Reviewer temporarily disabled my cache--too soon?

[+fwhittle]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

[+Manville Possum]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

[+Uncle Alaska]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

 

I wouldn't call two dnf's neglect. And the CO has a record of replacing when it has gone missing.

[+Manville Possum]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

 

I wouldn't call two dnf's neglect. And the CO has a record of replacing when it has gone missing.

 

I agree with the reviewer. Locally we have do many unmaintained listings it's hurting geocaching as a whole.

[+GeoBain]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

Different reviewers have their own schedules as to when or if they do maintenance searches for caches needing attention. I don't believe you will find a definitive guideline with specific deadlines.

 

However, looking at your cache, I think the problem is that when you replaced the cache, you posted a note to the page instead of a maintenance log. Since you did not log it as maintenance, your cache is still flagged as needing maintenance.

 

Go check the cache to ensure it is still there and then post a maintenance log stating such. This will clear the flag and get you off the reviewer's 30 plan.

 

Good luck.

Edited July 24, 2016 by GeoBain

[+GeoBain]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

 

I wouldn't call two dnf's neglect. And the CO has a record of replacing when it has gone missing.

 

I agree with the reviewer. Locally we have do many unmaintained listings it's hurting geocaching as a whole.

 

This doesn't seem to be such a situation. Reference my previous post.

 

He performed the maintenance but just didn't log it properly so the cache remained flagged.

[+Uncle Alaska]

 

This doesn't seem to be such a situation. Reference my previous post.

 

He performed the maintenance but just didn't log it properly so the cache remained flagged.

 

Yep, he/she should have used the OM when they replaced the cache after the previous NM.

[+fwhittle]

Thanks, GeoBain. I've learned something today.

[Pup Patrol]

The cache owner should post something on the page now, to let the Reviewer and others know that he/she is aware of the situation and is planning to take care of it.

 

A "write note" log would be appropriate for doing that.

 

Once the appropriate maintenance has been done, then the "owner maintenance" log should be used.

 

The Reviewer was acting appropriately. It's a good thing, too, and is appreciated by folks who might be thinking of searching for this cache.

 

The CO should have disabled the cache if he/she feels that it might have disappeared again.

 

CO's need to know what logs and actions they can/should take with their cache listings. Part of the CO's maintenance duties is to maintain the cache page, as well as the cache itself.

 

There's a lot of information for cache owners in the Help Center.

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php

 

Hiding a Geocache

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.book&id=19

 

4.10. Managing Your Geocache Listing

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=234

 

If situations change, the CO should also know how to edit coordinates, change the hint, etc.

 

B.

[+Bear and Ragged]

30 days?

 

Here in the UK, some reviewers give you 14 days to comment on what action you plan to take with the cache...

[+Walts Hunting]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

+1

[+Mudfrog]

I'm glad to see reviewers keeping a more watchful eye but, in my opinion, the disable trigger gets pulled too quickly in some cases. This looks to be one of those cases. Two DNFs should not be grounds for disablement. I'm guessing this may not have come about if the CO had used the "owner maintenance" log type when he replaced the cache on 5/27.

 

This happened on one of my caches a couple of months ago and i have to say, it caused an irritation. After i thought about it though, i realized it wasn't the end of the world and that i still had control of what happened next.

[+Walts Hunting]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

 

I wouldn't call two dnf's neglect. And the CO has a record of replacing when it has gone missing.

 

I agree with the reviewer. Locally we have do many unmaintained listings it's hurting geocaching as a whole.

 

This doesn't seem to be such a situation. Reference my previous post.

 

He performed the maintenance but just didn't log it properly so the cache remained flagged.

And then multiple DNFs after the maintenance

[+Mudfrog]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

If it's GC635P1, it appears you are neglecting it. I wish our local reviewer did such a great service to our community.

 

I wouldn't call two dnf's neglect. And the CO has a record of replacing when it has gone missing.

 

I agree with the reviewer. Locally we have do many unmaintained listings it's hurting geocaching as a whole.

 

This doesn't seem to be such a situation. Reference my previous post.

 

He performed the maintenance but just didn't log it properly so the cache remained flagged.

And then multiple DNFs after the maintenance

 

Two DNFs? Two should not be enough to garner a disable.

 

But, just now took another look at the cache page and see where the reviewer left a new note. Yep, seems the lack of an "owners maintenance" log got it disabled.

[+Manville Possum]

I'm watching a local listing now that has been missing for over eight months according to past logs, temp disabled for almost two, a recent NA posted that the CO deleted and posted a note that he would replace the cache when he was good and ready. I've seen the same CO drag this out with his other caches for about a year.

 

I'm a firm believer that reviewers should step in when the CO is lazy and don't maintain their cache in a reasonable amount of time. Some reviewers just do a better job than others.

[+wimseyguy]

Deleting NA logs doesn't get them off the reviewers' radar screens, just the cache page.

Edited July 24, 2016 by wimseyguy

[+Manville Possum]

Deleting NA logs doesn't get them off the reviewers' radar screens, just the cache page.

 

I'm well aware of that, but the local reviewer chooses to ignore NA's when Armchair Maintenance is postesd.

 

That is the best answer I can give you because it seems to be the case with this CO.

 

I feel if a reviewer did step in the CO would respond, but that has not happened yet.

[+Mn-treker]

Thanks, GeoBain. I've learned something today.

You do not have to wait for the reviewer to re-enable your cache. You can do it yourself. Just log owner maint. And enable it.

[+Pond Bird]

I have a cache that has just been temporarily disabled by a reviewer. I have 30 days to check on it. It just seems to me a little too soon to have done this. I replaced the missing cache on 5/27, the next post on 6/23 is a note from someone who didn't try to find it due to muggles. The next post on 7/12 is a DNF. Next on 7/13 is also a DNF. Reviewer disabled the cache on 7/23. It's no problem, as I can check on it next week, but is there any guideline on when to disable a cache and why?

 

You say that you replaced the cache, but if there wasn't an "Owner Maintenance" log then the reviewer may've thought there wasn't any maintenance done. I've seen people say things like "cache is still there" and "replaced" but then the cache isn't actually there.

[+Pond Bird]

I'm watching a local listing now that has been missing for over eight months according to past logs, temp disabled for almost two, a recent NA posted that the CO deleted and posted a note that he would replace the cache when he was good and ready. I've seen the same CO drag this out with his other caches for about a year.

 

I'm a firm believer that reviewers should step in when the CO is lazy and don't maintain their cache in a reasonable amount of time. Some reviewers just do a better job than others.

 

That is true.

[+dprovan]

You say that you replaced the cache, but if there wasn't an "Owner Maintenance" log then the reviewer may've thought there wasn't any maintenance done. I've seen people say things like "cache is still there" and "replaced" but then the cache isn't actually there.

Well, in this case the reviewer "knew" no maintenance was done because no OM was filed. From what I've seen in the forums, the reviewers rarely look at the text in the logs when sweeping an area, and that doesn't surprise r concern me because it must be a huge job in the areas where they feel like there are so many bad caches that they have to sweep.

[+Pond Bird]

You say that you replaced the cache, but if there wasn't an "Owner Maintenance" log then the reviewer may've thought there wasn't any maintenance done. I've seen people say things like "cache is still there" and "replaced" but then the cache isn't actually there.

Well, in this case the reviewer "knew" no maintenance was done because no OM was filed. From what I've seen in the forums, the reviewers rarely look at the text in the logs when sweeping an area, and that doesn't surprise r concern me because it must be a huge job in the areas where they feel like there are so many bad caches that they have to sweep.

 

Sometimes reviewers ignore a cache with multiple DNFs so at least the reviewer took notice that people weren't finding the cache. There was a cache with multiple DNFs and the reviewer NEVER disabled it, even after multiple people logged NA logs. Finally after 2 years of a missing cache, it was replaced. Maybe the reviewer knew it would eventually be replaced but didn't post anything. Wish reviewers would post their viewpoint of each cache on the page so people can see if there is something going on behind the scenes.