Jump to content

Flamed for NM or NA logs


geocat_
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. He wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

This guy is a well-respected cacher in my area and I don't want to develop a bad rep among him and his peers, but I just thought I was doing the right thing

 

I still consider myself a newbie but please give me your input. rolleyes.gif

Edited by geocating
Link to comment

If what you say is true then you did the right thing. Nothing is worse than a community that does not maintain it's caches. The reviewer will give him at least 30 days to straighten it out before it's archived. The CO may be ticked but you got his attention.

Link to comment

if the CO`s outburst makes you uncomfortable in the future just contact the reviewer and let them know that NM logs on the cache are being ignored, or whatever the problem is with the cache

that way you do your part and you keep your anonymity

Link to comment

The reviewer will give him at least 30 days to straighten it out before it's archived.

 

I wish.

 

You'll find there are people who find it easier to complain about the NM/NA log than actually taking care of their cache. Even the respected ones. If push comes to shove simply pass it along directly to your reviewer.

Link to comment

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. Then he gets on and logs a note flaming me for asking to archive his hide. Specifically, he wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

Are you looking for a serious answer? Or just to have your cache police attitude reinforced? (Okay. That was harsh.) How do you know the cache needed NA? Was the tree cut down? Is the field now a WalMart? Or you just could not find it? Not enough information here. There are lots of NM for stupid reasons. I see lots for "I could not find it. It must be missing." A CO is not required to perform maintenance just because someone could not find it, and posted NM. "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half" is NOT a valid reason for NA. Many COs know their caches (not to say all).

So explain in realistic terms why you thought the cache deserved NA. You have not given a good reason yet.

Yes. There are cranky COs who never do maintenance. Does this CO have such a record?

Link to comment

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. Then he gets on and logs a note flaming me for asking to archive his hide. Specifically, he wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

Are you looking for a serious answer? Or just to have your cache police attitude reinforced? (Okay. That was harsh.) How do you know the cache needed NA? Was the tree cut down? Is the field now a WalMart? Or you just could not find it? Not enough information here. There are lots of NM for stupid reasons. I see lots for "I could not find it. It must be missing." A CO is not required to perform maintenance just because someone could not find it, and posted NM. "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half" is NOT a valid reason for NA. Many COs know their caches (not to say all).

So explain in realistic terms why you thought the cache deserved NA. You have not given a good reason yet.

Yes. There are cranky COs who never do maintenance. Does this CO have such a record?

 

How many cache owners complain about being told their cache is missing and prove it's not, verses those who have months and years of MN/NA/Any status? and never respond ever.

 

If I post an NA - prove me wrong. That would actually be a welcome change.

Link to comment

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. He wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

 

In the above case I would've logged a DNF (I guess there were other DNFs over that 1.5 years too?) and then added another NM note saying something like, "It seems nobody has seen this cache for a very long time. Please could the CO check on this one and confirm it's still in place by adding a note to the cache page. I'll be happy to have another hunt sometime if it's still there. Thanks".

 

Then I'd put it on my Watchlist for maybe 6 weeks. If there was no response from the CO in all that time then I'd add a NA and let a reviewer take a look at it. It's the reviewer's decision to make. (Again, this is why I'd like the NA to be retitled NRA - Needs Reviewers Attention - or something similar.)

 

MrsB

Link to comment

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. Then he gets on and logs a note flaming me for asking to archive his hide. Specifically, he wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

Are you looking for a serious answer? Or just to have your cache police attitude reinforced? (Okay. That was harsh.) How do you know the cache needed NA? Was the tree cut down? Is the field now a WalMart? Or you just could not find it? Not enough information here. There are lots of NM for stupid reasons. I see lots for "I could not find it. It must be missing." A CO is not required to perform maintenance just because someone could not find it, and posted NM. "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half" is NOT a valid reason for NA. Many COs know their caches (not to say all).

So explain in realistic terms why you thought the cache deserved NA. You have not given a good reason yet.

Yes. There are cranky COs who never do maintenance. Does this CO have such a record?

