Deleting Should Be Archived Logs

[+Renegade Knight]

Recently I had one slapped on a cache and I deleted it. Until then I'd never even given it a thought. However since they can be placed by anyone for any reason I'm glad the option exists.

 

Cluttering up a cache page with worthless tripe is worthy of deletion. Tripe is along the lines of "gee rule 27.6 of paragraph II say's yada yada yada, and so clearly anyone can see this cache should not be here, if I submitted it it wouldn't be approved, what's with all the favortism"

 

I assume an admin or approver is still notified.

[WH]

A "Needs Archived" note on a cache automatically notifies the approver, even if deleted..

[+sept1c_tank]

You're toying with history, my friend.

[Keystone]

Groundspeak and the volunteers receive all the Should Be Archived logs at the time when the log is entered, similar to how notifications are sent to the watchlist. So deleting them doesn't matter much... but thanks for checking.

 

Many SBA logs are entered in error, often by new geocachers who are unfamiliar with how to log finds. Other times an SBA is used as a weapon in an argument between the cache owner and another geocacher. It's perfectly fine for the cache owner to delete these.

 

Sometimes an owner will delete or encrypt a Should be Archived log that describes a problem worth investigating, like "there were 8 bulldozers at the site and the construction foreman told me to leave," or "The Anytown Police Department Bomb Squad would like to talk with the cache owner." When the volunteer reads the e-mail notification, goes to the cache page, and sees a deleted or encrypted SBA log, I can tell you that this will not help your cause. A legit SBA is intended in part to alert people to a problem with the cache.

[+Mopar]

Is this part of a bet?

[+Renegade Knight]

Is this part of a bet?

Not at all. Just part of the local caching scene. A bunch of SBA logs have been made for various reasons. "This cache is 353' from that cache", "The cache is in an area that is closed for the season, that's crap" and other things meant to create an issue. Our local approvers appear to be giving them the creedance they are due. Which is none.

 

WH points out it's part of the cache history, and that's valid, but I never liked some of the debates that break out on a cache page as opposed to the forums where we are supposed to discuss things.

 

Maybe though WH's point is the real question. Should all logs remain or just the ones that actually have something to do with hunting the cache or it's condition?

[+Mr. Snazz]

Is this part of a bet?

Thanks Mopar, I just won my bet that somebody would ask if this thread was part of a bet before the sixth reply was posted.

[+robert]

I won a bet, too. My bet was that it would be Mopar.

 

[Trinity's Crew]

Since SBA logs are automatically sent to the reviewers, I see no reason NOT to delete those that appear to be inappropriate. The reviewers should be able to determine whether the SBA logs have merit and they will probably take the appropriate actions.

 

SBA logs that are unwarranted could cause prospective cachers to ignore a perfectly good cache.

 

RK, I feel confident from reading the forums that you would not delete a valid SBA log. You would go out and repair any problems that needed to be attended to, or archive the cache yourself, if necessary.

 

My only concern is that inexperienced cachers may not be able to make the same call.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

You could fight the logger by letting it stand as a testement to their behavior, when other cachers see the notes they've, left their true face will be seen.

[+cache_test_dummies]

Maybe though WH's point is the real question. Should all logs remain or just the ones that actually have something to do with hunting the cache or it's condition?

Great question.

 

Ultimately it's up to the owner to decide whether a TBA log remains on the cache page or not. Since I frequently use logs to gain critical intel before going after a cache, I would definately like to have access to information if it could do me some good, or help keep me safer.

 

If one was posted on one of my caches, I'd leave TBA log if it contained useful, factual information related to the cache or the surrounding area (like you said - something to do with hunting the cache or the cache's condition). But I'd swiftly purge any TBA log which contained useless, inappropriate, or potentially misleading information.

 

Having said that, I wonder if I would apply the same logic to a regular log? I guess not, since I think inherently a normal find/DNF log seems to carry less weight somehow than a TBA.

[+AtoZ]

I have submitted 2 SBAs one was done the other is in gaga land. I only did these because the cache was marked as inactive and the owner had not been on line if more then six months. What I find strange is that who ever caused RK delima is asking that a cache be archive that belongs to an active cacher and is being maintained, but they just don't like the cache. So if RK is keeping up the cache then the SBA is bogus and the person submitting the SBA has no clue of what a SBA is for. I am sorry if I am calling the person a twit but they need to know what they are doing. I would say they are in violation of GC.com guidelines etc... and should be repremanded. Okay so I am hyperbalizing but I think they are in the wrong and RK is corrcet to be able to delete a FALSE or tripe log.

cheers