Cache Owners and their responsibilities

[+Deepdiggingmole]

The topic of owner maintenance has come up in various forums including this one and I was reading the guidelines and one sentence struck me

"Cache owners who do not maintain their existing caches in a timely manner may temporarily or permanently lose the right to list new caches on Geocaching.com" 

How is this implemented ? and who is this implemented by ?

I recently came across a new cacher who has few finds but has been putting out caches - several of them have had issues and have had OARs added - though these have not been responded to - to the point that a reviewer note has also been added 

However I then saw a new cache published by this cacher - Now I am aware that when a new cache page is created if there are any other caches you own that have issues (OAR, reviewer notes, disabled etc) a pop up window is shown which indicates that before you proceed there are those caches which need attention . You then have the choice to tick a box to say you will deal and you then continue with creating the cache page.
However in this instance it is evident that immediate attention wasn't going to be given and in fact 3 caches still havent had the attention required 
I had a chat with the reviewer as I was curious as to how the process works and the reply was If the newly submitted cache fitted the placement guidelines then they are expected to publish apparently irrespective of how poor a COs maintenance regime is or if they are failing to carry out maintenance they can not take that into consideration
HQ can get quite funny if a reviewer doesn't publish a cache that fits the guidelines (citing the reason that the CO needs to carry out the maintnance on the other caches first) If there’s an issue with a CO generally they ask us (reviewers) to let them (HQ) deal with it.
 

Does this mean HQ are expecting reviewers to report COs who are not maintaining caches ? 

 

Either way it would seem that the highlighted sentence in the guidelines (as above) isn't something that is carried out as the publishing responsibility sits with reviewers who are required to publish 
 

Edited August 18 by Deepdiggingmole
spelling

[+CAVinoGal]

1 hour ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

it would seem that the highlighted sentence in the guidelines (as above) isn't something that is carried out

 

I am aware of one local situation where it WAS carried out, and quite recently (within the past year) too.  It is a tradition of sorts when you host an event, you hide a cache or two as a "pre-publication" opportunity for those attending.  We all go out after the event (typically after dark) and find the cache as a group.  The next morning, the cache is published and we can all log the pre-pub FTF, and wait to see who is the post-pub FTF.

 

Well, after our event, we waited for the cache to publish.  And waited.  And waited.  After a week we contacted the CO - when will it publish?  He said the reviewer wouldn't publish until he got some of his NM's cleared up, he had "too many" caches needing attention.  It took about a month, but eventually it did get published.  The CO places a lot of caches, and does do maintenance, although in "spurts".  You never quite know what to expect on one of his hides...

[+Deepdiggingmole]

59 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

He said the reviewer wouldn't publish until he got some of his NM's cleared up

That must be a local reviewer thing then and interesting/nice to hear  - but this is not the case in all countries - I say countries as I would think this is a country thing as the teams of reviewers from each country all work together and try and work to the same regime 

[+JL_HSTRE]

I wonder if temporary prohibition on publishing is tied to a low enough Cache Health Score?

 

Permanent hiding bans due to lack of maintenance must be very rare because otherwise we would get cachers complaining in the forums about how unfair it is that they received a ban.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 8/18/2024 at 10:27 PM, JL_HSTRE said:

I wonder if temporary prohibition on publishing is tied to a low enough Cache Health Score?

 

Permanent hiding bans due to lack of maintenance must be very rare because otherwise we would get cachers complaining in the forums about how unfair it is that they received a ban.

- yes, you hear of folk talking about the low health score on their caches and the fact that the cache got disabled and they had to deal 
if you dealt with issues in a timely manner - you wouldn't get low health scores - just saying 
I have not heard of anyone saying they got a ban because of low health scores or simply due to a poor maintenance record either - so as you say must be quite a rarity - and yet there are cachers all over the place who are failing to maintain their caches and yet still putting out new ones 

Edited November 18 by Deepdiggingmole
spelling

[+Max and 99]

5 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

if you dealt with issues in a timely manner - you wouldn't get low health scores - just saying LOL

Not necessarily. If a group of people goes together after an event and they all log a dnf on a cache that was there for the last finder, that health score drop happens with zero advance notice to the owner. 

