" version.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't recommend 'swapping through' several designs for one gadget cache listing. I would say that it would be appropriate to re-design the cache if a part of it becomes damaged repeatedly and can be improved. I think you should visit quite a few gadget caches to see what kind of mechanisms work and which do not.

 

On 8/3/2017 at 4:27 PM, RufusClupea said:

Partnering has always been part of the plan, but so far, no takers

As far as meeting other cachers, try attending an event close to where you live, or look for local groups on Facebook.

0

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, niraD said:

 I haven't returned to any previously found but updated-since-then caches to experience the "new improved" version.

That would be a mischaracterization.

.

0

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:
2 hours ago, niraD said:

 I haven't returned to any previously found but updated-since-then caches to experience the "new improved" version.

That would be a mischaracterization.

In what way?

0

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, RufusClupea said:

 

 

I don't, and that's the crux of the matter.

As I read (and re-read) through the responses in this thread, I can't help but think that while this is not (IMO--IANAL) a Title III (ADA) issue, I don't think it would be the end of the world to allow a little reasonable accommodation, especially since I'd be trying to work within the guidelines to the best of my ability.

And I would remind that they are guidelines--not laws--which does imply some judicious flexibility.

There are guidelines, some more strict than others, but most aren't set in stone. I think the best thing to do is talk with your reviewer. Let him or her know your situation and see what they recommend.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

 

7 hours ago, RufusClupea said:
9 hours ago, niraD said:

 I haven't returned to any previously found but updated-since-then caches to experience the "new improved" version.

That would be a mischaracterization.

7 hours ago, niraD said:

In what way?

 

The above wording suggests a "new improved" version of the same gadget, which is not what I've been proposing/discussing at all. 

Ironically, "new improved" versions of the same gadget probably occur quite often, e.g. when a gadget fails for some reason, and CO maintenance to restore it results in improving the original concept, design, fabrication, or combination thereof.

I'm not expecting anyone to return (or bring others), and I'm not sure that's a good argument.  One could revisit--or bring someone else to visit--any type of cache, and the experience not be what was expected for a variety of reasons (e.g. cache moved, missing, NM, container changed, muggles, etc.)

Edited by RufusClupea
0

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RufusClupea said:

Ironically, "new improved" versions of the same gadget probably occur quite often, e.g. when a gadget fails for some reason, and CO maintenance to restore it results in improving the original concept, design, fabrication, or combination thereof.

This is actually the meaning I intended. It doesn't happen as often now as it did when I started, but some cache owners would occasionally replace missing/damaged caches and then invite previous finders to return to find the replacement and post another Find log. Generally, this was done when the replacement was significantly different from the original, to the point that finding the original wouldn't help you find the replacement. But it was one of the reasons why some people would post multiple Find logs for a single GC code.

Anyway, the replacement caches weren't necessarily "improved", except possibly when they were camouflaged better to prevent repeated muggling. They were mainly "new", or at least new enough for the CO to invite additional Find logs from anyone who returns and finds the replacement. And while I have returned to caches to show new geocachers caches that I was pretty sure they would enjoy, I haven't returned to any to post additional Find logs for a replaced cache.

Anyway, since the point of a gadget cache is the gadget, I would encourage you to give each new gadget its own emphasis, and to leave them in place as long as possible. Caches like that tend to become destination caches that people plan special trips for.

1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, niraD said:

But it was one of the reasons why some people would post multiple Find logs for a single GC code.

I would imagine that this would now be discouraged since they are changing the logging rules to only allow 1 "Found" log per GC code.

 

9 hours ago, niraD said:

Anyway, since the point of a gadget cache is the gadget, I would encourage you to give each new gadget its own emphasis

Right. Plus, once someone finds a cache, they would have no way to ever know it was significantly changed. I don't think players typically go back and read cache pages for ones they have already found.

0

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, niraD said:

Anyway, since the point of a gadget cache is the gadget,

Here, and I've been thinking the point of any cache is the cache--signing the log.  <Slaps Head>  Silly me!  :blink:

0

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, AB&JB said:

.... they are changing the logging rules to only allow 1 "Found" log per GC code.

There's so much to learn on this site, and so many caches to find, that I missed this.  Can you/anyone point me to where you saw/heard it?  TIA

0

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:

There's so much to learn on this site, and so many caches to find, that I missed this.  Can you/anyone point me to where you saw/heard it?  TIA

 

Here's one place:

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RufusClupea said:

There's so much to learn on this site, and so many caches to find, that I missed this.  Can you/anyone point me to where you saw/heard it?  TIA

I think  the confusion  may be the poster said, "they are changing the logging rules..." (sounding like it's going to be done) which was incorrect, as they were already changed before you joined.    :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, RufusClupea said:

There's so much to learn on this site, and so many caches to find, that I missed this.  Can you/anyone point me to where you saw/heard it?  TIA

Some things are just easier to test for yourself.  Open a cache you have already logged as found.  Try to log another find.  (If it is accepted, you can delete it).

0

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, RufusClupea said:

Here, and I've been thinking the point of any cache is the cache--signing the log.  <Slaps Head>  Silly me!  :blink:

Well, there are caches where the point is to sign/stamp the log and get the smiley, period. But most seem to have some other reason for existence, beyond merely providing a log for someone to sign. I know mine do.

0

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, niraD said:

But most seem to have some other reason for existence, beyond merely providing a log for someone to sign. I know mine do.

Exactly. So why shortchange some players who will only every likely find one of them. If you really have 2 ideas that are worth putting in the time and effort to build the gadget cache, just wait to put the second one out until you find another spot.

0

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/9/2017 at 7:43 PM, niraD said:

Well, there are caches where the point is to sign/stamp the log and get the smiley, period. But most seem to have some other reason for existence, beyond merely providing a log for someone to sign. I know mine do.

Nevertheless, one doesn't get credit unless one signs/stamps the log.  ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, AB&JB said:

Exactly. So why shortchange some players who will only every likely find one of them. If you really have 2 ideas that are worth putting in the time and effort to build the gadget cache, just wait to put the second one out until you find another spot.

Shortchange?  :huh: 

I'm sorry, but I don't think you're comprehending what I've been saying.  I'm disabled.  I know my limitations.  I cannot effectively/reasonably maintain more than a couple/very few sites.  Given those limitations, I think it's better to--and I'd rather--well-maintain a couple of sites than place a bunch that would likely fail in short order.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I really think the best solution is to find a collaborator. Look at finders of area caches, attend a few events, and post on the local geocaching group page. What you want to do doesn't fit with the current rules of a global game. You can spend time and effort trying to change it or you can devote your efforts to finding a strategy that works for your unique situation. One other source of collaboraters might be local nonprofits. Libraries, museums, and local parks might be willing to maintain clever caches if given supplies and instructions.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/3/2017 at 0:18 PM, RufusClupea said:

Is there anything in the "rules" or intent/spirit to bar/dissuade a CO from changing/modifying a cache?

It's difficult for me to get around (sometimes more difficult than others)  SPOZE... I build a gadget cache and get it approved as, say... D=3, T=1.  Then after a while (several months?) I come up with another gadget cache of similar difficulty.  

 

On 8/3/2017 at 0:32 PM, cerberus1 said:

The problem with "switching it out" is it isn't the same cache.  Most we know of have spares of the same... If you're gonna replace a gadget for another completely different, archive it and replace with a new cache (in that same  fabulous spot).

 

On 8/3/2017 at 0:53 PM, noncentric said:

... If your goal is to provide cachers with a fun/interesting/cool/etc experience, then place that new gadget* as a separate cache.  Whether it's in the same location or a different one, the new gadget* should be a separate cache listing.

*By "new gadget", I mean a different gadget experience, not just a re-creation of the original gadget.  If the same gadget is repaired/replaced with another that works the same way, then that's not what I mean about a "new gadget".

I think cereberus1 and noncentric answered your question in the first two reply posts.  IF you are simply maintaining, fixing, the same gadget, it's the same cache experience for the finder.  If you are replacing the cache with another gadget (similar difficulty maybe, same location) the solution is to archive the original and create a new cache listing for the new gadget.

It seems you have several gadgets you want to place into play and "rotate" them frequently - you may need to change the frequency to once a year (giving local cachers time to find one before replacing it with another).  An alternate solution, as others have posted, is to collaborate with locals to place them in more locations in order to have them in play at the same time.

11 hours ago, RufusClupea said:

  I'm disabled.  I know my limitations.  I cannot effectively/reasonably maintain more than a couple/very few sites.  Given those limitations, I think it's better to--and I'd rather--well-maintain a couple of sites than place a bunch that would likely fail in short order.

And you can do this, with the caveat that the caches remain the same at each of those sites, or after a year or so, are archived and replaced with another gadget.  Different gadget=different cache.

0

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, Team Taran said:

I really think the best solution is to find a collaborator.

As I've said...

On 8/3/2017 at 4:27 PM, RufusClupea said:

[Collaborating] has always been part of the plan, but so far, no takers, and a good plan always accounts for contingencies.  Personally, in my years on this planet, I've learned to hope for the best, but plan for the worst, and have a Plan A.  If/when Plan A fails, there are 25 more letters.... :D

 

49 minutes ago, Team Taran said:

.... or you can devote your efforts to finding a strategy that works for your unique situation.

