Archiving Etiquette

[+Founden]

So there are several caches from the same cacher that have been in disrepair. I don't want to appear to be picking on this cacher, the fact of the matter is I actually like their caches. But it seems they haven't done any maintenance of any kind, or said anything at all since March. Is this too soon to suggest archiving some of these caches? I don't want to appear to be a jerk. But there are 5-6 caches by this same person that are clearly missing or destroyed with no word since March. Is that too soon?

[+Cache O'Plenty]

Has anyone posted a Needs Maintenance log on them? That would be the first step in getting the caches repaired.

[+whh0]

I always leave a NM note first explaining what the problem is - I usually carry spare logs and will replace if that is the only issue. If the cache container itself has gone or is in a poor state of repair I will then leave a NM note. I will also check to see if the CO is still active. If they are not I would leave it 2 weeks, then post a NA. If they are I would leave a couple of months before I post a NA

[+stijnhommes]

Take it one cache at a time. Perhaps the archival of one cache will spur them into action on the others.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Sometimes a 'Needs Archived' log can spur a cacher to perform the required maintenance, or Archive the cache themselves...

 

Other times it's left to a Reviewer to do the deed, as the cacher doesn't really care about the cache.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Bear and Ragged

[+JL_HSTRE]

I would post NM on any of those caches that do not have a NM log from this year explaining the situation.

 

If they all already have recent NM logs then I would send a message my Reviewer listing the problem caches. (I might be reluctant to NA 5-6 caches by a single owner as it might be mispercieved.) The Reviewer will probably Disable them with a Reviewer Note to nudge the CO to fix the problem; after another 1-2 months without CO response they would get archived. Or the Reviewer may deciede they warrant immediate archival.

[Aushiker]

Has anyone posted a Needs Maintenance log on them? That would be the first step in getting the caches repaired.

 

+ 1 ... I think there is a time frame allowed for maintenance before the next step is considered.

 

Andrew

[+Kacher82]

March isn't all that long ago. The CO might be on an extended vacation, or unable to get to his caches for some reason. I would log NM if a cache needs it, but it's a bit soon for NA.

[+The_Incredibles_]

I would start with a Needs Maintenance log. It's possible the CO's been sick or deployed overseas...or just generally busy. Give them 1 month, then if you no response, a Needs Archive may be appropriate.

[+dprovan]

Remember that the issue is each individual cache, not the owner. Imagine that each cache is by different COs, and consider each one by itself when deciding whether it needs maintenance or needs to be archived or just needs a note or a DNF. As soon as you start saying, even to yourself, "All this CO's hides are going bad", then you are picking on that cacher. Stay focused on the caches.

 

OK, so having said that, since you do think you're seeing a trend, perhaps you should contact the CO directly via mail to start a conversation. He might need help, or he might be interested in having someone adopt them. Or something else.

[+Founden]

Thanks everyone! This cleared up everything I was wondering. Since the caches are all within a mile of my house I am going to contact the owner privately and see if there is anything I can help with since I've been out and about so much lately. Thanks!

[AZcachemeister]

A 'Needs Maintenance' should be posted.

If one has been posted more than a month ago, a 'Needs Archived' should be posted.

 

Active caches need active owners.

[+Gooniemanalpha]

What I have seen in the forum is that people don't care if an owner stops geocaching for years, They say from other post just NM and archive. I agree active cache active owner.

[+Harry Dolphin]

A 'Needs Maintenance' should be posted.

If one has been posted more than a month ago, a 'Needs Archived' should be posted.

 

Active caches need active owners.

 

I'm working on the Jasmer Challenge. I always get a laugh at: "Thanks for maintaining this old cache". Very nice cache and cache container and great spot. But, umm, the CO has not signed in for three to five years! The praise is falling on deaf ears.

[+lamoracke]

A 'Needs Maintenance' should be posted.

If one has been posted more than a month ago, a 'Needs Archived' should be posted.

 

Active caches need active owners.

 

I'm working on the Jasmer Challenge. I always get a laugh at: "Thanks for maintaining this old cache". Very nice cache and cache container and great spot. But, umm, the CO has not signed in for three to five years! The praise is falling on deaf ears.

 

I know a user or two that says they have not logged in for years and years but they still get the emails to read and will respond if given an email. I just got a cache log the other day from someone and when I saw their profile, it said not logged in for 2 years. Not sure that field is very accurate anymore.

Edited June 25, 2013 by lamoracke

[+hzoi]

Since "last signed in" only tracks when the cache owner actually logged into the site from a computer, not when they last used the official phone app (or GSAK or c:geo or what have you), it's not as much of an indicator as it used to be. Especially since the official phone app allows owner maintenance and temporary disable logs (but not archive, interestingly).

 

But it's still a pretty good guide as to how active they are -- especially for those whose email isn't validated.

[Clan Riffster]

A 'Needs Maintenance' should be posted.

If one has been posted more than a month ago, a 'Needs Archived' should be posted.

 

Active caches need active owners.

 

I'm working on the Jasmer Challenge. I always get a laugh at: "Thanks for maintaining this old cache". Very nice cache and cache container and great spot. But, umm, the CO has not signed in for three to five years! The praise is falling on deaf ears.

Unless someone other than the cache owner keeps an eye on it.

I'm okay with absentee owners, so long as the cache itself is being cared for.

But a buggered up cache, combined with an absentee owner = Needs Archived.