Jump to content

"Needs Maintenance" Wrenches


TeamRabbitRun

Recommended Posts

So with the new search system, there's no indication that a cache is in a "Needs Maintenance" state.

 

On the OLD search page, it stands out right there on the results line.

 

I'm not sure about this, but I KINDA remember it used to show up on the cache's map pop-up. Anyone remember that?

 

It only appears on the cache page directly on the NM log, and above the first log with the log-type counters. Hard to notice, especially when the NM log gets pushed down by more logs. Nothing at the top, either.

 

You file an "Owner Maint" log to "clear" the red NM icon, but it seems like there's no real incentive for a CO to do that now. "Clearing" a bad icon that doesn't show itself to searchers? Why bother?

 

I know GS made the new search attractive to the smartphone crowd, with big cartoony buttons and nothing discouraging like a red wrench, but don't you think that's counterproductive to keeping the quality up?

Link to comment

It only appears on the cache page directly on the NM log, and above the first log with the log-type counters. Hard to notice, especially when the NM log gets pushed down by more logs. Nothing at the top, either.

When looking at the cache page in a web browser, the NM status is in the Attributes section - on the right below the overview map. If a cache has an uncleared NM, then you'll see a white cross in a red square in the attributes section.

Link to comment

[...]

When looking at the cache page in a web browser, the NM status is in the Attributes section - on the right below the overview map. If a cache has an uncleared NM, then you'll see a white cross in a red square in the attributes section.

 

Right. But the TO is talking about the search lists - not the cache page.

 

Hans

Link to comment

[...]

When looking at the cache page in a web browser, the NM status is in the Attributes section - on the right below the overview map. If a cache has an uncleared NM, then you'll see a white cross in a red square in the attributes section.

 

Right. But the TO is talking about the search lists - not the cache page.

 

Hans

The part of the OP's post that I quoted refers to the cache page, not the search results page. The OP said that the NM can only be seen on the cache page when looking at the logs. I noted that the NM can be seen on the cache page in the Attributes section.

 

I did not address the Search Results portion of the OP's post, which is why I also didn't quote the Search Results portion of the OP's post.

Link to comment

Old search has these columns:

1.check box loc download 2.distance 3.favs 4.found/owned 5.title pane 6.info-TB NM 7.D/T & size indicator 8.placed date 9.last found 10.send to gps

 

New search has these columns:

1.title pane (icon displays found/owned info) 2.distance 3.favs 4.size 5.difficulty 6.terrain 7.last 8.last found 9. placed date

 

Gone on new search: any way to download, and the "info" column which provides TB or NM info.

 

You can't download anything from new search (it's a big cartoony page to look at. :lol:)

Presumably you'll see the NM info from where ever you DO download. It's on the cache page, it still appears on all other "search" (nearby caches) pages. You can exclude NM caches in Pocket Queries.

Link to comment

It is a question whether to bother with the red wrench/cross anymore. There are caches around me (like this one) that are maintained but the inexperienced owner just doesn't care about getting rid off the NM sign. There is nothing that pushes owners to do that.

Then fix the lack-of-push. The attribute is still very much relevant.

 

I've got a couple of worm cans here. One is labelled "don't let the cacher hide any more caches while he has any with NM", and one is labelled "auto-disable after a time with no action". Which one shall we open first?

Link to comment

It is a question whether to bother with the red wrench/cross anymore. There are caches around me (like this one) that are maintained but the inexperienced owner just doesn't care about getting rid off the NM sign. There is nothing that pushes owners to do that.

I've seen similar caches, where the CO fixes the maintenance problem but doesn't post the OM log to remove the NM attribute from the cache page.

 

I've also seen some finders mention this in their logs, noting that the CO should post an OM log to remove the NM attribute. In some caches the finders include a helpful link to the relevant Help Center article: 4.21. Removing the Needs Maintenance Icon Some CO's don't know about the NM attribute. Pointing the issue out to them may help them become better CO's or at least better manage the NM attributes on their listings.

Link to comment

I've got a couple of worm cans here. One is labelled "don't let the cacher hide any more caches while he has any with NM", and one is labelled "auto-disable after a time with no action". Which one shall we open first?

The other one ("auto-disable after a time with no action") would be fine, I guess, as there are owners who have only a single cache and don't plan to hide another one. An unmaintained cache shouldn't be offered to the audience and one would know directly from the map that the cache should be avoided.

 

Maybe some sort of nag on the main page could be enough, as suggested in this thread.

Link to comment

I've got a couple of worm cans here. One is labelled "don't let the cacher hide any more caches while he has any with NM", and one is labelled "auto-disable after a time with no action". Which one shall we open first?

 

Both. But this is the best: "auto-disable after a time with no action".

Link to comment

I've got a couple of worm cans here. One is labelled "don't let the cacher hide any more caches while he has any with NM", and one is labelled "auto-disable after a time with no action". Which one shall we open first?

Both. But this is the best: "auto-disable after a time with no action".

Think of it this way: do you consider an un-OMed red wrench to be a significant enough problem to warrant disabling the cache? Personally, I'd say no, at least not as a blanket rule.

 

I think what we need to do is make the NM notification currently available on the cache submission form to be visible at the top of every geocaching.com page. Make it like the site maintenance banners used to be and plaster a big notice across the top of the page with a link to the Help Center article about the Owner Maintenance log. That way, the cacher has been sufficiently notified and given the tools they need to fix the problem.

 

Oh, and have the red wrench show up on search result lists again. That would be good too.

Link to comment

I've got a couple of worm cans here. One is labelled "don't let the cacher hide any more caches while he has any with NM", and one is labelled "auto-disable after a time with no action". Which one shall we open first?

Both. But this is the best: "auto-disable after a time with no action".

Think of it this way: do you consider an un-OMed red wrench to be a significant enough problem to warrant disabling the cache? Personally, I'd say no, at least not as a blanket rule.

 

I think what we need to do is make the NM notification currently available on the cache submission form to be visible at the top of every geocaching.com page. Make it like the site maintenance banners used to be and plaster a big notice across the top of the page with a link to the Help Center article about the Owner Maintenance log. That way, the cacher has been sufficiently notified and given the tools they need to fix the problem.

 

Oh, and have the red wrench show up on search result lists again. That would be good too.

 

This.

Link to comment

I've got a couple of worm cans here. One is labelled "don't let the cacher hide any more caches while he has any with NM", and one is labelled "auto-disable after a time with no action". Which one shall we open first?

Both. But this is the best: "auto-disable after a time with no action".

Think of it this way: do you consider an un-OMed red wrench to be a significant enough problem to warrant disabling the cache? Personally, I'd say no, at least not as a blanket rule.

 

I think what we need to do is make the NM notification currently available on the cache submission form to be visible at the top of every geocaching.com page. Make it like the site maintenance banners used to be and plaster a big notice across the top of the page with a link to the Help Center article about the Owner Maintenance log. That way, the cacher has been sufficiently notified and given the tools they need to fix the problem.

 

Oh, and have the red wrench show up on search result lists again. That would be good too.

 

Like it. :)

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...