Owners deleting published log

[+benh57]

I've seen some owners deleting the reviewers 'published' log. IMO, this should not be possible. Without the published log, there is no way to tell when a cache was 'really' placed. (GC number, and cache owners placed date are both unreliable) Also, it's good to know what reviewer published a cache.

 

Can you file a bug on this? thanks!

[LQ]

IMO a cache is placed, when you place the "box". So if you can't trust the owner, then there's no way to tell for sure. The publish log tells when the cache was published give or take one day as it's forced to Groundspeak (Seattle) time zone. If you really need to know when a cache was published, you have to look at the timestamp in your publish notification email.

 

I don't think this is a major issue, even if I don't like some usres habit to delete 'archive' and 'coordinate update' logs either.

 

BTW before summer 2005 publishing a cache didn't generate any visible log.

[+benh57]

IMO a cache is placed, when you place the "box". So if you can't trust the owner, then there's no way to tell for sure. The publish log tells when the cache was published give or take one day as it's forced to Groundspeak (Seattle) time zone. If you really need to know when a cache was published, you have to look at the timestamp in your publish notification email.

 

I don't think this is a major issue, even if I don't like some usres habit to delete 'archive' and 'coordinate update' logs either.

 

BTW before summer 2005 publishing a cache didn't generate any visible log.

 

Yeah, that reminds me, i've seen them delete a whole series of archived/notes/unarchived logs. That's really bad. Now the cache was unavailable for a long period but we have no way of knowing that.

 

An owner should just not be able to delete any log created by a reviewer, or any log that affects the active status of a cache.

[Alan White]

I agree with the OP: there are some log types that it's inappropriate and unnecessary for the cache owner to be able to delete. The published log (what on earth's the point of deleting that?), SBA, NM, enable/disable and coord update logs should be undeletable by the CO.

Edited September 14, 2009 by Alan White

[+Bear and Ragged]

I've seen some owners deleting the reviewers 'published' log.

 

Why?

All I can think of is, someone placed the cache, let their friends know where it is, then it's submitted and published on the site for others to find.

 

Other than 'the general' cacher is deprived of FTF (FTF goes to one of the cache setters friends) whats the point of removing the Reviewers Publish log?

 

If there's an issue with the cache that needs a Reviewer to be notified, that information can be found by looking at who published other local caches...

 

Shouldn't be allowed to delete Reviewers Published, Needs Maintenance, or Should Be Archived, or coord update logs logs.

 

(But Reviewer/Groundspeak can in certain circumstances

[+Knight2000]

eh.

[+tozainamboku]

I agree with the OP: there are some log types that it's inappropriate and unnecessary for the cache owner to be able to delete. The published log (what on earth's the point of deleting that?), SBA, NM, enable/disable and coord update logs should be undeletable by the CO.

The publish log can only entered by a reviewer. Archived, disable, enable, and owner maintenance can only be entered by the cache owner or a reviewer. SBA and NM on the other hand can be entered by anyone with an account. The cache owner must be allowed to delete inappropriate logs including bad language or spam. In the case of SBA, reviewers are notified so owner deletion does not keep the reviewer from seeing legitimate SBA logs.

 

Cache owners are given the capability to delete logs so they can do their duty under the cache maintenance guidelines to delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. It probably isn't worth changing the website to make certain logs not deletable by the owner and allow other to be deletable. Instead a discussion in the forum as to what logs a owner should delete and what logs shouldn't be deleted may eventually lead to a Groundspeak approved explanation of what cache maintenance entails. Right now it is up to each cache owner to determine for themselves. For some this means deleting any logs that in the opinion of the cache owner aren't necessary.

[+Kit Fox]

If I had a choice, I would opt out of the published log entirely. I never liked them in the first place. As a cache owner I would like to opt out of the new cache notification. How is that for a twist?