Jump to content

Archive This Cache Feature


Followers 0

Recommended Posts

The ability to reccomend a cache be archived was touted and finally implemented. About a week ago I had a cache recieve this reccomendation.

 

The premis of the cache is to hide a micro cache in a spot that makes it very hard to find by using creative hiding. Call it a professional challenge for advanced cachers. If they find it they get to move it to another spot and see how well they can hide it.

 

In short it should skunk people.

 

So after a recent move by a cacher who skunked me about 9 times on a micro he had hid it accumulated several not founds. (This didn't suprise me)

 

A cacher reccomended it be archived. So I emailed the cacher and told them they should have emailed me with their concerens. Then I emailed the last finder/hider to have him verify the cache which he prommised to do at his first opportunity.

 

Meanwhile an admin archives the cache on me without emailing me to find out what I'm doing about the cache. True there was no post on the cache saying what I was doing, but both the person who reccomended the cache be archived and the person who can verify it had heard from me.

 

So now I have an archived cache on the word of a cacher and was never contacted by anyone during the process.

 

When I hear from the last hider (and I will) I'll post the status and now either request the cache be unarchived (or leave it archived if it really is MIA).

 

The point of this long rant was that as a group geocachers decided that a cache should be archivable if the owner could not be reached among other factors. I can be reached as wasn't. Everyone involved could have emailed me and solved the problem. Instead a rather heavey handed approach was used by all.

 

For those who want to take a look at the cache here it is.

 

Curse's Revenge

Link to comment

It's regrettable you've had this problem with your cache, but happily the situation is reversible.

 

I have no problem with the administrators archiving a cache until its true status is determined. (Again, because the process is reversible.) But I do think this is one situation where, if I were the administrator, I would consider the experience of the person(s) making the request.

 

Of course, it would have been best if the person who recommended the cache be archived had taken the time to contact you first.

Link to comment

This may be a case of the person who requested the cache be archived not understanding the nature of the cache in the first place. And not understanding the proceedure for verifying it's status in the second place.

 

I feel that archive this cache option should only be used after all attemts to contact the cache owner have failed. But I guess some people have a hard time accepting a no find. They think that if they can't find it, it must be gone.

 

smile02.gif If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people??

Link to comment

I have to agree that somebody with no finds is not exactly 'qualified' to recommend a cache be archived just because they couldn't find it. Contacting you first, or maybe just going after a few easier caches first, would have been more appropriate.

However, in the Admins defense, they are VERY busy people and I'm sure don't have time to analyze all the details of every single cache that gets recommended for archiving, or go sending emails off to every cache owner who's cache gets recommended.

First glance at this cache shows three no finds in a row, one of them by a very experienced geocacher (260 finds), followed by a archive recomendation. Then, six days later, still no response from the cache owner (on the cache page) to the archive request. If iryshe (one of Jeremy's multiple personalities) had read the cache description carefully, he might have noticed that this cache is supposed to skunk people frequently ... but I'd personally prefer Jeremy spent his time creating great new features instead. I would have archived it too. As the cache owner, I think your only mistake was not posting a note that you were checking into it.

 

---------------------------------------

Friends don't let friends NOT geocache.

---------------------------------------

 

[This message was edited by skydiver on August 26, 2002 at 09:50 PM.]

Link to comment

I have unarchived the cache, so no harm done. But in Jeremy's defense, there's a good chance I would have done the same thing if I had been the one to review the archival request. The admins receive dozens of archival notices each week, and it is a judgment call as to which ones should indeed be archived. Emailing the owner every time is simply not practical. This one had some warnings signs that there was trouble --a string of no finds on a cache with a low difficulty rating, a long passage of time from the last find, and no notes in the logs from the hider assuring people that the cache was still there (and letting the admins know that he had checked on it). On the other hand, the hider is a known, active cacher. So, please accept our apologies and let us know if you experience any other instances where we were a little quick on the "archive" trigger.

 

Moun10Bike's Geocaching Pages

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Kite & Hawkeye:

If the idea here is to hide so creatively that people are commonly skunked, aren't we looking at a difficulty of 4 or 5 rather than 2? That might also give admins who see a number of not-founds followed by an archive request something to think about -- a lot of not-found activity on a difficulty 2 implies that it's not there.


 

Well... 2 is relative. The last cache placed by this guy that was a 2 skunked me on the order of 9 times before I found it and felt like an idiot. The last hider set the difficult at 2 so I changed it accordingly. Were the next cacher to tell me it's a 3 I'd change it. Though experience teaches me that some peoples 2's are harder than others 4's....

 

As Moun10bike said, it's been unarchived. I just need to hear back from Idahoflyer and we are good to go. It all worked out. Hopefully the cache is still around. I'd like to see this one complete it's cycle before being archived. I gave it a limited lifespan.

Link to comment

I still think the concept of requesting/suggesting an archive is a good one. I've gone this route once: after noticing that the past four attempts to find a cache in my area had been filled with comments like "found what was left of the container," and "nothing there but some trash," I e-mailed the cache owner - twice. After receiving no response in a couple of months, I suggested an archive. The cache was in fact archived, and that was that. In a way I felt kind of weird about it - hey, it wasn't MY cache - but, on the other hand, this had clearly been abandoned and the owner, for whatever reason, wasn't interested in taking care of it. It didn't seem right for it to continue coming up on the cache list page...

 

Charlie

"One should never begin a journey by heading in the wrong direction."

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...