When to log "Needs Maintenance" / "Needs Archiving"

[+cache_n_out]

Hi All,

 

I could use some guidance when it comes to these logs and some information. Is there a link on GC.com?

 

From what I've been able to gather, if you give a cache and "Maintenance" tag the clock is running for the owner to address an issue. (Anyone know how long?) If they don't log something in reply a volunteer takes some action (archiving). I assume you do this if there is some real impediment for the next cacher to find and log the cache. Would you include:

 

- Wet log?

- Missing cache (after verfiying with previous finders)

- bad coordinates (more than 30 feet off - verified by other finders logs)?

- (anything else?????)

 

So when would you log a "needs archiving"? Seems to invoke a faster response.

 

There are several "orphan" caches in my area that are in really neat locations and they are missing, soaked, and otherwise neglected (owners who don't respond to emails concerning whether their cache is missing). I think it degrades the experience and takes up room (a .1 mile radius to be presice) to place another, cared for cache in the same area. Maybe there should a "request adoption" optiion for these orphans. Right now, only the owner can initiate an adoption.

[+Lil Devil]

Not quite.

 

Needs Maintenance is for minor issues. The reviewers do NOT get notified of these logs.

Needs Archived is for major issues, or even minor ones if the cache owner has already ignored a NM log for a few weeks. The reviewers DO get notified of these logs. The "clock" you refer to varies among reviewers but is generally a few weeks or less.

There are no forced adoptions. You can only adopt a cache if the owner agrees to it and goes to the adoption page and offers it to you. If the owner ignores your email, tough nuts.

[+StarBrand]

Needs maintenance is for serious issues such as wet log, broken container, hide spot comprimised, something leaked inside cache etc

 

If you do not find the cache - log a DNF log (did not find) - an owner cannot maintain something that is missing. Several DNFs over time in a row with no owner response deserves a Needs Archived log. Coordintes off by 30 to 50 feet are not really to be considered overly bad either.

 

Needs Archived should be reserved for gross, obvious guideline violations including maintenance clauses. Always try to clear the matter up with a polite email to the owner when you can.

 

Since the original cache placer owns the box - the site cannot give that away. However, they can archive the listing (with good reason) thus freeing up the space for a new cache.

[jholly]

Several DNFs over time in a row with no owner response deserves a Needs Archived log.

 

I some what disagree with StarBrand on this one. Depends on the difficulty. A 3, 4, or 5 star can easily get several in a row. The owner might not be responding since they know is is hard one to find. Just yesterday I did a 2 star that had 4 or 5 DNF's in a row with no owner response. I logged a find and right after me is another DNF. Tough call. I think I would be more likely to log a NM for the owner to check on it. If there are several more DNF's after that then I might consider a NA log. There is a 4 star near me that has more DNF's than finds. Not much owner response, but an occasional find, so it's there.

 

Jim

[+StarBrand]

Several DNFs over time in a row with no owner response deserves a Needs Archived log.

 

I some what disagree with StarBrand on this one. Depends on the difficulty. A 3, 4, or 5 star can easily get several in a row. The owner might not be responding since they know is is hard one to find. Just yesterday I did a 2 star that had 4 or 5 DNF's in a row with no owner response. I logged a find and right after me is another DNF. Tough call. I think I would be more likely to log a NM for the owner to check on it. If there are several more DNF's after that then I might consider a NA log. There is a 4 star near me that has more DNF's than finds. Not much owner response, but an occasional find, so it's there.

 

Jim

Sorry - should have qualified that a bit......agreed - high difficulty caches are going to get DNFs. However, I still don't get doing a NM log if you suspect it is missing.

[jholly]

Several DNFs over time in a row with no owner response deserves a Needs Archived log.

 

I some what disagree with StarBrand on this one. Depends on the difficulty. A 3, 4, or 5 star can easily get several in a row. The owner might not be responding since they know is is hard one to find. Just yesterday I did a 2 star that had 4 or 5 DNF's in a row with no owner response. I logged a find and right after me is another DNF. Tough call. I think I would be more likely to log a NM for the owner to check on it. If there are several more DNF's after that then I might consider a NA log. There is a 4 star near me that has more DNF's than finds. Not much owner response, but an occasional find, so it's there.

 

Jim

Sorry - should have qualified that a bit......agreed - high difficulty caches are going to get DNFs. However, I still don't get doing a NM log if you suspect it is missing.

 

The point is a difficult cache can get a number of DNF's and still be there, so I don't think I can form the opinion it is missing. I can form the opinion that the owner should check on it. Of course if the PAF lets me zero in on the hide and I still can't find it, then a NA seems more likely.

 

Jim

[+beejay&esskay]

Even if I'm "sure" the cache is missing, I would log a NM to allow the cache owner time to replace. It would only be after an ignored NM for some long period that I would consider a NA.

 

(In my area, reviewers are known to check caches with very old NM that haven't been addressed and suggest the owner take some action or they will archive it.)

[Skippermark]

Unless someone is with someone who's actually found a cache, there's no way for certain to know if it's missing and even then, it may not be missing but maybe got rehidden differently than when that person found it.

 

We were in this situation this weekend. I was with friends who were looking or a high difficulty, very well hidden cache, that I'd already found, but I didn't see it anywhere around.

 

The cache has 1 find after ours last year and then 4 or 5 DNFs since plus a bunch of other DNFs and a couple finds mixed in over the past few years.

 

I posted a note on the cache page about our experience and suggested the owner look for it. Unfortunately, the owner hasn't been online in 4 months and may not be caching any longer.

 

If the note goes unanswered and the DNFs continue to mount, after awhile, there comes a point where it becomes a question of if a SBA should be posted since the owner isn't maintaining his cache. I've found that posting a NM will usually do nothing in those situations if the owner doesn't cache anymore, but an SBA with a note from the reviewer saying fix it will sometimes spur people into action...or they do nothing and it gets archived or archive it themselves.

[+Renegade Knight]

Hi All,

 

I could use some guidance when it comes to these logs and some information. ...

 

I have the dissenting opinion on these logs.

 

Any active cache owner can read their regular logs. Thus for most things your find log is perfect for maintanence issues. Any owner who's not reading logs, won't see your NM log either. Thus active owners don't need them and inactive or inattentiave owners won't get them. That means NM logs are solely for the benefit of other finders to alert them there is some Maintanence issue that would interfere in their fun. A few cache owners are too busy to read real logs and skim emails for the NM flag. For those few they do serve a purpose. Meanwhile a few more are annoyed by the entire thing.

 

SBA logs are entirly about ridding this site of a cache for some reason. Normally that reason should be "needs archived right now because time is of the essence". Any other reason you have time to contact the owner. Active owners will get your email. Inactive owners won't. Same as above. If after some efffort to contact the owner you have failed, then and only then, and only if the cache is missing (since a maintance issue doesn't prevent the cache from being found) or some other critical issue (like the land manager yelling at you and you still can't get a hole of the owner) then you use the SBA log and get the reviewer involved.

 

Others tend to think of these as "casual" logs. Sort of like that neighbor who phones the police because the neighborhood kids are playing hide and seek in the park 2 mintues after dusk.

[+Renegade Knight]

Even if I'm "sure" the cache is missing, I would log a NM to allow the cache owner time to replace. It would only be after an ignored NM for some long period that I would consider a NA.

 

(In my area, reviewers are known to check caches with very old NM that haven't been addressed and suggest the owner take some action or they will archive it.)

 

I had two finders pull the NM "Ding dong the cache is gone" button. They did it in a way that annoyed my helpa and so my help refused to jump up and do their bidding. Later when I could make it over the cache was fine. Just a hard find that had a longer than normal DNF streak.

 

For you to make the judgment that a cache is missing you really need a dead giveaway hint. "Cache is flouresent orange in space 12 of the parking gargage" If space 12 is empty. Yup. Missing.

[+beejay&esskay]

Even if I'm "sure" the cache is missing, I would log a NM to allow the cache owner time to replace. It would only be after an ignored NM for some long period that I would consider a NA.

 

 

For you to make the judgment that a cache is missing you really need a dead giveaway hint. "Cache is flouresent orange in space 12 of the parking gargage" If space 12 is empty. Yup. Missing.

 

I did, after all, say "sure". Wouldn't do it just because I couldn't find it.

 

(And when I call the police about those kids in the park, I use the regular phone number, not 911.)

[+Renegade Knight]

...(And when I call the police about those kids in the park, I use the regular phone number, not 911.)

 

So your the one!

 

I live in a yuppie neighborhood. Amazing how picky those yuppies are. Give them all nice homes, cars, and campers, plus a nice neighborhod park and they call in on who's camper was parked 4 hours too long in the street because there is nothing worth watching on the 50" Plasma and 200 satalite channels. Probably the same ones who's kids saw the mufflers off their dirt bikes and ride them up and down the street.

