Are Reviewers Overwhelmed? Why does it take so long to Archive a cache that is definitely lost?

[4wheelin_fool]

I'll admit to being confused, too.

 

I thought that archiving caches was indeed part of the reviewer's job?

 

If not the reviewer, then who is supposed to archive them?

 

The owner of the cache is primarily responsible for archival of their cache if it's missing. The reviewers only do it as a secondary bonus if they have time.

 

Perhaps there should be an"Archiver", that would only archive caches, to keep the heat off of the reviewers.

[Clan Riffster]

An interesting, though slightly off topic archival:

I was in the early stages of building a night cache, when a Reviewer emailed me, asking if I had ever hunted for an archived night cache that started at the same location, Reflection Cache. I wasn't aware of this one, as it got archived before my radius extended out that far, so I checked it out.

 

In August 2004, Central Florida had been whacked pretty good by Hurricane Charley. A local legend went out and found the cache shortly after the storm passed, though it was still raining and the area had flooded. In March 2005, a Reviewer posted a note indicating that there might be issues with the cache, though there are no logs making note of that. In June 2005, the owner disabled it. In July 2005, another Reviewer posted a note asking that the cache be fixed or archived. In September 2005, the first Reviewer posted a similar note. In October 2005, the owner archived it.

 

By this time, this cache had been through 3 hurricanes, (and sideswiped by a 4th), and was very deep under flood waters.

 

In February 2006, I went out to work on my night cache, and poked around, locating most of the reflectors. I eventually located the ammo can, which, judging by the water marks on the trees, had been under at least 6' of water for several months. The ammo can was in excellent condition. I took it with me, letting the owner know that I would mail it to them if they gave me an address, but I never heard back from her. It still resides on a shelf in my garage.

[+scwri2000]

Since you asked it sounds like you are being unreasonable to me.

 

The reviewers are volunteers. I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find any cachers that would prefer that a reviewer archives caches instead of publishing new ones. Given the choice I want my reviewer to put the priority on publishing new caches.

 

Telling a reviewer that her actions are ridiculous will certainly not endure you to her. Fortunately most reviewers don't take personal feelings into account when reviewing caches.

 

But that was my whole point....its missing has been for sooooo long. I placed a new one to replace it, she and I have gone back and forth for a while, I just don't understand, well I guess I want to understand is it easier to just publish new ones instead of archiving others? She doesn't seem to understand what I keep asking her....is it a push of a button? It is extra research? BUT when you give the CC owner 10 days to reply or you will archive and that time is up, I think you should archive! I believe in do what you say, that's all.

 

How do you know it is missing? Have you looked for it (I didn't see a DNF from you so I can't tell)? The only fact is that several new cachers have not been able to find it. It could very well still be there.

 

In a situation like this, caches aren't archive immediately, so that the owners can check on things. I have several difficult caches that people DNF all the time, but I know that cache is still there. I'd hate for one of those DNF's to post a NA and have the cache immediately archived.

 

Hi there, I posted a Needs Archived and thought that counted as a DNF because we physically looked everywhere. I also personally emailed the Reviewer it was still missing after I looked again just to be sure. I just didnt want to keep posting more DNF's on the page as she already knew and had started the Archive process with the CO. I have picked up some of your caches (most of which are excellent) and I understand sometimes there are alot of DNF's. I didn't realize that I should have posted a NM instead of just right to archive. I know you have been doing this for a long time and I am fairly new to the game so there are things I'm still learning. One question though..in the future if there are multiple DNF's for months including my own and I have sent an email to the CO asking for a hint/is is still there with no response, then can I post an Archive? Would that be the proper thing to do? Still learning...

[+scwri2000]

I'll admit to being confused, too.

 

I thought that archiving caches was indeed part of the reviewer's job?

 

If not the reviewer, then who is supposed to archive them?

 

The owner of the cache is primarily responsible for archival of their cache if it's missing. The reviewers only do it as a secondary bonus if they have time.

 

Perhaps there should be an"Archiver", that would only archive caches, to keep the heat off of the reviewers.

 

Thank you for answering. That was one of my biggest questions.

[Clan Riffster]

One question though..in the future if there are multiple DNF's for months including my own and I have sent an email to the CO asking for a hint/is is still there with no response, then can I post an Archive? Would that be the proper thing to do? Still learning...

Great question! My personal standard for posting a "Needs Archived" is:

 

The cache is in need of significant help. (missing/seriously damaged/etc)

The owner is no longer active.

The community is unwilling to informally adopt it.

 

The exception are caches that are in serious violation of the guidelines.

[+scwri2000]

 

I wanted it archived because I placed one near the missing one and I would like it to be published for the kids in this park before winter, lol.

 

 

When I see that written, or hear that uttered, I cringe. I have had people decide they want "my spot" in the past and repeatedly muggle the cache until it gets archived.

Find another spot.

 

That's horrible I would never muggle someone elses cache for a spot! Who does that? That's like the people who trade swag for rocks and trash, I can't stand that! I was out caching and thought it was easy to replace a lost one and since this seemed to be lost I just placed mine near where other used to be. I had no idea that it would turn into such an ordeal. Again I am semi new to this sport and I just figured well, if its missing and the CO hasn't checked on it with all the dnf's and I can't find it, I'll ask them to archive it. Didn't mean any harm. Now I know.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

One question though..in the future if there are multiple DNF's for months including my own and I have sent an email to the CO asking for a hint/is is still there with no response, then can I post an Archive? Would that be the proper thing to do? Still learning...

