[FEATURE] Willing To Adopt option

[+Mallah]

There are plenty of caches out there that are in fantastic locations but have effectively been abandoned by those who have lost interest in the game or for other unknown reasons.

 

Sadly this eventually results in the cache receiving several NM logs followed by the inevitable NA where after a few weeks a reviewer will simply archive the cache and it is lost to everyone.

 

Although this then allows someone else to replace the cache, this loses the history associated with it including all the finds and logs since it was set. In some cases these can go back to the early days of caching.

 

The current system of adoption requires the current owner to initiate the process. However, where the current owner has ‘left the game’ and no longer logs in, or fails to respond to any contact, the only option is for the cache to be archived under current system.

 

I would like to see an ‘Adoption Request’ option similar to the NA requests where after suitable contacts or NM logs that a player can identify that they are ‘Willing to Adopt’ so that the reviewer can change ownership as easily as they can archive, or indeed as an alternative to archiving.

[+Isonzo Karst]

It used to be possible to adopt caches where the owner was MIA, this was referred to as "forced adoption".

 

This is no longer possible, and unlikely to come back, as Groundspeak's position is that it doesn't own the box. And cannot take over ownership of the box, and then transfer it.

 

I expect there are legal issues here, and that this decision will not be revisited.

 

I was around for "forced adoption" and in fact own one such cache. I think it was a mistake to ever do it, and don't support the idea at all. I see "old" caches that are really just old listings - not the original owner, write up, location, box. Just the old GC Code.

 

"this loses the history associated with it including all the finds and logs"

 

No, archiving the listing places it in an archive. It's available to those who have a connection with it, and to others who want to poke around hunting old caches from old profiles.

 

FAR better to archive an old cache then to transfer it. I have finds on caches from 2001 where the cache was transferred (forced adoption). some of those listings now make absolutely NO sense to my experience of the cache. One where the cache is on its third owner, 4th location (9 miles from the original location!) and 5th box. The original was a paddle cache , now it's walk-in-the-park. That hide should have been archived with the few original finds, when it first went missing and the cache owner was non-responsive, just as it was.

[+speakers-corner]

It used to be possible to adopt caches where the owner was MIA, this was referred to as "forced adoption".

 

This is no longer possible, and unlikely to come back, as Groundspeak's position is that it doesn't own the box. And cannot take over ownership of the box, and then transfer it.

 

I expect there are legal issues here, and that this decision will not be revisited.

 

I was around for "forced adoption" and in fact own one such cache. I think it was a mistake to ever do it, and don't support the idea at all. I see "old" caches that are really just old listings - not the original owner, write up, location, box. Just the old GC Code.

 

"this loses the history associated with it including all the finds and logs"

 

No, archiving the listing places it in an archive. It's available to those who have a connection with it, and to others who want to poke around hunting old caches from old profiles.

 

FAR better to archive an old cache then to transfer it. I have finds on caches from 2001 where the cache was transferred (forced adoption). some of those listings now make absolutely NO sense to my experience of the cache. One where the cache is on its third owner, 4th location (9 miles from the original location!) and 5th box. The original was a paddle cache , now it's walk-in-the-park. That hide should have been archived with the few original finds, when it first went missing and the cache owner was non-responsive, just as it was.

 

+1 from me. If a Cache is in such a good location I am sure that when a new Cache is published it is possible to include a link to the original listing so that Cachers can view the old listing and the logs that have been entered there.

[+StarBrand]

And no history is lost at all when a new cache listing comes along. The new and active owner need only mention the previous cache and provide a link to the now archived page. It will stay and live on.

 

New container, new owner, new hide style equals a new cache listing to me. Reusing the old listing is simply a sham. I would not want that for any of my 10 plus year old cache hides.

[+ArcherDragoon]

And no history is lost at all when a new cache listing comes along. The new and active owner need only mention the previous cache and provide a link to the now archived page. It will stay and live on.

 

New container, new owner, new hide style equals a new cache listing to me. Reusing the old listing is simply a sham. I would not want that for any of my 10 plus year old cache hides.

+1

 

http://coord.info/GC14DMM - I have one that does just as described...a link and description about the "old" cache...

[jholly]

Of course the fly in the ointment on this suggestion is if the owner dropped out of the game the owner is probably not going to bother responding to the Adoption request any more than they are responding to the archive notices. And your making the assumption that the owner is still connected to the original email that was used to sign up with their account. Could be a throw away email account was used for geocaching that is no longer monitored so all contact attempts are going into the bit bucket. And then you have players that past on and no one in the family has the ability to log on to their account so these requests are for naught. If an owner does not respond to a email request or a request on the cache page the only option is to archive and place a new cache. If you happen to know the previous cache that was there you can always link to the previous listing for the history.