Jump to content

Lonely Caches - Does time include maintenance/ CO check?


Recommended Posts

A question about lonely caches.   I'm trying to get a feel on if a cache is considered lonely if its been checked by its owner, but not found for years.

 

The example would be that a cache was last found in 2018, but it was checked by the owner in early 2020.  Is this cache considered 1 year or 3 years lonely?

 

Now to add confusion to the mix, how to you if it was checked by a previous finder instead of the CO?

I think its 3 years lonely in both cases.

 

There is no prize or glory that I can see other than possibly for some early challenge cache that I am not aware of. And likely the glory is in my own mind.

I am just curious what the consensus is.

  • Surprised 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, marvin_gardens said:

A question about lonely caches.   I'm trying to get a feel on if a cache is considered lonely if its been checked by its owner, but not found for years.

 

The example would be that a cache was last found in 2018, but it was checked by the owner in early 2020.  Is this cache considered 1 year or 3 years lonely?

 

Now to add confusion to the mix, how to you if it was checked by a previous finder instead of the CO?

I think its 3 years lonely in both cases.

 

In all the old lonely cache challenges I've seen, they're only looking at Found logs. OMs by owners and WNs by previous finders don't count and don't reset the clock.

 

  • Helpful 3
Link to post

I agree with that, only Found logs reset the timer.

 

If there was a particularly difficult Puzzle cache that was last Found in 2016 but had received yearly visits from the CO to make sure it was still good, I'd consider that un-found for five years.

  • Helpful 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, marvin_gardens said:

A question about lonely caches.   I'm trying to get a feel on if a cache is considered lonely if its been checked by its owner, but not found for years.

The example would be that a cache was last found in 2018, but it was checked by the owner in early 2020.  Is this cache considered 1 year or 3 years lonely?

Now to add confusion to the mix, how to you if it was checked by a previous finder instead of the CO?

I think its 3 years lonely in both cases.

There is no prize or glory that I can see other than possibly for some early challenge cache that I am not aware of.

And likely the glory is in my own mind.

I am just curious what the consensus is.

 

I feel you're correct, that "glory" is in your own mind, though last we noticed, there were 12 "lonely" challenges still in play.   :)

Most we know wouldn't count a CO's, or another's "check".    

Link to post

The obvious answer is that it's up to the CO of the challenge cache. But unless they're pretty clear about it -- and I've never seen that -- I'd assume it's just find logs. I wouldn't expect a problem, but, worst case, I'd be ready to try to talk the CO into accepting my finds if he initially rejects them.

 

(I don't think I've actually run into enough caches in this state to cause me a problem in achieving a clear success at the challenge. What keeps happening to me is that I far exceed the requirement by the time I get around to signing the challenge cache log even when there's an initial period where I have to work towards that goal. Once I started looking for unfound caches, I couldn't stop myself.)

 

My reaction to your question is that this is a good reason not to call them "lonely" precisely because it opens up this ambiguity: a CO's or previous finder's visit means they're not lonely, right? "Unfound" is more accurate, but not as cute. I think "unloved" works here: someone that can't find a friend might be called "unloved" even though their parents love them.

 

The first few challenges I saw of this type used the terms "recovered" and "neglected", but those have fallen out of favor. I always liked those terms better, but I don't think they're any better at making it obvious CO visits don't count. Indeed, "neglected" kinda implies even more strongly than "lonely" that the CO hasn't visited.

  • Surprised 1
Link to post

Internally,  I think there is more "glory" attached to hunting a cache with no logs for 5 years, than hunting one with a more recent owner maintenance log.  Even more glory attaches if the previous log was a DNF.   (Friends of mine found a south Florida paddle cache unfound for 7 years, with the last logs as 3 DNFs by group).

 

My favorite FTF was  of a cache unfound for a year - but slightly less wonderful than it might be, as the CO disabled for a while that year (flooding) and then checked and found it okay.

So it sat for a year, but was disabled part of the time, and CO visit. Hey, I still got there first ;-)

 

A slightly different question - I've seen two forms of lonely challenge checker:

1)  checks your find date against previous find date. Intervening logs don't matter.  Cache might have spent the intervening year(s) disabled, but the checker is ONLY looking at date of find logs.

2) average of finds over life of cache  - on that checker my   best is on a multi where I was the only finder.  Cache was active for a while.

Edited by Isonzo Karst
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

I use the same as the consensus — previous found log… but with the tweak ‘previous found log which wasn’t today’ in the case of a group finding a lonely cache.

 

p.s. I also include archived if the container is still present.  My best is 6 years, 11 months, 3 days since previous find.

Edited by barefootguru
Link to post

I'm a fan of hunting lonely caches.  But, I've run into a few problems/questions.

Cache last found in 2015.  Two DNFs.  CO replaced it in 2020.  Five year lonely?

Found a cache in 2017.  Last finder, in 2015,  did not sign the log.  "I was out today running errands and trying to fill in another loop of my D/T grid."  Three mile round trip hike, and  a climb up a boulder (Unless you have long arms.)  Find before that was 2012.

Out helping my sister hide some caches in 2018.  Spotted an ammo can!  Final for a multi archived bythe reviewer in 2015, because the first stage was missing and not replaced.  Last found/logged in 2014.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 7/19/2021 at 12:40 PM, dprovan said:

My reaction to your question is that this is a good reason not to call them "lonely" precisely because it opens up this ambiguity: a CO's or previous finder's visit means they're not lonely, right? "Unfound" is more accurate, but not as cute. I think "unloved" works here: someone that can't find a friend might be called "unloved" even though their parents love them.

 

And parents are a good reason why lonely can still actually work - a child can be lonely having no friends or visits, even though living with family and doing stuff with them.  That's how I think of a 'lonely cache' - lonely of new faces, of non-"family" it may see "every day" (well, maintenance checks) :)

Link to post
8 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

I'm a fan of hunting lonely caches.  But, I've run into a few problems/questions.

Here's how I feel about them:

 

8 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Cache last found in 2015.  Two DNFs.  CO replaced it in 2020.  Five year lonely?

Not lonely. I consider the container being what's lonely, so the timer resets if the cache is replaced.

 

8 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Found a cache in 2017.  Last finder, in 2015,  did not sign the log.  "I was out today running errands and trying to fill in another loop of my D/T grid."  Three mile round trip hike, and  a climb up a boulder (Unless you have long arms.)  Find before that was 2012.

So you're saying the 2015 log was not an actual find of that cache? I'd use it if I thought the case I was presenting was solid, but I wouldn't argue if the CO rejects it.

 

8 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Out helping my sister hide some caches in 2018.  Spotted an ammo can!  Final for a multi archived bythe reviewer in 2015, because the first stage was missing and not replaced.  Last found/logged in 2014.

Ooooh! Lonely, for sure. To me, the administrative status of the cache is entirely irrelevant.

Link to post
On 7/22/2021 at 4:25 AM, dprovan said:
On 7/21/2021 at 7:50 PM, Harry Dolphin said:

Out helping my sister hide some caches in 2018.  Spotted an ammo can!  Final for a multi archived bythe reviewer in 2015, because the first stage was missing and not replaced.  Last found/logged in 2014.

Ooooh! Lonely, for sure. To me, the administrative status of the cache is entirely irrelevant.

 

Interesting. I'd sure log the find, but internally, I'm not sure I'd consider that find "lonely".  

I've both deliberately hunted archived and fallen over them.    Oddly perhaps, and purely subjective, I'd be more inclined to think a find lonely if I'd deliberately targeted it, rather than just happened on it.  Certainly if it's archived.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Time since last found and time since last maintenance are two different measures, both relevant. The last of the two, too. I wouldn't rule out any. I believe that the Project-GC number is about the last found.

 

The whole concept about lonely caches is important and I really would love to see "lonely days" challenges be allowed again. That is just about the only challenge I would consider creating myself.

Link to post
12 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

Time since last found and time since last maintenance are two different measures, both relevant. The last of the two, too. I wouldn't rule out any. I believe that the Project-GC number is about the last found.

 

The whole concept about lonely caches is important and I really would love to see "lonely days" challenges be allowed again. That is just about the only challenge I would consider creating myself.

 

 

I get the whole 'Lonely Cache' thing and think that highlighting them for hunting is a worthwhile thing for GC to do.

 

I would suggest that the 'Loneliness' exclude the current day. If two cachers independently go out to snag the same Lonely Cache at the end of an ordeal (long hike, complex field puzzle, etc.) then one person is going to be mightily disappointed after putting in a lot of effort.

 

Likewise with two people going out together; only one of them would be able to claim the 'Lonely Find', whether it's just sayin', or a Challenge, Souvenir or whatever.

 

A find 'yesterday' would make it no longer lonely. A find 'today' wouldn't reset the clock.

 

Yes, someone could see someone's 'find' in the morning and decide to go get it themself later in the day because they now KNOW it's there, but I'd consider that gaming the system and wouldn't do it for a Challenge. 

 

And no, this isn't the same as a FTF. For THAT strictly conceptual prize, you have to have your name FIRST in the paper log.
 

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...