+Kiwi Nomad Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 Please change it so that when a cache owner re-enables their cache they don't have to do a separate log to get rid of the needs maintence attribute. Either that or place the maintence performed action in the admin tools box on the right and make it remove the needs maintence attribute and enable the cache in one go. Went to publish an event and got told a cache I fixed months ago was needing maintence when it didn't. The current way of showing a cache is fixed online doesn't feel very intuative to me at all. Quote Link to comment
+K13 Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 Owner Maintenance log clears the Red Wrench/Needs Maintenance tag. What could be more intuitive than filing an Owner Maintenance log when you fix your cache? 1 Quote Link to comment
+Gill & Tony Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, K13 said: What could be more intuitive than filing an Owner Maintenance log when you fix your cache? Well, combining the "My cache was temporarily disabled and now it isn't any more" log with the "Here's what I did to fix the problem" log into a single operation would feel more intuitive to me. A combined "I fixed the problem, possibly changed the coordinates and have re-enabled the cache" operation would be even more intuitive. Having to go through 3 separate processes seems very counter-intuitive. Edit, to add: In fact, I think an Owner Maintenance log which does not enable a disabled cache should be prohibited. Obviously, if the cache isn't disabled then an OM is fine. But OM on a disabled cache should imply that the cache is now ready to go. Simply saying "I went there, agree the problem is real and I'll fix it next week" should be a note, not an OM. Edited January 7, 2019 by Gill & Tony 3 Quote Link to comment
+hzoi Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 13 hours ago, Gill & Tony said: Well, combining the "My cache was temporarily disabled and now it isn't any more" log with the "Here's what I did to fix the problem" log into a single operation would feel more intuitive to me. A combined "I fixed the problem, possibly changed the coordinates and have re-enabled the cache" operation would be even more intuitive. Having to go through 3 separate processes seems very counter-intuitive. Edit, to add: In fact, I think an Owner Maintenance log which does not enable a disabled cache should be prohibited. Obviously, if the cache isn't disabled then an OM is fine. But OM on a disabled cache should imply that the cache is now ready to go. Simply saying "I went there, agree the problem is real and I'll fix it next week" should be a note, not an OM. That's not a bad idea. Instead of a log, maybe a link called "Owner actions." Enabling/disabling, maintenance notes, adding photos, and coordinate updates could all be options. 2 Quote Link to comment
+dprovan Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 16 hours ago, Gill & Tony said: In fact, I think an Owner Maintenance log which does not enable a disabled cache should be prohibited. Obviously, if the cache isn't disabled then an OM is fine. But OM on a disabled cache should imply that the cache is now ready to go. Simply saying "I went there, agree the problem is real and I'll fix it next week" should be a note, not an OM. The cache might be disabled for some reason unrelated to the maintenance issue being addressed. They are two operations: announcing what was done to fix the maintenance issue and opening up the cache for business. While it's true that enabling a cache is often done because a maintenance problem has been corrected, that's not enough for me to think we should ignore the difference between the two operations. Having said that, this kinda of simplify-at-all-costs thinking is now normal at Groundspeak, so I'm surprised they haven't already added a check box -- probably checked by default -- when posting an OM log to generate an automatic enable just like they added the automatic NM if a box is checked on a find or DNF. 4 Quote Link to comment
+arisoft Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, dprovan said: Having said that, this kinda of simplify-at-all-costs thinking is now normal at Groundspeak, so I'm surprised they haven't already added a check box -- probably checked by default -- when posting an OM log to generate an automatic enable just like they added the automatic NM if a box is checked on a find or DNF. Years ago we could tick the maintenance attribute on and off. Mandatory log came later. In most cases I forget to post the maintenance log when I enable the cache, but it is not a big deal even if I forget it completely. Idea: prevent enabling the cache if it still needs maintenance Maintenance should come first, before enabling. Edited January 7, 2019 by arisoft Quote Link to comment
+Bear and Ragged Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 2 hours ago, arisoft said: Years ago we could tick the maintenance attribute on and off. Mandatory log came later. In most cases I forget to post the maintenance log when I enable the cache, but it is not a big deal even if I forget it completely. Idea: prevent enabling the cache it it still needs maintenance Maintenance should come first, before enabling. Kind of agree with this. eg. I can fix the problem, but leave the cache Temp Disabled for a while until other things are sorted.... Quote Link to comment
+baer2006 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 20 hours ago, Gill & Tony said: In fact, I think an Owner Maintenance log which does not enable a disabled cache should be prohibited. Obviously, if the cache isn't disabled then an OM is fine. But OM on a disabled cache should imply that the cache is now ready to go. Simply saying "I went there, agree the problem is real and I'll fix it next week" should be a note, not an OM. OM without Enable can make perfect sense. I have posted OM logs on one of my multi which said things like "Fixed stages x and y today, have to check the others later". Followed by a second OM logs a few days later, together with an Enable log. I did maintenance on both occasions, and logged it as such. Of course this only works when the cache is disabled. Otherwise, after the first OM the red wrench is removed, and cachers will have the wrong impression that the cache is ready to be found. 1 Quote Link to comment
+JL_HSTRE Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 The problem is that while enabling, owner maintenance, and changing coords often overlap sometimes they don't. A finder might give me better coords. Caches are sometimes disabled for reasons other than maintenance. Maintenance is sometimes performed without disabling the cache. 2 2 Quote Link to comment
+J Grouchy Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 On 1/7/2019 at 12:12 PM, dprovan said: The cache might be disabled for some reason unrelated to the maintenance issue being addressed. They are two operations: announcing what was done to fix the maintenance issue and opening up the cache for business. While it's true that enabling a cache is often done because a maintenance problem has been corrected, that's not enough for me to think we should ignore the difference between the two operations. Having said that, this kinda of simplify-at-all-costs thinking is now normal at Groundspeak, so I'm surprised they haven't already added a check box -- probably checked by default -- when posting an OM log to generate an automatic enable just like they added the automatic NM if a box is checked on a find or DNF. Yeah...a rushed job (with an empty box)...but you get the idea: 1 Quote Link to comment
+noncentric Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 10 hours ago, J Grouchy said: Yeah...a rushed job (with an empty box)...but you get the idea: But that would presume the cacher logging the OM knows that they need to select "Other Action" - which seems to be the problem. Some cachers assume that submitting an OM will restore their cache completely and not that they need to add an Enable action. 1 Quote Link to comment
+Mudfrog Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 I had thought about replying about this a few months back in the "What irks you most" thread but I realized this isn't that much of an irk. It is an inconvenience though that could be remedied easily with an "enable cache" check box. As dprovan mentioned, maybe it being checked by default. As noncentric stated, it shouldn't be hidden either. 1 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.