 

I agree

Link to comment

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. He wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

This guy is a well-respected cacher in my area and I don't want to develop a bad rep among him and his peers, but I just thought I was doing the right thing

 

I still consider myself a newbie but please give me your input. rolleyes.gif

 

Is this everything? Wanting to know why a cache needs to be archived is hardly flaming.

Link to comment

For me, I wait to see a string of DNFs before suggesting a NM log, if the CO has not responded. Unfortunately, there are many cachers who apparently feel shamed if they post a DNF, so don't do so. There's a cache very close to my house and I've seen many cachers look for it, not find it, and none of them has posted a DNF. I looked where I found it, posted a note that it is likely gone, but not a NM or NA. However, the CO has not responded, so it may be time for more than a note.

Link to comment

So I thought I was just doing my job logging a few NM an NA logs. I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. He wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

This guy is a well-respected cacher in my area and I don't want to develop a bad rep among him and his peers, but I just thought I was doing the right thing

 

I still consider myself a newbie but please give me your input. rolleyes.gif

 

Is this everything? Wanting to know why a cache needs to be archived is hardly flaming.

 

No it's not everything. I won't post details since I am not looking to gather together to burn this guy at the stake, but let's just say that he:

 

Has a history of not maintaining his caches

Has a self-appointed God complex based on several other long-time cachers in the area

Pretty much told me and the others who posted NM logs that he "wouldn't waste his time driving out to check on it"

Is not very well liked by several experienced cachers in the area (from the same references as in #2)

Has a history of deleting or editing NM logs

 

 

 

Edited by geocating
Link to comment

1. If you can't find it log a DNF and move on.

 

2. If you find it and the containers broken or log wet etc log a NM. ( we never do it for a wet log, we simply add a new one )

 

3. I would only use the NA if a safety or private property ( I was told by property owner to remove cache) issue existed.

 

I think the NM's and NA's are improperly used for the most part when most of the time a plain old DNF is what it is.

Link to comment

If I don't find it, I DNF it, not NM. Many DNF's? I'll maybe email the CO and ask if I was looking in the right place. If I find the container and it needs work (cracked/broken) I'll make a note in my log. I may or may not post a NM.

If I cannot contact a CO directly, and the cache has NEVER been found, and there have been multiple DNFs (including 3 of ours) I'll post a NM. Unable to contact CO as "account not verified" I waited 6 weeks and posted the NA. CO archived the cache saying "my friend is scum."

There is a new cache near us - "off the trail" placing it on the private farmland. The trail is a public right of way, the grassy area is not. I know the farm owners, they are not happy that the trail was deeded to the people of our area. I am in a quandry - suggested in my log that the CO may wish to move the container, or get permission for the hide from the farmers. Also emailed, offering to act as a go-between if needed. Had no reply. Still wondering what, if anything, I should do.

Link to comment

 

This guy is a well-respected cacher in my area and I don't want to develop a bad rep among him and his peers, but I just thought I was doing the right thing <snip>

 

 

If this guy was well-known in the area, meet him sometime at an event and see if you can ask him....

 

In any event...I don't throw down any NM or NAs....most cachers can see that it is probably not there, but then some cachers [i know of one] that will purposely search these out..

Edited by alohabra
Link to comment

If I don't find it, I DNF it, not NM. Many DNF's? I'll maybe email the CO and ask if I was looking in the right place. If I find the container and it needs work (cracked/broken) I'll make a note in my log. I may or may not post a NM.

If I cannot contact a CO directly, and the cache has NEVER been found, and there have been multiple DNFs (including 3 of ours) I'll post a NM. Unable to contact CO as "account not verified" I waited 6 weeks and posted the NA. CO archived the cache saying "my friend is scum."

There is a new cache near us - "off the trail" placing it on the private farmland. The trail is a public right of way, the grassy area is not. I know the farm owners, they are not happy that the trail was deeded to the people of our area. I am in a quandry - suggested in my log that the CO may wish to move the container, or get permission for the hide from the farmers. Also emailed, offering to act as a go-between if needed. Had no reply. Still wondering what, if anything, I should do.

 

If you know the cache is not wanted by the land owners then let the reviewer know. If you do not want it to be known publicly then email the reviewer directly and give him all of the information.

 

Here is how I handle these situations. I'm hunting for a cache at a store. The cache owner says on the page that they are neighbors of the store owner and friends. So I'm surprised when the owner comes out and is not happy to hear what I'm doing. He stated CO had not asked and requested I remove the container. I leave and post a NA with this info. (Reviewer archived, the CO got permission and the reviewer unarchived.)

 

Second situation. I notice a cache hidden on property clearly owned and controlled by a community HOA. At the beginning of the trail at the entrance to the community there is a clear No Trespassing sign. I take pics, look at google maps street view and see that when they shot this road the sign wasn't there. I then email the reviewer all of this information. The CO says that they go to the pool all of the time meaning they belong to the HOA. So maybe they have permission or since they are property owners they can grant permission. The reviewer will look into it and either leave it or archive it if needed. Either way the CO doesn't feel publicly attack and if there is a problem the reviewer will correct it.

Link to comment

I have never really understood why NM or NA logs can cause so much emotion. Almost every cache is going to need maintenance sometime. I have had an NM log for everything from the fact that the container lid was missing (which I was glad to know about) to when a cacher could not find a container at an earthcache (I was happy to explain earthcaching in a little more detail and modified the page to make it clearer that there is no container to be found), Occasionally someone might write a NM log for a cache of mine that they could not find. But if there is no problem with a cache, then its not that hard to remove the NM tag.

 

So yes, if I cannot find a cache, I will generally DNF and see if anybody else has found it the next time I am in the area. But if there is a string of dnfs on a cache that is not supposed to be difficult, I probably will use the NM log to ask that it be checked. And if there is a string of NM logs and the owner is no longer active, I will use the NA log so that the reviewer can determine if the cache should still be listed.

 

I like to believe that most owners will deal with a problem that would should cause a cache to be moved or archived - as when a property owner came to me and told me that the newly published cache was on private property and was not welcome. All I had to do was to apologize to the person and contact the CO, who immediately took care of it. Occasionally, that is not enough -- I contacted a reviewer after another CO did not seem overly concerned that a cache was on property posted with no trespassing signs (although the reviewer told me to work it out with the CO and the cache remained active until there was a confrontation with the property owner). But there are more serious issues in life than either an NM or NA log on a cache.

Edited by mulvaney
Link to comment

I would have logged a DNF and asked the direct question - "maybe owner can verify since it has been 1.5 years since last found?"

 

I would not generally log a a "NA" log unless I had been to the cache and there was a clear guidelines violation of some kind.

 

((...and, I have to agree that many NM logs I have seen are for some fairly bogus reasons).

Link to comment

I would have logged a DNF and asked the direct question - "maybe owner can verify since it has been 1.5 years since last found?"

 

I would not generally log a a "NA" log unless I had been to the cache and there was a clear guidelines violation of some kind.

 

((...and, I have to agree that many NM logs I have seen are for some fairly bogus reasons).

 

Agree with this advice, but this CO NEVER responds to logs that request checking on a cache. I consider this pretty ridiculous.

 

 

Link to comment

I would have logged a DNF and asked the direct question - "maybe owner can verify since it has been 1.5 years since last found?"

 

I would not generally log a a "NA" log unless I had been to the cache and there was a clear guidelines violation of some kind.

 

((...and, I have to agree that many NM logs I have seen are for some fairly bogus reasons).

 

Agree with this advice, but this CO NEVER responds to logs that request checking on a cache. I consider this pretty ridiculous.

Some COs have so many hides, they can't keep track of them all, so they don't. And if you ask them in person, they'll insist they fixed the cache. Compound that with email issues (IMs do seem to evaporate around here), and you've got caches that perpetually need maintenance. I have never done a NA, although a bunch of caches really need that. I'll just log the find, and that (chronic problem) still exists, or a DNF when I did not find -- regardless of how obviously not there the container may be. Then I make a mental note to avoid that COs caches.

