Delete all person's caches who have not logged in in a year

[+cjjohnstad]

Anybody have any input or say if caches can be deleted once a member disappears and doesn't log into their account for a specific length of time, say a year more or less? I say this due to the fact especially with long multi's that pieces disappear and people are left looking for something no longer there

Edited September 18, 2009 by cjjohnstad

[GOF and Bacall]

We'd loose some really fine caches that way. If the caches are still viable leave 'em be. If they are in need of maintenance post a Needs Maintenance log. If nothing is done after a few weeks post a Needs Archive.

[+StarBrand]

Anybody have any input

Yup - don't do it.

 

Ever hear of Military service?? Overseas deployment?

 

If there is a specific issue with any hide by anybody - feel free to log a needs maintenance log or needs archive log on it but no need to blitz it just because the owner hasn't logged into the site for a while.

[+mrbort]

Anybody have any input or say if caches can be deleted once a member disappears and doesn't log into their account for a specific length of time, say a year more or less?

 

Just guessing but this is going to be a response of a decisive "NO" to this. There are mechanisms to archive (delete) caches and they work. No reason to inject the timeframe into this as a rule; the reviewers will take that into account when attempts to contact the owner are made. I know a few owners who have been active and have active hides yet have not logged in for quite some time; they're still invested in their hides yet have no time to hunt. They get the logs in their email and have no need to log on to the site. If there were a problem with a hide, these cachers would know immediately and act on it. Then they'd log in and note it. However, they hide caches that are pretty remote and robust.... a find a year or two is normal... Just go through the accepted, established channels; they're pretty good about this.

 

Edit: a few got in before me with the predicted response

Edited September 18, 2009 by mrbort

[+Knight2000]

My question is - Why?

[+texasgrillchef]

Anybody have any input or say if caches can be deleted once a member disappears and doesn't log into their account for a specific length of time, say a year more or less? I say this due to the fact especially with long multi's that pieces disappear and people are left looking for something no longer there

 

If you believe a cache or any part of a multi-cache has gone missing. Then log a Needs Maint. log. if they don't check on it after a reasonable length of time. Then log an SBA for it.

 

If the cache has allready a significant amount of DNF's allready logged on it, and it has been a considerable bit of time since someone has logged a find. Then I would just immediatly log an SBA for it. If the cache owner really wants to keep his cache's viable he will do something about it. If not it gets archived & he won't care anyways.

 

Thats JMO... & thats what I do & have done in the past.

 

Heres an example:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...c8-7ead2fc81fd9

 

TGC

[+Shop99er]

My question is - Why?

 

Ditto.

 

Or is there more to this than we're seeing?

[+Jeep_Dog]

 

Ever hear of Military service?? Overseas deployment?

 

 

Thanks for pointing that out, Starbrand. I've been off the geocaching net for a year before, and will do so again. I would be a little bit on the sad ( ) side to come back to a deleted account.

 

Especially given that I'm a premium member.

[+Knight2000]

Like many of us, we have had caches out over a year which haven't needed maintenance. Good containers, good amount of swag stocked, good local cachers. Heck, one is two feet underwater!

[+ecanderson]

Anybody have any input or say if caches can be deleted once a member disappears and doesn't log into their account for a specific length of time, say a year more or less? I say this due to the fact especially with long multi's that pieces disappear and people are left looking for something no longer there

Don't forget that some caches are placed with a "group account" set up for the purpose. The owners may well be logging in and keeping track of those caches, but you'd never know it... it's happening under another account name.

 

If there are problems with caches, do as suggested above. Log the NM, and if nothing happens to resolve it, log the SBA.

[+kayak-cowboy]

I carry a "Group Account" that consists of 3 other cachers. This account is where we put the caches that we Adopt, so if someone wants their cache back they are all in one spot. This account is rarely logged onto unless there is a problem with one of the caches. Then we will go on to that account to note that we fixed the problem or acknowledge that a problem exists and we will get to it soon.

[+edscott]

Many good caches are unofficially maintained by the local caching population long after the original owner had moved on. If the cache and the owner are both gone, then a SBA post will suffice.

[+Castle Mischief]

I'd rather Groundspeak spend their time and money developing technology that causes Travel Bugs and Geocoins to explode violently when the held in the inventory of a person that has not logged on for over a year.

 

Or at least glow as bright as the sun and make a "OOOWWWWWOOOOWWWWOOOWWWWOOOOOOWWWWO" noise.

[+smstext]

an ex local cacher has moved away leaving loads which as they come up with need maintentance are being archived, just wondered (as some of them are great and im willing to take over them) how i go about taking them over as i cant get hold of the owner.

[+Arrow42]

an ex local cacher has moved away leaving loads which as they come up with need maintentance are being archived, just wondered (as some of them are great and im willing to take over them) how i go about taking them over as i cant get hold of the owner.

 

You can't. You need the owner to initiate the adoption procedure.

[+Sky King 36]

an ex local cacher has moved away leaving loads which as they come up with need maintentance are being archived, just wondered (as some of them are great and im willing to take over them) how i go about taking them over as i cant get hold of the owner.

Well, this is indeed the perfect example of what can go wrong. I agree with others, that systematic deletion of caches isn't the way to go.

 

Luckily, I have access to a lot of active cachers... SE Minnesota and Eastern Iowa contains tight-knit groups of cachers that know each other and they add much to the fun of caching. In the missing-multi-stage example, I would contact a few of the past finders, have them help me verify that an intermediate stage was gone... then together we'd check on the remaining stages, replace the missing one, and drive on... Thus, the cache gets "community adopted", but stays in the name of the missing hider. If we determine the multi is in too much disarray, or the previous finders I contact aren't fond enough of the cache to want to do this, then we submit it for archival.

 

BUT... I do also agree that your example could be a real problem. Let's say you live in a community where the hides are largely dominated by one very active hider, who owns 30 of the 40 nearest caches. He/she moves away, is never heard from again... and those caches just sit... Many locals are willing to adopt but can't reach the hider... Other locals want to place out new caches to replace them but the process of letting each cache deteriorate until they need to be archived one at a time is slow... and so caching in that small community sort of grinds to a near halt. Interest in hiding fades, interest in caching is diminished... all bad.

 

In this special case, I believe that the volunteer admins should investigate briefly, and if there is a consensus that the hider is gone, the admin provides a mechanism for local cachers to adopt those caches or nominate them for archiving. I am sure there is no procedure for this in place, and admittedly, it is rare... but it definitely does happen. The problem is this is probably too time consuming, as the workload on the volunteers is already pretty hefty.

 

No easy answers.

[+BlueDeuce]

In this special case, I believe that the volunteer admins should investigate briefly, and if there is a consensus that the hider is gone, the admin provides a mechanism for local cachers to adopt those caches or nominate them for archiving. I am sure there is no procedure for this in place, and admittedly, it is rare... but it definitely does happen. The problem is this is probably too time consuming, as the workload on the volunteers is already pretty hefty.

 

No easy answers.

 

I think they would apply the current process regardless of the owner status. Each cache would have to be taken into consideration, one at a time.

 

No cache will be offer up for adoption without owner approval and each cache will be determined as needing to be archived due to it's condition.

 

Maintaining a cache for an owner, with no owner support, doesn't help the community.

Edited September 19, 2009 by BlueDeuce

[+Vater_Araignee]

Maintaining a cache for an owner, with no owner support, doesn't help the community.

And it does help the community.

Q: What is the #1. prerequisite for listing a cache?

A: The CO believes that the spot and cache are worthy of listing.

IE One person finds it worthy. So if it gets listed and loses owner support and one other person finds it worthy of maintaining then it is still meeting the one person finds it worthy requirement.

 

GCC5E

 

When I first visited it the log books where full.

I dropped a mini log log book in and posted a NM.

The CO seemed MIA for over a year.

Eventually I took a bigger log book to it, wrote a note and sent a request to the reviewer to have the NM flag removed so that it wont get filtered.

Next day the CO logs in and I get a note from the reviewer I contacted that lead me to believe that he is at least in part the CO.

1+1= I helped out reviewer who is 2 busy helping our butts to help his own.

[+BlueDeuce]

Maintaining a cache for an owner, with no owner support, doesn't help the community.

And it does help the community.

Q: What is the #1. prerequisite for listing a cache?

A: The CO believes that the spot and cache are worthy of listing.

IE One person finds it worthy. So if it gets listed and loses owner support and one other person finds it worthy of maintaining then it is still meeting the one person finds it worthy requirement.

 

GCC5E

 

When I first visited it the log books where full.

I dropped a mini log log book in and posted a NM.

The CO seemed MIA for over a year.

Eventually I took a bigger log book to it, wrote a note and sent a request to the reviewer to have the NM flag removed so that it wont get filtered.

Next day the CO logs in and I get a note from the reviewer I contacted that lead me to believe that he is at least in part the CO.

1+1= I helped out reviewer who is 2 busy helping our butts to help his own.

 

uh-huh. I'll skip the attack on a reviewer part.

 

Who updates the cache page?

 

Who responds to cacher queries?

 

Who responds to the land owner who has requirements for caches placed on his property?

 

You think that a state park wants some non-owner to comply with the cache placement requirements?

 

I don't care if you assist a fellow cacher who is active but if someone can't take care of all of the cache, and that is more than just a fresh logbook and a new container, it needs to be archived.

Edited September 19, 2009 by BlueDeuce

[+ChannelFadge]

an ex local cacher has moved away leaving loads which as they come up with need maintentance are being archived, just wondered (as some of them are great and im willing to take over them) how i go about taking them over as i cant get hold of the owner.

 

You can't. You need the owner to initiate the adoption procedure.

 

Maybe there should be some procedure to register a cache as 'orphaned'. for example if the owner hasnt logged in for over a year then an email is sent, and if the owner doesnt claim it then its is put up for adoption...

or something like that

[+Vater_Araignee]

Maintaining a cache for an owner, with no owner support, doesn't help the community.

And it does help the community.

Q: What is the #1. prerequisite for listing a cache?

A: The CO believes that the spot and cache are worthy of listing.

IE One person finds it worthy. So if it gets listed and loses owner support and one other person finds it worthy of maintaining then it is still meeting the one person finds it worthy requirement.

 

GCC5E

 

When I first visited it the log books where full.

I dropped a mini log log book in and posted a NM.

The CO seemed MIA for over a year.

Eventually I took a bigger log book to it, wrote a note and sent a request to the reviewer to have the NM flag removed so that it wont get filtered.

Next day the CO logs in and I get a note from the reviewer I contacted that lead me to believe that he is at least in part the CO.

1+1= I helped out reviewer who is 2 busy helping our butts to help his own.

 

uh-huh. I'll skip the attack on a reviewer part.

 

Who updates the cache page?

 

Who responds to cacher queries?

 

Who responds to the land owner who has requirements for caches placed on his property?

 

You think that a state park wants some non-owner to comply with the cache placement requirements?

 

I don't care if you assist a fellow cacher who is active but if someone can't take care of all of the cache, and that is more than just a fresh logbook and a new container, it needs to be archived.

Attack on a reviewer? Where?

 

Why does the cache page need to be updated if nothing is changing other than the removal of an NA?

In my opinion a cache of that age is tied to its location and if it needs to be mover then it is not the same cache and there for SBA.

I don't respond to cacher queries on my cache but it is maintained, should it be archived?

A land owner that cant get a response will confiscate it, SBA.

The state park will allow it until it no longer complies and eventually they will confiscate, SBA.

 

Those last two examples are flat because nobody has the right except the Land Manager and CO to move or remove a functional cache.

Would you remove a functional cache because the CO is MIA? I highly doubt it.

[+E = Mc2]

Usually, when one of our local cachers has a reason for being gone an extended amount of time, they'll post it to their profile page or contact someone else locally to ask if that person will watch over their caches.

 

If someone drops out of the game and no one can contact them, then the usual process of 'wait and see what happens' takes place. Perfect example here occurred when someone got caught caching during working hours... and in a city-owned vehicle at that. He ended up just dropping out of sight. As his caches become unusable, they've been SBA'd and then archived.

 

And... Of course there's always the hidden subtext here that someone could (knowing that the person won't be back) remove the offending cache, post a SBA log, and then hide a new cache after archival... but I didn't say that.

[+Vater_Araignee]

Usually, when one of our local cachers has a reason for being gone an extended amount of time, they'll post it to their profile page or contact someone else locally to ask if that person will watch over their caches.

 

If someone drops out of the game and no one can contact them, then the usual process of 'wait and see what happens' takes place. Perfect example here occurred when someone got caught caching during working hours... and in a city-owned vehicle at that. He ended up just dropping out of sight. As his caches become unusable, they've been SBA'd and then archived.

 

And... Of course there's always the hidden subtext here that someone could (knowing that the person won't be back) remove the offending cache, post a SBA log, and then hide a new cache after archival... but I didn't say that.

Yeah, I don't like thinking about people being a maggot just to place a cache regardless of the circumstance. Well actually I'm trying to reprogram myself to not spew the dark side so I try to pretend that people though mostly unreasonable are essentially honest when it comes to hobbies.

