Log Deletion Guidelines

[+StashSeeker]

Can someone from "on high" please explain the guidelines and

procedures for the deletion of logs by reviewers? Are reviewers required to give a

reason for the deletion when they notify you that the log is being

deleted? Are premium or non-paying members allowed to first have

the opportunity to change the log before deletion (which I would

think would require a reason given for the deletion?). Can a log

be removed by a reviewer without the cacher being contacted by

the cache owner first and given an opportunity to make adjustments?

Remember....when a log is deleted so is the FIND.

 

I know as a HAPPY paying premium member I certainly would like to

think that I would be treated with enough respect to be communicated

with by Groundspeak before my find is taken from me.

[+Too Tall John]

My Spidey Senses are telling me there's more to this story.

 

Care to give more details?

[+geodarts]

I suppose if you told us what you wrote, who deleted it, and any other pertinent information that might allow others to understand what happened, we could get at least ten pages on the topic. But have you tried relogging it with something completely innocuous so that you can get your find counted>

[+briansnat]

Reviewers don't generally get involved with deleting logs unless there are extraordinary circumstances.

[+ChileHead]

Sure it was the reviewer and not the cache owner? The cache owner can go ahead and delete finds at any point, but I'd be surprised if the reviewer did that.

[+thedeadpirate]

As busy as reviewers are, I gotta wonder just what kind of log would prompt them to get involved.

 

Also, are we talking about a reviewer removing the log or someone from the home office?

 

Is it because of advertising? What message did you get?

 

Inquiring minds want to know. (so we can all give our 2 cents worth)

[+Walts Hunting]

This should be interesting.

 

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

I agree... there's more to this story.

 

First, I just cannot fathom that a reviewer or other "someone "on high"", would delete a log w/o question, or at least notification. Perhaps I suppose, if the language in it were vile enough to offend, but then would expect a warning about such type of logs.

 

I would more rather guess that a CO, unhappy with the log for whatever reason, would more likely delete the log w/o question or notification. I would also guess that the CO deleting the log, would already assume that you know why it was deleted -- be that right or wrong.

 

I just don't see geocaching.com volunteers or other personnel simply leaving one hanging as that.

[+deranja]

I have actually had first hand knowledge of this log as i read it and the email that was sent.

The email gave no reasons as to why it was deleted just that it was deleted by a reviewer, here is the email

 

"Your log entry for the listing Quarters? (Traditional Cache) was deleted by Nomex at 2/23/2010 7:48:22 PM"

 

That was the entire email! sent 3 weeks after it was logged.

 

I don't have a copy of the log obviously but i remembered it be very funny. There were no swear words or crude/crass comments. Unless the term "bovine excrement" offended someone.

 

I agree with stashseeker as well as the cacher who posted the log, that you would think that an explanation of some sort would be given. Myself as well as the cacher are very good at following the rules set down, but how is one to know what they are or what they did wrong if they don't explain it?!

[+StashSeeker]

Can someone from "on high" please explain the guidelines and

procedures for the deletion of logs by reviewers? Are reviewers required to give a

reason for the deletion when they notify you that the log is being

deleted? Are premium or non-paying members allowed to first have

the opportunity to change the log before deletion (which I would

think would require a reason given for the deletion?). Can a log

be removed by a reviewer without the cacher being contacted by

the cache owner first and given an opportunity to make adjustments?

Remember....when a log is deleted so is the FIND.

 

I know as a HAPPY paying premium member I certainly would like to

think that I would be treated with enough respect to be communicated

with by Groundspeak before my find is taken from me.

 

This was the log that was posted, the names have been deleted to protect

the cachers involved and so not to stir a huge mess here....all I am asking

is the guidelines and procedures for log deletion by reviewers. My feeling is

if anything in this log was offensive or out of line....why isn't this cacher

(it's NOT me) being told exactly what was the issue and allowed to

make changes (and I'm absolutely sure he would have) instead of just being notified

that it was being deleted? Sure, he could just relog

without a word but as some of us do we share our experiences in order to give those

that follow a heads-up to protect the cache.

 

"Out rain caching with (cacher #2) today, and felt compelled to stop at this one. I guess all military barracks are the same. I spent my fair share of time in facilities such as these, when I wasn't assigned shipboard.

 

While heading to this hide, (cacher #2) and I noticed that we were being followed quite closely and when we neared the site, I parked and waited for the driver (who stopped off to the right rear of the cachemobile). We were not to surpised to see a security guard, who asked us what we were doing, he related to us that the area was secured after sunset, when I asked why there was no signage stating this fact at the entrance so the general public would not be violating any ordnances, his response was that the county did not have the funds. We explained we were geocaching and he informed us he knew about the sport, and asked for information that would allow the county to contact the responsible parties to have the caches removed from the area, as the county had been wanting to do this for some time but did not know who to contact.

 

(cacher #2) gave this gentleman the website address, and he informed us that he would include it in his report. I asked him why nobody had tried a google search for Geocaching, and his response was that "County workers are to stupid to think of that".

 

Now i'll be the first to admit that one of my charater flaws is a very low tolerance for Bovine Excrement, and really don't respect the speaders of the same (except for farmers). I am thankful that (cacher #2) was with me or who knows what I might have said to this person, as several of the statements this person made had me thinking WT..., does he really feel we are that gullible?

 

To his credit, he allowed us to look for and find this nice hide (Which I am afraid he and another security guard who showed up shortly after we made the find, probably removed from it's location), but asked us to be quick so he would not get in trouble with his supervisor.

 

After signing the log, we promptly left the area and got off the facility.

 

We were unaware that this area is unavalable at night, and it is possible that this ignorance was due to our oversight, but more than likely a result of the reliance on technology and not checking previous logs or cache descriptions and following a PQ, and checking descriptions, hints and previous logs only after starting the search on site.

 

I have now read the forum posts regarding this area and am hopeful that there is a happy medium found.

 

Thanks for the adventure!!!)

 

I'm sad to say that the cacher that this happened to is now looking for guardians for his caches in order

to close his premium account. He's a plus to this sport and it saddens me that he was not given an

explanation.

Edited February 27, 2010 by StashSeeker

[+bittsen]

Nomex deleted it?

 

Interesting.

 

 

Euphemisms are often subject to deletions, or even suspensions from the forums (based on previous experience)

[+palmetto]

As the deleted log isn't yours, I'm not certain how you know that no explanation was given.

 

That Nomex posted a reviewer note to the cache page, since deleted, which says in part, "Just confirming Deletion of users' Log Entry of February 6th per Groundspeak instructions..." suggests that there was communication in a number of directions.

[+ChannelFadge]

Well then surely if the log was offensive enough to be deleted then your forum post repeating it would be deleted (or censored) too

unless theres more to the story....?

[+StashSeeker]

As the deleted log isn't yours, I'm not certain how you know that no explanation was given.

 

That Nomex posted a reviewer note to the cache page, since deleted, which says in part, "Just confirming Deletion of users' Log Entry of February 6th per Groundspeak instructions..." suggests that there was communication in a number of directions.

 

I know because I know the cacher AND read the post after his day of caching. I was later told it had been deleted without explanation other than to be notified it was deleted. I honestly didn't see anything

wrong with it and am here not to stir but to become better aware of any changes that may have been made.

I have been a member here since 2003 and have not witnessed such a thing. Can logs be deleted

by reviewers without reason? Without being given a chance to alter the log? The cache owner had no communication with this cacher regarding his log.

[+StashSeeker]

Well then surely if the log was offensive enough to be deleted then your forum post repeating it would be deleted (or censored) too

unless theres more to the story....?

 

Please tell me if you see something offensive enough that the post should be deleted? If there is, why

aren't cachers allowed the courtesy of altering the post?

[+Lil Devil]

Meh. Just tell your friend to re-log without all the diatribe and get on with your his life.

[+thedeadpirate]

Seems like an accurate description of the hunt. Not sure what would have caused the deletion. You didn't use any expletives, although you did make it clear which ones you would like to use.

 

From Nomex's log it appears the instructions came from higher up. But that makes me wonder why higher up didn't just handle it as they have other logs.

 

It just seems to me that reviewers have enough headaches already without getting hit with accusations of policing logs now. I think TPTB should handle these type of situations and not involve the reviewers in it.

 

Then if there is a backlash, it's on the Frog and not the reviewers.

 

Meh. Just tell your friend to re-log without all the diatribe and get on with your his life.

 

That's the easy solution. But if everyone stops logging their experiences and just post TFTC, then they might as well stop sending the logs to the owners.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Just to emphasis that I don't feel all is told...

 

I'm sad to say that the cacher that this happened to is now looking for guardians for his caches in order

to close his premium account. He's a plus to this sport and it saddens me that he was not given an

explanation.

 

Why?

 

Quitting caching because of a singular incident?

or

Suspension/Banning from geocaching.com?

 

Methinks there are still pieces to the puzzle that are missing.

 

It would be nice to know the color on the "other side of the coin".

[+StashSeeker]

Meh. Just tell your friend to re-log without all the diatribe and get on with your his life.

 

Excuse you me? life will go on, indeed, but I do support this site financially and would hope that

I could get an answer to my question from someone with the authority to do so. It may not

be my log, but I read it before it was deleted and am shocked as to why

[+wimseyguy]

If nomex was performing these duties in his home state then it really isn't rogue behavior anyway.

[+NeecesandNephews]

Meh. Just tell your friend to re-log without all the diatribe and get on with your his life.

 

Excuse you me? life will go on, indeed, but I do support this site financially and would hope that

I could get an answer to my question from someone with the authority to do so. It may not

be my log, but I read it before it was deleted and am shocked as to why

 

 

 

If you want to get an answer from "someone with the authority to do so" you came to the wrong place to do it. I would suggest an email to Groundspeak themselves, instead of asking opinion here.

 

 

 

edit to add- I cant believe Groundspeak would just delete this post without some kind of communication. (not saying it couldn't happen)

 

I agree with Gitchee-

Methinks there are still pieces to the puzzle that are missing.

Edited February 27, 2010 by NeecesandNephews

[+briansnat]

Well then surely if the log was offensive enough to be deleted then your forum post repeating it would be deleted (or censored) too

unless theres more to the story....?

 

Please tell me if you see something offensive enough that the post should be deleted? If there is, why

aren't cachers allowed the courtesy of altering the post?

 

Actually he can.

[+StashSeeker]

Meh. Just tell your friend to re-log without all the diatribe and get on with your his life.

 

Excuse you me? life will go on, indeed, but I do support this site financially and would hope that

I could get an answer to my question from someone with the authority to do so. It may not

be my log, but I read it before it was deleted and am shocked as to why

 

 

 

If you want to get an answer from "someone with the authority to do so" you came to the wrong place to do it. I would suggest an email to Groundspeak themselves, instead of asking opinion here.

 

I really haven't spent alot of time over the last 7 years in the forum, I thought maybe the moderators had the capability of directing questions such as these to the head office. I thank you for your advise, I'll take it. Happy Caching All!

[+StashSeeker]

Well then surely if the log was offensive enough to be deleted then your forum post repeating it would be deleted (or censored) too

unless theres more to the story....?

 

Please tell me if you see something offensive enough that the post should be deleted? If there is, why

aren't cachers allowed the courtesy of altering the post?

 

Actually he can.

 

Thank you Brian, I'm sure he can however the road goes both ways. I believe we as members

deserve an explanation as to why a log is pulled. I'm going to take earlier advice and pose my question

to Groundspeak. Thanks for your time and help.

[+NeecesandNephews]

My response may have come off as a bit rude. I did not mean it to be. Perhaps an email or PM to the Reviewer involved informing him or your situation, and asking if he can help you better understand it, might help. It might not help at all, but it can't hurt to ask.