[+midnightfaerie]

I

 

1. assess the logs and/or cache condition. (if there are five or more logs saying it's missing, AND those logs are from cachers with at least 1000 caches logged, then there's a problem)

 

2. Email the owner

 

3. Wait a couple of weeks.

 

4. No response, post a NM log.

 

5. Wait a month.

 

6. Still no response, put a needs archived log on cache.

 

I firmly believe it's all about communication. Someone can not get to their cache for months if they don't want to, as long as they're posting logs telling the cachers of the situation. And anyone who places a cache, is responsible for it, therefore, should definitely be reading their email. If they "don't have time" to read email...they shouldn't be placing caches.

[+paleolith]

If the coordinates are off by 30' MORE than your estimated error, then post your find with your coordinates at the cache (check the Add a Waypoint box), and in your log, say that these are the coordinates you measured, say what kind of GPSr you have, what the estimated error was, and how many cycles you averaged it. Don't make any judgement about whether the coordinates need to be changed; the owner should be able to decide that, usually based on more than one log. This has the advantage that if you're right but the owner doesn't change anything, the next seeker may read your log, find the cache at your coordinates, and post "found it at paleolith's coordinates".

 

You might go under 30' in an area with exceptionally good reception. If you're crawling under rocks, don't bother until it's a good bit worse. Etc.

 

Edward

[+TeddyR]

Its sad to watch caches being neglected for what ever reason. LOl. I just got a NM on the fact the logbook was full. I asked the person if the backside of the log was full as well, she said they are empty. New cacher FYI.

 

Now a quick Owner maintenance log until the silly thing does need to be totally maintained!

[CoyoteRed]

My view:

 

If you don't find a cache: DNF. No other log-type will apply unless you are certain a cache should not be there, like the land steward saying so, then it's an SBA.

 

If the cache is viable, but needs some TLC, then a Needs Maintenance log-type is what it will get from me.

 

If the cache is no longer viable, i.e. permission or environmental issues, abandonment, etc. then an SBA is what it will get. Remember, "SBA" is not the acronym for "Must Be Archived," it's "Should," as in "if it's not fixed, it should be archived."

 

Here's the thing. I'm not the cache police. I'm not going to put a cache on some watch list to see if the cache owner is doing his job. If there's a minor problem the cache will get a NM log and I'm done. If the cache needs serious maintenance or archiving, I'll let a reviewer know and take over the policing. Being a "cache cop" is pretty much their job.

[+Isonzo Karst]

I'm with Renegade Knight on the usefulness of the Needs Maintenance log - meaning I see little use to it at all.

 

If the cache owner is paying attention, they've read that the lid is cracked, and if they aren't, they haven't. A Needs Maintenance log isn't going to get read any more than any other log. I've never logged one. I guess they might be useful for other cachers to judge whether they're interested in finding this particular pile of moldy crud, but they're so misused that I don't find them to be indicative of a cache's condition.

 

Needs Archived is the log to call a reviewer's attention to a cache; again, I see RK's post as getting this pretty much right.

[scidawg]

Jim

Sorry - should have qualified that a bit......agreed - high difficulty caches are going to get DNFs. However, I still don't get doing a NM log if you suspect it is missing.

 

I would think that verifying if it is still there falls under the category of maintenance, just MHO

[+StarBrand]

 

Sorry - should have qualified that a bit......agreed - high difficulty caches are going to get DNFs. However, I still don't get doing a NM log if you suspect it is missing.

 

I would think that verifying if it is still there falls under the category of maintenance, just MHO

But I'm not going to run out and check to see if my cache is still there just because 1 cacher could not find it and decided to misuse the NM log.

 

I see the occasional DNF on most all my caches - then a week or 2 or 3 passes and another cacher finds it. I just don't worry about a maintenance run until I see 2 or 3 DNFs in a row over time.

Edited August 27, 2009 by StarBrand

[AZcachemeister]

I'm with Renegade Knight on the usefulness of the Needs Maintenance log - meaning I see little use to it at all.

 

If the cache owner is paying attention, they've read that the lid is cracked, and if they aren't, they haven't. A Needs Maintenance log isn't going to get read any more than any other log. I've never logged one. I guess they might be useful for other cachers to judge whether they're interested in finding this particular pile of moldy crud, but they're so misused that I don't find them to be indicative of a cache's condition.

 

Needs Archived is the log to call a reviewer's attention to a cache; again, I see RK's post as getting this pretty much right.

 

Not so much anymore...at least here in Arizona lately.

We have a new 'reviewer' called 'Rana Pirica' who is aggressively enforcing owner maintenance in our area.

ANY cache with a 'NM' attribute will soon be disabled by 'RP' (perhaps it should be 'RiP'), and if not repaired within a specified time (four weeks, I believe) it gets archived.