Fastest Way To Have A Cache Archived

January 22, 2005

A recent visitor to GCJTRQ was confronted by a nearby building manager who requested in no uncertain terms that the cache be removed. The cacher's post from Jan. 19 didn't result in the cache being archived, so they posted again on Jan. 21. I happened to have this cache on my watchlist, so I added a request that the cache be archived, but it still hasn't been. Now, I realize I've given the moderator less than 24 hours, but this particular cache is in Las Vegas so it's particularly popular on weekends and it's often visited by folks from out of town. The faster we get it archived, the less chance a visitor will have an unpleasant confrontation with the nearby building manager.

The owner of this cache hasn't logged in since last summer, so I don't think we'll have much luck getting in touch with him.

What's the fastest way of getting a cache archived?

Thanks in advance for your advice!

Amy

9.4k · January 22, 2005

I went ahead and archived it. Thanks for the info.

2.6k · January 22, 2005

Sounds like an active cache.

Is this cache on private property? Is there permission to have a cache there?

That manager has no right to have it removed if it is not on his property. Therefor the cache shouldn't be archived without further info from the cache owner.

9.4k · January 22, 2005

In these situations we always archive first. If the owner would like to dispute it they can always contact us. Unfortunately the owner hasn't been on the web site for some time and their email address is no longer valid.

1.4k · January 22, 2005

Ha. Jeremy and I archived it at the same time.

Cache owner has been inactive for several months, so I don't think we'll be hearing from him.

January 22, 2005

Thanks so much! So the answer to my subject line is: Post a note in the forum and get everyone all stirred up!

Seriously, I didn't mean to make a fuss, but thanks to everyone who archived this cache!

Amy

2.6k · January 22, 2005

In these situations we always archive first. If the owner would like to dispute it they can always contact us

Sounds fair. It's easy to un-archive.

9.4k · January 22, 2005

Ha. Jeremy and I archived it at the same time.

Wild. Interesting stat. 27 logs occured between yours and mine. We're currently receiving a new log entry every 10 seconds.

Edited January 22, 2005 by Jeremy

January 22, 2005

I also need to find out how to have a cache archived. I have requested that the cache named Dam Mesa (GC3A78) be archived, but nothing has happened. Efforts to contact the owner have failed. Do the 'request archived' logs just go into cyberspace? It is in No. Arizona and I live in So. Utah, so I have no idea how to contact the Arizona Admin. Any suggestions?

1.4k · January 22, 2005

27 logs occured between yours and mine. We're currently receiving a new log entry every 10 seconds.

I guess I type slow.

9.4k · January 22, 2005

Send another SBA if the first one doesn't get attention. We have more people monitoring that mailing list nowadays.

I archived that one too. The original owner's account is also no longer active so it would be good if they or someone else will retrieve the destroyed container

1.4k · January 22, 2005

I also need to find out how to have a cache archived. I have requested that the cache named Dam Mesa (GC3A78) be archived, but nothing has happened. Efforts to contact the owner have failed.

Both of these situations frustrate me. I don't particularly like archiving a cache when the cache is still in place.

In the first case, if I was accosted by security or the property manager, I would have apologized for the inconvenience, taken the whole cache, and tried to return it to the owner later.

In the second case, where the cache is ruined, it should have been trashed out by the last person to find it. By leaving the trash, and requesting it be archived, guarantees that the trash will sit there ignored for a long time. This is especially true of caches that are miles from anywhere like this one.

Do the 'request archived' logs just go into cyberspace? It is in No. Arizona and I live in So. Utah, so I have no idea how to contact the Arizona Admin.

The SBA notes are emailed to several reviewers. However we tend to let them sit in our inbox for a few weeks to give the cache owner a chance to fix things on their own. After a few weeks, it will be archived if there is no indication that something will be done.

