Allow sharing of unpublished caches

[+Team Monkeyboy]

I'm SURE this has been suggested before, but here it is again...

 

I'd like to see a feature that would allow a cache owner to "share" ownership of a cache with another account, and allow that sharing privilege to be turned off/on or changed at any time. This would be invaluable for those of us that volunteer with various educational groups, scout groups, museums, parks departments, etc...

 

I've also worked with other cachers in the past to create "collaboration" caches, where we've shared the responsibility of gathering information, waypoints, etc. and shared a listing.

 

Just being able to get someone else's input on an unpublished cache would make this a wonderful feature...

[+cerberus1]

I'm SURE this has been suggested before, but here it is again...

 

I'd like to see a feature that would allow a cache owner to "share" ownership of a cache with another account, and allow that sharing privilege to be turned off/on or changed at any time. This would be invaluable for those of us that volunteer with various educational groups, scout groups, museums, parks departments, etc...

 

I've also worked with other cachers in the past to create "collaboration" caches, where we've shared the responsibility of gathering information, waypoints, etc. and shared a listing.

 

Just being able to get someone else's input on an unpublished cache would make this a wonderful feature...

If someone collaborates with a hide, it's nice to see thanks given on the cache page.

Allowing others to edit the CO's cache pages... no, I don't like that idea.

One person (one account) should be responsible for the cache.

What happens if the CO loses interest, moves far away, gets ill, or dies and failed to "turn off" the change beforehand?

[+GeoTrekker26]

I'm SURE this has been suggested before, but here it is again...

 

I'd like to see a feature that would allow a cache owner to "share" ownership of a cache with another account, and allow that sharing privilege to be turned off/on or changed at any time. This would be invaluable for those of us that volunteer with various educational groups, scout groups, museums, parks departments, etc...

 

I've also worked with other cachers in the past to create "collaboration" caches, where we've shared the responsibility of gathering information, waypoints, etc. and shared a listing.

 

Just being able to get someone else's input on an unpublished cache would make this a wonderful feature...

This is simple enough to do now. Create a team account and share the password, which can be changed as needed when people join or leave the "team."

[+Team Monkeyboy]

If someone collaborates with a hide, it's nice to see thanks given on the cache page.

Allowing others to edit the CO's cache pages... no, I don't like that idea.

One person (one account) should be responsible for the cache.

What happens if the CO loses interest, moves far away, gets ill, or dies and failed to "turn off" the change beforehand?

 

It's not meant to be a permanent situation. It's suggested as a way to temporarily allow someone else access to edit the page. If you fail to turn off the ability to make changes, then you're on your own... no different from giving someone your password and never changing it again.

 

This is simple enough to do now. Create a team account and share the password, which can be changed as needed when people join or leave the "team."

Preventing the need for password sharing is exactly the reason I'm suggesting this... that's an unacceptable security risk.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Team Monkeyboy

[+derektiffany]

Just being able to get someone else's input on an unpublished cache would make this a wonderful feature...

I've done this pre-publication by adopting the cache back and forth and / or exporting the cache page to .PDF (or some other layout-saving document format).

[+dprovan]

This is simple enough to do now. Create a team account and share the password, which can be changed as needed when people join or leave the "team."

Preventing the need for password sharing is exactly the reason I'm suggesting this... that's an unacceptable security risk.

You know that security risk you're afraid of by having a team account and sharing the password? That's exactly the security risk geocaching.com doesn't want to take by letting you have a "team" geocache. From geocaching.com's point of view, there's one single entity responsible for the cache. The burden of any desire to share responsibility for any geocache is kept out of geocaching.com's domain. I'm glad you appreciate the issues with a shared account, but now, I'm afraid, you have to deal with them instead of pretending they don't exist because you've pushed the sharing characteristic onto the geocache.

 

You'll probably go around and around about it, but in my opinion, in the end your best approach is exactly what's being forced on you: one individual is responsible for the geocache, both responsible for maintaining the page and responsible if there's a problem with the cache, and then any other individuals involved can do whatever you want them to do, they just have to go through that one responsible owner to update the cache page or to get maintenance assignments.

 

A few times I've seen someone use a troop account for geocaches, but it seems like what always happens is everyone stops paying attention to the group account since, after all, it's not their account, and the cache is left without any contact. And I'm sure in every single case, the people that set it up that way said, "That won't happen to us."

[+Walts Hunting]

Just being able to get someone else's input on an unpublished cache would make this a wonderful feature...

I've done this pre-publication by adopting the cache back and forth and / or exporting the cache page to .PDF (or some other layout-saving document format).

Really you think sharing a password on an account that controls a page on this site is a security risk. There is nothing going on her that is important enough to worry about. You don't think the power trails have multiple members of group with access

 

There is an old maxim. If more than one is in charge no on one is in charge.

[+dprovan]

Really you think sharing a password on an account that controls a page on this site is a security risk. There is nothing going on her that is important enough to worry about.

You'd be surprised how many security breeches are caused by people thinking nothing important enough to worry about is going on somewhere. In this case, for example, someone could turn a legitimate, well established and much revered scouting geocaching into a phishing scheme. And if you just said "but everyone with the password will be trustworthy", you're a sucker.