+shunra Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 A puzzle cache in my area was recently archived. The container was left in place, log and all, however, and a new listing for a traditional cache appeared instead, without a puzzle, with 'real' coordinates. The new cache page says quite clearly that this replaces the ill-fated' previous puzzle cache. Now - I was a finder of the original puzzle cache - the only person who got to find it. What I don't want to do is delete my Find for the puzzle cache. I worked hard to get to the right coordinates. So what do I do about the new one? Since it's officially a new cache, logging a find on the new cache page makes sense. On the other hand, it's the same container, and the same log sheet, and logging the same cache twice is a no-no. Then again, not logging the new cache or logging it as a note means that it will be stuck there at the top of my 'nearest unfound' page forever. Not logging it will also be odd, since my name WILL be on the log sheet. So far, what I think of doing is treating it as if it were an entirely new cache, and not logging it until I go out there and sign the log again, with a new date. What do you guys and gals think? Quote
+pnew Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 (edited) I'd log it it gets it off your unfound list and technically you did find it. If anyone accuses you of "padding your stats" they've obviously got worse problems feeling the need to play Mr. or Mrs Voluntary Cache Ethics Administrator. Edited February 12, 2004 by pnew Quote
SBPhishy Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 Yeah. I would agree. I think you got lucky. I don't think it would be fair to you not to log it. Quote
+sea_dragon Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 I say congradulations on getting the coords through all of your hard work. You get a bonus cache!!!! Quote
+Divine Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 I wouldn't log a cache twice even in a case like this. The fact that there are 2 listings doesn't change the fact that there's only one physical cache. That's only one find in my book. Since there's no ignore this cache feature available (yet?), I'd probably change my first find (on the archived listing) to a note and edit it to explain the situation, and then log a find to the new listing. I'd probably date the log to that certain date when I found it, even if the newer listing date is after that. Of course, I'd explain the situation in the new log too. I'm not opposing to log it twice, like some have suggested. I just wouldn't do it myself. Quote
+The Cheeseheads Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 The simple solution is to just ask the cache owner. Personally, I would allow you to log it again, especially as a reward for finding it the first time. Quote
+sbell111 Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 Very interesting question. I think I would revisit the cache and log it as a find. This is why: It is not uncommon for a cache to be archived and another to be placed in the exact same location. If this were the case, you would visit the new cache and log your find. The only difference in your situation is that it is the same box and log. Quote
+Team GPSaxophone Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 Log both as a find. You did the work to solve the puzzle and found the cache. You also went to the location of the current cache and signed the logbook. Quote
+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 Well it's a 2fer in my book. Quote
+shunra Posted February 12, 2004 Author Posted February 12, 2004 I would follow Divine's idea, if that wouldn't remove the puzzle cache from my public profile. I'm proud of the puzzle caches that I solved, and want them to be visible! Since the 'ignore' function isn't available, not even in the pocket query section (wouldn't a PQ field for ignoring individual waypoints be an excellent solution?), I'll go with my gut feeling, and I appreciate all your support. I'll only do it after logging a new physical log, though, and I won't rush it, so as to give someone else a chance to log an FTF on the new cache, which I think they deserve. Even so, it's not an easy one! Quote
+Geo Ho Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 I say BONUS for you . . . log it. It's a lame find cuz you already know where it's at but it's still a legit find. Go for it! That's my opinion. . . such as it is. Happy caching and stuff! Quote
RandMan Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 The cache evidently has a new waypoint - therefore it's a new cache! In a situation like this I would hold back and let others go for the first-find. Quote
Radman Forever Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 We are the borg. Took all broken action figures and assimilated them into our collective Left Nothing. The Borg Quote
+Shawn&Holly Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 Geocaching is all about getting out of the house, into nature, enjoy the sights, if in doubt, use the information on the new cache page and go out and find it again. Take someone that was not with you the first time and let them locate the cache, resign the log book and then log the new cache online. I have visited a few caches that I had a difficult time locating the second time to get a TB, wait for a different season, depending on where you live if the terrain changes from winter to spring to summer to fall and make it a new search. Quote
uperdooper Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 Log both as a find. You did the work to solve the puzzle and found the cache. You also went to the location of the current cache and signed the logbook. what the smurf said. Quote
+Quest Master Posted February 12, 2004 Posted February 12, 2004 I had something like this happen to me once. Somebody archived their cache after I found it and then put it back in the same place under a new listing. I didn't notice that the coordinates were the same and went looking for it again. I was surprised to find the same container with the same logbook in the same place. I logged it anyway. Please feel free to deduct one from my official score if you do not agree. Some people are taking this find count stuff WAY to seriously! Quote
+shunra Posted February 13, 2004 Author Posted February 13, 2004 The cache evidently has a new waypoint - therefore it's a new cache! In a situation like this I would hold back and let others go for the first-find. Did that... Someone else had the FTF on the new one yesterday. Thank y'all for your input! Quote
+Happy Bubbles Posted February 13, 2004 Posted February 13, 2004 This happened with a cache in my area. It was a three stop multi, but the owner decided to make a traditional cache out the final. He posted a note on the new cache saying that anyone who logged the original cache could just log the new one, saying "been there done that" or copy/pasting their original log. Perhaps you could ask the owner? He or she would probably give you permission to log both. Quote
Recommended Posts
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.