"Temporarily" Disabled

[+Charbs]

What's the deal with people "temporarily" disabling a listing and after a year (or longer! ) they still haven't done maintenance or archived it.

 

In searching a couple mile radius from my own home, I found over a dozen caches that had been "temporarily" disabled for anywhere from 6 months to 2 1/2 years!

 

I've started marking them with a "Needs Archived" tag, but some of them have already been done months ago with no result. Does anybody know if this sends a note to just the cache owner, or also to a reviewer? Why aren't the reviewers removing these submitted caches? If the reviewers are too busy to deal with this, maybe Groundspeak should institute an auto-archive of any caches that have been temporarily disabled for more than, say, 6 months. If that's not possible, than I'll volunteer to review temporarily disabled caches and archive them as necessary.

 

Living in Victoria, BC, we have a huge number of caches locally. Cache saturation is somewhat an issue, and it's frustrating to not be able to hide caches in great places because there's a temporarily disabled cache still there that's been defunct for months or years.

 

That's my rant for the day...

[+Knight2000]

A SBA log alerts the local reviewer. It shouldn't be long now...

[+Charbs]

A SBA log alerts the local reviewer. It shouldn't be long now...

 

I wish that were true, but it seems more than a couple caches were submitted for archiving over 2 months ago and are still "temporarily" disabled. Hopefully it'll happen this time.

[+Hrethgir]

I have a cache that's been temp disabled since October, I think it was. It's mounted on a dock, and the dock gets pulled out of the water during the winter season, so there's nowhere to put the cache right now. As soon as the dock goes back into the water, so does the cache! At least this gave me a chance to repaint and upgrade parts of the cache that needed it, so it will look and a little better and last a little longer than it would have before.

[+Cache O'Plenty]

In our area, "disabled" is supposed be only long enough to get out there and fix it, normally a "couple of weeks". This isn't hard and fast though. If the CO has to keep it out of commission for longer than that (like your "dock" issue) he merely posts periodic notes to the page to indicate how long it will be down. Then everyone knows.

 

Our reviewer does a good job of watching over disabled caches and getting them either fixed or archived.

 

And, yes, SBA logs go the the Reviewers. NM logs do not.

[+Charbs]

I agree with you Cache O'Plenty. It should (and common sense denotes it does) mean a couple of weeks offline until you can get out and check on it, replace it, or find it gone, and disable it. What frustrates me is the times when they're TD'd with a note saying "I'll have to check on this one" and then nothing for 6 months... a year... 2 years... The cachers are out every day or couple of days finding new caches, but they don't bother to take 30 minutes and maintain their own.

 

I have no issue with a cache that has to be TD'd because the location is not available due to season, or vegetation rehabilitation, etc. As long as the CO explains that, it's perfectly understandable. Here in Victoria we don't have issues really with caches that can't be accessed in the winter due to snow or what have you, but for other areas, it's entirely understandable (such as a dock being removed for the season)

[+NYPaddleCacher]

In our area, "disabled" is supposed be only long enough to get out there and fix it, normally a "couple of weeks". This isn't hard and fast though. If the CO has to keep it out of commission for longer than that (like your "dock" issue) he merely posts periodic notes to the page to indicate how long it will be down. Then everyone knows.

 

Our reviewer does a good job of watching over disabled caches and getting them either fixed or archived.

 

And, yes, SBA logs go the the Reviewers. NM logs do not.

 

Out here on the other coast, where we actually *have* seasons, April to October is occasionally referred to as construction season. Winters here often prevent any sort of road construction. There are many places where snow and ice closes public trails or prevents safe access to caches hidden in some areas. As a result, it's not that uncommon for a cache to be temporarily disabled for much longer than two weeks.

[+Cache O'Plenty]

Understand about seasonal non-availability but that should be covered in the "out of commission" log. Communication is the key. If it's going to be down for more than a few weeks, the CO should post logs that explain that - not just "Will fix it soon....". And, when that condition expires, periodic updates (at least monthly) should be posted. Otherwise it just appears abandoned.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Understand about seasonal non-availability but that should be covered in the "out of commission" log. Communication is the key. If it's going to be down for more than a few weeks, the CO should post logs that explain that - not just "Will fix it soon....". And, when that condition expires, periodic updates (at least monthly) should be posted. Otherwise it just appears abandoned.

 

There is no such thing as an "out of commission" log. There are several log that one, as an owner can use.

 

Temporarily Disabled Listing: This should be used a cache might not be available temporarily for any reason. Like you said, "temporary", at least according to guidelines should only be a couple of weeks at most but as you suggest if it's going to be anything longer than that the owner should explain why. My local reviewer, and I imagine many others will send a note to the cache owner if it's temporarily disabled for much longer (typically several months). An owner which ignores these warnings will have their cache archived by the reviewer.

 

Archive: An owner can archive a cache (and should subsequently remove the container) if it's not going to be maintained. There are numerous reasons why a cache might be archived and it essentially makes it unavailable for any subsequent finds. There are very occasionally caches which are unarchived (only a reviewer can do it) but it doesn't happen often. I suspect what you refer to as an "out of commission" log is actually an archive log.

 

Write a Note: Anyone can post a "write a note" log and as you said it's a good idea for a CO to post them if there is some reason why a cache might not be available for an extended length of time.

 

Owner Maintenance: Should be used anytime the CO has performed some kind of maintenance on the cache. I personally prefer to use them on my caches when I've maintenance (even the cache doesn't necessarily require it) as it provides a good flag to show others that the cache is actively being maintained.

 

As a cache seeker you are free to post a "Should Be Archived" on a cache when it's appropriate. Bear in mind that although a CO should be responsive to a cache need of maintenance, quite often the local community will maintain the physical container and logbook when the owner has essentially left the game. Posting an SBA on a cache that is more or less maintained by the community because you want to place one in that location might deprive others from finding a cache that has a certain amount of historical value. The two oldest caches in my area are essentially maintained by the community and it would be a shame to have them archived just because someone wanted to place a cache in area where they are located.

[+legacypac]

The "temporarily disabled" rule is not so evenly enforced. I live in BC like you and find that in BC caches can be down for months or years, with SBA notes even, with no action. I also cache in WA state where the reviewers seem to proactively post warning notes on disabled caches, followed by archiving. Differant reviewers, differant standards.

 

I've found that maybe 10% of the time a SBA note will spur an inactive owner into action to fix it. Maybe 30% of the time the owner will just archive it. You might get a nasty or pity me note. In BC sometimes the reviewer will do something with an SBA note, but most of the time not. I personally think our reviewer is overworked as he covers several US states too.

 

Dead caches (often the only thing remaining is the web listing) clutter up searches and waste caching time when you go looking and find the cache should have been disabled or archived ages ago.

 

I will be spending next weekend caching in Victoria, so I've got a personal interest in "cleaning up the playing field" there before I head over. There was/is a discussion on the BCGA forums about this exact issue in Victoria.

 

One other suggestion - if the general location is a good one - consider placing and submitting a new cache within 161 m of the long dead one. You could post a reviewer note with a link to the long dead cache asking that it be archived in favor of your cache. The reviewer will then have to choose between allowing the long dead cache and your new live one.

[+Cache O'Plenty]

Understand about seasonal non-availability but that should be covered in the "out of commission" log. Communication is the key. If it's going to be down for more than a few weeks, the CO should post logs that explain that - not just "Will fix it soon....". And, when that condition expires, periodic updates (at least monthly) should be posted. Otherwise it just appears abandoned.

 

There is no such thing as an "out of commission" log. There are several log that one, as an owner can use.

 

Understand the comment. I was referring to the Disabled log that reported that it was to be down (aka "out of commission" and, thus, unavailable. That's why I quoted the reference.

Temporarily Disabled Listing: This should be used a cache might not be available temporarily for any reason. Like you said, "temporary", at least according to guidelines should only be a couple of weeks at most but as you suggest if it's going to be anything longer than that the owner should explain why. My local reviewer, and I imagine many others will send a note to the cache owner if it's temporarily disabled for much longer (typically several months). An owner which ignores these warnings will have their cache archived by the reviewer.

 

Archive: An owner can archive a cache (and should subsequently remove the container) if it's not going to be maintained. There are numerous reasons why a cache might be archived and it essentially makes it unavailable for any subsequent finds. There are very occasionally caches which are unarchived (only a reviewer can do it) but it doesn't happen often. I suspect what you refer to as an "out of commission" log is actually an archive log.

 

Write a Note: Anyone can post a "write a note" log and as you said it's a good idea for a CO to post them if there is some reason why a cache might not be available for an extended length of time.

 

Owner Maintenance: Should be used anytime the CO has performed some kind of maintenance on the cache. I personally prefer to use them on my caches when I've maintenance (even the cache doesn't necessarily require it) as it provides a good flag to show others that the cache is actively being maintained.

Good practice for demonstrating CO maintenance. This type log also will remove the "Needs Maintenance attribute (the red cross) if one exists on the cache)

 

As a cache seeker you are free to post a "Should Be Archived" on a cache when it's appropriate. Bear in mind that although a CO should be responsive to a cache need of maintenance, quite often the local community will maintain the physical container and logbook when the owner has essentially left the game. Posting an SBA on a cache that is more or less maintained by the community because you want to place one in that location might deprive others from finding a cache that has a certain amount of historical value. The two oldest caches in my area are essentially maintained by the community and it would be a shame to have them archived just because someone wanted to place a cache in area where they are located.

If a community is maintaining a cache for an absent CO, for whatever reason, I'd suggest they place it on their Watchlist so they will receive e-mails for all logs. They could try to adopt it but that's addressed in another thread.

[+Knight2000]

A SBA log alerts the local reviewer. It shouldn't be long now...

I meant it shouldnt be long because a reviewer will see your post on the boards and intervene. The first statement was just a factual FYI.