Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
CAVinoGal

Deleting Needs Maintenance logs

Recommended Posts

Is it accepted protocol to delete a NM log after posted your OM log?  I'm pretty new to geocaching (3/2017), and still learning a lot.  But I thought an OM effectively canceled the NM and you aren't supposed to delete those kinds of logs?  Here's the background:

 

While traveling over the Christmas/New Year holiday, we stopped to find a geocache.  We found a broken container, in pieces, and magnets; clearly the cache based on the description, hint, and coordinates. We claimed the find, and I submitted the NM log.  It posted, for some reason, as a Write Note (with my explanation of why it needed attention) and a NM ("This geocacher reports that the container is damaged" - auto text).  Within a day or two I got a notice that a log had been deleted - it was the "write note" and I figured the CO felt it was redundant; I'd mentioned the broken container in my Found it  log, and the NM flag still stood.

 

Then I got another notice a few days later that another log had been deleted on the same cache.  I checked, and my NM log was gone, and the CO had posted an OM saying he was out of town and would check on things when he returned.  I put the cache on my watchlist.  Today, I got a notification of a new log - another OM that the cache is ready to be found. All previous notes, NM, and OM logs are gone, only the one is there now, though it follows my log stating the container is cracked and magnets are loose.

 

I guess, in this case, the logs show *most* of the record...we found it, noted in our log that there was an issue, and a week or so later, an OM by the CO states it's fixed.  The CO is obviously keeping watch and doing his job; that's a good thing!  It's the first time I've ever received a notice of a log deletion though, and I got TWO!  A bit unsettling til I figured out what was actually deleted, and it still feels like that's not really how it's intended to flow.  What's the right way to deal with this?  I've left all logs on the cache page, just done what's needed to remedy the situation and then logged the fix.  It's part of the history of the cache, in my mind.

 

I'm interested in other opinions, and how other people deal with clearing the NM or negative logs.  

 

Share this post


Link to post

I had four of my logs deleted by a CO because he didn't like my logs saying they were negative and he wouldn't allow it on his caches pages. I wasn't negative, I was truthful. I found the cache in a different location then what the hint suggested. I logged it over and said TFTC. He has 150ish finds with almost as many hides, I have over 9000 finds and have owned about 80 something caches. I think I know what I'm doing in comparison. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

As Touchstone, I feel it's their page and whatever they want to do (within guidelines) is fine.

Some are ocd or anal enough to maybe feel that it's keeping their cache page "neat".  As long as the "smiley" isn't missing too, no skin off my back... 

We don't, as even the odd "log full"  is part of the cache's history. 

 -  My "You know, there are two sides to a logbook page..." log gives future readers a bit of humor too.    :D

We have a couple here who delete NM when (if) they do OM. 

That info's all still there for a Reviewer to see,  if issues later.    :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had one recently where I logged a NM, as the coordinates were out. The CO took a reading of the co-ords and changed them. Then they deleted my log. (Annoying!) I wouldn't necessarily trust the latest attempt at co-ords, because this isn't their first co-ord change.

Share this post


Link to post

There are cases when it's reasonable to remove NM logs - if they contain spoilers certainly as an example (and sometimes that have to to describe what's needed). But it's not a huge deal if the problem's been dealt with imo.

Share this post


Link to post

Around here it's definitely not standard procedure to delete OM logs after maintenance has been done. I have logged over 350 NMs in 10+ years, and exactly one of them was deleted by the CO because "otherwise, the maintenance flag wouldn't go away". I know this isn't true (also, the CO did log an OM), but I wasn't in the mood to argue.

 

Regarding the opinion, that it's "their" (the CO's) webpage ... well, sure, but it's my log ;) . So I'm always a bit irritated when one of my logs gets deleted, although it doesn't contain anything which could be viewed as spoiler or "inappropriate" language. NMs are admittedly not so important anymore once maintenance has been done, but deleting them whenever OM is done still deletes part of the cache's history. In some situations, I as a cacher would like to know beforehand if a cache is "trouble prone", i.e. if there are unusually many NM/OM pairs in the past.

 

Finally, from the OP ...

10 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

my NM log was gone, and the CO had posted an OM saying he was out of town and would check on things when he returned.

In this situation I would definitely have reposted the NM, because an OM log admitted that maintenance is yet to be done!

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

If the NM is valid it should stand.

 

I know some folks who delete NM logs after they perform maintenance. I'm not sure if thry think it's necessary or are concerned with the cache page will look bad because there was ever a NM log.

 

There was also a local CO who would delete DNF logs if the cache wasn't missing or after he replaced it if it was missing. First CO I ever put on my ignore list. His caches weren't very good anyway.

