Jump to content

cache disabling guidelines


Team CeDo

Recommended Posts

Recently a fellow cacher posted a "needs maintenance note" on one our caches and stated that due to all of the construction a good sized lake was removed from the area, so a Reviewer disabled our cache in less than 48 hours w/o giving us time to respond (we were at Universal Studios and caching in orlando, FL for the day) only to find, everything was still there and the big lake- well it was still there too. I have posted a needs maintenance note recently that a soaking wet log needs to be replaced in a cahce that we recently found. That cache has not been disabled by a reviewer and that was 6 days ago, nor has the owner posted a owners note.

 

Is there any kind of guideline in place that allows a reviewer to disable your cache without doing the proper research and allowing for the owner of the cache ample time to go and check on it?? Yes we are, I'm sure considered newbe's by many of you out there, howeverwe have hidden some caches and the other cachers in our neck of the woods sure know who we are and that we take care of our caches!!! as well as follow the Geocaching guidelines. i also wrote a note to that reviewer and got absolutely no response. If there are no guidelines for the reviewers to follow in this situation, i think that some need to be implimented immediately. Fellow cachers were not able to go out and look for our cache, because someone who had less than 3 finds at the time-really screwed up and the Reviewer took action without doing research.

 

NOT FAIR!!!

Link to comment

No. There's no guideline for disabling caches. Since disabling a cache means that the cache itself remains listed on the site there should be no reason why fellow cachers couldn't look up the cache and find it online.

 

Additionally, if you felt that the cache shouldn't have been disabled it is well within your power to re-enable it at any time.

 

Although I understand your frustration with the situation of having an inexperienced geocacher submit a needs maintainence note, I feel that erring on the side of caution seems to have far more positives than negatives.

Link to comment

Recently a fellow cacher posted a "needs maintenance note" on one our caches and stated that due to all of the construction a good sized lake was removed from the area, so a Reviewer disabled our cache in less than 48 hours w/o giving us time to respond (we were at Universal Studios and caching in orlando, FL for the day) only to find, everything was still there and the big lake- well it was still there too. I have posted a needs maintenance note recently that a soaking wet log needs to be replaced in a cahce that we recently found. That cache has not been disabled by a reviewer and that was 6 days ago, nor has the owner posted a owners note.

 

Is there any kind of guideline in place that allows a reviewer to disable your cache without doing the proper research and allowing for the owner of the cache ample time to go and check on it?? Yes we are, I'm sure considered newbe's by many of you out there, howeverwe have hidden some caches and the other cachers in our neck of the woods sure know who we are and that we take care of our caches!!! as well as follow the Geocaching guidelines. i also wrote a note to that reviewer and got absolutely no response. If there are no guidelines for the reviewers to follow in this situation, i think that some need to be implimented immediately. Fellow cachers were not able to go out and look for our cache, because someone who had less than 3 finds at the time-really screwed up and the Reviewer took action without doing research.

 

NOT FAIR!!!

I feel your frustration. You just need to remember that carp happens and I for one applaud you for placing caches and for caring about your caches this passionately. Just take a deep breath remember we are all humans, even TPTB, and as such we make mistakes.

Hang in there and it'll get better. :P

Link to comment

thanks to all the replied. but i do think that a "reviewer" needs to have a few more guidelines before they go and disable a cache especially so quickly!!

 

thanks!!

 

What they should to is email the owner and not mess with the cache before they hear back (or don't hear back whichever the case may be). What they actually do is archive/disable the cache. It's quicker and you get an automatic email. However you also have to undo what they did.

Link to comment

The reviewers do have guidelines for when it's appropriate to archive a geocache, vs. a less drastic action such as an e-mail to the owner or disabling the cache. That's because an archival cannot easily be reversed by the owner.

 

Disabling a cache is a tool we use frequently in response to complaints. It is one common response to "Needs Archived" logs, which reviewers receive notices for. If the owner resolves the problem and enables the cache, it's all good. If time goes by with no action, the disabled cache gets archived.

 

The OP should bear in mind that reviewers are not automatically notified when a "needs maintenance" log is placed on a cache. Nor should we be. That's because the community asked for a less drastic log type to flag problems, short of asking for a cache to be archived. So, for a reviewer to have taken action, they first need to learn of the problem. In this case, it's quite possible that a geocacher wrote an e-mail to the reviewer. In the OP's other example, a "needs maintenance" log because of a wet logbook, the reviewer likely has no idea that it's there. Nor does the reviewer need to be involved in that situation. In contrast, a "changed landscape" issue is a common scenario where a reviewer is asked to look at a cache.

Link to comment

Call me crazy...but before questioning guidelines and complaining on the forums, wouldnt it behoove one to use that little "send message" button and contact their local reviewer about the situation? I can only speak for my experience with my local reviewer, but he has bent over backwards to help me out with various situations. You might just find that your local reviewer is an OK guy afterall.

Link to comment

I'd be thankful for the dedication and quick response you got from your reviewer. Perhaps the other side of the coin would be a cache like this one. It's hard for us cachers to understand if reviewer action is too fast or slow because we don't know what's going on behind the scenes. Our volunteers do a thankless job and we owe them our gratitude for what gets done whether fast or slow.

Edited by n0wae
Link to comment

Call me crazy...but before questioning guidelines and complaining on the forums, wouldnt it behoove one to use that little "send message" button and contact their local reviewer about the situation? I can only speak for my experience with my local reviewer, but he has bent over backwards to help me out with various situations. You might just find that your local reviewer is an OK guy afterall.

 

I did send an email to the reviewer, however he negelected to respond to me and to this day still has not.

Link to comment

I'm one of the two reviewers in your area who receives the NEEDS ARCHIVED logs for Florida. I'm not seeing anything by you that I've disabled, though that's tough to check without a GC#.

 

Needs Maintenance logs are not sent on to reviewers. I'd guess that in addition to a maintenance log, the cacher must have also emailed a reviewer, presumably with something dire enough for the reviewer to temporarily disable the cache. Construction zones in Florida are considered to be No Trespass areas, whether posted or not, likely the cacher found themselves crossing a construction area, and emailed the reviewer with that.

 

If a reviewer temporarily disables your cache, and you determine that all is well, just re-enable it. You can also remove the maintenance Icon with a maintenance performed log.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...