Can these caches be adopted or will they be archived?

[+ArtieD]

A question to post to the group, with a bit of back story...

 

An area caching acquaintance of mine got arrested and indicted for some rather...serious...crimes. Let's just say that if convicted (and the probability is high that he will) he will be gone a long, long time. That said, he's also a decent cache hider, with many hides under his belt. Speaking to another cacher about this some time back, we wondered what was going to happen to them. I think he has family, but it's questionable if they want anything to do with him at this point, given the nature of the charges.

 

So, knowing that he's likely not going to be able to access the internet, much less maintain his caches, can they be adopted without his or his family's input or should they be archived?

[+ChileHead]

It's unlikely that they would get adopted out without his permission. In the case of death the family can give the ok for adoption, though I would be very surprised to see HQ want any part of this situation. Best to be archived.

[+on4bam]

You could copy the cachelistings and ask for the copies to be published after the originals are archived. Cache - reloaded..., cache - the sequel, cache - part two...

[Pup Patrol]

You could copy the cachelistings and ask for the copies to be published after the originals are archived. Cache - reloaded..., cache - the sequel, cache - part two...

 

Which would require the "new" caches to pass the current Guidelines in order to be published.

 

B.

Edited October 19, 2015 by Pup Patrol

[+pppingme]

Shoot him a letter (or visit him in jail) and tell him what you want to do and ask for his password.

[+Sagefox]

Shoot him a letter (or visit him in jail) and tell him what you want to do and ask for his password.

 

Probably best to wait until he actually gets convicted, though. Vultures circling image comes to mind.

[+ArtieD]

Shoot him a letter (or visit him in jail) and tell him what you want to do and ask for his password.

 

Probably best to wait until he actually gets convicted, though. Vultures circling image comes to mind.

 

That is my attitude totally, and I agree. I would never presume to jump the gun. I just have a nasty feeling that, knowing what has been reported on the news, conviction is likely.

[+AustinMN]

Shoot him a letter (or visit him in jail) and tell him what you want to do and ask for his password.

 

Probably best to wait until he actually gets convicted, though. Vultures circling image comes to mind.

 

That is my attitude totally, and I agree. I would never presume to jump the gun. I just have a nasty feeling that, knowing what has been reported on the news, conviction is likely.

 

I have never read a news story in which I knew the facts where the news story did not conain at least one factual error. I once read a full page article in the New York Times about an employer of mine. Every paragraph had at least one factual error, and some paragraphs contained total fabrications. This was in the prestigious New York Times!

 

Don't believe everything in the news, especially when all of the information comes from one source, such as the police spokesman. A good defence lawyer will not typically blab the defendant's side of the story all over the media, and until someone looks at the evidence from a different point of view, the truth can be obscured. I don't know who said it, but it is still true: "Don't believe anything you read, and only half of what you see."

 

Austin

[+on4bam]

You could copy the cachelistings and ask for the copies to be published after the originals are archived. Cache - reloaded..., cache - the sequel, cache - part two...

 

Which would require the "new" caches to pass the current Guidelines in order to be published.

 

It's just a suggestion to let these caches "live on". As we have no idea about which caches the OP would consider adopting my idea was just "as is". I'm not even presuming the existing caches violates any guideline.

[+pppingme]

Shoot him a letter (or visit him in jail) and tell him what you want to do and ask for his password.

 

Probably best to wait until he actually gets convicted, though. Vultures circling image comes to mind.

 

That is my attitude totally, and I agree. I would never presume to jump the gun. I just have a nasty feeling that, knowing what has been reported on the news, conviction is likely.

I was thinking more of an offer to take care of his stuff while he takes care of business.

[+MountainWoods]

Shoot him a letter (or visit him in jail) and tell him what you want to do and ask for his password.

 

Probably best to wait until he actually gets convicted, though. Vultures circling image comes to mind.

 

That is my attitude totally, and I agree. I would never presume to jump the gun. I just have a nasty feeling that, knowing what has been reported on the news, conviction is likely.

 

I have never read a news story in which I knew the facts where the news story did not conain at least one factual error. I once read a full page article in the New York Times about an employer of mine. Every paragraph had at least one factual error, and some paragraphs contained total fabrications. This was in the prestigious New York Times!

 

Don't believe everything in the news, especially when all of the information comes from one source, such as the police spokesman. A good defence lawyer will not typically blab the defendant's side of the story all over the media, and until someone looks at the evidence from a different point of view, the truth can be obscured. I don't know who said it, but it is still true: "Don't believe anything you read, and only half of what you see."

 

Austin

As Hercule Poirot said when Hastings asked "Where do they get this stuff??" (to a newspaper article):

"They make it up!"