Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
OZ2CPU

Log Need Maintenence on own caches.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, RuideAlmeida said:

In my opinion you missed the best option. Go to the location and do maintenance, if really necessary.

After all, this is an outdoor game.

It is not always possible to run out to a location whenever there is a cache log that includes mention of a problem.  What is needed is a way to flag or list these caches so that they do not get forgotten as we go about our busy daily schedules.  If you want to say that if we're too busy to take care of maintenance right away we should just archive all our caches, well there are very few of us who do not have other obligations in our lives.  Should those people who have jobs, families, health issues, etc not be cache owners at all?  How many caches would be left in the world if all people with other obligations were to archive all their caches?  Why not make it easier, rather than harder, for COs to keep track of which cache(s) need maintenance?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, OZ2CPU said:

or even dont know what kind of nice service it makes for a CO,

I agree. That's why I put it in the cache description, 'Please log NMs for any issue with the cache, even minor issues". It seemed to help, I got an NM shortly after my cache was published because the magnets I used weren't doing a good job. Fixed it the next day. 

Then again. I was monitoring my email and would have read about the problem via a Found It log too. But I try to encourage finders to post the NM on the cache page. 

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, NanCycle said:

It is not always possible to run out to a location whenever there is a cache log that includes mention of a problem.  What is needed is a way to flag or list these caches so that they do not get forgotten as we go about our busy daily schedules.  If you want to say that if we're too busy to take care of maintenance right away we should just archive all our caches, well there are very few of us who do not have other obligations in our lives.  Should those people who have jobs, families, health issues, etc not be cache owners at all?  How many caches would be left in the world if all people with other obligations were to archive all their caches?  Why not make it easier, rather than harder, for COs to keep track of which cache(s) need maintenance?

I agree, it's not always possible.   I believe most here have jobs as well.  But even when we had more than today, I can't see how a cache with issues can be forgotten. I know it'd bug me until I could fix it.  May take weeks to finally head out (weather mostly), but I sure couldn't "forget" about it.  We simply put that cache's name on the fridge.  I see the fridge door a couple times a day.   We don't forget about oil changes/car inspections with our busy schedules either.    :)

Share this post


Link to post

Here is a good example. I just got a Found It log which stated that the log sheet is almost full, but this information was written in the Found It log without proper "Logbook is full" status update. Normally I would immediatelly add the missing NM status to get this cache in the maintenance tool queue but this time I must wait until more experienced geocacher visits the cache and does the correct status update.

Edited by arisoft

Share this post


Link to post

If I had tons of caches I would prepare a universal "politely asking a geocacher to write a NM log and how to do it" text and always copy'n'paste it to a message to a geocacher that has mentioned an issue with my cache in his FI/WN log. It is not reliable, I know, and it may take some time until he reacts. But it has the benefit of educating newbies how to do it properly next time. If noone tells them they won't get better.

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Pontiac_CZ said:

If I had tons of caches I would prepare a universal "politely asking a geocacher to write a NM log and how to do it" text and always copy'n'paste it to a message to a geocacher that has mentioned an issue with my cache in his FI/WN log. It is not reliable, I know, and it may take some time until he reacts. But it has the benefit of educating newbies how to do it properly next time. If noone tells them they won't get better.

In my case the finder was not a newbie. Experienced geocachers avoids entering NM without a major cause because it may trigger another "issues" as you may already know. I am sure that the log sheet space will run out in the near future and then I will get the NM status. I have nothing to worry :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, arisoft said:

Here is a good example. I just got a Found It log which stated that the log sheet is almost full, but this information was written in the Found It log without proper "Logbook is full" status update. Normally I would immediatelly add the missing NM status to get this cache in the maintenance tool queue but this time I must wait until more experienced geocacher visits the cache and does the correct status update.

Why wait? Why not go out and replace the log?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

Why wait? Why not go out and replace the log?

Sometimes it takes a week or three to plan a trip to visit a particular cache site.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, niraD said:

Sometimes it takes a week or three to plan a trip to visit a particular cache site.

That's OK. A heads-up log gives the owner even more time. 