[Keystone]

My response may have come off as a bit rude. I did not mean it to be. Perhaps an email or PM to the Reviewer involved informing him or your situation, and asking if he can help you better understand it, might help. It might not help at all, but it can't hurt to ask.

If I received such a question from someone other than the cache owner or the log owner, I'd say to MYOB and write to either or both of them. I expect Groundspeak will say the same thing, though I'm not Groundspeak.

 

Palmetto has the Yoda post in this thread.

[+NeecesandNephews]

My response may have come off as a bit rude. I did not mean it to be. Perhaps an email or PM to the Reviewer involved informing him or your situation, and asking if he can help you better understand it, might help. It might not help at all, but it can't hurt to ask.

If I received such a question from someone other than the cache owner or the log owner, I'd say to MYOB and write to either or both of them. I expect Groundspeak will say the same thing, though I'm not Groundspeak.

 

Palmetto has the Yoda post in this thread.

 

 

Thanks Keystone! I suspected that would be the likely response. From a Moderator and a Reviewer, that probably as high on the food chain as its going to get here!!

[+jvSquared]

Interesting that a reviewer has done the deletion, I know cache owners have the power, and since they are notified at every log and in charge of maintaining the cache both online and in the field they should have this power. Not sure why a busy reviewer would take the time to go out of their way to do that unless there is more to the story, and of course there is.

 

One of my logs was deleted by the cache owner without warning, several weeks after posting, and I was using it as a part of two different challenges (including a 29day find streak). In addition to mentioning the challenges that we were working on I mentioned in the log that when we got to the site, I was initially worried that the "UP" in the title meant we had to climb, but looking at the 1.5/1.5 rating was reassured it was not and the find was quick after that. Apparently that upset the CO, so he deleted it. I simply emailed him asking why, and then relogged with a simple statement concerning our hopes of fulfilling a couple challenge requirements, and mentioning nearly nothing of our experience with the cache itself.

 

We kept our PM, didn't worry about cache sabotage, qualified for the challenges, and kept on cachin!

[+StarBrand]

 

.... I believe we as members

deserve an explanation as to why a log is pulled. ....

 

No we don't - sounds like a private communication between Groundspeak and another customer. None of our business.

Edited February 27, 2010 by StarBrand

[+narcissa]

This post seems like an attempt to create more drama than is necessary. If someone wants to quit the game in a huff because their log was deleted, let them.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Well then surely if the log was offensive enough to be deleted then your forum post repeating it would be deleted (or censored) too

unless theres more to the story....?

I'm going to venture a guess that the deletion has a lot to do with smoothing feathers of the parties involved in a dispute over Caching in the area. Having an inflamatory log like that on the Cache page will just serve to make a resolution more difficult, especially if the guard get's in trouble over the incident.

 

And...Using the BE to describe Cow Pies is one thing, but using it to describe BS is pushing it.

[jholly]

I'm going to guess we are not even on page 2 yet. And as for us finding out on these pages, it simply won't happen. Glad to see Nomex is still has the watch.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Meh. Just tell your friend to re-log without all the diatribe and get on with your his life.

 

Excuse you me? life will go on, indeed, but I do support this site financially and would hope that

I could get an answer to my question from someone with the authority to do so. It may not

be my log, but I read it before it was deleted and am shocked as to why

Contact@Groundspeak.com

[+tozainamboku]

 

.... I believe we as members

deserve an explanation as to why a log is pulled. ....

 

No we don't - sounds like a private communication between Groundspeak and another customer. None of our business.

So now we are left to do what these forums do best - speculation.

 

There will be those that believe that the frog can do no wrong and since the decision to delete the log came from the frog there is no need for an explanation.

 

There will be others who believe that if TPTB are deleting legitimate Found logs without explaining to logger, at least, the reason for deletion that there is some serious problems in the way Groundspeak is treating members.

 

The truth probably lies some where in between. For privacy reasons I doubt we will ever find out. I only hope that the OP's friend does eventually get an explanation on why the log was deleted.

