+TEAM 360 Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 Since the Yellow Jeep Virt was archived, there have still been finds on it. This happens with many "archived" caches. My question is this: Should you be able to view an archived cache, or should it only be accessible to the cache owner? Also, would it be a good idea to allow the owner of the cache to "un-archive" their own caches, without having to summon an admin to do it? Quote Link to comment
+Beta Test Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 It sounds nice in theory, but so did communism. While most cachers would use it responsibly, a few would abuse it for spite. No I was not referring to any drama that has appeared in the past. Abandoning ship now, may come back. Quote Link to comment
+Ambrosia Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 I was wondering about yjtb, also. I had thought that gc.com were the ones to archive that, and if that is the case, aren't they on top of making sure no one logs it anymore? People aren't even putting in yellow jeeps, they're even putting in thngs that look like jeeps, and stuff. They're not taking it seriously. But I think it is important to view archived caches, for many reasons. It is nice to look at caches that you have been to in the past, even when they are archived. And also, sometimes you need to backlog a traditional cache, and if it is archived, you should be able to do that. For instance, my kids (and husband) need to log some caches that they have been to, but have never logged. I know that a couple of them are now archived. If an owner were able to unarchive their own caches, it would have to be only if they had archived it themselves, for obvious reasons. But you then run into the whole .1 mile thing. If another cache was placed 50 feet away from theirs while theirs was archived, that could present a problem. They should have temporarily disabled it, and not archived it, if they wanted it to be listed in the future. Quote Link to comment
Pipanella Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 I say let them be viewed. They're all part of someone's geocaching adventure. Quote Link to comment
+Beta Test Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 I forgot about the view part of the question. I think there should be a cookie that allows you to see archived caches by default in searches. Quote Link to comment
+Beta Test Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 WOOHOO! People like my ideas! Quote Link to comment
+IV_Warrior Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 Yes to the view question for reasons already stated. No to the self unarchival, for reasons listed already, and it just opens up a can of worms. Some "less than honorable" cachers would abuse the system, get a cache approved, archive it, change the cache to an unapprovable one, then unarchive it......and a host of other possible problems I'm probably not thinking of yet. Quote Link to comment
+PandyBat Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 I like being able to see the archived ones so if I want to put another cache in the same area or close, I can see by past experience how the archived one fared there. Quote Link to comment
+Robespierre Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Here in "the Kalihari desert of geocaching," we don't have archived caches (save one that was changed to a multi). We only have a dozen caches. I am "missing" part of the "experience" of caching here...I don't get it. In a couple of sentences, please explain the whole issue. Quote Link to comment
MOCKBA Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 It might be a nice option to be able to view archiveds by distance, e.g. when planning a new cache to see if other caches in this area have muggle problems, or approvaibilty problems. Obviously the admins have this tool at their disposal already, but giving an option to the rank-and-file cachers may releive some load from the admins. We just recently had a cache placed almost exactly where a cache has gone MIA a few months before. Guess what? The new one didn't last either, much to the disappointment of the unwary owners. Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 It's hard to believe that GS can't just block people from logging archived caches. Why not just take away the option for "Log Your Visit". Seems like the most simple solution to me. Quote Link to comment
+TEAM 360 Posted July 8, 2004 Author Share Posted July 8, 2004 It's hard to believe that GS can't just block people from logging archived caches. Why not just take away the option for "Log Your Visit". Seems like the most simple solution to me. Great idea, and one that should be implemented to keep the integrity of archived caches! Quote Link to comment
+IV_Warrior Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 It's hard to believe that GS can't just block people from logging archived caches. Why not just take away the option for "Log Your Visit". Seems like the most simple solution to me. Because there are enough legitimate times cachers need to log an archived cache. Not everyone logs their finds the minute they get home. Sometimes people fall a week or more behind on logs, maybe they were busy, maybe caching on vacation and didn't have access until they got home. Say I find a cache today, the first day of my vacation. Tomorrow, the owner decides it's out-lived it's usefulness and archives it. Shouldn't I be able to log my find when I get home? Quote Link to comment
+New England n00b Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 a case in point for me: I had a cache in my Palm that had been archived since I loaded it in. I did not think to check the website. I found the obvious (trashed up) hiding location and was gonna log a DNF and email the owner about a possible muggling. Once I saw the cahce was archived (due to a muggling) I logged a note to 1) thank them for the initial cache as it brought me to a very nice out of the way spot & 2) to make a note to myself that i was there. I did not log it as a find. Maybe what needs to happen is that an archived cache cannot be FOUND or DNF on or after the date of archiving, while still allowing notes from that date forward. FOUND/DNF logs for dates previous might still be allowed. Just another perspective. Quote Link to comment
+Beta Test Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Maybe archived caches could have their own search like locationless caches do. Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 It's hard to believe that GS can't just block people from logging archived caches. Why not just take away the option for "Log Your Visit". Seems like the most simple solution to me. Because there are enough legitimate times cachers need to log an archived cache. Not everyone logs their finds the minute they get home. Sometimes people fall a week or more behind on logs, maybe they were busy, maybe caching on vacation and didn't have access until they got home. Say I find a cache today, the first day of my vacation. Tomorrow, the owner decides it's out-lived it's usefulness and archives it. Shouldn't I be able to log my find when I get home? OK, that makes sense. Good point. Quote Link to comment
