When your old puzzle cache turns into a new mystery

[EnergySaver]

Ok, I’m not sure how this works:

My old “Port Puzzle” cache … GCK6YC … I retired it on 11/3/05 … but someone with an old printout managed to find it today!

This puzzle involved finding multiple “items of interest” that contained numbers to unscramble the coordinates to the final (which were a dead-end) and some words (which told you it was a dead-end and told you were the cache was) … but 2 of those “items of interest” are no longer in place (one being fairly important to figuring out what to do). Plus, the fact that I removed the container from it’s hiding spot 1 1/2 years ago!

So … I guess this person must have “filled in the gaps” some how and found the original container which originally went missing (most likely because an animal dragged it deep under the steps, into a hollow unreachable area full of junk). [theme from “Twilight Zone” is playing]

[RSplash40]

I’ve had containers go missing before…but not 2 years! Wow.

[bnb]

@EnergySaver wrote:

So … I guess this person must have “filled in the gaps” some how and found the original container which originally went missing

Their log states “Found where it should have been.” not that they found the container itself. Still a mystery how they derived the coords if one of the major clues is missing. You did state that you removed it from the steps on St. Mary’s Hill” so perhaps that was good enough to help.

[Team Deejay]

I would probably ask him to delete the log. I think bnb is right that they found “the spot where it was hidden”, not the cache itself.

[LightningBugs Mum]

You did put an option on there to get credit for it even if they didn’t find the cache itself (which it sounds like they did not). Did they email you with the correct answer? If so, then I would let them keep the find. If not, then I would email them about it. Though they are not “newbies”, neither do they have much experience with cache finding. I think some communication with them is in order before any action is taken.

[RSplash40]

Wholly geez, gc.com member since 2001 and only 36 found! Thats gotta be a record.

[Ray]

I am of mixed opinion here…

on one hand, I think that if this cacher wants to seek archived caches to find where they might have been, It’s his game let him have his fun.

On the other hand, once a cache is archived, it is out of play, kaput, done, over, toast; don’t even go there. If you have access to a computer to log your finds, then you can check the status of a cache before you seek it out. If you are finding caches at a rate of less than one per month, there is no reason to be using a cache sheet that is 18 months old.

We will be going on a 2-week vacation in August and we started watching about 400 caches along our route. Over the next 6 weeks we will be watching to make sure that the 25-50 we eventually visit are ready for us.

Obviously, a big cache count is really not what our subject wants. Perhaps he should consider changing his smiley to a memo. At least until he has the opportunity to communicate with the cache owner.
~tb

[Trekkin and Birdin]

Wholly geez, gc.com member since 2001 and only 36 found! Thats gotta be a record.

Or maybe it’s restraint? Extreme restraint?

[kent1915]

I had a couple micros from one of my series that kept disappearing. I would replace them, they would disappear. Then later the caches would return after I replaced. That was really irritating. But those were micros. Yep. Yours is a weird situation.

[EnergySaver]

THANKS FOR YOUR FEEDBACK … Some Comments Back …

(1) It’s true that I “let the cat of the bag” by stating it was under St Mary’s steps … however, they would not have that knowledge since they were using an old sheet.

(2) I had missed that they found where it should have been and I did allow for that (due to problems with containers) … but they never emailed me the location (but now I’ve revealed that location).

(3) I feel I can give them the benefit of the doubt that they truly did complete the whole puzzle and ended up in the right place (some how) … even though they shouldn’t have been caching from such an ancient piece of paper.

MY DECISION … It’s not that big of a deal … the puzzle is very time consuming, completing the puzzle steps is 95% of the “work”, 5% is finding the spot/cache … I’m going to leave their “find” stand as is.

[LightningBugs Mum]

Sounds rational. It’s an isolated incident that I would let be as well.

[draconis dave]

Hey, it may be a bit off the mark, but my ‘Crossing Franks Path’ (GCGJ73) went missing sometime near May 2005. Then on Christmas 2006, hillardr found it 200 feet from where it should have been. The only explanation was malicious intent, as any grounds keeping wouldn’t have moved it.

I went out and retrieved ti and intend to recycle it, as it was a good container.

I couldn’t reactivate it, as there were other new ones nearby too close.

[Thraxman]

@RSplash40 wrote:

Wholly geez, gc.com member since 2001 and only 36 found! Thats gotta be a record.

Well, people who make a habit of hunting retired caches tend to have unusually low find rates.

[EnergySaver]

Good Point!

It’s one thing to have 500 “finds” … but much more impressive to have 10 “finds that are not there”.

[Author]

Posts