Great question! My personal standard for posting a "Needs Archived" is:

 

The cache is in need of significant help. (missing/seriously damaged/etc)

The owner is no longer active.

The community is unwilling to informally adopt it.

 

The exception are caches that are in serious violation of the guidelines.

 

I usually don't worry too much about caches that seem to be missing, with little to no owner response. If I come across a cache that appears to be missing, and the owner has not responded or logged in for a significant amount of time (6 months or more), I will usually drop the local review a private email indicating the issue(s) and cache number (private emails tend to minimize angst and other issues). They will then usually temp disable it, and give the owner 30 days to take action. Then, if I happen to see that much more than 30 days have elapsed, I may drop the reviewer another email. Then I stop worrying about it.

 

Now, I don't go actively searching these caches out, but if I come across them, I see what the story is, and go from there. If I happen to be near a cache that has reported issues that I previously found, I will check on it, and post the appropriate log (Still There, Missing, etc).

[cliff_hanger]

Our reviewer (CTReviewer) is great. Very pro-active. I don't know how he finds the time

[knowschad]

I'll admit to being confused, too.

 

I thought that archiving caches was indeed part of the reviewer's job?

 

If not the reviewer, then who is supposed to archive them?

 

The owner of the cache is primarily responsible for archival of their cache if it's missing. The reviewers only do it as a secondary bonus if they have time.

 

Perhaps there should be an"Archiver", that would only archive caches, to keep the heat off of the reviewers.

 

Thank you for answering. That was one of my biggest questions.

 

I would qualify 4WF's comment by saying that it is the cache owner who generally archives their cache when they feel the time has come to archive it. But it is a rare cache owner that does that in response to a NA log. Generally, by that time, one or more NM logs have been posted that the cache owner has failed to respond to. If that is the case, they are also unlikely to respond to a NA log, which is when the reviewer steps in.

 

By the way, while the proper thing for you to have done would probably be to post your DNF, followed at first by a NM log, that cache is a classic abandoned cache. A cache with many finds in the past suddenly starts to accumulate DNF after DNF, cache owner hasn't even been online for some time. You maybe could have done better, but you didn't do wrong.

[+CanadianRockies]

Perhaps there should be an"Archiver", that would only archive caches, to keep the heat off of the reviewers.

I guess we're spoiled in our area. Our reviewer team regularly checks for caches that need owner attention. In addition, there appears to be a volunteer "sweeper" who occasionally helps out with that task.

[+A & J Tooling]

I've logged a DNF in my area 3 times for the same cache and I've been over the area with a fine tooth comb. I've looked for it with a thermal imaging device at night and with a buried cable/ metal detector and shining lights in the area at night. At least 6 DNF's before me. D/T 1, 1 1/2 stars. Other people have found it since. I never once considered asking or posting a needs archived (well, maybe once).

[+dfx]

Perhaps there should be an"Archiver", that would only archive caches, to keep the heat off of the reviewers.

 

Some areas do have dedicated or semi-dedicated "archiver" reviewers.

[+wimseyguy]

I have been waiting for a cache to be Archived for approx. 128 days now. The last DNF was over 100 days ago with other DNF's since. I searched twice and posted a "Archive" note recently. My reviewer/publisher left a message for the CC owner on the page that if she did not respond within 10 days she would archive the cache.

 

I wanted it archived because I placed one near the missing one and I would like it to be published for the kids in this park before winter, lol.

 

<snip>

 

School me....

 

Your first problem was that you started the countdown on the date of the first DNF, not your NA log. This has created angst which you don't need, geocaching is supposed to be fun for you.

 

Your second problem was getting too attached to a particular location for your cache. It's a big world out there with lots of room for new caches.

 

I won't mention that the reviewer may have wondered why you haven't posted a DNF on the cache before posting the NA as you have already explained that here.

 

As others have already suggested, take a deep breath, go outside and have some FUN, and try to develop a more positive working relationship with your volunteer reviewer.

[+GeoBain]

I'll admit to being confused, too.

 

I thought that archiving caches was indeed part of the reviewer's job?

 

If not the reviewer, then who is supposed to archive them?

 

The owner of the cache is primarily responsible for archival of their cache if it's missing. The reviewers only do it as a secondary bonus if they have time.

 

Perhaps there should be an"Archiver", that would only archive caches, to keep the heat off of the reviewers.

 

Ditto on all 3 points.

 

The exception being that if there is an urgent reason to act, such as trespassing issues or a request from the police, then the reviewer should step in immediately. Groundspeak personnel have even been known to step in as well in these cases.

[+GeoBain]

One question though..in the future if there are multiple DNF's for months including my own and I have sent an email to the CO asking for a hint/is is still there with no response, then can I post an Archive? Would that be the proper thing to do? Still learning...

 

*** The following is my opinion and is by no means meant to dictate how everyone should approach the situation ***

 

If you sent an email asking only for a hint and get no response and you really think it is missing after searching thoroughly, then you should begin with a Needs Maintenance.

 

If you sent an email asking for a hint and mentioned your posted DNF and where you looked, etc. and the owner responds in such a manner that you feel they are fully aware it is missing and have no intention of doing anything about it then go straight for the Needs Archive.

 

If you see a string of DNF's AND you have looked thoroughly as well and don't want to email the owner, then start with the Needs Maintenance if no other NM log has been posted. Then wait a while (probably at least a couple of weeks) before going for the Needs Archived log.

 

If there are a string of DNF's AND at least one other NM log has been posted with no response for a couple of weeks, then an NA log would probably be called for.

 

But keep this in mind. There are some caches where DNF's are expected. Take into consideration the difficulty and terrain ratings. Take a look at the log history and see if DNF's are the norm. In other words, if you haven't laid hands on the cache yourself, please take the time to investigate the situation fully before asking for it to be archived.

 

And even if you find the cache and it is destroyed, full of bees, wildlife has urinated on it, etc., that doesn't mean it needs to be archived. Use the Needs Maintenance. This alerts the owner to the problem as well as flagging the listing so other finders are aware as well. Hiders are not always able to perform this maintenance on a same day basis. You have to allow sufficient time for someone to get out and check on their cache. 3 days from NM to NA is not generally an appropriate timeframe.

[knowschad]

One question though..in the future if there are multiple DNF's for months including my own and I have sent an email to the CO asking for a hint/is is still there with no response, then can I post an Archive? Would that be the proper thing to do? Still learning...

 

*** The following is my opinion and is by no means meant to dictate how everyone should approach the situation ***

 

If you sent an email asking only for a hint and get no response and you really think it is missing after searching thoroughly, then you should begin with a Needs Maintenance.

 

If you sent an email asking for a hint and mentioned your posted DNF and where you looked, etc. and the owner responds in such a manner that you feel they are fully aware it is missing and have no intention of doing anything about it then go straight for the Needs Archive.

 

If you see a string of DNF's AND you have looked thoroughly as well and don't want to email the owner, then start with the Needs Maintenance if no other NM log has been posted. Then wait a while (probably at least a couple of weeks) before going for the Needs Archived log.

 

If there are a string of DNF's AND at least one other NM log has been posted with no response for a couple of weeks, then an NA log would probably be called for.

 

But keep this in mind. There are some caches where DNF's are expected. Take into consideration the difficulty and terrain ratings. Take a look at the log history and see if DNF's are the norm. In other words, if you haven't laid hands on the cache yourself, please take the time to investigate the situation fully before asking for it to be archived.

 

And even if you find the cache and it is destroyed, full of bees, wildlife has urinated on it, etc., that doesn't mean it needs to be archived. Use the Needs Maintenance. This alerts the owner to the problem as well as flagging the listing so other finders are aware as well. Hiders are not always able to perform this maintenance on a same day basis. You have to allow sufficient time for someone to get out and check on their cache. 3 days from NM to NA is not generally an appropriate timeframe.

 

I think I need an app for that!

 

Seriously... that might seem like a lot to a new geocacher to absorb, but it really isn't. The essense is common sense and courtesy. Start with the less invasive techniques before you resort to major surgery.

[+GeoBain]

One question though..in the future if there are multiple DNF's for months including my own and I have sent an email to the CO asking for a hint/is is still there with no response, then can I post an Archive? Would that be the proper thing to do? Still learning...

 

*** The following is my opinion and is by no means meant to dictate how everyone should approach the situation ***

 

If you sent an email asking only for a hint and get no response and you really think it is missing after searching thoroughly, then you should begin with a Needs Maintenance.

 

If you sent an email asking for a hint and mentioned your posted DNF and where you looked, etc. and the owner responds in such a manner that you feel they are fully aware it is missing and have no intention of doing anything about it then go straight for the Needs Archive.

 

If you see a string of DNF's AND you have looked thoroughly as well and don't want to email the owner, then start with the Needs Maintenance if no other NM log has been posted. Then wait a while (probably at least a couple of weeks) before going for the Needs Archived log.

 

If there are a string of DNF's AND at least one other NM log has been posted with no response for a couple of weeks, then an NA log would probably be called for.

 

But keep this in mind. There are some caches where DNF's are expected. Take into consideration the difficulty and terrain ratings. Take a look at the log history and see if DNF's are the norm. In other words, if you haven't laid hands on the cache yourself, please take the time to investigate the situation fully before asking for it to be archived.

 

And even if you find the cache and it is destroyed, full of bees, wildlife has urinated on it, etc., that doesn't mean it needs to be archived. Use the Needs Maintenance. This alerts the owner to the problem as well as flagging the listing so other finders are aware as well. Hiders are not always able to perform this maintenance on a same day basis. You have to allow sufficient time for someone to get out and check on their cache. 3 days from NM to NA is not generally an appropriate timeframe.

 

I think I need an app for that!

 

Seriously... that might seem like a lot to a new geocacher to absorb, but it really isn't. The essense is common sense and courtesy. Start with the less invasive techniques before you resort to major surgery.

 

LOL. I said that in the space of a couple of sentences ealier. But it got mixed in with a lot of other stuff. But since he asked a specific question, I tried to cover several scenarios. Start small and build covers the other situations.

[+sidekeck]

I have been waiting for a cache to be Archived for approx. 128 days now. The last DNF was over 100 days ago with other DNF's since. I searched twice and posted a "Archive" note recently. My reviewer/publisher left a message for the CC owner on the page that if she did not respond within 10 days she would archive the cache.

 

I wanted it archived because I placed one near the missing one and I would like it to be published for the kids in this park before winter, lol.

 

I didnt understand at first that disable and archived were two different things, I sent the reviewer a note saying I was sorry for the confusion, nd I waited and waited and waited, you get the point.

 

So I sent her a detailed email with dates emails were sent, last dates of DNF's, specific count of days since missing, etc. I asked again that she Archive it since by this time the 10 days SHE gave the CC owner in the note had passed. Which logically would mean she can Archive it.

 

Below is her response, then my response...............................

 

******

Hi there.

 

I do my best to take care of archiving caches when I have the time to do so. My paying job (my real job) is working me over 40 hours in the summertime, so I don't have a lot of free time right now.

 

Please be a bit on the patient side, and I will get around to archiving caches like 'shoelaces' soon.

 

Archiving caches like that isn't something I'm expected to do as a reviewer - it's something that I try to incorporate over the year when I have the time to do it.

 

Thanks for being patient and understanding!

 

MY RESPONSE TO THAT,....

 

I'm not going to argue with you. I just think its a little rediculous that you are publishing cache after cache, day after day (even as I type) and can't get rid of one which YOU clearly stated you would do to the owner in a specific time period. I'm not sure how this works (I'll figure specifics out tomorrow) but I'm sure there is someone I can contact to help you keep up with what needs to be done if you are to overwhelmed. Compromise...I'm moving my cache, this way you don't have to worry about archiving since it seems to be more about publishing.

 

HERE IS MY ISSUE: I just placed a new cache in her "area" today. Will I have a hard time? And is there a lesson in here for me? What is the rules of Archiving....do you have to wait hundreds of days even with no response from the CO?

 

School me....

 

My first reaction when I read this post was, "wow." I actually read this at 3am this morning. And it's taken me until now to respond. And I've been approached by more than one person asking to respond. Interesting, don't you think? My 'found it' log was quoted somewhere along the way by somebody...I don't recall who. I knew exactly which cache this was by just reading my log. But, I digress...

 

If you had spoken to me, as you responded to the MA state reviewer, you would not have liked my reply. At all. I don't care if it relates to one's job, social events, volunteer efforts or as in this case--a game--there is absolutely no need for that. You are two and a half months new to this speaking to someone with multiple years experience under their belt. Do you really believe you know more than they do and are entitled to that tone and judgment of how they do their job? A job that is strictly on a volunteer basis that sucks up valuable time that takes them away from their paying job, family, friends, social events and other things they would rather be doing other than listening to people get unnecessarily snippy with them.

 

I recently had a PA cache owner berate me, via email(in bolded, huge font, all capital letters), for getting one question of five wrong on a virtual cache. I kindly explained to him that if he was going to get that bent out of shape over a game then perhaps it was time to re-evaluate his life. I might throw that suggestion out to you as well.

 

There are a lot of different ways to educate yourself about geocaching. The knowledge books on the website are a start. Contacting experienced cachers in your area is another. Attending events, meeting people, asking questions and asking to go caching with experienced cachers is another. We had an event in RI this July and our RI state reviewer flew in for that. What a grand learning opportunity missed right there. Above all else, being kind and courteous goes a long way. Never underestimate the power of that.

 

Regarding DNF, NM and NA around here. Avenois summed it up pretty well so I won't rehash it. You wouldn't know this because you are too new, but the reviewer archive notices are all canned. They are not personalized for each cache or cacher. Joe_cacher doesn't get 10 days vs. Bob_cacher's 20 days vs. Fred_cacher's 30 days. If you look at CTReviewer's notes, gpsfun's notes and madmin's notes they are all canned responses--albeit they each have their own version. So for you to be a stickler and demand that a reviewer abide by the x-day timeframe in their canned response is akin to demanding Publisher's Clearinghouse pay you $35 million dollars each time that letter comes in the mail.

 

And while we are being technical (your term, not mine) Shoelaces is in Mass, not Rhode Island. And technically you do not definitely know that it is lost. You definitely know there is a number of DNF's, including your own, although you did not care to post it as such. If you wanted to confirm that this cache was missing, you could easily contact a previous finder (since the CO was unresponsive) and ask them for hints or ask them your questions, couldn't you? Or you could even ask them to accompany you out to GZ to look for it. Or you could ask them to go check on it for you. You had any number of options long before you hit the NA.

 

Anyway, as I said before I was contacted by a few for assistance. I am by no means a saint. I'm not even a nice person. I'll admit that. My logs ought to be proof enough. But I did abandon my plans to hide two caches of my own this evening to go check on this cache. It was not in the hidey hole I originally found it in. I expanded my search ~40-50ft and did not see it. But this area is a huge party spot, so it doesn't surprise me that it went missing.

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

[+BlueDeuce]

... You are two and a half months new to this speaking to someone with multiple years experience under their belt. Do you really believe you know more than they do and are entitled to that tone and judgment of how they do their job?...

 

I'm not two and a half months into this and I have the same questions. All I see is people jumping his case without being able to officially speak to the guidelines.

 

Let me ask again, can you clarify gc.com guidelines?

[+Ambient_Skater]

That's horrible I would never muggle someone elses cache for a spot! Who does that? That's like the people who trade swag for rocks and trash, I can't stand that! I was out caching and thought it was easy to replace a lost one and since this seemed to be lost I just placed mine near where other used to be. I had no idea that it would turn into such an ordeal. Again I am semi new to this sport and I just figured well, if its missing and the CO hasn't checked on it with all the dnf's and I can't find it, I'll ask them to archive it. Didn't mean any harm. Now I know.

You did write:

 

I wanted it archived because I placed one near the missing one and I would like it to be published for the kids in this park before winter, lol.

[knowschad]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

[AZcachemeister]

I believe in do what you say, that's all.

 

I haven't read the entire thread, but in my eyes this is the crux of the biscuit:

 

The reviewer says they are giving the CO of the original cache XX days to do something, or the cache will be archived.

 

XX days pass, and the reviewer does nothing.

 

The reviewer is a liar. (Or a paper tiger if that sounds better.)

 

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Perhaps I am spoiled since the reviewer in Arizona (despite any other faults)

DOES make sweeps for disabled caches that have not had action in several months

DOES disable caches with a sudden streak of DNFs

DOES follow-up (and archives the cache) if the CO does nothing after a reasonable time period

[+sidekeck]

It says right here in the knowledge books not to use 'needs archived' when you did not find a cache.

 

That wasn't difficult to find.

[+sidekeck]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

I do not make assumptions about cache owners. Not logging in since June 8 doesn't raise any red flags for me. We have a local cacher here that has Stage IV cancer. He hasn't logged in for quite some time but we, as a caching community, know of his situation and we collectively keep his caches going. We do maintenance on them when they need it, despite the fact we don't own them. So no, log in dates don't automatically raise flags. Not here. RI is a small state with a tight knit community of people. We pretty much know everyone here. And if we don't, we will soon enough.

[+sidekeck]

This states the reviewer was required to do nothing with the OP's first NA log.

[+BlueDeuce]

This states the reviewer was required to do nothing with the OP's first NA log.

 

"he/she will usually"

[knowschad]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

I do not make assumptions about cache owners. Not logging in since June 8 doesn't raise any red flags for me. We have a local cacher here that has Stage IV cancer. He hasn't logged in for quite some time but we, as a caching community, know of his situation and we collectively keep his caches going. We do maintenance on them when they need it, despite the fact we don't own them. So no, log in dates don't automatically raise flags. Not here. RI is a small state with a tight knit community of people. We pretty much know everyone here. And if we don't, we will soon enough.

 

Well, apparently there is no community assistance going on for this cache owner. Community assistance is a nice thing, but at the end of the day... the responsibility is up to the cache owner, no matter what their circumstances may be. I had a good friend contract leukemia last year. They archived their caches, and I picked them up for them.

 

It isn't just the login date in this case... also the date of the last find, the number of finds, and the number of hides. Plus the fact that nobody was DNF'ing it (an easy find, according to you) and then suddenly nobody is finding it. Its either gone, or somebody rehid it much better than it was originally hidden, and probably off-coords, which means... owner maintenance needed. But there is no owner, apparently. So guess what...?

[knowschad]

This states the reviewer was required to do nothing with the OP's first NA log.

 

Great points on both of those KB links, and I do appreciate you pointing them out. But I think that you are needlessly defending a bad cache and absentee cache owner in this case.

[AZcachemeister]

Active caches need active owners.

[+sidekeck]

This states the reviewer was required to do nothing with the OP's first NA log.

 

Great points on both of those KB links, and I do appreciate you pointing them out. But I think that you are needlessly defending a bad cache and absentee cache owner in this case.

 

Not so much. Just helping BD in the endless quest for knowledge.

[+BlueDeuce]

This states the reviewer was required to do nothing with the OP's first NA log.

 

Great points on both of those KB links, and I do appreciate you pointing them out. But I think that you are needlessly defending a bad cache and absentee cache owner in this case.

 

Not so much. Just helping BD in the endless quest for knowledge.

 

Whoa, was that a light down that particular tunnel? Train!

[+sidekeck]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

I do not make assumptions about cache owners. Not logging in since June 8 doesn't raise any red flags for me. We have a local cacher here that has Stage IV cancer. He hasn't logged in for quite some time but we, as a caching community, know of his situation and we collectively keep his caches going. We do maintenance on them when they need it, despite the fact we don't own them. So no, log in dates don't automatically raise flags. Not here. RI is a small state with a tight knit community of people. We pretty much know everyone here. And if we don't, we will soon enough.

 

Well, apparently there is no community assistance going on for this cache owner. Community assistance is a nice thing, but at the end of the day... the responsibility is up to the cache owner, no matter what their circumstances may be. I had a good friend contract leukemia last year. They archived their caches, and I picked them up for them.

 

It isn't just the login date in this case... also the date of the last find, the number of finds, and the number of hides. Plus the fact that nobody was DNF'ing it (an easy find, according to you) and then suddenly nobody is finding it. Its either gone, or somebody rehid it much better than it was originally hidden, and probably off-coords, which means... owner maintenance needed. But there is no owner, apparently. So guess what...?

 

Not my words. Please re-read my log.

[+Castle Mischief]

It says right here in the knowledge books not to use 'needs archived' when you did not find a cache.

 

That wasn't difficult to find.

 

I think I just highlighted the issue right there. Sometimes there seems to be a difference between "in the guidelines" and "in the knowledge books". Sometimes there doesn't. It's not as clear-cut and perfectly defined as you seem to insist it is.

[+sidekeck]

This states the reviewer was required to do nothing with the OP's first NA log.

 

Great points on both of those KB links, and I do appreciate you pointing them out. But I think that you are needlessly defending a bad cache and absentee cache owner in this case.

 

Not so much. Just helping BD in the endless quest for knowledge.

 

Whoa, was that a light down that particular tunnel? Train!

 

You asked...

 

Let me ask again, can you clarify gc.com guidelines?

 

So I just provided the links to the KB. It's just that simple.

[knowschad]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

I do not make assumptions about cache owners. Not logging in since June 8 doesn't raise any red flags for me. We have a local cacher here that has Stage IV cancer. He hasn't logged in for quite some time but we, as a caching community, know of his situation and we collectively keep his caches going. We do maintenance on them when they need it, despite the fact we don't own them. So no, log in dates don't automatically raise flags. Not here. RI is a small state with a tight knit community of people. We pretty much know everyone here. And if we don't, we will soon enough.

 

Well, apparently there is no community assistance going on for this cache owner. Community assistance is a nice thing, but at the end of the day... the responsibility is up to the cache owner, no matter what their circumstances may be. I had a good friend contract leukemia last year. They archived their caches, and I picked them up for them.

 

It isn't just the login date in this case... also the date of the last find, the number of finds, and the number of hides. Plus the fact that nobody was DNF'ing it (an easy find, according to you) and then suddenly nobody is finding it. Its either gone, or somebody rehid it much better than it was originally hidden, and probably off-coords, which means... owner maintenance needed. But there is no owner, apparently. So guess what...?

 

Not my words. Please re-read my log.

That was my mistake. I glanced over your post where you said, "That wasn't difficult to find.", but you were referring to the KB articles, not the cache. I'd say "My bad", but I detest that phrase.

[Keystone]

I believe in do what you say, that's all.

 

I haven't read the entire thread, but in my eyes this is the crux of the biscuit:

 

The reviewer says they are giving the CO of the original cache XX days to do something, or the cache will be archived.

 

XX days pass, and the reviewer does nothing.

 

The reviewer is a liar. (Or a paper tiger if that sounds better.)

 

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Perhaps I am spoiled since the reviewer in Arizona (despite any other faults)

DOES make sweeps for disabled caches that have not had action in several months

DOES disable caches with a sudden streak of DNFs

DOES follow-up (and archives the cache) if the CO does nothing after a reasonable time period

That is such a sad, sad reply from an experienced geocacher. I'm moved to respond.

 

Here is a real simple, clear reason why a reviewer may say "you have ten days" and then not archive a listing for thirty days: Because if the cache is archived on the tenth day, the reviewer is exposed to criticism for being an unbending slave to the rules and the calendar. I know this from personal experience. BUT, if you say "ten days" and don't archive until the 21st day, or the 30th day, or whenever you have a few free moments, then the cache owner or a reader of the cache page will say "wow, the reviewer even gave them extra time - that was fair."

 

Also, I fail to understand your summary of the Arizona reviewer's habits in regards to "sweeps" for disabled caches. While that optional voluntary effort is noble and commendable, the issue in this thread is how a reviewer reacts to a "Needs Archived" log. This is governed by a different standard.

 

Consider yourself lucky not to receive a forum suspension. I chose instead to involve myself in the debate.

[Keystone]

I'll admit to being confused, too.

 

I thought that archiving caches was indeed part of the reviewer's job?

 

If not the reviewer, then who is supposed to archive them?

 

What has been explained here from time to time by reviewers such as Keystone is that sweeping for neglected caches is not a required part of their job. But I would certainly think that responding to NA logs would be. Its pretty rare when a cache owner will archive their own cache as a result of somebody posting an NA.

Thank you very much for your helpful and accurate post. You clearly articulate the difference between the optional and required tasks. I appreciate your paying attention to my prior posts on this subject.

[+sidekeck]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

I do not make assumptions about cache owners. Not logging in since June 8 doesn't raise any red flags for me. We have a local cacher here that has Stage IV cancer. He hasn't logged in for quite some time but we, as a caching community, know of his situation and we collectively keep his caches going. We do maintenance on them when they need it, despite the fact we don't own them. So no, log in dates don't automatically raise flags. Not here. RI is a small state with a tight knit community of people. We pretty much know everyone here. And if we don't, we will soon enough.

 

Well, apparently there is no community assistance going on for this cache owner. Community assistance is a nice thing, but at the end of the day... the responsibility is up to the cache owner, no matter what their circumstances may be. I had a good friend contract leukemia last year. They archived their caches, and I picked them up for them.

 

It isn't just the login date in this case... also the date of the last find, the number of finds, and the number of hides. Plus the fact that nobody was DNF'ing it (an easy find, according to you) and then suddenly nobody is finding it. Its either gone, or somebody rehid it much better than it was originally hidden, and probably off-coords, which means... owner maintenance needed. But there is no owner, apparently. So guess what...?

 

Not my words. Please re-read my log.

That was my mistake. I glanced over your post where you said, "That wasn't difficult to find.", but you were referring to the KB articles, not the cache. I'd say "My bad", but I detest that phrase.

 

I agree with you there.

[+GeoBain]

All I see is people jumping his case without being able to officially speak to the guidelines.

 

No. What everyone (well, at least I) were jumping his case about was his attitude. Pure and simple.

 

Ask your questions, but ask them courteously if you want a courteous response.

 

I've read through a number of his other NA logs and he appears to be a very impatient person who wants everyone to jump when he says jump. And that just isn't the way this works.

 

I've said this before and I feel it bears repeating. This entire endeavor depends on the trust, honesty, and courtesy of its collective participants. It is not about one single player.

[knowschad]

I believe in do what you say, that's all.

 

I haven't read the entire thread, but in my eyes this is the crux of the biscuit:

 

The reviewer says they are giving the CO of the original cache XX days to do something, or the cache will be archived.

 

XX days pass, and the reviewer does nothing.

 

The reviewer is a liar. (Or a paper tiger if that sounds better.)

 

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Perhaps I am spoiled since the reviewer in Arizona (despite any other faults)

DOES make sweeps for disabled caches that have not had action in several months

DOES disable caches with a sudden streak of DNFs

DOES follow-up (and archives the cache) if the CO does nothing after a reasonable time period

That is such a sad, sad reply from an experienced geocacher. I'm moved to respond.

 

Here is a real simple, clear reason why a reviewer may say "you have ten days" and then not archive a listing for thirty days: Because if the cache is archived on the tenth day, the reviewer is exposed to criticism for being an unbending slave to the rules and the calendar. I know this from personal experience. BUT, if you say "ten days" and don't archive until the 21st day, or the 30th day, or whenever you have a few free moments, then the cache owner or a reader of the cache page will say "wow, the reviewer even gave them extra time - that was fair."

 

Also, I fail to understand your summary of the Arizona reviewer's habits in regards to "sweeps" for disabled caches. While that optional voluntary effort is noble and commendable, the issue in this thread is how a reviewer reacts to a "Needs Archived" log. This is governed by a different standard.

 

Consider yourself lucky not to receive a forum suspension. I chose instead to involve myself in the debate.

 

If the reviewer doesn't intend to take action until the 30th day, why would they state that they will take action after 10 days? Their log clearly said that they would. If they don't plan to take action for a month, then say that.

[AZcachemeister]

 

 

Consider yourself lucky not to receive a forum suspension. I chose instead to involve myself in the debate.

 

Why should I be threatened with a suspension for expressing my opinion of the situation?

[+BlueDeuce]

So I just provided the links to the KB. It's just that simple.

 

Yeah and you missed my humor. Not a problem.

 

I do take issue with people jumping on someone for asking a question. Tell me how many times I had to ask before I got a response.

[+sidekeck]

So I just provided the links to the KB. It's just that simple.

 

Yeah and you missed my humor. Not a problem.

 

I do take issue with people jumping on someone for asking a question. Tell me how many times I had to ask before I got a response.

 

I was sleeping. Then working. I promise to do better next time.

[Keystone]

 

 

Consider yourself lucky not to receive a forum suspension. I chose instead to involve myself in the debate.

 

Why should I be threatened with a suspension for expressing my opinion of the situation?

Another moderator or a Groundspeak Lackey will get back to you on this point.

[+GeoBain]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

Sidekick KNOWS it is missing. He went out today and verified this. It still does not excuse the OP's responses to the reviewer.

 

I've read through some of the OP's other NA logs and it looks like ALL of them are probably on the money. Those caches are probably missing. But he still needs to learn some logging etiquette and more importantly needs to learn how to communicate more effectively.

 

And I don't necessarily agree with the earmarks of an abandoned cache remark. I've read through the logs. Several people who found the cache previously remarked that the terrain and difficulty ratings were probably set too low. There are NO NM logs on the cache. The OP is being impatient.

 

The CO may very well be AWOL. But 2 months since the last time someone logged in is not too far out there. I didn't log into the website for about 6 months. But I was still actively caching via the Android app. Granted I had archived all my caches prior. But who's to say the CO isn't touring Europe or in the hospital, or stuck on a deserted island somewhere. 2 1/2 months is not that long of a time to not log in to the site. If it had been 6 months to a year I would agree with you.

 

Either way, most reviewers I know of give CO's at least 30 days to respond to issues. We still haven't reached the 30 mark from the reviewer disabling the cache.

[+GeoBain]

I believe in do what you say, that's all.

 

I haven't read the entire thread, but in my eyes this is the crux of the biscuit:

 

The reviewer says they are giving the CO of the original cache XX days to do something, or the cache will be archived.

 

XX days pass, and the reviewer does nothing.

 

The reviewer is a liar. (Or a paper tiger if that sounds better.)

 

 

I think the reviewer needs to make better boiler plates. That's what this boils down to.

[+sidekeck]

I believe in do what you say, that's all.

 

I haven't read the entire thread, but in my eyes this is the crux of the biscuit:

 

The reviewer says they are giving the CO of the original cache XX days to do something, or the cache will be archived.

 

XX days pass, and the reviewer does nothing.

 

The reviewer is a liar. (Or a paper tiger if that sounds better.)

 

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Perhaps I am spoiled since the reviewer in Arizona (despite any other faults)

DOES make sweeps for disabled caches that have not had action in several months

DOES disable caches with a sudden streak of DNFs

DOES follow-up (and archives the cache) if the CO does nothing after a reasonable time period

That is such a sad, sad reply from an experienced geocacher. I'm moved to respond.

 

Here is a real simple, clear reason why a reviewer may say "you have ten days" and then not archive a listing for thirty days: Because if the cache is archived on the tenth day, the reviewer is exposed to criticism for being an unbending slave to the rules and the calendar. I know this from personal experience. BUT, if you say "ten days" and don't archive until the 21st day, or the 30th day, or whenever you have a few free moments, then the cache owner or a reader of the cache page will say "wow, the reviewer even gave them extra time - that was fair."

 

Also, I fail to understand your summary of the Arizona reviewer's habits in regards to "sweeps" for disabled caches. While that optional voluntary effort is noble and commendable, the issue in this thread is how a reviewer reacts to a "Needs Archived" log. This is governed by a different standard.

 

Consider yourself lucky not to receive a forum suspension. I chose instead to involve myself in the debate.

 

If the reviewer doesn't intend to take action until the 30th day, why would they state that they will take action after 10 days? Their log clearly said that they would. If they don't plan to take action for a month, then say that.

 

I always assumed (and I know the ramifications of that) that it was just more along the lines of courtesy. A reviewer gives a CO x-number of days to sort something out. If it turns into X+ number of days so be it. Who does it harm, really? We're not talking open heart surgery here or anything like that. I always thought that was a nicer (for lack of better term) approach than whacking a cache at day x and then finding out there are always extenuating circumstances. Seems like that would create more unnecessary work. Likelihood of that? Probably low, but it also creates an unfriendly/confrontational atmosphere I'm sure The Frog has no interest in.

[knowschad]

<stuff snipped like crazy>

 

So there you have it. But there's a lesson in this for you, I'm certain of that.

 

I do hope your experiences with others in the local caching community are more positive--for yours and the collective's sake.

 

Whoa!!! I think that was a bit over the line, sidekeck! Yes the OP did some things wrong, but you have to admit that it is extremely likely that the cache is indeed missing, when you look at the logging history, and it is at least possible that the cache owner has gone AWOL, having not logged in since June, has only found 23 caches, and hidden only 1. And their last actual find was well over a year ago. That has all the earmarks of an abandoned cache to me.

 

Keep in mind that a NA log does NOT archive a cache. All it does it to notify the reviewer of a potential problem, and I do think that was very appropriate in this case.

 

Sidekick KNOWS it is missing. He went out today and verified this. It still does not excuse the OP's responses to the reviewer.

 

I've read through some of the OP's other NA logs and it looks like ALL of them are probably on the money. Those caches are probably missing. But he still needs to learn some logging etiquette and more importantly needs to learn how to communicate more effectively.

 

And I don't necessarily agree with the earmarks of an abandoned cache remark. I've read through the logs. Several people who found the cache previously remarked that the terrain and difficulty ratings were probably set too low. There are NO NM logs on the cache. The OP is being impatient.

 

The CO may very well be AWOL. But 2 months since the last time someone logged in is not too far out there. I didn't log into the website for about 6 months. But I was still actively caching via the Android app. Granted I had archived all my caches prior. But who's to say the CO isn't touring Europe or in the hospital, or stuck on a deserted island somewhere. 2 1/2 months is not that long of a time to not log in to the site. If it had been 6 months to a year I would agree with you.

 

Either way, most reviewers I know of give CO's at least 30 days to respond to issues. We still haven't reached the 30 mark from the reviewer disabling the cache.

 

2 1/2 months to log in, over a year since last logged cache, one hide, 32 finds. I seriously doubt any of your theories.

[+BlueDeuce]

All I see is people jumping his case without being able to officially speak to the guidelines.

 

No. What everyone (well, at least I) were jumping his case about was his attitude. Pure and simple.

 

Ask your questions, but ask them courteously if you want a courteous response.

 

I've read through a number of his other NA logs and he appears to be a very impatient person who wants everyone to jump when he says jump. And that just isn't the way this works.

 

I've said this before and I feel it bears repeating. This entire endeavor depends on the trust, honesty, and courtesy of its collective participants. It is not about one single player.

 

Fair enough, but I would like a topic drift into the details of the NA process. Sometimes it seems my efforts, which I certainly hope are reasonable, don't have much of an affect.

[+Too Tall John]

Consider yourself lucky not to receive a forum suspension. I chose instead to involve myself in the debate.

Why should I be threatened with a suspension for expressing my opinion of the situation?

Does this ring a bell?

The reviewer is a liar. (Or a paper tiger if that sounds better.)

 

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Perhaps you should revisit the Forum Guidelines:

Please treat Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, fellow community members, and guests on these boards with courtesy and respect.