[+Deepdiggingmole]

17 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

must be very rare because otherwise we would get cachers complaining in the forums about how unfair it is that they received a ban.

and yet if the powers that be did implement this (noting - this their own guideline so could not be critisised for doing it) then we could potentially see far less cache statuses  of 'disabled' by reviewer due to lack of CO action and potentially more CO activity in the maintenance dept.  
 

[+Deepdiggingmole]

1 hour ago, Max and 99 said:

Not necessarily. If a group of people goes together after an event and they all log a dnf on a cache that was there for the last finder, that health score drop happens with zero advance notice to the owner. 

Yea, I was speaking in general - those odd occasions do happen - though if I was a CO and suddenly had a dozen DNFs I would be on it tout de suite (as they say) 

[+hzoi]

On 8/18/2024 at 8:06 AM, Deepdiggingmole said:

How is this implemented ? and who is this implemented by ?

 

Bans in general are implemented by HQ.

 

As far as how, reviewers are made aware of hiding suspensions.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 8/21/2024 at 8:44 PM, hzoi said:

 

Bans in general are implemented by HQ.

 

As far as how, reviewers are made aware of hiding suspensions.

Yes but does it happen ?
I have seen so many new cachers putting out several caches and then not doing anything with them when the need arises - and yet they continue to put out caches 

It would seem the algorithm or whatever triggers HQ in taking the steps for a ban, temporary or permanent, must have such a high threshold as none of these have resulted in suspensions - and I know that otherwise the reviewers would not be publishing the new ones 

[Keystone]

Two factual clarifications:

 

1.  There is no "algorithm" that directly drives a temporary or permanent hiding suspension, or a temporary or permanent account suspension.

2.  Hiding suspensions and account suspensions, both temporary and permanent, are very much a thing.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 8/25/2024 at 4:27 PM, Keystone said:

Two factual clarifications:

 

1.  There is no "algorithm" that directly drives a temporary or permanent hiding suspension, or a temporary or permanent account suspension.

2.  Hiding suspensions and account suspensions, both temporary and permanent, are very much a thing.

No algorithm - so how does - "Cache owners who do not maintain their existing caches in a timely manner may temporarily or permanently lose the right to list new caches on Geocaching.com" get picked up and then implemented

Hiding suspensions and account suspensions are very much a thing, where ?
where we are we have not heard of anyone having this implemented - and as per the point of the OP it isn't happening to COs in our area who are blatently failing in their roles as far as maintenance goes

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

No algorithm - so how does - "Cache owners who do not maintain their existing caches in a timely manner may temporarily or permanently lose the right to list new caches on Geocaching.com" get picked up and then implemented

Hiding suspensions and account suspensions are very much a thing, where ?
where we are we have not heard of anyone having this implemented - and as per the point of the OP it isn't happening to COs in our area who are blatently failing in their roles as far as maintenance goes

That's the same where I live.

[+MNTA]

The only suspension I personally know about was from a recipient of a suspension though the message center. This was several years ago now but they had 1300+ active caches at the time in the area. The complaints were many according to the message both from reviewers and cachers in the community, and the impossibility to maintain that many. The message was pretty harsh and they simply archived many of them and left the game. Most of them were DNA tubes or magnetic pouches that failed eventually due to rain. You knew what to expect so it did not bother me and I enjoyed many of the puzzles, challenges and multis. I also ignored many of the impossible puzzles. Six years later today there are 214 still unarchived though they slowly are being archived.

[+garretslarrity]

On 8/18/2024 at 6:06 AM, Deepdiggingmole said:

"Cache owners who do not maintain their existing caches in a timely manner may temporarily or permanently lose the right to list new caches on Geocaching.com" 

 

I actually wasn't aware that this was in the guidelines, but I am very happy to see it. In my area (SoCal) I have seen many cachers who have hundreds of poorly maintained hides continue to hide dozens more. At some point they're just littering, so I hope that the reviewers are actually enforcing this.

[Keystone]

1. Many geocachers who receive a hiding suspension don't like to advertise the fact that they've received a hiding suspension.  Just because you're not aware of one in your area doesn't mean that it hasn't happened.  The most recent incident I've dealt with was this morning.
2. A geocacher has to cross far over the line, ignoring maintenance requests repeatedly, before receiving even a temporary hiding suspension.  It's better to correct the behavior, using the threat of a suspension as a motivator.  In a given region, there could be one or several geocachers in various stages of the enforcement process for good cache maintenance habits.