 

Many odd logging practices out there which is an inevitable side effect of how many people are introduced to geocaching with little or no training. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

I had something similar happen to me.  I went out and the cache I looked for was most likely missing, based on the previous DNFs as well as the generous hint.  I posted the NM log and a few days later the CO posted an OM log to clear the NM from the cache, stating he would get out there later to check on it.  That's NOT an owner maintenance log.  That should be a note posted to the cache page.  I re-submitted my NM log, stating that it wasn't owner maintenance if no maintenance had actually been done.  My second NM log drew the attention of the reviewer and it was disabled.  The CO posted another wrong OM log, saying they'd get out there and 2 1/2 months after the original NM log was posted and 5 days after it was disabled, the CO replaced it, filed the now correct OM log, but then didn't enable it.  Our reviewer did.

 

I would never delete a NM log on one of my caches as it's part of the cache's past history, even if it's an incorrect or accidental use.  I just don't understand why someone would want to remove something that just alerts them to a cacher letting them know there's something wrong with the cache.  That's helping them understand that their cache needs a visit to get fixed up.  It doesn't mean they're a bad CO or it's a bad cache but apparently some COs believe that's what it means so they delete the NM logs.

 

I had one CO delete a DNF I logged.  I was going for FTF and the cacher had the cache published but hadn't put out the cache yet, just done all the stuff to get it published.  I still don't understand why they did it.

 

As far as negative logs go, I try to be factual rather than judgmental.  I've never had a log deleted for negative comments.  I've had a photo log deleted and a Found it log deleted because I failed to read the cache page carefully enough and didn't meet the requirements as stated.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

As long as the "smiley" isn't missing too, no skin off my back... 

<snip>

We have a couple here who delete NM when (if) they do OM. 

That info's all still there for a Reviewer to see,  if issues later.    :)

Good to know that the full record IS still there.  Our "Found it" logs were never deleted or questioned, but we did have a moment when the first "Your log has been deleted" notification came in!

6 hours ago, Blue Square Thing said:

There are cases when it's reasonable to remove NM logs - if they contain spoilers certainly as an example (and sometimes that have to to describe what's needed). But it's not a huge deal if the problem's been dealt with imo.

My log only described the problem (broken container, magnets no longer attached to the container) with no photos or other spoiler info; the Write Note that was added when I sent the NM was redundant, and added nothing that wasn't already stated in my Found it log.  I understand deleting that one.  The deletion of my NM surprised me.

4 hours ago, baer2006 said:

Regarding the opinion, that it's "their" (the CO's) webpage ... well, sure, but it's my log ;) . So I'm always a bit irritated when one of my logs gets deleted, although it doesn't contain anything which could be viewed as spoiler or "inappropriate" language. NMs are admittedly not so important anymore once maintenance has been done, but deleting them whenever OM is done still deletes part of the cache's history. In some situations, I as a cacher would like to know beforehand if a cache is "trouble prone", i.e. if there are unusually many NM/OM pairs in the past.

^^^This^^^  And this cache may be one of those "trouble prone" caches.  The logs only show consistent finds, (definitely a factor in our decision to try for this particular cache on our way through a desert town!) and his OM just states that all is good; only my Found it log indicates there is any kind of a problem.

 

Thank you, all, for chiming in!  I'm curious now, as to other hides by this same CO - maybe that's just how he plays the game and deals with NM's.  He did react and fix it quickly, and I still have the smilie.  And I learned how another CO deals with NM logs!

 

***ETA***  This particular CO has over 2K active hides - randomly viewing a half dozen or so, there are NO NM logs on any, an occasional DNF, an OM here and there, and tons of Finds on power trails and series.  So it appears that his MO is to delete the NM's once the problem is fixed.  That or his hides are remarkably trouble-free and we happened upon that rare one with an issue!

Edited by CAVinoGal
Typo corrections

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, coachstahly said:

I had something similar happen to me.  I went out and the cache I looked for was most likely missing, based on the previous DNFs as well as the generous hint.  I posted the NM log and a few days later the CO posted an OM log to clear the NM from the cache, stating he would get out there later to check on it.  That's NOT an owner maintenance log.  That should be a note posted to the cache page.  I re-submitted my NM log, stating that it wasn't owner maintenance if no maintenance had actually been done.  My second NM log drew the attention of the reviewer and it was disabled.  The CO posted another wrong OM log, saying they'd get out there and 2 1/2 months after the original NM log was posted and 5 days after it was disabled, the CO replaced it, filed the now correct OM log, but then didn't enable it.  Our reviewer did.

I wonder if the CO submitted OM's because OM is the default log type with the new logging page and/or they weren't familiar with the Write Note log option. If so, then it might be a case for not having a default log type, or at least making the default WN instead of OM.  Their failure to log an Enable seems to suggest that they didn't have the strongest understanding of log types, so maybe their non-maintenance OM logs were a simple mistake, rather than an intentional attempt to hide issues.  Hopefully, they learned something from your second NM and maybe have a better understanding of what an OM log is supposed to mean. 

 

5 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

***ETA***  This particular CO has over 2K active hides - randomly viewing a half dozen or so, there are NO NM logs on any, an occasional DNF, an OM here and there, and tons of Finds on power trails and series.  So it appears that his MO is to delete the NM's once the problem is fixed.  That or his hides are remarkably trouble-free and we happened upon that rare one with an issue!

It's also possible that NM's don't get reported, which seems to be more likely with caches on PT's.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, noncentric said:

I wonder if the CO submitted OM's because OM is the default log type with the new logging page and/or they weren't familiar with the Write Note log option. If so, then it might be a case for not having a default log type, or at least making the default WN instead of OM.  Their failure to log an Enable seems to suggest that they didn't have the strongest understanding of log types, so maybe their non-maintenance OM logs were a simple mistake, rather than an intentional attempt to hide issues.  Hopefully, they learned something from your second NM and maybe have a better understanding of what an OM log is supposed to mean.

 

I recently got caught out by this stupid default OM log thing. I'd disabled a cache while I'd taken it home to do some minor repairs, then, after putting it back, went to re-enable it, only I was focussed on composing the log text and forgot to change the log type from its default so instead ended up logging an OM. Luckily I noticed that the cache was still disabled and corrected the error by deleting the OM and relogging it as an enable, but it's certainly a trap for the unwary. In another thread a reviewer said that incorrect OM logs have become epidemic since the change to the logging page, making the monitoring of unservicable caches difficult, yet it seems nothing can be done to fix it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, coachstahly said:

the CO replaced it, filed the now correct OM log, but then didn't enable it.  Our reviewer did.

 

That was very nice of them. I've seen a number of disabled caches get archived over the years because the CO replaced the cache and logged OM saying so, but the CO never logged Enable nor responded no Reviewer Notes reminding them to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

Is it accepted protocol to delete a NM log after posted your OM log? 

 

 

IMO--NO! NO! NO!  The NM is part of the history of the cache and should remain.

  • Upvote 6
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, noncentric said:

I wonder if the CO submitted OM's because OM is the default log type with the new logging page and/or they weren't familiar with the Write Note log option. If so, then it might be a case for not having a default log type, or at least making the default WN instead of OM.  Their failure to log an Enable seems to suggest that they didn't have the strongest understanding of log types, so maybe their non-maintenance OM logs were a simple mistake, rather than an intentional attempt to hide issues.  Hopefully, they learned something from your second NM and maybe have a better understanding of what an OM log is supposed to mean. 

 

That's certainly a possibility.  I don't like the new method of logging NMs or the OMs.  I wonder about the turnaround on the replaced cache if the reviewer hadn't disabled it.  It took 2 1/2 months to replace it.

 

23 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

That was very nice of them. I've seen a number of disabled caches get archived over the years because the CO replaced the cache and logged OM saying so, but the CO never logged Enable nor responded no Reviewer Notes reminding them to do so.

 

He's a great guy and does a great job for our state.

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

My log only described the problem (broken container, magnets no longer attached to the container) with no photos or other spoiler info; the Write Note that was added when I sent the NM was redundant, and added nothing that wasn't already stated in my Found it log.  I understand deleting that one.  The deletion of my NM surprised me.

 

I guess that someone might consider the magnets part a spoiler, but I think this is more the cache owner's behaviour in general. I guess, ultimately, that it's up to them but it is interesting what you've discovered about the lack of NM logs in general.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I recently got caught out by this stupid default OM log thing. I'd disabled a cache while I'd taken it home to do some minor repairs, then, after putting it back, went to re-enable it, only I was focussed on composing the log text and forgot to change the log type from its default so instead ended up logging an OM. Luckily I noticed that the cache was still disabled and corrected the error by deleting the OM and relogging it as an enable, but it's certainly a trap for the unwary. In another thread a reviewer said that incorrect OM logs have become epidemic since the change to the logging page, making the monitoring of unservicable caches difficult, yet it seems nothing can be done to fix it.

 

I wondered why I'd seen more of these situations. Thanks.

 

Surely a pop up warning could be thrown to at least inform people that they need to enable the cache as well? The logic shouldn't be that hard to deal with in that case and it should be able to be coded. I'd have thought.

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/10/2019 at 2:00 AM, CAVinoGal said:

 We found a broken container, in pieces, and magnets; clearly the cache based on the description, hint, and coordinates. We claimed the find, and I submitted the NM log.

 

The NM should have stayed, since you didn't find /signed a log it's the Found It that should have been deleted (or better, a DNF should have been logged too)..

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/10/2019 at 11:53 PM, Blue Square Thing said:
On 1/10/2019 at 8:47 AM, CAVinoGal said:

My log only described the problem (broken container, magnets no longer attached to the container) with no photos or other spoiler info...

 

I guess that someone might consider the magnets part a spoiler

 

The cache description said that the cache is small and magnetic - I didn't think mentioning magnets was a spoiler.  In any case, my original question has been answered, the cache is back up and running, and all is well.

  • Upvote 1

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 4

×