+TheOldfields Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 This is Mrs O here, I was looking at some local caches and there is an owner who is prolific but who doesn't maintain his caches, looking at his list quite a number have been archived and of the ones left many need maintenance. However he continues to place caches. I don't get that someone who owns loads of caches, never maintains them or even responds to requests/ notifications they need maintaining then is allowed to continue placing. This is irritating and a waste of time for cachers and also blocks areas for new caches. I understand that we all have different opinions about what is an acceptable condition of a container, what is a good cache etc but if a cache cannot function/ goes missing /is badly damaged / log full/soaking wet and owner doesn't look after it what is the point of continuing placing? Surely part of owning caches is maintaining them for the pleasure of others. So... the question is: should reviewers look at the state of current caches owned by people when publishing new ones? And advise that perhaps maintain existing ones before publishing new ones might be an idea? Quote Link to comment
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.