Needs Maintenance

[+Mark+Karen]

Yesterday I posted a "Needs Maintenance" log to a cache that I had not found myself but I hope to find in the next few weeks. The problem being that almost every person who had logged the cache for around a year have said that the log book is damp, with the latest saying that it has turned to mush and is mouldy.

 

I got an email straight back from the cache owner who was concerned that now I'd posted a Needs Maintenance that the reviewers would see it and the cache would be quickly, and permanently archived, and that he looks forward to me never being able to find it.

 

First of all, did I make an error here in posting that log? Secondly it was my understanding that NM logs were just informational for the owner and didn't copy reviewers into the process?

[+Lovejoy and Tinker]

Yesterday I posted a "Needs Maintenance" log to a cache that I had not found myself but I hope to find in the next few weeks. The problem being that almost every person who had logged the cache for around a year have said that the log book is damp, with the latest saying that it has turned to mush and is mouldy.

 

I got an email straight back from the cache owner who was concerned that now I'd posted a Needs Maintenance that the reviewers would see it and the cache would be quickly, and permanently archived, and that he looks forward to me never being able to find it.

 

First of all, did I make an error here in posting that log? Secondly it was my understanding that NM logs were just informational for the owner and didn't copy reviewers into the process?

 

NM logs do not go through to the reviewer. Needs Archiving logs do go to the reviewer.

 

Sounds like a lazy cache owner - can ignore all the logs telling him the log is wet but as soon as someone posts a NM log they jump up and down.

 

His next course of action should be to get out there and put a new log in his cache. The cache he promised to maintain when he set it up, but clearly hasn't.

Instead of having a go at you, he should keep his own house in order really.

 

Personally I don't think you did anything wrong reporting a cache you haven't found. After all, they are the ones you have most interest in being in good condition - so you can go and find them.

Are you going to go look for a cache that you know has problems?

Nope, they just keep popping up on the PQs and nearest to home lists but you don't want to go and find them until they have been sorted out by the CO.

 

If you want to contact the CO again, explain in a friendly manner that your log was meant as a means of letting him know there is a problem, in case he hadn't been reading other people's logs, and you were keen for it to be put right because you are looking forward to a day's caching which includes his cache on your list.

You can also assure him that the reviewer does not receive notice of a NM log, and even if they did they would not archive a cache unless he failed to respond to their requests that something be done about the problem.

 

Good on you.

Lovejoy

[+drdick&vick]

I often post notes for caches that are 'Temp Disabled' or have problesm if I am going to the area and want to find. Only ever had one bad reaction and the deleted my note and sent me a shirty email syaing' You don't know our circumstances etc' but were still caching now and then and it was only 2 miles from home.

[+FollowMeChaps]

Copy the email to the reviewers and hope they take some action.

 

Better still name & shame them here!

[Deceangi]

Numerous logs stating that the log book is wet, or Needs Maintenance log should be considered by a Cache Owner to be a Yellow card ie: a Warning. Reviewers will not be aware of either unless someone flags the cache up to us.

 

A Needs Archiving log should be considered to be a Red Card ie: a Final and Ultimate Warning. Either Fix the cache or issues with it, or it will be Archived. Reviewers are copied in on NA logs. Even then the chances of the cache being immediately Archived is very slim. Circumstances for immediate Archiving are Landowner Issues ie: a Landowner has challenged a Cacher, and requires the immediate removal of the cache. Or it is very and positively clear the Owner has not been active for a very long time. Other than that, a Warning is Posted by a Reviewer, giving the owner a chance to action the cache. By action that is

 

Contact the Reviewer and explain what is going on, and when it will be Maintained.

Post a note to the cache page, giving a Time Line of when the cache will be Maintained.

Go out and Maintain the Cache

Archive the cache (initially this is a Cache Owners choice and not a requirement/demand of the Reviewer)

 

Only after the Owner has failed to take one of the actions, will the cache get Archived. The Reviewer actioning the Needs Archiving log, is not out to Archive the Cache! Jut to simply get the cache active again, so members of the community can go out and find it.

 

Personally apart from Landowner Issues, I can only remember Immediately Archiving a Handful of caches due to a Needs Arching Log. Even then, the Owners had not been active for a very extended period.

 

Deci

[+Mark+Karen]

Copy the email to the reviewers and hope they take some action.

 

Better still name & shame them here!

 

I don't think there is any need for that. The CO said that they can't get to it at the moment, but they didn't elaborate. From what I've read about the cache it's a very interesting puzzle cache and I'd hate to see it go, but for the same reason I'd like to find it too! He also said "I sent logs to a recent finder for them to replace the log" which I'm not sure what that means.

 

Alternatively I could go and find the cache already armed with a new log book! Which is probably what I'll do.

[team tisri]

Yesterday I posted a "Needs Maintenance" log to a cache that I had not found myself but I hope to find in the next few weeks. The problem being that almost every person who had logged the cache for around a year have said that the log book is damp, with the latest saying that it has turned to mush and is mouldy.

 

I got an email straight back from the cache owner who was concerned that now I'd posted a Needs Maintenance that the reviewers would see it and the cache would be quickly, and permanently archived, and that he looks forward to me never being able to find it.

 

First of all, did I make an error here in posting that log? Secondly it was my understanding that NM logs were just informational for the owner and didn't copy reviewers into the process?

 

If someone isn't maintaining their caches then sooner or later they will get archived. It's right that this happens, because it allows others who will maintain caches to use the locations.

 

If someone can't maintain their caches for whatever reason they can say as much on the cache page - if it's gone missing they can disable it and post periodic notes to explain when they are likely to be able to get to it. If it needs a new log or whatever they can always ask someone else to replace the log if they can't do it themselves.

 

If they can't get to their cache due to travelling that's one thing, but if they haven't done anything in 12 months the question needs to be asked whether they are in a position to maintain it, and if not it needs to be adopted or archived.

[+Teacosies]

I logged a cache and added a needs maintenance due to the contents being wet. This was the 4th mention of a waterlogged cache and 2nd NM. 10 days later and another wet log mentioned I posted a needs archiving - later that day the owner fixed the cache. I wonder why

 

What I do hate is when some one cant find a cache and posts a needs maintenance.

[+Mark+Karen]

What I do hate is when some one cant find a cache and posts a needs maintenance.

 

I've done that, however. The two people before me hadn't found the cache either. Another two people after me also failed to find the cache so at the weekend I posted a "Needs Archiving" on it. The cache is still active so I assume the reviewer concerned is giving the CO time to respond / fix the problem.

 

However I've heard tales elsewhere on this forum of someone being watched by the cache owner doing a 5 minute search, giving up and then posting a "Needs Archiving" log as the cache was apparently missing!

[+currykev]

I think markhewitt1978 is getting a little carried away with his cache logs!

[+Mark+Karen]

I think markhewitt1978 is getting a little carried away with his cache logs!

 

 

I've only posted a total of 2 needs maintenance and 1 needs archiving!

[+Amberel]

I've only posted a total of 2 needs maintenance and 1 needs archiving!

Except that a Needs Archiving based on no more than 3 DNFs sounds premature!

 

> The cache is still active so I assume the reviewer concerned is giving the CO time to respond / fix the problem.

 

There must exist the possibility that it's still active because there wasn't a problem in the first place! Obviously the probability of this will vary with the difficulty of the cache and its previous find history, but even for an easy cache, 3 DNFs is too soon for a Needs Archiving!

 

Rgds, Andy

[+Mark+Karen]

It's 5 DNF's. And 6 weeks after the NM log with no response from the CO.