That's what this thread has been all about.  This strategy would work for my situation. 

With (estimates I've seen posted here or on YT range from 2.5 to 3 million) geocachers worldwide, I'm dubious that my "situation" is all that unique.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:

With (estimates I've seen posted here or on YT range from 2.5 to 3 million) geocachers worldwide, I'm dubious that my "situation" is all that unique.

There may be millions of geocachers worldwide, but there aren't nearly that many gadget cache developers/owners. And without swapping one gadget for another, there aren't as many reasons for recycling a cache location.

With that said, I have seen cache owners around here recycle cache locations occasionally. I'm thinking of doing that myself, replacing my puzzle cache with a cache that highlights a landmark at its final location (something I can't really do with the puzzle in its current form). But the puzzle has been around 10 years, which is pretty good as geocache permanence goes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

It seems you have several gadgets you want to place into play and "rotate" them frequently

Incorrect.  There would be no "repeat performances", so to speak.

briansnat mentioned, " The general minimum is at least three months " and I would consider that an absolute minimum; realistically, I would expect quite a bit longer.

I've addressed the collaboration issue several times already; is it somehow only appearing on my monitor ‽  :huh::blink:

35 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

And you can do this, with the caveat that the caches remain the same at each of those sites, or after a year or so, are archived and replaced with another gadget.  Different gadget=different cache.

Then it seems the only issue may be interpretation/negotiation of a "reasonable" time-frame.  I've addressed that above, but I hesitate to be bound/constrained by a year (even though, realistically, some could be that long or longer--it depends on my future... ability).

0

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/8/2017 at 8:35 AM, RufusClupea said:

As I read (and re-read) through the responses in this thread, I can't help but think that while this is not (IMO--IANAL) a Title III (ADA) issue, I don't think it would be the end of the world to allow a little reasonable accommodation, especially since I'd be trying to work within the guidelines to the best of my ability.

I'm also not a lawyer, but I'd wager that accommodations within the geocaching hobby would not fall until the ADA regulations. I think the accommodation is that you can work with another cacher, or even someone who is not a cacher but is willing to do the legwork (placing the cache and doing maintenance with your guidance). Geocaching is a hobby, and as with most hobbies, there are plenty of people that aren't able to participate to the extent they'd like because of physical limitations that are beyond their control. From the athlete that gets an injury that keeps them out of the game, to the kid that can't play sports with their friends because of a congenital heart defect, to the elderly person that can't climb mountains anymore, etc etc.

There are plenty of cachers, and people, with unique situations. That doesn't mean that everyone can have their unique situation accommodated, especially within the context of participation in a voluntary hobby.  Sometimes, life can be a harsh reality.

1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, RufusClupea said:

I've addressed the collaboration issue several times already; is it somehow only appearing on my monitor ‽  :huh::blink:

No, everyone reading this thread can see it. Of course, some people may not read it.

I think it's been mentioned by multiple posters because it's a good way to place more caches if you are unable to travel to multiple sites, and other posters have mentioned additional ways to find collaborators because you stated that you hadn't yet had success finding someone.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Rufus,

 

Based on this and other posts, you clearly enjoy geocaching and are off to a very enthusiastic start, and you're interested in bringing some quality caches into play.  For that, I thank you.  I'm a little jealous of the cachers in your area, since it sounds like they're going to start seeing some cool hides.

 

Others have pointed out the different guidelines that are in play, so I won't reiterate them.  At the end of the day, it is between you and your local reviewer as to how best to implement this idea while still meeting the requirements in the guidelines.  I would recommend asking your reviewer what time frame they were comfortable with as far as keeping a particular cache active (six months?  more?  less?) and then advertising that time frame on the cache page when you publish the listing.  When the deadline hits, archive that cache listing and then publish a new one with a new gadget.  (With enough advance coordination, your reviewer could have the new gadget cache listing primed and ready to go so there was minimal down time between caches.

 

If you still wanted folks to be able to experience the old gadgets even after their window was up, maybe you could host an event where you'd bring out the old gadgets.  It wouldn't count for multiple finds, but others could check it out and get to have fun with your design.

 

Does that help meet your intent?

0

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/11/2017 at 0:25 AM, RufusClupea said:

I'm sorry, but I don't think you're comprehending what I've been saying.  I'm disabled.  I know my limitations.  I cannot effectively/reasonably maintain more than a couple/very few sites.  Given those limitations, I think it's better to--and I'd rather--well-maintain a couple of sites than place a bunch that would likely fail in short order.

No, I get it. But what I'm saying is to make and place your first gadget cache. See what the maintenance is really like over a few months. During that time, attend an event, meet some other geocachers, and go from there. 

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0