Should Be Archived Etiquette

[+bons]

There are times I think caches have some serious maintainence issues but despite the logs or e-mails nothing seems to be done about these caches. What I wonder is what an acceptable reaction would be to these caches since leaving them as they are would be a disservice to other cachers.

 

Some examples would be:

 

1) The perpetually "temporarily disabled" cache. I can see someone turning off their cache for the winter and promising to replace it in spring when the ground cover has returned, but it's June now. How long should a cache remain in this state? Should a SBA be posted if e-mails don't get a response within a reasonable period of time (a week after being sent perhaps)?

 

2) The broken multi. These can be interesting. When the multi is just getting a string of DNFs, that's one thing, but we've managed to have a couple multis with missing stages that are still going strong. People have found later stages using hints and continuing on from there. Some of these remain this way for a long time.

 

3) The incorrect co-ordinates. I've seen these with regular and puzzle caches. The puzzle caches get really interesting as everyone attempts (and sometimes succeeds) at figuring out what the correct co-ordinates are. I've seen puzzle caches that require making simple math errors in order to solve and another cache where the local cachers seem to have rebuilt the graphics needed in order to get the correct co-ordinates.

 

4) Has a SBA note, but still persists. What's a reasonable amount of time to post a second SBA? I'm thinking 1 month, but I could be wildly off.

[+Runaround]

I would be very willing to post an SBA in all these cases. Then let the owner and the local admin sort it out.

[+TeamK-9]

On any of the four scenarios, I'd probably just send a friendly email to the approver to try and bring the situation to their attention. Hopefully, the approver will carry out whatever actions he/she sees need to be done.

 

But specifically relating to Scenario One, I know for a fact that every once and a while Keystone Approver does a search (probably a pocket query) for disabled caches, and takes action towards caches that have been disabled for a bit too long.

[+Torry]

Amen!

 

I see a lot of situations where the owner caught the caching bug, found a few, placed a bunch of caches, and then lost interest. The rules try to encourage us to maintain our caches but that's not nearly as much fun to some as "upping" the cache count numbers.

 

Two weeks is plenty of time for an owner to deal wih issues in one manner or another. I get a bit miffed when I see a page with a couple of DNF's and other negative comments but no response from the owner.

 

By the same token I just found one the other day that had been prematurely archived. But the two weeks limit is sufficient.

[+welch]

In those cases heres what I would do:

1) The perpetually "temporarily disabled" cache. I can see someone turning off their cache for the winter and promising to replace it in spring when the ground cover has returned, but it's June now. How long should a cache remain in this state? Should a SBA be posted if e-mails don't get a response within a reasonable period of time (a week after being sent perhaps)?

As long as the owner is acutally working on it.

I would say yes. But before posting an NA, I would email the owner and/or post a note to the cache asking what is happening. Then a week or two later (two is better than one ), do it again. Let another week go, then post an Needs Archived log to it.

 

2) The broken multi. These can be interesting. When the multi is just getting a string of DNFs, that's one thing, but we've managed to have a couple multis with missing stages that are still going strong. People have found later stages using hints and continuing on from there. Some of these remain this way for a long time.

That caches sounds like it needs fixed, not archived. Same thing, contact owner, though maybe this time if they don't turn up. Fix the cache and try to adopt it (if your nearby of course).

 

3) The incorrect co-ordinates. I've seen these with regular and puzzle caches. The puzzle caches get really interesting as everyone attempts (and sometimes succeeds) at figuring out what the correct co-ordinates are. I've seen puzzle caches that require making simple math errors in order to solve and another cache where the local cachers seem to have rebuilt the graphics needed in order to get the correct co-ordinates.

I guess Im more into fixing caches than ending them totally. If its missing or very damaged then yea, if the owner isn't responding get it archived and remove whatevers left.

This cache seems much like number two. Try to get the problem fixed. Shouldn't you be able to get an approver to modify the coords for you? I contacted an approver one time and got them to add some more text to a cache descrption (the cache was on a trail that required a use permit, and there were no pay here polls anywhere around) whose owner at the time would only respond to email once every couple months...

 

4) Has a SBA note, but still persists. What's a reasonable amount of time to post a second SBA? I'm thinking 1 month, but I could be wildly off.

I wouldn't bother with another log like that, I would email whatever approver happens to be closest and ask them if its being looked into. If they got the copy of the last NA, they may be checking with the owner or something. If thats the case posting a new one won't help. And if they didn't see the first one, then emailing them will serve the same purpose as a second one.

[+Lone Duck]

I have posted archive notices in the past on caches that I know for a fact that are missing or plundered. One thing I do before posting such a notice is to check the cache owner's user profile to see when they last visited the Geocaching.com website. If it was recent, then they probably know about the problem. If it has been a number of months, then I post an archive notice.