Link to comment
I logged one NA log for a cache I could not find which hadn't been found in over 1.5 years and had 2 other NM logs with no CO response. He wants to know why it should be archived. I thought I made it clear in the previous NA log in which I stated "no CO response and hasn't been found in over a year and a half"

 

What's the Difficulty rating on the cache and how many DNFs were there during that 1 1/2 year span without any Finds? What was the cache's Find & DNF history before that period?

 

If it's 1.5/1.5 ammo can with 50 consecutive Finds then suddenly gets DNF'd 5 times in a row it's usually gone. If during that DNF streak there have also been 2 NM logs with no owner response that adds to the likelihood of a problem.

 

If it's high D/T rating, located in a rural area, gets very few visits, has a history of alternating between Finds and DNFs, how experienced are the DNFs, or something like that then don't be too quick on the NA log. Especially if the CO is still active. Keep in mind the abscence of Find logs does not neccesarily mean DNFs have taken place.

Link to comment

If I don't find it, I DNF it, not NM. Many DNF's? I'll maybe email the CO and ask if I was looking in the right place. If I find the container and it needs work (cracked/broken) I'll make a note in my log. I may or may not post a NM.

If I cannot contact a CO directly, and the cache has NEVER been found, and there have been multiple DNFs (including 3 of ours) I'll post a NM. Unable to contact CO as "account not verified" I waited 6 weeks and posted the NA. CO archived the cache saying "my friend is scum."

There is a new cache near us - "off the trail" placing it on the private farmland. The trail is a public right of way, the grassy area is not. I know the farm owners, they are not happy that the trail was deeded to the people of our area. I am in a quandry - suggested in my log that the CO may wish to move the container, or get permission for the hide from the farmers. Also emailed, offering to act as a go-between if needed. Had no reply. Still wondering what, if anything, I should do.

 

If you know the cache is not wanted by the land owners then let the reviewer know. If you do not want it to be known publicly then email the reviewer directly and give him all of the information.

 

Here is how I handle these situations. I'm hunting for a cache at a store. The cache owner says on the page that they are neighbors of the store owner and friends. So I'm surprised when the owner comes out and is not happy to hear what I'm doing. He stated CO had not asked and requested I remove the container. I leave and post a NA with this info. (Reviewer archived, the CO got permission and the reviewer unarchived.)

 

Second situation. I notice a cache hidden on property clearly owned and controlled by a community HOA. At the beginning of the trail at the entrance to the community there is a clear No Trespassing sign. I take pics, look at google maps street view and see that when they shot this road the sign wasn't there. I then email the reviewer all of this information. The CO says that they go to the pool all of the time meaning they belong to the HOA. So maybe they have permission or since they are property owners they can grant permission. The reviewer will look into it and either leave it or archive it if needed. Either way the CO doesn't feel publicly attack and if there is a problem the reviewer will correct it.

The farmers don't know that cachers (including me) are leaving the trail to get this cache. There are signs at each end stating private farmland, keep to the trail and a large one by the parking area. The CO has placed the "all dogs must be leashed" warning as this is sheep/lamb land. The map actually show the cache off the parkland. I think I will talk to the farmers - if they are OK with it, that's great. If not, I will contact the reviewer.

Link to comment

I would have logged a DNF and asked the direct question - "maybe owner can verify since it has been 1.5 years since last found?"

 

I would not generally log a a "NA" log unless I had been to the cache and there was a clear guidelines violation of some kind.

 

((...and, I have to agree that many NM logs I have seen are for some fairly bogus reasons).

 

Agree with this advice, but this CO NEVER responds to logs that request checking on a cache. I consider this pretty ridiculous.

 

Just to throw this out there; it's very possible to deal with a NM as a CO and not post it on the cache page. While it's nice to advise anyone reading your cache page that maintainence has been done, it's not necessary. Some people don't even know that as the CO, they're the only one who can remove the little red cross in the attributes section.

 

Not suggesting this is what happened, but just saying that it could be.

Link to comment

2. If you find it and the containers broken or log wet etc log a NM. ( we never do it for a wet log, we simply add a new one )

 

If you do that, you can expect to get flamed by the CO for not telling him privately.

I always replace wet logs and post it on the log. Never been flamed yet. I do it only so I can sign the thing.

Link to comment
2. If you find it and the containers broken or log wet etc log a NM. ( we never do it for a wet log, we simply add a new one )
If you do that, you can expect to get flamed by the CO for not telling him privately.
That sounds like a CO with a personal problem to me...
Link to comment

2. If you find it and the containers broken or log wet etc log a NM. ( we never do it for a wet log, we simply add a new one )

 

If you do that, you can expect to get flamed by the CO for not telling him privately.

 

Ooof, I am overwhelmed! Since opening my own account a few weeks ago I have spent hours and hours reading through the FAQ's and forums to figure out what the protocol is on all sorts of topics. Tonight I was trying to find out the guidelines for posting a NM and I've found info that is sometimes contradictory and sometimes flat out distressing [see above].

 

I found a cache with a log that was wet, which I figured was the result of a failed container. I posted a NM because I thought that's what they're for: notify the CO of a problem that needs attention. Was this the wrong use of a NM? I sent a private note to the CO explaining my confusion so hopefully I didn't just piss someone off. Ack! :(

 

I want very much to be an asset to this community, but the more time I spend searching for info on the forums the more nervous I get that I'm going to unintentionally offend. For example, when I first opened my account I read through all the FAQ's and learned about "TFTC", but then tonight I've found threads that reveal many CO's hate it when people use that acronym in their posts. I desperately need a copy of "Emily Post's Geocaching Etiquette for Dummies"!!

Link to comment

I found a cache with a log that was wet, which I figured was the result of a failed container. I posted a NM because I thought that's what they're for: notify the CO of a problem that needs attention. Was this the wrong use of a NM?

If there's a string of previous "wet log" logs, it's definitely appropriate. Depending on the situation, I may just mention that "it's soaking wet" in my Found It log, and leave it at that. But any log is sent to the CO (and they can read the cache logs even if their email isn't working), so consider them notified.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

 

I found a cache with a log that was wet, which I figured was the result of a failed container. I posted a NM because I thought that's what they're for: notify the CO of a problem that needs attention. Was this the wrong use of a NM? I sent a private note to the CO explaining my confusion so hopefully I didn't just piss someone off. Ack! :(

 

No, the container was wet so you were right to log a NM.

 

 

I want very much to be an asset to this community, but the more time I spend searching for info on the forums the more nervous I get that I'm going to unintentionally offend. For example, when I first opened my account I read through all the FAQ's and learned about "TFTC", but then tonight I've found threads that reveal many CO's hate it when people use that acronym in their posts.

 

Some people hate it when that's the only thing in a log/ when it's the only comment in a found it log. People aren't fed up because the acronym was used, but because it was the only comment in the online log.

 

I hope you don't feel discouraged by any of the things you see on these forums... geocachers are usually a very nice bunch.

Happy Caching!

Link to comment
For example, when I first opened my account I read through all the FAQ's and learned about "TFTC", but then tonight I've found threads that reveal many CO's hate it when people use that acronym in their posts.

 

Some people hate it when that's the only thing in a log/ when it's the only comment in a found it log. People aren't fed up because the acronym was used, but because it was the only comment in the online log.

After I found out that people actually like to read cache logs, I went back and changed all my previous "TFTCs", by typing a little something more about each cache. Even with a "NM" cache, there may be a good story to tell about the caching trip, which could also be in the log. A "good story" may even be a few misfortunes you had while seeking the cache. :-)

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

Ooof, I am overwhelmed! Since opening my own account a few weeks ago I have spent hours and hours reading through the FAQ's and forums to figure out what the protocol is on all sorts of topics. Tonight I was trying to find out the guidelines for posting a NM and I've found info that is sometimes contradictory and sometimes flat out distressing [see above].

 

I found a cache with a log that was wet, which I figured was the result of a failed container. I posted a NM because I thought that's what they're for: notify the CO of a problem that needs attention. Was this the wrong use of a NM?

 

Hi,

One of the interesting things about caching is that cachers seem to come from a number of walks of life, therefore have a wide range of opinions on matters. In reading over the forums, it is obvious that cachers don't agree on a number of things, therefore you are not going to please everybody all the time. My best advice is to just do what you would want done if you were on the receiving end. If you make a 'newbie' mistake, the experienced cacher you are dealing with should get a grip and understand that not everyone is at their level yet.

 

As for wet logs, this is important and if you haven't a spare to add to the cache, then it should be NM (with an explanation)...because that log is part of the official verification process that validates people's finds. If that log is damaged beyond readability, then there is no verification. It may not be true in some locations, but in my area a wet log soon means mold, not just blurred writing. That needs to be taken care of quickly!

Link to comment

Thanks so much for the feedback. Would someone please explain why a CO might be upset by a NM? I'm not understanding that at all.

 

Also, I noticed that when I logged the NM my "found" number did not increase. I don't understand that either. Why wouldn't I be given credit for finding it when I have to have found it in order to see that it needed maintenance? Does it revert to a smiley after the CO looks at it?

 

(If this is all explained somewhere, I won't be offended if someone would share the link. I have literally spent hours reading through the FAQ's and the forums and am frustrated that I can't find info on this stuff.)

Link to comment

Thanks so much for the feedback. Would someone please explain why a CO might be upset by a NM? I'm not understanding that at all.

 

I've no idea. It's the correct way to let a cache owner know that something about their cache requires their attention. Cache owners who have a lot of hides have admitted on these forums that they don't always read the details of Found logs so mentioning something like, 'The log needs replacing' can easily be missed but they do pay attention to a NM log when it appears.

Please feel free to log NM on any of our caches, if necessary, any time you're in our area. :D

 

Also, I noticed that when I logged the NM my "found" number did not increase. I don't understand that either. Why wouldn't I be given credit for finding it when I have to have found it in order to see that it needed maintenance? Does it revert to a smiley after the CO looks at it?

 

You have to do two separate logs, one for the Found, one for Needs Maintenance. This is because cachers often re-visit caches for various reasons and it's quite possible that one may need to report a NM issue on a cache that one has already found previously.

 

MrsB :)

Link to comment

2. If you find it and the containers broken or log wet etc log a NM. ( we never do it for a wet log, we simply add a new one )

 

If you do that, you can expect to get flamed by the CO for not telling him privately.

Ouch! Guaranteed, that cache owner would never see another log of any sort from me if s/he reacted that way to a politely worded, matter of fact, "Needs Maintenance" log. The examples given by Bamboozle are perfect situations for when the "Needs Maintenance" log should be applied. Edited by Ladybug Kids
Link to comment

Thanks so much for the feedback. Would someone please explain why a CO might be upset by a NM? I'm not understanding that at all.

No good reason at all. A "Needs Maintenance" log is an innocuous way of telling a Cache Owner their cache has been found, but it has a problem. It sets the "Needs Maintenance" attribute firstaid-sm-yes.gif on the cache page and on the larger cache lists one can view when searching for caches by location or when viewing a cacher's profile.

 

Now, what understandably could bother a cache owner is when someone inappropriately uses the "Needs Maintenance" log when a "Did Not Find" log would have been more appropriate. A cacher can't possibly know whether or not a cache needs maintenance if they haven't seen it and touched it.

 

Long strings of "Did Not Find" logs on a cache that used to be regularly found can be a sign to the cache owner and the local reviewer that something may have gone awary. That's why it's so important for cachers to document their "did not finds." I have posted over 420 "did not find" logs out there, and I'm proud of it. (Note: posting "did not find" logs is the source of much angst in other threads, so I won't go into more detail here.)

 

As the owner of more than 120 active caches, I appreciate having the ability to click through a half dozen pages and see at a glance which caches require a maintenance visit. When preparing to travel, I filter out caches with the "Needs Maintenance" attribute set (as well as those with recent multiple "Did Not Finds" so I don't spend my vacation time hunting for caches that have problems.