+Navdog Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 I'm sure this is an insignificant problem with most caches, but maybe the best solution is to have a time limit of 30-60 days before an archived cache is disabled to allow new logs. Quote Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 If the cache is still there, logs should still be allowed Quote Link to comment
+RuffRidr Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 If ain't broke don't fix it. I think its fine the way it is now. --RuffRidr Quote Link to comment
+welch Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Since the Yellow Jeep Virt was archived, there have still been finds on it. This happens with many "archived" caches. My question is this: Should you be able to view an archived cache, or should it only be accessible to the cache owner? Also, would it be a good idea to allow the owner of the cache to "un-archive" their own caches, without having to summon an admin to do it? If the owner is having a problem controling the logs can they re-archive the cache page this time not allowing viewing?? Most of the time I would say it should be viewable to everyone. Its interesting to read the saga, and if new caches get placed there the old ones might be helpful in figuring out what/if the area has had problems in the past. The ideas good, but won't work out. There are just too many users for everyone to do things responsibly. As stupid as that sounds its true. Either you need a huge police force to watch the worst one percent or take steps to limit the abuses people can do. Take away being able to change coords, change types, edit text after being archived, etc. Quote Link to comment
+The Cheeseheads Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Say I find a cache today, the first day of my vacation. Tomorrow, the owner decides it's out-lived it's usefulness and archives it. Shouldn't I be able to log my find when I get home? OK, I'll say it... I generated a PQ on a Monday for a vacation a few months ago. On the way home, we stopped to switch drivers, and it turned out that there was a cache about a quarter mile away from where we pulled off, which we quickly found. When we got home to log it in, it turns out that the cache owner had archived that morning, but still allowed us to count it as a find. I wouldn't have screamed bloody murder if we wouldn't have been able to log the find, but it still is nice to have been able to do so. Also, some people seem to take their sweet time logging event caches, especually if there were a few temps that people were allowed to log as well. The few events I have done I have archived a week afterwards so they stop showing up in people's searches, but the procrastinators should still be allowed to log that they were there. Quote Link to comment
+The Cheeseheads Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Hmm. Maybe there should be two levels of archiving. One that lets people still be able to view the cache (and therefore be able to create logs) and one that prohibits viewing altogether... Quote Link to comment
+welch Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Hmm. Maybe there should be two levels of archiving. One that lets people still be able to view the cache (and therefore be able to create logs) and one that prohibits viewing altogether... Yea that would work Quote Link to comment
+PandyBat Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Hmm. Maybe there should be two levels of archiving. One that lets people still be able to view the cache (and therefore be able to create logs) and one that prohibits viewing altogether... Yea that would work I agree too. If the Yellow Jeep locationless cache was archived due to the burden on the server (or whatever reason it was) and people are still logging to it, is it really archived? Kinda defeats the reason it was archived in the first place. Quote Link to comment
+Harrald Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 <<SNIP>>I agree too. If the Yellow Jeep locationless cache was archived due to the burden on the server (or whatever reason it was) and people are still logging to it, is it really archived? Kinda defeats the reason it was archived in the first place. It was archived because of the strain on the PQ server. It had nothing to do with stopping people from logging the cache. This has been discussed numerous times. I'm sure a quick search will show up the various threads. Quote Link to comment
+Ambrosia Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 <<SNIP>>I agree too. If the Yellow Jeep locationless cache was archived due to the burden on the server (or whatever reason it was) and people are still logging to it, is it really archived? Kinda defeats the reason it was archived in the first place. It was archived because of the strain on the PQ server. It had nothing to do with stopping people from logging the cache. This has been discussed numerous times. I'm sure a quick search will show up the various threads. Yes, it has been archived, but if you look at the site, you can see that people are logging it as a find quite regularly. So he is saying that it defeats the whole purpose of archiving it, since it is still being hit often. Quote Link to comment
+Mastifflover Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 <<SNIP>>I agree too. If the Yellow Jeep locationless cache was archived due to the burden on the server (or whatever reason it was) and people are still logging to it, is it really archived? Kinda defeats the reason it was archived in the first place. It was archived because of the strain on the PQ server. It had nothing to do with stopping people from logging the cache. This has been discussed numerous times. I'm sure a quick search will show up the various threads. Yes, it has been archived, but if you look at the site, you can see that people are logging it as a find quite regularly. So he is saying that it defeats the whole purpose of archiving it, since it is still being hit often. Harrald is right. In previous discussions about this TPTB said that they had no problems whatsoever with people still logging it. Because it had over 1000 logs it caused problems on the machine that spits out the pq's but did not cause any other problems. So in this particular case keep on a loggin' those yellow jeeps. Quote Link to comment
+IV_Warrior Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 I agree too. If the Yellow Jeep locationless cache was archived due to the burden on the server (or whatever reason it was) and people are still logging to it, is it really archived? Kinda defeats the reason it was archived in the first place. As Harrald states, Yellow Jeep fever was archived because of the burden it's 1000+ logs were putting on the PQ server. Archiving the cache takes it out of normal searches and PQ's there by "solving" the problem. Since it doesn't show in the searches, it can now hit 1 million logs without causing the problem that was the reason it was archived in the first place, so no, the continued logs DON'T defeat the purpose of archiving it. 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.