9.4k · January 22, 2005

I have been considering a new attribute "needs maintainence" that is flagged when a SBA note is made. The owner can remove that flag. This will make it easier for reviewers to follow listings that have issues.

9.2k · January 23, 2005

I'm somehow reminded of a Gallagher joke. The idea was to have a gun that shot super-glue coated suction-cup darts with little signs on them that said "Idiot". When you see a driver on the road do something stupid, you shoot a dart at his car. If a cop sees a car with 3 or more signs on it, he pulls them over and gives them a ticket.

Edited January 23, 2005 by Prime Suspect

January 23, 2005

Here's another one that I asked to have archived. No response on this one either:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-4c4af0b60868

It's never been found and the owner doesn't respond to email.

-Charles

1.4k · January 23, 2005

OK folks, let's not duplicate all the SBA notes here. They will all be handled in due time.

1.4k · January 23, 2005

Here's another one that I asked to have archived. No response on this one either:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-4c4af0b60868

It's never been found and the owner doesn't respond to email.

Just because two people (with less than 10 finds each) can't find it, it doesn't mean that it's not there. <_<

2.6k · January 23, 2005

Here's another one that I asked to have archived. No response on this one either:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-4c4af0b60868

It's never been found and the owner doesn't respond to email.

Just because two people (with less than 10 finds each) can't find it, it doesn't mean that it's not there.

After reading charlesml3's log it looks like he/she/it was never there. charlesml3 just wants to steal the cache location.

7.2k · January 23, 2005

Here's another one that I asked to have archived. No response on this one either:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-4c4af0b60868

It's never been found and the owner doesn't respond to email.

Just because two people (with less than 10 finds each) can't find it, it doesn't mean that it's not there.

Actually, only one person appears to have looked for it. Charles, your log leads me to think you never actually looked for the cache. I just states that you think it might be gone and that you tried to contact the owner. Caches are not archived with one DNF.

January 23, 2005

A recent visitor to GCJTRQ was confronted by a nearby building manager who requested in no uncertain terms that the cache be removed. The cacher's post from Jan. 19 didn't result in the cache being archived, so they posted again on Jan. 21. I happened to have this cache on my watchlist, so I added a request that the cache be archived, but it still hasn't been. Now, I realize I've given the moderator less than 24 hours, but this particular cache is in Las Vegas so it's particularly popular on weekends and it's often visited by folks from out of town. The faster we get it archived, the less chance a visitor will have an unpleasant confrontation with the nearby building manager.

The owner of this cache hasn't logged in since last summer, so I don't think we'll have much luck getting in touch with him.

What's the fastest way of getting a cache archived?

Thanks in advance for your advice!

Amy

Absentee cache owner or a cache owner who is no longer active? A landowner/controlling agency that wants the cache removed? It's simple ... take the matter into your own hands. Visit the cache site, remove the cache personally or verify that it has been removed, and post that information to the cache page with a SBA log.

2k · January 23, 2005

There was a cacher in our area that requested caches be archived if he/she did not like the cache hider. Sometimes its a good thing that moderators take a little time to investigate the facts before they archice a cache. <_<

1.3k · January 23, 2005

I have been considering a new attribute "needs maintainence" that is flagged when a SBA note is made. The owner can remove that flag. This will make it easier for reviewers to follow listings that have issues.

Jeremy, will users be able to post "needs maintenance" logs without posting a SBA log? There are times when you come across a cache that needs to be "fixed" but not necessarily archived.

southdeltan

6.5k · January 23, 2005

Thanks so much! So the answer to my subject line is: Post a note in the forum and get everyone all stirred up!

Seriously, I didn't mean to make a fuss, but thanks to everyone who archived this cache!

Amy

Ha <_<

that or send an email to a nearby approver (if you know who) and explain what/why it should archived.

posting a needs archived log has to go threw the system (rarely do they get lost so thats probably not the problem), which takes a little time. Then the approver can look at the page and take some course of action. maybe post to the page, or archive the cache, emailing the owner, or just watch the page to see somone fixes the problem. If you've email the approver they might respond and let you know they working on it, if you just post something to the page, it might look like nothing is happening while things are actually being checked out.

January 24, 2005

Unbelieveable. I really can't believe what I just read.

"After reading charlesml3's log it looks like he/she/it was never there. charlesml3 just wants to steal the cache location."

That has to be the most offensive and nastiest comment I've ever seen on this board. Leatherman accuses me of being a thief and then Prime Suspect comes right back with an "idiot" reference.

Not one of you offered the slightest smidgen of constructive feedback. I really thought these forums were a friendly place for all Geocachers, veterans and newbies alike. My impression from this exchange is just the opposite. Disgusting, nasty, "let's all wail on the new guy." All of you should be ashamed of yourselves. You remind me of the bullies I had to deal with as a school kid.

If ANY of you had read the full description of the cache you'd notice that the owner has never maintained it. You'd also note that the owner hasn't been here on the forums in many months or responded to my emails. If ANY of you had looked at my profile you'd see I've only been out here for 1 month.

It should have been quite clear to all of you that my intent was to place a cache there that people will WANT to go find. Look at the current description and log entries for "Lake Gaston Storm Effect." Would YOU go on a trek to try and find this one?

But it really wasn't about that, was it Leatherman/Prime Suspect? It wasn't about whether or not I had a point. It was all about the two of you showing who's "the man" here.

I would think that since Geocaching is meant to be a friendly, family oriented sport there would be no occasion where this kind of behavior and these types of comments are appropriate. Then again, I don't set the rules on this forum. But I do see how I've been treated here. I'd been referring lots of my friends to this site and to these forums. It may be time to rethink that idea.

-Charles

9.1k · January 24, 2005

Charles, here's a quick lesson in time/spatial relationships:

When a forum post appears ABOVE yours, it typically is not a response to your following post, unless its author is a psychic.

2k · January 24, 2005

Unbelieveable. I really can't believe what I just read.

Charles,

I know how you feel.

Don't give up just yet.

Some of the replies you can get on these forums are unbelieveable at times.

6.4k · January 24, 2005

Charles, here's a quick lesson in time/spatial relationships:

When a forum post appears ABOVE yours, it typically is not a response to your following post, unless its author is a psychic.

6.5k · January 24, 2005

Unbelieveable. I really can't believe what I just read.

"After reading charlesml3's log it looks like he/she/it was never there. charlesml3 just wants to steal the cache location."

That has to be the most offensive and nastiest comment I've ever seen on this board. Leatherman accuses me of being a thief and then Prime Suspect comes right back with an "idiot" reference.

Not one of you offered the slightest smidgen of constructive feedback. I really thought these forums were a friendly place for all Geocachers, veterans and newbies alike. My impression from this exchange is just the opposite. Disgusting, nasty, "let's all wail on the new guy." All of you should be ashamed of yourselves. You remind me of the bullies I had to deal with as a school kid.

If ANY of you had read the full description of the cache you'd notice that the owner has never maintained it. You'd also note that the owner hasn't been here on the forums in many months or responded to my emails. If ANY of you had looked at my profile you'd see I've only been out here for 1 month.

It should have been quite clear to all of you that my intent was to place a cache there that people will WANT to go find. Look at the current description and log entries for "Lake Gaston Storm Effect." Would YOU go on a trek to try and find this one?

But it really wasn't about that, was it Leatherman/Prime Suspect? It wasn't about whether or not I had a point. It was all about the two of you showing who's "the man" here.

I would think that since Geocaching is meant to be a friendly, family oriented sport there would be no occasion where this kind of behavior and these types of comments are appropriate. Then again, I don't set the rules on this forum. But I do see how I've been treated here. I'd been referring lots of my friends to this site and to these forums. It may be time to rethink that idea.

-Charles

Sorry Chuck :wub: ,

amid all the spoofing I somehow managed to lock onto the OP.

but since you need to want a second opinion about the cache you pointed out. I would go there and try and locate a place a quarter mile or so away and hide my own. While I'm there I think I might take a swing at the so far unclaimed FTF.

I don't know if I hike out there just for the cache or not. Depends if the cache is easy on foot, or is it on a island, has the water level has been lowered, or the maps that keep showing the location in the lake just wrong. Also I'd need to factor in my desire to scope out hiding spots, and/or a possiable cache in distress...

7.2k · January 24, 2005

If ANY of you had read the full description of the cache you'd notice that the owner has never maintained it. You'd also note that the owner hasn't been here on the forums in many months or responded to my emails. If ANY of you had looked at my profile you'd see I've only been out here for 1 month.

I did read the description and the logs. I looked at your profile. I would say that Hemlock and I both did from our comments. That is the reason why I stated that it appeared that you had not actually looked for the cache and said that it appears that the cache might still be there. Charles, have you actually gone to the location to find the cache? Your log on that page is not clear. I did mentioned above that we would not archive any cache on one Did Not Find (DNF). Hemlock and I are both reviewers for the site.

I also looked at the topozone map when I looked at the cache initially. Looking at it again, this cache would only be accessible by boat looking at the old topography that was left on the map by the mapmakers when they added the lake to that map.

I am curious if you looked for the cache and the time you spent there. We would typically not archive the cache if one or two people with less than 10 finds looked for it. In many cases the cache is still there but hidden well. More clarification is definitely needed in this particular case.

2.6k · January 24, 2005

That has to be the most offensive and nastiest comment I've ever seen on this board. Leatherman accuses me of being a thief and then Prime Suspect comes right back with an "idiot" reference.

Not one of you offered the slightest smidgen of constructive feedback. I really thought these forums were a friendly place for all Geocachers, veterans and newbies alike. My impression from this exchange is just the opposite. Disgusting, nasty, "let's all wail on the new guy." All of you should be ashamed of yourselves. You remind me of the bullies I had to deal with as a school kid.

I was responding to Hemloc's assumption that you had been to the cache location. Get a grip.

If ANY of you had read the full description of the cache you'd notice that the owner has never maintained it. You'd also note that the owner hasn't been here on the forums in many months or responded to my emails.

I don't log maintenance trips out to my caches. What do the forums have to do with being active? There are literally thousands of cachers that have never been in the forums. Even to look/lurk.

It should have been quite clear to all of you that my intent was to place a cache there that people will WANT to go find. Look at the current description and log entries for "Lake Gaston Storm Effect." Would YOU go on a trek to try and find this one?

All that is CLEAR is your assumption, that no one would seek this cache. Which is obviously WRONG. Someone has already looked for it. To bad they didn't find it. Nothing you have said suggests that you have been out there to look for it.

But it really wasn't about that, was it Leatherman/Prime Suspect? It wasn't about whether or not I had a point. It was all about the two of you showing who's "the man" here.

I would think that since Geocaching is meant to be a friendly, family oriented sport there would be no occasion where this kind of behavior and these types of comments are appropriate. Then again, I don't set the rules on this forum. But I do see how I've been treated here. I'd been referring lots of my friends to this site and to these forums. It may be time to rethink that idea.

Get a grip.

January 24, 2005

:sad:

That's just fine, guys. Not one person here has been even remotely helpful with this.

It's just like the bad old days of usenet where every thread turned into a flame war.

I'm out of here.

1.3k · January 24, 2005

That's just fine, guys. Not one person here has been even remotely helpful with this.

It's just like the bad old days of usenet where every thread turned into a flame war.

I'm out of here.

I think the approvers are attempting to be helpful, but they need some feedback from you. They don't just archive caches because people think they're missing. Have you looked for the cache? Do you have personal reason to think that the cache is missing or are you basing it on previous logs?

southdeltan

January 24, 2005

Looks to me like it might be a bouy or something, or the coordinates are a little off.

Either way, it looks like a fun trip if I was closer to it. But, at 1096 miles as the crow flies I am not doing it in the afternoon.

7.2k · January 24, 2005

That's just fine, guys. Not one person here has been even remotely helpful with this.

What help do you require?

6.4k · January 24, 2005

That's just fine, guys. Not one person here has been even remotely helpful with this.

What help do you require?

He needs help getting a cache he doesn't like and hasn't looked for archived, so he can hide a "better" one there.

7.2k · January 24, 2005

Looks to me like it might be a bouy or something, or the coordinates are a little off.

Maybe not. I have noticed that topozone is off by a certain degree depending on what part of the country you are in. A good test is to look at the topozone map of a cache you have just found and study the exact location. Depending on where you are and the map "stitching" to put maps together you see different degrees of error. The NAD27 datum has a little effect as well.

9.2k · January 25, 2005

That has to be the most offensive and nastiest comment I've ever seen on this board. Leatherman accuses me of being a thief and then Prime Suspect comes right back with an "idiot" reference.

My post had nothing to do with you. You hadn't even posted in the thread yet. I was drawing an analogy between posting "needs maintenance" logs to the dart/signs in the joke.

The "idiot" reference had nothing to do with you. However, if you wish to think otherwise, I'll not argue.

9.4k · January 25, 2005

I'm out of here.

I'm envious.

:sad:

:laughing:

24.7k · January 25, 2005

...If ANY of you had read the full description of the cache you'd notice that the owner has never maintained it. You'd also note that the owner hasn't been here on the forums in many months or responded to my emails. If ANY of you had looked at my profile you'd see I've only been out here for 1 month. ...

Constructive feedback.

1) Generally if you have not been to the cache an SBA log is not appropriate.

2) The owner logging into this site, or checking their email is a different issue than the cache itself having a problem, which if you were not there, you can't verify.

3) The cache owner ignoring you may be annoying but it's not a cache problem.

4) If nobody has been to the cache then there is nothing to maintain. Remote caches survive better and longer and with less trouble that urban caches.

5) You placing a better cache is a personal judgment, and doesn't make this cache any less viable.

6) How long you have been around actually only has a bearing on what the approvers would consider your maintainable distance. But that has nothing to do with the decision on archiving this cache.

I'm with the approvers on this cache.

2.6k · January 25, 2005

...If ANY of you had read the full description of the cache you'd notice that the owner has never maintained it. You'd also note that the owner hasn't been here on the forums in many months or responded to my emails. If ANY of you had looked at my profile you'd see I've only been out here for 1 month. ...

Constructive feedback.

1) Generally if you have not been to the cache an SBA log is not appropriate.

2) The owner logging into this site, or checking their email is a different issue than the cache itself having a problem, which if you were not there, you can't verify.

3) The cache owner ignoring you may be annoying but it's not a cache problem.

4) If nobody has been to the cache then there is nothing to maintain. Remote caches survive better and longer and with less trouble that urban caches.

5) You placing a better cache is a personal judgment, and doesn't make this cache any less viable.

6) How long you have been around actually only has a bearing on what the approvers would consider your maintainable distance. But that has nothing to do with the decision on archiving this cache.

I'm with the approvers on this cache.

Very good feedback. Thank you for smoothing out the animosity. :sad:

2.1k · January 25, 2005

looks like its on the edge of an island -

http://www.yvanovich.com/terraserver/index...6667:36.5047833

topo puts it in the water

http://www.yvanovich.com/terraserver/index...6667:36.5047833

but that is hard to determing given water levels -

3.8k · January 25, 2005

Very good feedback. Thank you for smoothing out the animosity.

Agree on all counts... RK's 6, and your 1. :laughing:

Fastest Way To Have A Cache Archived

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation