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

[+GeoBain]

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.

 

That's not what I see. I see him saying the same thing I have been saying. Chill. Respect your fellow players and reviewers and realize it's not all about you. Reviewers and CO's have lives too.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

 

Sidekick KNOWS it is missing. He went out today and verified this.

 

(It's sidekeck with an "e", and it's "she").

[+sidekeck]

 

Sidekick KNOWS it is missing. He went out today and verified this.

 

(It's sidekeck with an "e", and it's "she").

 

See....told you it was a small, tight knit community here.

[+GeoBain]

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

 

Sidekick KNOWS it is missing. He went out today and verified this.

 

(It's sidekeck with an "e", and it's "she").

 

See....told you it was a small, tight knit community here.

 

So small in fact that she's actually seen me cache in the buff.

[knowschad]

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

 

Somewhere along the way there, I would ask a geocaching friend to watch my caches for me, or at least to temp disable them.

[+BlueDeuce]

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

 

Sending you a link and you tell me what should be done.

 

Edit: and yes I did previously find the cache. If necessary I can provide additional links showing a pattern.

Edited August 26, 2011 by BlueDeuce

[+sidekeck]

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

 

Word. I cracked a rib a month ago (geocaching!) and contracted bronchitis. So I'm moving at a granny's pace. I understand that geocaching falls to the bottom of the priority list. I also don't eat, drink, breathe and live it either. Occasionally, I go to work.

[+sidekeck]

 

Sidekick KNOWS it is missing. He went out today and verified this.

 

(It's sidekeck with an "e", and it's "she").

 

See....told you it was a small, tight knit community here.

 

So small in fact that she's actually seen me cache in the buff.

 

And buffed a cache.

[knowschad]

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

 

Word. I cracked a rib a month ago (geocaching!) and contracted bronchitis. So I'm moving at a granny's pace. I understand that geocaching falls to the bottom of the priority list. I also don't eat, drink, breathe and live it either. Occasionally, I go to work.

 

We all handle things differently... and I am NOT judging you or anybody else, but your post made me take a look at my own medical history over the time that I have been hiding geocaches:

 

• October 2005 I underwent surgery for a ruptured disc in my neck. I cached right up to the surgery.
• Sometime during the winter of 2006, I had one eye operated on for cataracts. I cached right up to the surgery, and probably (without taking the time to check) cached shortly afterward.
• August 2008, I had a 3" x 8" chunk of flesh surgically removed almost to the bone from my right shin due to an infected hemotoma that I got while geocaching. I cached right after the surgery.

Wow! I had no idea. And prior to geocaching, I hadn't been hospitalized since I was 6!

[+sidekeck]

Geocaching is hhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrddddddddd.

[+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.

 

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.

 

There were no theories other than to say sometimes stuff happens. Examples are just that, examples; not theories. I don't have a clue what is going on with this CO. You could be %100 on the mark. But I'm glad the reviewers tend to give us the benefit of the doubt.

[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.

 

There were no theories other than to say sometimes stuff happens. Examples are just that, examples; not theories. I don't have a clue what is going on with this CO. You could be %100 on the mark. But I'm glad the reviewers tend to give us the benefit of the doubt.

Boy, you sure are being generous!! Sometimes people hear about geocaching, find 32 caches, hide one, and then leave the hobby.

 

I will say again that politeness would probably have had the OP post a NM, but frankly, I'm pretty sure that would have been ignored just as all of those DNF's were ignored. If I were the cache owner and suddenly my cache started to get so many successive DNF's, I would be on it in a heartbeat.

[+BlueDeuce]

<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.

 

There were no theories other than to say sometimes stuff happens. Examples are just that, examples; not theories. I don't have a clue what is going on with this CO. You could be %100 on the mark. But I'm glad the reviewers tend to give us the benefit of the doubt.

Boy, you sure are being generous!! Sometimes people hear about geocaching, find 32 caches, hide one, and then leave the hobby.

 

I will say again that politeness would probably have had the OP post a NM, but frankly, I'm pretty sure that would have been ignored just as all of those DNF's were ignored. If I were the cache owner and suddenly my cache started to get so many successive DNF's, I would be on it in a heartbeat.

 

ayep.

[+fizzymagic]

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

 

What he (she?) said. I am just now getting back up to speed after knee surgery. My caches that require significant hikes are going to have to take care of themselves for a couple more months.

[+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.

 

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.

 

There were no theories other than to say sometimes stuff happens. Examples are just that, examples; not theories. I don't have a clue what is going on with this CO. You could be %100 on the mark. But I'm glad the reviewers tend to give us the benefit of the doubt.

Boy, you sure are being generous!! Sometimes people hear about geocaching, find 32 caches, hide one, and then leave the hobby.

 

I will say again that politeness would probably have had the OP post a NM, but frankly, I'm pretty sure that would have been ignored just as all of those DNF's were ignored. If I were the cache owner and suddenly my cache started to get so many successive DNF's, I would be on it in a heartbeat.

 

Agreed. I had a friend email over the weekend they DNF'd one of my caches. Then someone posted a DNF log Monday. So I went out earlier in the week and sure enough it's still there. But I had to be sure.

[+BlueDeuce]

What he (she?) said. I am just now getting back up to speed after knee surgery. My caches that require significant hikes are going to have to take care of themselves for a couple more months.

 

And here you are posting in the gc.com forums.

[knowschad]

What he (she?) said. I am just now getting back up to speed after knee surgery. My caches that require significant hikes are going to have to take care of themselves for a couple more months.

 

And here you are posting in the gc.com forums.

 

Doesn't take knees to do that unless you are a moderator. Sometimes moderators do need their knees to post here.

[+BlueDeuce]

What he (she?) said. I am just now getting back up to speed after knee surgery. My caches that require significant hikes are going to have to take care of themselves for a couple more months.

 

And here you are posting in the gc.com forums.

 

Doesn't take knees to do that unless you are a moderator. Sometimes moderators do need their knees to post here.

 

Easy now.

[knowschad]

What he (she?) said. I am just now getting back up to speed after knee surgery. My caches that require significant hikes are going to have to take care of themselves for a couple more months.

 

And here you are posting in the gc.com forums.

 

Doesn't take knees to do that unless you are a moderator. Sometimes moderators do need their knees to post here.

 

Easy now.

 

[+GeoBain]

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.

 

It's been a couple of years since the BIG boiler plate debate, but suffice it to say that I don't agree with them. I know they help speed up reviewers' workload but they also lead to problems like this.

 

Active caches need active owners.

 

God forbid you wind up in the hospital for a month and almost die and when you finally make it home you are bed ridden for another 3 months being pumped full of intravenous antibiotics and after that you get to go through another 6 months of physical therapy to try to learn to walk and after that you still can't walk worth crap so you can no longer get to your caches.

 

Yeah, life happens and geocaching takes the back burner sometimes.

 

Somewhere along the way there, I would ask a geocaching friend to watch my caches for me, or at least to temp disable them.

 

The above scenario happened to me. I went in the hospital fully expecting to be home in one week deal and be up and walking in a couple of weeks. I spent the entire month of September there and a few days of October. I can tell you that the last thing on my mind was geocaching. Fortunately for me I built good caches. I had no problems except for one that floated away due to a flooded creek bed and a bad tether. That cache went without owner maintenance for about 6 months before I finally got around to worrying with it. It did wind up being archived, btw. (by me) In the grand scheme of things that cache just didn't matter at the time.

 

But my point is sometimes things do happen. You can not always prepare for them ahead of time. And unless you have intimate knowledge of the situation you can't presume to know what is going on.

 

You can make guesses. You can NA. But try to be respectful in the way you approach it. Try to realize that sometimes there are extenuating circumstances or at the very least perhaps your reviewer realizes that and is trying to give the benefit of the doubt. Don't go jumping down their throat because they don't jump when you say jump.

[+BlueDeuce]

You can make guesses. You can NA. But try to be respectful in the way you approach it. Try to realize that sometimes there are extenuating circumstances or at the very least perhaps your reviewer realizes that and is trying to give the benefit of the doubt. Don't go jumping down their throat because they don't jump when you say jump.

 

That's all fine and dandy but all I see is people saying they can't maintain their cache in a timely manner, and responding. What can I expect when the cache is DNF for a year and no response.

[+scwri2000]

Wow. This went off topic, back on. Anyway I sent my reviewer an apology for being impatient and a wench. All I wanted was some technical info for how it works and I just was not getting the right answers. Thought I would ask for help. Thanks for those who actually took the time to look into it and post (sidekick) even if your mean. It helps and thanks.

[+GeoBain]

You can make guesses. You can NA. But try to be respectful in the way you approach it. Try to realize that sometimes there are extenuating circumstances or at the very least perhaps your reviewer realizes that and is trying to give the benefit of the doubt. Don't go jumping down their throat because they don't jump when you say jump.

 

That's all fine and dandy but all I see is people saying they can't maintain their cache in a timely manner, and responding. What can I expect when the cache is DNF for a year and no response.

 

I don't know how many times I have to respond to you about this. I responded directly earlier in this thread and again to the email you sent.

 

You situation is DIFFERENT. It doesn't appear your reviewer even bothered to disable the cache so that other cachers stop looking for it. And yes, after a number of NM logs (which I guess have been deleted by left the maintenance flag) have been deleted by the CO, I would be upset too.

 

That is not what transpired here. 3 days after the OP logged his NA the reviewer disabled the cache. The reviewer acted in a timely manner. The OP and several others here are bent out of shape because the reviewer didn't stick to the 10 days quoted in her reviewer note.

 

But disregarding the boiler plate issue, it still doesn't give the OP just cause to be rude to the reviewer. Let's all table this issue until next week. If the reviewer still hasn't responded after giving the CO the standard 30 days that I have seen all other reviewers give in situations like this, then let's reconvene and crucify the reviewer and give the OP high fives for being rude to her.

[+GeoBain]

Wow. This went off topic, back on. Anyway I sent my reviewer an apology for being impatient and a wench. All I wanted was some technical info for how it works and I just was not getting the right answers. Thought I would ask for help. Thanks for those who actually took the time to look into it and post (sidekick) even if your mean. It helps and thanks.

 

Thanks for smoothing things with the reviewer. And hopefully moving forward things will run a little smoother for everyone.

[ertyu]

I'm of a similar opinion, it takes but a few hours to get a new cache published.

 

It often takes months for a cache owner to perform maintenance required to reactivate a disabled cache.

 

It can take upwards of a year to go through a courteous process to have a cache disabled/archived where the owner has abandoned it.

 

While the impact of a disabled cache is generally fairly minor, it does block others from hiding a findable cache in the general area. The impact of a missing, but active cache, is obviously more significant as it sends people on an unenjoyable wild goose chase and increases the impact on the area as people spend more time there and search more thoroughly.

 

You end up with a lot of these flash in a pan style hides, where someone puts out a cache, it is found a few times, then goes missing for whatever reason and hangs around for months until being disabled and then months more before being archived.

 

In my opinion, the overall approach demonstrates a lack of care about cache maintenance by Groundspeak.

[+releasethedogs]

I think the root problem is their just is not enough reviewers. I can't believe that places like Japan don't have a dedicated reviewer. States need to be split up and more reviewers added depending on how active the community is. I think if they would have just further divided the globe and take on more reviewers then we would not be stuck with challenges (which my local reviewer said were "stupid") instead of actual virtual caches because the whole reason for make challenges the way they did was because reviewers were afraid of being swarmed with publish requests. Slim down the areas and get more reviewers and now everyone's work load is less and it is not a problem.

Edited August 27, 2011 by Keystone
Potty language removed by moderator.

[Keystone]

I think the root problem is their just is not enough reviewers. I can't believe that places like Japan don't have a dedicated reviewer.

I just checked, and the newest cache submissions in Japan were published on a same-day basis. Alarm bells should go off if new listings languish in the review queue for a week.

States need to be split up and more reviewers added depending on how active the community is.

That is exactly how it's always worked. Korea acquired a dedicated reviewer when the global reviewer became too busy. Massachusetts acquired a local reviewer (the subject of this thread) when the reviewer covering most all of New England became too busy (there are now five or so volunteers covering New England). Speaking personally, I originally covered Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia back in 2003-2004; now, that area is served by seven volunteers who have "split up" those states.

I think if they would have just further divided the globe and take on more reviewers then we would not be stuck with challenges (which my local reviewer said were "stupid") instead of actual virtual caches because the whole reason for make challenges the way they did was because reviewers were afraid of being swarmed with publish requests. Slim down the areas and get more reviewers and now everyone's work load is less and it is not a problem.

I wish you wouldn't introduce a debate about challenges into this thread, so that it can keep on topic. I will just say that you misapprehend the root cause of the review problem for virtual caches, and I invite you to post about your concerns in one of the topics open on that subject.

[+Caching_Campers]

Shoelaces - GC1QD8C has been archived.

 

Unfortunately "Shrapper" has passed away. He was only 38 years old and will be missed.

 

A quick note about the volunteer reviewers. THERE VOLUNTEERS!! By definition "volunteer" is a person who performs a service willingly and without pay.

 

Most volunteers have multiple states or areas in which they review and (i assume) regular jobs. So far all of my interactions with GC volunteers have been great, including contact about the cache in question. This entire thread would have been a non issue, if the OP didn't want to place his own cache in the proximity of this cache.

[+Caching_Campers]

As a side note, being respectful to others in person or via email should be a common practice.

Edited January 27, 2012 by Caching_Campers

[+Tiffany]

A quick note about the volunteer reviewers. THERE VOLUNTEERS!! By definition "volunteer" is a person who performs a service willingly and without pay.

 

Most volunteers have multiple states or areas in which they review and (i assume) regular jobs. So far all of my interactions with GC volunteers have been great, including contact about the cache in question. This entire thread would have been a non issue, if the OP didn't want to place his own cache in the proximity of this cache.

 

Caching_Campers, thank you for the kind words you have said about the volunteers. The Volunteers are a very hard working group of individuals who do have families, work and their own love of caching to fit in along side publishing sometimes hundreds of caches a week. Love your volunteers!

Edited January 27, 2012 by Tiffany

[+popokiiti]

Caching_Campers, thank you for what you said. I agree with you, and I know I'm not alone when I say I appreciate our volunteer reviewers.

My condolences to the family, you and your community on the loss of Shrapper, CO of Shoelaces. 38 is way too young to die.

Things do get in the way of cache maintenance, and this sad event proves it. I think it would be respectful to NOT place a cache at this location for a while, then maybe one for Shrapper?

[+Caching_Campers]

I think it would be respectful to NOT place a cache at this location for a while, then maybe one for Shrapper?

 

My wife had mentioned to me that i should have fixed this cache and relisted it instead of archiving it, but not Knowing shrappers login or password would have made this impossible. I think i will add an "in memory off cache" to this location very soon.

 

Shrapper (Todd) was a great friend and will be missed.