Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 59

Thread: Archiving Caches

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Gainesville, Georgia
    Posts
    3,875

    Default Archiving Caches

    I guess this is a 2 part question and would like this to be a good and honest discussion as well.

    1. When should a cache be archived?

    2. Should complaints be validated before a cache is archived?
    Just smile it won't crack your face

    The statistics on sanity are that one out of every four persons is
    suffering from some sort of mental illness. Think of your three best
    friends -- if they're okay, then it's you.

  2. #2
    dí76 Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haffy
    I guess this is a 2 part question and would like this to be a good and honest discussion as well.

    1. When should a cache be archived?

    2. Should complaints be validated before a cache is archived?
    I think that complaints should not be a valid reason to archive anything. So haffy I dont like your Frenches Mountain cache. Does that mean it's outta here if I can come up with a good lie and sell it well.

    This was just an example, I havent even done the Frenches Mountain cache.

    And I think that we all know when a cache should be archived.


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,972

    Default French's Mountain

    Quote Originally Posted by dave1976
    I think that complaints should not be a valid reason to archive anything. So haffy I dont like your Frenches Mountain cache. Does that mean it's outta here if I can come up with a good lie and sell it well.

    Well we did this cache yesterday and it was one of my favorite short hikes with a view. But I get the point.
    Why not live life like it is your last day....instead of pretending to be a member of the Peter Pan Club and believing you will be around forever.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    temp
    Posts
    666

    Default

    Part 1: a.)When a cache is no longer loggable due to lack of maintenence or simply missing and when the original cache owner can not be reached or the original hider has shown no intention of maintaining or replacing the cache.
    B.) When the cache is in violation of gc.com's hiding guidelines. c.) When the owner wishes to discontinue the cache.

    Part 2: Only complaints that can be validated are legitimate complaints. An anonomous complainer should not be considered valid as the true intention behind the complaint is unknown. While the anonomous complainer may site specific things, those things may be fabricated with malice intent. Anonomous complainers that quote greviences of other as a focus for action are usually done to promote their own interest in hope to convince others they are the benefactors for the agrieved. This tactic is used as diversionary in hopes to shift blame onto the supposed person with a complaint, in case the complaint is found unjust and unvalid, which usually happens.

    Because unvalidated complaints are simply that; unvalidated, it would be hard to pass a judgement without talking to the actual parties involved, not the supposed benefactor (usually anonomous) of the agrieved party. As details progress by those investigating, it may be found that there was no complaint or even knowledge of any conflict by those people cited as having the complaint.

    Responding to these complaints in a punitive or definitive manner without validating the complaint is not fair to the person or party that the complaint was made against. Any action in favor of the unvalidated complaint is like saying that an individual is guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around. To reiterate, were punishing someone for a crime they may or may not have commited simply because someone said you did it.

    The short answer: No, caches should not be archived based on unfounded and unvalidated complaints. Maybe disabled until circumstances can be properly investigated but not archived. I'm sure there are special circumstances to stand against my arguments here but I'm not debating those here.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Brewer,ME
    Posts
    2,575

    Talking Holy crap!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun
    Part 1: a.)When a cache is no longer loggable due to lack of maintenence or simply missing and when the original cache owner can not be reached or the original hider has shown no intention of maintaining or replacing the cache.
    B.) When the cache is in violation of gc.com's hiding guidelines. c.) When the owner wishes to discontinue the cache.

    Part 2: Only complaints that can be validated are legitimate complaints. An anonomous complainer should not be considered valid as the true intention behind the complaint is unknown. While the anonomous complainer may site specific things, those things may be fabricated with malice intent. Anonomous complainers that quote greviences of other as a focus for action are usually done to promote their own interest in hope to convince others they are the benefactors for the agrieved. This tactic is used as diversionary in hopes to shift blame onto the supposed person with a complaint, in case the complaint is found unjust and unvalid, which usually happens.

    Because unvalidated complaints are simply that; unvalidated, it would be hard to pass a judgement without talking to the actual parties involved, not the supposed benefactor (usually anonomous) of the agrieved party. As details progress by those investigating, it may be found that there was no complaint or even knowledge of any conflict by those people cited as having the complaint.

    Responding to these complaints in a punitive or definitive manner without validating the complaint is not fair to the person or party that the complaint was made against. Any action in favor of the unvalidated complaint is like saying that an individual is guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around. To reiterate, were punishing someone for a crime they may or may not have commited simply because someone said you did it.

    The short answer: No, caches should not be archived based on unfounded and unvalidated complaints. Maybe disabled until circumstances can be properly investigated but not archived. I'm sure there are special circumstances to stand against my arguments here but I'm not debating those here.
    What law school did you attend Steve.
    Happy Trails!
    Yeah it's a Jeep thing!


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Unity, Maine
    Posts
    3,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mainiac1957
    What law school did you attend Steve.
    I was reading Steve's thread thinking the very same thing as you Brad . . . scary that we were thinking along the same lines, huh?
    "Courage is not the absence of fear, but the realization that there is something more important than fear."

    "Death is only one of many ways to die."

  7. #7
    dí76 Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun
    Part 1: a.)When a cache is no longer loggable due to lack of maintenence or simply missing and when the original cache owner can not be reached or the original hider has shown no intention of maintaining or replacing the cache.
    B.) When the cache is in violation of gc.com's hiding guidelines. c.) When the owner wishes to discontinue the cache.

    Part 2: Only complaints that can be validated are legitimate complaints. An anonomous complainer should not be considered valid as the true intention behind the complaint is unknown. While the anonomous complainer may site specific things, those things may be fabricated with malice intent. Anonomous complainers that quote greviences of other as a focus for action are usually done to promote their own interest in hope to convince others they are the benefactors for the agrieved. This tactic is used as diversionary in hopes to shift blame onto the supposed person with a complaint, in case the complaint is found unjust and unvalid, which usually happens.

    Because unvalidated complaints are simply that; unvalidated, it would be hard to pass a judgement without talking to the actual parties involved, not the supposed benefactor (usually anonomous) of the agrieved party. As details progress by those investigating, it may be found that there was no complaint or even knowledge of any conflict by those people cited as having the complaint.

    Responding to these complaints in a punitive or definitive manner without validating the complaint is not fair to the person or party that the complaint was made against. Any action in favor of the unvalidated complaint is like saying that an individual is guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around. To reiterate, were punishing someone for a crime they may or may not have commited simply because someone said you did it.

    The short answer: No, caches should not be archived based on unfounded and unvalidated complaints. Maybe disabled until circumstances can be properly investigated but not archived. I'm sure there are special circumstances to stand against my arguments here but I'm not debating those here.
    Goooooo Steve, That was awesome. I should have called you to handle my Divorce.

    OBTW, Why are divorces so expensive.....





    Because their worth it.


    LOL, LOL, LOL

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haffy
    I guess this is a 2 part question and would like this to be a good and honest discussion as well.

    1. When should a cache be archived?

    2. Should complaints be validated before a cache is archived?
    There is a relatively new cache in my area that I have a complaint about. I have made my issue with it known to both the owner, and the entire geocaching community(needs maintenance icon), and NOTHING has been done about it.

    Is it a serious issue?....yes and no....could someone get hurt because of it? not likely....could some one get questioned by muggles or the muggle force due to the area it is in?....yes....very likely. Should the cache be archived?....no....it's an okay cache. The owner has done nothing to fix this cache. I have heard through the geo grapevine that he has no plans to fix it and that he was somewhat pleased because then, cachers would have to search longer. I believe several other finders had the same problem with this cache. I don't know. I feel my complaint has been "validated" since others have had the same complaint, but I don't think that should force an archive. I think it depends on the situation, and every situation is going to be different, and handled accordingly.

    Thankfully, we have a great approver in GPSFUN who is willing to guide us and educate us on how things will work.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    31

    Default

    From the reviewer perspective, there are separate archive situations.

    In the case of a property owner complaint, including private property, trespassing, complaints from the managers or stewards of land parcels and the like, we typically will archive the cache immediately and then look into ways the property owner's issues might be mitigated. There are a few exceptions, but this is the general practice.

    If we are notified of a situation where a cache should not have been published, e.g., placement on a railroad right of way, we will either un-publish the cache page if there are no find logs or archive it if there are find logs.

    In the case of a "needs archived" note placed on a cache page, I will generally add a reviewer note to the page asking the cache owner to let me know their intentions within ten days. If I encounter a cache that has been inactivated for more than a month, I may post a reviewer note with the same question. Reviewer notes placed on a cache page cause an e-mail to be sent to the cache owner; if there is no response, I will archive the cache page.

    It is not our goal to archive as many caches as we can; actually we would like to keep as many caches in play as we can. If a cache falls into poor condition, our actions are intended to motivate the cache owner to bring it back up to par. If you do a search or a pocket query to plan a geocaching outing, we would like the result to be a list of caches that are not going to disappoint you.

    Also keep in mind that cache pages that have been archived can be unarchived if the issues are mitigated successfully.

    Hope this helps.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Auburn
    Posts
    2,113

    Default

    I have temporarily disabled my cahces when I recieved complaints.

    But it does depend on tne nature of the complaint.
    Some common complaintsL

    Missing log, pen: replace on next maint. visit
    Missing cache: verify as soon as posible
    Wet cache:temporarily disable and fix on next maint. visit
    Got feet wet going to/from the cache: do nothing
    Ticks bugs, etc. at the cache: do nothing
    Access complaints: Temporarily disable until the complaint is resolved.
    Mis-read or mis-understood instructions: Temporarily disable the cache description can be made foolproof.

    Complaints regarding GC.com rule violations: i.e. cache in railroad row. Temporarily disable and ask the reviewer for a ruling.

    Complaints should always be considered. If the complaint is valid, it does not matter what the source is. However, if the compaint is from the land owner/manager, the cache needs to be disabled until their concerns are met. The land owner/manager has the final say, always.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •