Reviewer Disabling a Cache

[+blackoakred]

After reading this post, I am confused. How do reviewers know that a cache needs to be disabled or archived? I have no agenda in asking this, I am just curious.

[+Isonzo Karst]

They might receive a Needs Archived log, or a private email that would cause them to look at the cache.

[+blackoakred]

So if someone posts a "needs to be archived" note for a cache, the note goes to the reviewer also?

[+luckycharmer]

After reading this post, I am confused. How do reviewers know that a cache needs to be disabled or archived? I have no agenda in asking this, I am just curious.

 

After reading through that post, I think everyone was left confused and still wondering.

[+briansnat]

They may receive a complaint from someone. Also, reviewers are geocachers too. They encounter caches with possible problems just like any other geocacher would.

[+StarBrand]

So if someone posts a "needs to be archived" note for a cache, the note goes to the reviewer also?

yes. It doesn't mean they will take any immediate action but they will look into it maybe email the owner. Depends on the situation.

[+Isonzo Karst]

Needs archived logs are forwarded to a local reviewer, yes.

[+JohnnyVegas]

SBA and Needs Maint. logs go to reviewers, at that point the reviewer will contact the cache owner reg any issus with the cache.

 

But reading the logs for the cache that was archived leads me to believe the real reason was not mentioned. To archive a cache becuase it has not been for a few months evan after the cache owner checked does appear to be a little strange. In N. Cal we have over 16,000 caches within 100 miles, some caches around get found only once a year, not because of a problem with the cache, ther are just so many to find.

I think evan Alamo has trouble keeping up with all the caches that get hidden here wvery month

[Keystone]

Correcting the prior post by Johnny Vegas, a "needs maintenance" log is NOT automatically sent to Groundspeak or any volunteer cache reviewers. That is the whole reason why the log type was added -- in response to community demand for something less drastic than "needs archived."

 

In addition to reacting to "needs archived" logs, e-mail complaints and personal observations, reviewers may also notice caches with lots of DNF's through their normal browsing of cache pages. Some reviewers may order pocket queries for all caches with the "needs maintenance" attribute, to make sure that the listing meets the "Cache Maintenance" guideline. I do that maybe once or twice a year, to catch caches that really should have a "needs archived" log rather than a "needs maintenance" log.

[+Mopar]

But reading the logs for the cache that was archived leads me to believe the real reason was not mentioned. To archive a cache becuase it has not been for a few months evan after the cache owner checked does appear to be a little strange. In N. Cal we have over 16,000 caches within 100 miles, some caches around get found only once a year, not because of a problem with the cache, ther are just so many to find.

I think evan Alamo has trouble keeping up with all the caches that get hidden here wvery month

I guess you didn't actually read that thread? The cache wasn't archived until after the cache owner posted a log on the cache page saying he had removed the cache.

[+blackoakred]

Thanks for the clarification. Now I have an even greater appreciation for my reviewer. I thought the reviewers were busy enough just responding to and approving new cache submissions. I had no idea that they also were sent the other info also.

[+Renegade Knight]

After reading this post, I am confused. How do reviewers know that a cache needs to be disabled or archived? I have no agenda in asking this, I am just curious.

 

For disabled factor in logs, emails etc. and take their best guess. The disable is their way of getting your attention rather than a direct email. Not sure why.

 

Pretty much the same for archived.

[+Sileny Jizda]

I think a few DNF's shouldn't be cause for a disable. Even a long time between finds doesn't mean much really. We ran out to check our caches after one DNF at first until we realized we should just wait for a few more. Personally, we wait for three DNF's before checking it out unless we already have a scheduled check run planned. One DNF/maintenance request had us hoppin' for a few weeks wondering about the state of the cache. Came to discover the cacher looking for it actually found an old log book and bag from a previous hide in the area ours was in. Somehow we missed it when checking the area because it was hidden in a tree. The cacher missed finding our cache by literally 20' because of it.

[Keystone]

I think a few DNF's shouldn't be cause for a disable. Even a long time between finds doesn't mean much really.

It all depends on the cache. Three DNF's in a row on a difficulty 4 nano in a secure hiding place is of little concern to an active cache owner, let alone a volunteer reviewer. Three DNF's in a row on a 1/1 cache near a playground, hidden by an owner who hasn't logged into Geocaching.com for six months... now that's where I might disable the cache page, especially if a prior finder reports that they cannot locate the cache.