I've had a cache a 2-hour drive away and couldn't drop everything to go replace the log. I replaced logs within the 4-week time frame, and the couple of times I couldn't I posted a note with a time-frame for replacement. The second time I asked my sister to replace the log for me. Then I retrieved and archived it a couple of months later because I realized it was becoming a chore to maintain. It lasted 5 years though. 

Besides, a heads up of "almost full" gives the owner more time than an NM that says the log is full.  And now that arisoft has a heads up there is little excuse to wait for the NM. 

 

Edited by L0ne.R
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

Why wait? Why not go out and replace the log?

Maintenance tool does not give any indication that there is a problem and I have other caches with higher priority waiting for maintenance. I will forget the almost full log while handling more critical issues like disabled caches.

Share this post


Link to post
57 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Maintenance tool does not give any indication that there is a problem and I have other caches with higher priority waiting for maintenance. I will forget the almost full log while handling more critical issues like disabled caches.

 So you are saying that even if someone put an NM on your cache with an almost full log you would not visit the cache?

I'm getting a feeling that the NM log is used by owners as a way to tell the next finders to help with the cache. Otherwise, why do you want to post an NM log on a cache with an almost full log which you do not intend to go out to replace?

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 So you are saying that even if someone put an NM on your cache with an almost full log you would not visit the cache?

Huh... I didn't read arisoft's post that way at all. To me, it sounds like he'll spend time maintaining other caches that have the NM attribute or that are disabled, and will probably forget about the cache with the almost full log because it doesn't have the NM attribute.

The finder didn't bother to post a NM log to set the NM attribute, and Groundspeak is making it difficult for owners to post NM logs to set the NM attribute themselves. The whole point of this suggestion is that some owners would like to set the NM attribute as a way to keep track of which caches need maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arisoft said:

Maintenance tool does not give any indication that there is a problem and I have other caches with higher priority waiting for maintenance. I will forget the almost full log while handling more critical issues like disabled caches.

May be just me, but if  there are "other" caches needing maintenance, so many that they're sorted by priority, I'd wanna get them fixed before I played the hobby again myself.   :)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

I agree, it's not always possible.   I believe most here have jobs as well.  But even when we had more than today, I can't see how a cache with issues can be forgotten. I know it'd bug me until I could fix it.  May take weeks to finally head out (weather mostly), but I sure couldn't "forget" about it.  We simply put that cache's name on the fridge.  I see the fridge door a couple times a day.   We don't forget about oil changes/car inspections with our busy schedules either.    :)

Good.  You have a system.  I have a system too.  I keep a list of caches called "Home". Whenever a new cache is published. it goes on that list.  When I find it, it comes off.  Whenever I get a log mentioning maintenance is needed, or after a couple DNFs, that cache goes on the list, so whenever I see one of my own caches on "Home" I know that it needs attention.  

But that's not the issue here.  The statement was made "If that's too much work for the CO then he should stop beeing a CO and archive his cache."

Also your statement "fixing the cache as soon as possible shouldn't create a problem of "which one it was".   If a CO has so many caches needing maintenance that they can't keep track anymore, no "list" is gonna help much with that  ..."    Maybe your memory is much sharper than mine, but if I get more than 1 or 2 I'll probably remember that I have some that need work, but for sure won't remember which ones they are.  I don't have a single cache that is in official NM status, but do currently have 2 on my "Home" list.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/4/2018 at 1:27 PM, OZ2CPU said:

this also works for PMO caches, even if my extra "user" is not PM

this link, 
https://www.geocaching.com/play/geocache/gcXXXX/log

If you want an easier to remember link, than you could use this:   www.geocachingadmin.com    This is a known way for Basic Members to log PMO caches.

 

On 4/4/2018 at 1:27 PM, OZ2CPU said:

put in the GC number, and then OPT OUT , else you dont have access to Need Maintenance log,

Just an FYI - but it is possible to log an NM without Opting Out. Under the log entry text box is a "Report a problem". Clicking on that provides options (missing, full log, damaged, other) that will result in an NM log being placed on the cache. There is also an option for suggesting NA.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×