.

 

Now for some speculation -

 

<speculation> Given the discussion on libel in the cache maggot arrested thread - I suspect the security guard who confronted the logger did log into Geocaching.com and saw what was written about him in the log. He demanded that Groundspeak remove the log immediately and threatened to sue their pants off for defamation it was not done. Now $30 per year from a disgruntled premium member is a lot less that getting your pants sued off - so you can bet what Groundspeak's reaction was. </speculation>

 

Any other ideas?

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

You know what baffles me...Some Cacher has what amounts to an altercation with the folks in charge of managing an area, and then comes to the website to brag about it. After refering the other party to visit the website?? so the guy and his superiors and the LMs who don't want Caching there come to the website, and see someone talking a bunch of Crap about them. That really helps get the situation resolved to our benefit, doesn't it?? Gimmee a break, of course the log was deleted, it should be removed from here too, so that they don't see it in the forums also.

 

Gee...today while out hunting a Cache, I got in a big arguemant with some idiotic park ranger who doesn't have a clue, and told me that his bosses were stupid. I told him to come to the site and look things up, and the first thing he'll see on the Cache page is me(Us)(all of geocaching) boasting about how stupid he is.

 

That's real smart. I'm sure he won't have any problems with geocaching now.

[4wheelin_fool]

Palmetto has the Yoda post in this thread.

 

And that is the key.

 

Remember, a Jedi's strength flows from the Force. But beware. Anger, fear, aggression. The dark side are they. Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Embrace the smiley.

Edited February 27, 2010 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Too Tall John]

If I had to guess, I'd go along with tozainamboku's theory.

 

Looking at the cache in question, the caching companion of the guy whose log was deleted posted a log that didn't editorialize about the security, and their log remains. The big difference between the two logs is the inflammatory language.

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

It certainly sounds as if the CO were not involved at all. The post in question (not even mentioning the euphemisms) is offensive, and violates TOS. A mere mention from park officials to the reviewer of "This is an offensive post" should be enough for the reviewer to delete.

[GOF and Bacall]

I gotta say it. If that is in fact the log as deleted it shouldn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out what the deal is. If I posted to the forums about the OP like the logger posted about the guard the OP would be trying to have me banned. What? Didn't the logger didn't think the guard would follow through with the Google suggestion?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

Now for some speculation -

 

<speculation> Given the discussion on libel in the cache maggot arrested thread - I suspect the security guard who confronted the logger did log into Geocaching.com and saw what was written about him in the log. He demanded that Groundspeak remove the log immediately and threatened to sue their pants off for defamation it was not done. Now $30 per year from a disgruntled premium member is a lot less that getting your pants sued off - so you can bet what Groundspeak's reaction was. </speculation>

 

Any other ideas?

 

I was going post the exact same speculation. From the story it sounded like the guard was worried about getting in trouble over the incident and took the advice of the geocacher, googled geocaching, read the log and sent a request to Groundspeak to have it deleted. One has to wonder why if the security guard, who was doing a favor to the geocacher to allow the cache to be found, would include text in the log that could potentially cause a problem for the security guard.

[Clan Riffster]

$0.02 from an ole fat guy;

The person who posted the log, and had it deleted is the only one with a dog in this fight. If they don't care enough to come in here and ask questions themselves, or write to the other parties involved themselves, I'm not gonna waste what few brain cells I have left trying to speculate on motive.

 

To address your questions:

Can a Reviewer delete a log? Yes, I suppose they could. Can they do so without communicating with the person whose log they are deleting? Probably, but I doubt they would. In this case, judging by Nomex's note, he did communicate. While you may know what was said in the posted log, you have no way of knowing about the communications between Rogue and the person who posted the log.

