'Needs Maintenance' log type does not equate to 'seen'

[+Newberys]

Hi all,

 

Should a cache log entry for "needs maintenance" be equivalent to a "found it" log entry?

 

I'm a newbie so I may have this back to front but...I logged a visit to a cache yesterday where the cache container lid had a hole in it, so the log type I chose was "needs maintenance". There were 2 problems after I did this:

 

1. When I was checking the geocaching map today, the cache icon was not the smiley face "found it" one, it was the standard cache icon - even though I found it yesterday.

 

2. When I was checking my friend's profile for found caches (we visited that site together yesterday), there was no red tick next to his listing for this cache to show that I had been there too (cool feature by the way). Sorry, we are super competative!

 

To get around this a few minutes ago I deleted the "needs maintenance" log and replaced it with a normal "found it" log. Problems 1 and 2 above went away then. I figured that this should already have sent an email to the cache owner for a fix.

 

What do you think?

[+Delta68]

'Needs Maintenance' and 'Found it' are two separate log types

 

It would be normal to log a find (assuming you found the cache) and then log a 'Needs Maintenance'

 

A 'Needs Maintenance' can be logged on a cache even if you didn't find it

For example, if there has been a string of DNFs on a cache which had previously been found easily by all other cachers which would suggest it has gone missing

 

 

 

Mark

[+Isonzo Karst]

If I'm understanding you properly, your suggestion is that any Needs Maintenance log should increment Find count by 1?

 

No, logging Needs Maintenance does not equate Found It!

 

People use the Needs Maintenance log on caches that they're revisiting, many many many people use Needs Maintenance when they DNF a cache - ie, in lieu of the Did Not Find log ('cause if they couldn't find it, there must be something wrong with the cache). I created a second member account in part to log Needs Maintenance on my own caches (cache owners cannot). That way I see the icon, and remember which caches need what. In none of these circumstances should find count increment.

[+Landstedt]

Hi all,

 

Should a cache log entry for "needs maintenance" be equivalent to a "found it" log entry?

No

I'm a newbie so I may have this back to front but...I logged a visit to a cache yesterday where the cache container lid had a hole in it, so the log type I chose was "needs maintenance". There were 2 problems after I did this:

 

1. When I was checking the geocaching map today, the cache icon was not the smiley face "found it" one, it was the standard cache icon - even though I found it yesterday.

 

You need to do a found log first. And if there is problem with the cache. As in your case a hole in the lid. Then you make a need maintenance log.

 

To get around this a few minutes ago I deleted the "needs maintenance" log and replaced it with a normal "found it" log. Problems 1 and 2 above went away then. I figured that this should already have sent an email to the cache owner for a fix.

 

Yes the owner got mail about all the logs and even mail when you delete a log.

[knowschad]

There are occasions when, while on my way to a new cache, I will be passing by one that I have already found. I have been known to detour over and check out the old one. If I found out that it needed maintenance, I would want to be able to notify the owner without adding to my find count.

[+StarBrand]

YOu should have entered 2 different logs - 1 for NM and one for the find. Noting a caches needs maintenance isn't the smae thing as noting that you found it.

[+Lil Devil]

To get around this a few minutes ago I deleted the "needs maintenance" log and replaced it with a normal "found it" log. ...

 

What do you think?

I think you should not have deleted the "needs maintenance" log. It's better to have both logs.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Should a cache log entry for "needs maintenance" be equivalent to a "found it" log entry?...What do you think?

Personally they should delete the NM log entirly. An active cache owner will read your "found it log" and know that it was also needing maintenance. An inactive cache owner won't see any kind of log you put on that cache at all.

 

However if we are to live with the NM log it should also be a "Found it, Needs Maintenance" log since the only way to know it needs maintance is to have actually found the cache. Sure a nuclear strike, and other exceptional circumstances would be exceptions. However the exceptions would be so rare they can be dealth with as exceptions.