 

(If this is all explained somewhere, I won't be offended if someone would share the link. I have literally spent hours reading through the FAQ's and the forums and am frustrated that I can't find info on this stuff.)

No worries there. The forums are supposed to be a friendly place where folks can get answers to their questions. The only bad question is the question that is not asked. Edited by Ladybug Kids
Link to comment

Long strings of "Did Not Find" logs on a cache that used to be regularly found can be a sign to the cache owner and the local reviewer that something may have gone awary.

 

(Not directed at you specifically)

 

Is the reviewer truly aware of a string of DNFs and a NM? (I'm not sure if adding more NM actually does anything) I've asked my reveiwer(s) but I know the answer as to how they handle these. To paraphrase - We address each issue as needed

 

Is there some sort of statute I can follow so I know when it's time to escalate? You'd think after a year of problems I could request action without being the bad guy.

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment

Long strings of "Did Not Find" logs on a cache that used to be regularly found can be a sign to the cache owner and the local reviewer that something may have gone awary.

 

(Not directed at you specifically)

 

Is the reviewer truly aware of a string of DNFs and a NM? (I'm not sure if adding more NM actually does anything) I've asked my reveiwer(s) but I know the answer as to how they handle these. To paraphrase - We address each issue as needed

 

Is there some sort of statute I can follow so I know when it's time to escalate? You'd think after a year of problems I could request action without being the bad guy.

There is no set process for reviewer action regarding strings of DNFs or long-standing NM. As a player, two consecutive DNFs or a NM log is enough for me to filter out a cache using GSAK and avoid looking for it, especially when I'm traveling. As a reviewer, I give cachers a lot more time before I start nudging them (see above).

 

I review caches for Alaska which has a fairly small number of caches (~4300), so with five PQs I can pull every cache in the state, crunch them through GSAK, I create a list of caches with four or more consecutive DNFs or a NM attribute. For the caches with serial DNFs, I'll post a Reviewer Note suggesting that the cache owner check on their cache and let the caching community know via a Note log that the cache is all right and just tough to find, replace the cache, or archive it themselves, knowing that eventually a frustrated cacher will drop a Needs Archived (NA) log on the cache and "force" me to "officially" look at the cache and potentially take action. Once an NA is written to a cache page, I'll archive fairly quickly if the cache owner has not logged onto the site within the past three months or so. All of my archive notes include content informing the cache owner then can have their cache unarchived within thirty days if the contact me, but prior to unarchiving, the cache will receive the same review as a new cache.

 

NM attributes by themselves won't prompt me to archive a cache, but I will drop a friendly reminder note on each cache page displaying that attribute in the Fall suggesting that the cache owner take care of any issues before the snow flies and maintenance will be more difficult. In late Spring as the last of the snow melts at lower elevations, I'll drop a similar reminder note on each cache page suggesting that the cache owner may wish to spiff up their cache before the summer caching crush begins. The notes have tips on how to clear the attribute if maintenance was performed and the cache owner didn't clear the attribute with an Owner Maintenance log.

 

Is there some sort of statute I can follow so I know when it's time to escalate? You'd think after a year of problems I could request action without being the bad guy.
No, there isn't a specific guideline on this. However, I don't see anyone being the "bad guy" reporting issues of any sort about a cache if there is a problem (lots of consecutive DNFs, bad coordinates, private property, soaked log). The only "bad" guys and gals I see out there are the cache owners who take issue with chachers for bringing issues up or don't respond to NM and other logs with at least a simple "I checked on the cache and it's where it's supposed to be" note to the cache page. Even if one doesn't watch the cache logs stream into their inbox, it's very simple to check all of one's caches online through one's profile by looking for the NM attribute and then go check or fix the caches with potential issues.

 

Your volunteer reviewer experience will vary depending on work load, total number of caches in the reviewer's area, etc.

Edited by Greatland Reviewer
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...