[Nomex]

My apologies to the cacher for not following up with a private email. I had written a Note on the cache page, which I posted to deflect any criticism on the Cache Owner, which they unfortunately deleted relatively quickly (I told them that they could if they wished). The log deletion was a result of a complaint that was sent to contact@ and was forwarded on to me. The complaint mainly focused around this portion of the log entry:

 

"County workers are to stupid to think of that"

 

which was characterized as a gross misquote of the exchange that went on. Since I wasn't there, I can't vouch for the exact wording, but I'd suggest being careful when quoting someone. Particularly when the individual is in a position of authority and can just as quickly shut down Geocaching in a very large area under their control.

 

Thankfully, I was aware of a thread in the Regional Forums in which this exchange was described, and the effort of the local Community to diffuse and clarify the situation (many thanks to Photom for taking the initiative in this situation).

 

As a result of a few misplaced words, this could have had a very unhappy ending for a number of cache owners in the area. Thanks to the efforts of the Community, and to the Lackey that deftly handled this issue, we can hopefully expect many happy years of Geocaching to continue in this area.

 

Please tell cacher that they are welcome to repost their Find (sans the part about the interaction with the Security folks).

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Good enuf.

 

At least we can all see "The rest of the story".

 

Thank you.

[+ChileHead]

"County workers are to stupid to think of that"

 

I have to laugh at the irony of the misspelling.

 

I would rather see the complaint dealt with immediately by having Groundspeak or the reviewer delete the log to prevent any additional hard feelings by somebody possibly outside the geocaching community, especially one that has influence on geocaching policies on their land. Deleting the log immediately seems to satisfy the person that is being disrespected, and the original cache owner can always log again with a different log.

[+NeecesandNephews]

This post seems like an attempt to create more drama than is necessary. If someone wants to quit the game in a huff because their log was deleted, let them.

 

 

Prophetic! After reading Nomex' post it seems like this may have been exactly what happened. Good call Narcissa!

 

 

There will be those that believe that the frog can do no wrong and since the decision to delete the log came from the frog there is no need for an explanation.

 

There will be others who believe that if TPTB are deleting legitimate Found logs without explaining to logger, at least, the reason for deletion that there is some serious problems in the way Groundspeak is treating members.

 

The truth probably lies some where in between. For privacy reasons I doubt we will ever find out. I only hope that the OP's friend does eventually get an explanation on why the log was deleted.

 

 

Thank you for playing!!! We have a wonderful parting gift for you!!! The OP and the "quitter" knew exactly why the post got deleted. Or perhaps just didn't read it.

[+jackrock]

This thread has gone way off topic. The question was about the guidelines. The specific incident is not the topic of this thread. For clarification of guidelines, the suggestions to contact Groundspeak directly are the best answers.

[+jvSquared]

"County workers are to stupid to think of that"

I have to laugh at the irony of the misspelling

 

That makes two of us... I too have to laugh at the misspelling, and often feel my inner grammar-Nazi flare up.

 

Now back to the topic...

 

Looking at the cache guidelines, I see

 

The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings.

 

The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.

 

Could the alleged log be thought of as 'off topic' and therefore deemed deletable by the CO?

 

Or more likely just falls into the general forum guidelines "be nice"

 

3. Personal attacks and inflammatory behavior will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad. General attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

 

and therefore a higher authority than the CO, as represented by a reviewer, was tasked to do the clean up.

 

Always nice to know a bit more to the story, and it seems everything is in order here.

[+Wooden Cyclist]

I'm going to guess we are not even on page 2 yet. And as for us finding out on these pages, it simply won't happen. Glad to see Nomex is still has the watch.

 

They give watches to reviewers?

[+briansnat]

I'm going to guess we are not even on page 2 yet. And as for us finding out on these pages, it simply won't happen. Glad to see Nomex is still has the watch.

 

They give watches to reviewers?

 

Those aren't watches, they are electronic monitoring bracelets.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

I'm going to guess we are not even on page 2 yet. And as for us finding out on these pages, it simply won't happen. Glad to see Nomex is still has the watch.

 

They give watches to reviewers?

 

Those aren't watches, they are electronic monitoring bracelets.

Like an electronic tether? Good idea!