[+Sky King 36]

Well, I still like the general premise that there ought to be a community-accepted way to determine if a cache is orphaned--such as an MIA, non-responsive owner over a long period, etc. But once determined to be "orphaned"... Then what?

 

Several posters in this thread are speaking in absolutes, but c'mon, there are some situations where there simply are no easy answers.

 

Let's use the example I used before... a prolific hider that has hid most of the caches in a community and has many, many good spots monopolized. He/she goes MIA, and over time, the caches slip into disrepair. Some last months or years, some are muggled, some logs fill up... Over time some gradually get nominated for, and are archived. But in many cases the physical cache is still there.

 

If I go retrieve the archived cache, we have already determined in other threads this is kind of a no-no, I have no "right" to do this just because it was archived on GC. It doesn't belong to me, and it may still be posted elsewhere. If I leave them all in place, and place another cache nearby, I have the same confusion issue specifically addressed in the cache spacing guidelines. If I go maintain the caches and keep them going on behalf of the community, then as one earlier poster said "Maintaining a cache for an owner, with no owner support, doesn't help the community." If we do nothing at all and leave the cache listings in place, then people will go look for missing/deteriorated caches. If we use the physical viability of the cache as the only measure of whether it gets archived, then we may leave active a cache that a private land owner did not want hunted any more.

 

Again, there are no easy answers. It is a smaller problem when it is one cache in an out-of-the-way place. But when one cacher has 9 hides in a county park that leaves no room for others--and that hider goes MIA--it is a problem, it creates sort of a caching "dead zone" after a while.

 

In a way, the real dilemma is this... There are three parties... The individual hider, the local community of cachers, and Groundspeak. Groundspeak can decide what does, and doesn't meet the guidelines for a cache to be listed in their database. But they have no control over the caches, the hiders, land owners, cachers... The local caching community influences geocaching through the way they establish regional norms, exert pressure on cachers and hiders to comply... But there are no rules, no governance, there is only peer pressure. But they too have no official relationship with the hider, or the seeker, who is free to do as they please.

 

(BTW, This is what I love about caching in the Cedar Rapids and NE Iowa area. It is a close-knit group, we all know most of the cachers and most of the hiders, and we know about each other's personal situations. If I get killed in an accident tomorrow, there will be quite a few in the caching community that will know about this, who will come up with an action plan for my hides, and present it to the volunteer reviewers. They know that I would want them to adopt my caches if they can, archive them if they can't, and recover the containers if archived. But in Minneapolis--no one would ever really know, or care what happened to me, or what I would want them to do about it.)

 

One possibility... a published orphan policy that could be opted out of at the time the hide is posted. "Unless you specifically opt out by checking this box, this cache you are about to post will be flagged as orphaned under condition a, b, and c, and once orphaned may be adopted, or archived and physically removed." If you want the cache left alone if you go MIA, you check the box, if you want the local community to be able to decide what to do with your listing, and the physical cache, if you disappear--you leave it unchecked.

 

Edited September 20, 2009 by Sky King 36

[+simpjkee]

Caches can be archived due to lack of maintanence regardless of how long a cacher hasn't logged on. However, bulk archiving caches for any reason is a bad idea. Sure some caches that are gone aren't "in our way" anymore, but the ones that are present become litter in the areas we don't want litter. Until we have a way to responsibly remove geotrash from irresponsible cachers, letting caches live on until they are obviously gone is the way to go IMO.

[+Sol seaker]

and assuming just because someone hasn't logged on for a while that they aren't keeping an eye on their cache isn't a great idea either.

 

I had a friend who did just this. He quit finding caches for over a year, maybe a couple years, but still had a cache on a mountain.

 

He checked on his cache whenever he hiked there; replaced the log and the container as needed.

 

I know he would have been mad if his cache had of been archived just because he hadn't logged on.

 

and now he's an avid cacher once again.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

an ex local cacher has moved away leaving loads which as they come up with need maintentance are being archived, just wondered (as some of them are great and im willing to take over them) how i go about taking them over as i cant get hold of the owner.

Just start taking care of them, no need to make it official. It happens all the time.

[+two bison]

I'd hate to see all the older placements disappear just because the owner stopped caching whatever the reason. Caches like Wyoming's "Caching through the years" GC1CM3A is just one example as to why they are needed. Heck, just the fact that they are part of the fun is reason enough.

 

It would also be nice if there was a process for adoption of old caches where the owner no longer can be contacted. Until such happens, WRITE SHOP ROBERT has the right idea.

[+texasgrillchef]

an ex local cacher has moved away leaving loads which as they come up with need maintentance are being archived, just wondered (as some of them are great and im willing to take over them) how i go about taking them over as i cant get hold of the owner.

 

Since officially you can't adopt them without owner input. I suggest this:

 

1. Go find the cache & make sure it's still there. If it isn't make note of that too.

 

2. Put the cache (Found or not) on your watch list. If not found & you know you put in an honest sincere search for it & therefore think it has gone missing. Then initiate an SBA for the cache.

 

3. Put the cache on your watchlist. Prepare to take over that cache site/cache container when the cache site gets archived.

 

4. Once the site has been archived. Submit a new cache for that area, If you found the original container, then use it. No need to throw it away.

 

The BIG drawback I see to doing it this way, is that it generates a whole new Geocache number & has no reference back to the original logs.

 

TGC

[+texasgrillchef]

Here is one thing...

 

I can't speak for other states.. but in TEXAS....

 

If a cache is on a Texas State Park a permit is required. If the CO goes MIA. Then getting the cache to be archived is VERY simple & can be quick.

 

All it takes is issuing an SBA on the cache site informing geocaching.com of that fact, & letting them know that the permit on the cache has expired, OR is even in violation of the Texas State Parks permit.

 

The Texas State Parks permit for geocaching lists the owndes phone number, name & address. So if you make a complaint to the State Park HQ for that particular park. They will contact the CO. If they can't get a hold of the CO in a reasonable length of time. The State Park will remove the cache container.

 

Once the cache container is removed by the Texas State Park in question. Getting it archived is a very simply process. Thus freeing that spot for a NEW cache.

 

When caches are on private property though, Then different rules apply.

 

TGC

[+ecanderson]

 

The BIG drawback I see to doing it this way, is that it generates a whole new Geocache number & has no reference back to the original logs.

 

TGC

If I were ever to do as you suggest, I'd make a POINT of placing a reference to the original cache in my description for the new cache. Archived caches are viewable at gc.com if you know the original GC code for them. They just don't show up on the maps, PQs, etc. So anyone who was curious about the original and its logs would have ready access to these.

[+Planet]

You can't delete history. It happened. Leave it alone.

[+SixDogTeam]

Anybody have any input or say if caches can be deleted once a member disappears and doesn't log into their account for a specific length of time, say a year more or less? I say this due to the fact especially with long multi's that pieces disappear and people are left looking for something no longer there

 

Really bad thinking here.

[+Markwell]

Anybody have any input or say if caches can be deleted once a member disappears and doesn't log into their account for a specific length of time, say a year more or less? I say this due to the fact especially with long multi's that pieces disappear and people are left looking for something no longer there

 

I am saying this tongue-in-cheek, not trying to sound malicious. It is with a smirk on my face and a wry grin...

 

Can we delete posts of someone that has been geocaching for 3 years, makes their first post in the forums that would probably stir up a lot of angst, and then doesn't respond back that he's at least reading the posts with something like "I hadn't thought of that..." ?

cjjohnstad

Posts: 1

Joined: 15-June 06

 

Of course not.

 

Geocaching.com has a great system of notifying cachers of their situation of the cache through e-mails, which negates the necessity to log in. I could be off-line for 30 days, but still getting e-mail, and I'll know the status of my cache just as much as if I had logged in to Geocaching.com and looked at my caches.

 

However, if you find an individual cache isn't being maintained, and the owner hasn't logged in to check after numerous problems have been reported on the cache page, maybe it's time to post a "Needs Archived" log. The reviewers will handle it from there, usually giving people ample warnings and opportunities to fix things up under some deadline.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Markwell

[+Kyle98632]

When I first started caching back in April there were only maybe 20 or so caches in town, most of them by a cacher who hadnt been active in a very long time. Some of them were missing, but most of them were not and helped get me hooked on geocaching. So Im happy they were not deleted. I think the same can be said for many cachers in my area as since I first started my city has gone from around 20 or so to around 100.

 

So these old caches, as long as they are still in good shape, can and do serve an important purpose.

[+jellis]

Me....if they are not being maintained by other (any) cachers to keep it alive then kill it. I love old caches and they should be treated like a rare antique. But what do you do if no one wants to help keep it going? I can understand if someone passes away but cachers who don't want to play anymore should pass them on to someone else.

Military caches should be treated like Vacation caches. If you own it you should have someone nearby maintaining it.