Jump to content

Slaughtering orphans


Recommended Posts

What you are proposing is predicated on the owner actually responding.

The caches are archived because they are not responding.

 

Hello? :D

Is this thing on? :D

 

Or would the notice spur the community into taking on a general maintenance of the neglected cache?

 

(the argument could be made that if the community cared about the cache they'd already be looking after it and the notice wouldn't matter)

Link to comment

Right. If locals cared, they would be taking care of it already. I've enabled caches where a local person wrote to me and said that it was fixed and they and others were watching it.

 

Great example? A cacher passed away in one of my areas. He was well known and well respected. The community contacted me, told me about his passing and said that they will be watching his caches. They are still active to this day and no one felt the need to have them moved over to their accounts.

Link to comment

What you are proposing is predicated on the owner actually responding.

The caches are archived because they are not responding.

 

Hello? :D

Is this thing on? :D

:)

I'm not proposing anything. But as you insisted on answering a question about forced adoption, and asked for clarification on the original matter, I made another attempt to explain. At least you seem to be on the same wavelength now!

 

So I would point out that a local might manage to achieve something that the reviewer can't, if the cache is of interest, and contact the cache owner. For instance, if such a cache was brought to my attention around here I expect I'd be able to obtain a phone number for the owner within a couple of days. Perhaps we'd agree on an adoption, or perhaps not.

 

But as things are, chances are that I'd have logged the cache some time ago and wouldn't notice the reviewer note. So I see that a list of "caches people might want to arrange adoption for" could possibly be of some limited use. That's all it is, and if it looks like too much work then maybe it's not worth it.

Link to comment

Frankly, if you *can* get the unresponsive owner to reply to you after archival, I would bet if you were to email the reviewer and if the formerly unresponsive owner were to finally email the reviewer within a week or two after archival, that the reviewer might work with the formerly unresponsive cache owner and the prospective adopter to get the cache unarchived so it can be transfered. I know I might, but not after more time than that has passed. It all depends on the situation.

 

If the location is oh so important, all someone has to do is place a new container and list a new cache.

 

Of all of the hundreds of caches I've archived due to unresponsive cache owners, I don't think I've had more than a handful pop up and say they want their cache unarchived and that they have it fixed.

Link to comment
"would Groundspeak care to consider giving warning of forthcoming cache archiving in the weekly e-mail? This will give local cachers due notice, and allow them to attempt adoption of caches before it's too late.".

 

What your talking about would require Site Coding, something not the responsibility of Reviewers. As such I'd suggest a new topic is started in the Main Site Forum, to bring it to the attention of the Lackeys who are responsible for doing so.

 

There is nothing to stop anyone putting local caches on a Watch/Bookmark list, so that they are notified of new posts to any cache which it appears the owner is not maintaining. As already stated very few caches are immediately Archived. The majority of these are Landowner Requests that the container is removed or they have already removed the container.

 

Needs Maintenance & Needs Archiving Logs, flag up cache issues. Which lets those watching the caches who might be interested in adopting them,know that they need to attempt to contact the cache owner with the aim of adopting them. Or lets them post details of the cache to their local forum to let others know.

 

Deceangi

 

I actually see this working quite nicely. The reviewer normally (at least in our part of the world he does) posts a note on the cache page to the effect that if he/she does not hear from the owner within a set time it will be archived. This already happens.

 

Now if this log by the reviewer were to set a flag on the page, the system could add these caches to the weekly email, in the same fashion as you get recently published caches local to your area in that email.

 

It would then be up to the locals to investigate either by doing some voluntary maintenance and stating on the page that the cache is fine, or to instigate the adoption process by contacting the owner themselves.

 

The reviewers have to do nothing different except set a "to be archived" flag. If, after the set time, nobody has responded the he/she archives it as usual. The only difference is that locals get to be alerted on caches that will be archived shortly. It is up to them to do anything about it if they want to - the reviewers do not have to do any extra admin.

 

A few of my own thoughts...

 

Most of the caches I have so far come accross that are archived by reviwers because the owner has not responded to a needs maintance log and the reviwer has disabled the listing.

 

If you want to know about caches that maybe archived soon where the owner has not responded to reviwer contact then if you are a premium member the notification tool is at your disposal to inform you of listing that have been flaged with an SBA or disabled log, thus as most will know you will recive the logs by e-mail and that will tell you if the listing was disabled by reviwer and why.

 

In the case of listings with a SBA log you can e-mail the owner about adoption or if it has been disabled by the reviwer you can inform the reviwer that you intend to maintain the cache instead of adopting it in the absence of the owner.

 

Or if an owner has archived a cache themselves you might be able to (if the owner agrees) sweet talk the reviwer into unarchiving the cache, but I suspect you would have to arrange this fairly soon after the archivel.

 

If none of that is sutable then you can allways "clone/ copy" the archived listing with the same details and cache type and create a new listing in your name.

 

This seems to me like a resonable workarround and in anycase I would have thought the maintaince of a cache is more important than who owns it.

Edited by Hampshire_Hog
Link to comment
If you want to know about caches that maybe archived soon where the owner has not responded to reviwer contact then if you are a premium member the notification tool is at your disposal to inform you of listing that have been flaged with an SBA or disabled log, thus as most will know you will recive the logs by e-mail and that will tell you if the listing was disabled by reviwer and why.

That does bring up a great idea. If some are so concerned about these caches, a pocket query of caches where you select "is not active" would give you an instant list of caches that could eventually be archived. You can do this right now and go after some of those caches and work to save these poor "orphans". If you are serious about this, then you have the means to be proactive right now. Go for it!

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...