View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently 21 August 17 10:03 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
GCA Adoptions 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14546
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post GCA Adoptions
To the Honourable Senators.

As GCA continues to grow, people join up, people move on there may be an ultimate need for an "adoption" process at GCA.

This thread is to discuss the pros and cons of any and all suggestions for cache adoptions.

e.g. Adoption by mutual consent.
The owner puts the cache up for adoption to a named cacher or an "anyone who wants it" type adoption. The adopter agrees that they will take on ownership of the physical cache and listing. The owner is updated to the new owner (so it appears on their lists and not the old owner) and the placed by becomes "by oldcacher adopted by newcacher" to keep the historical aspects of the cache alive. All is solved.

e.g. Adoption by being "missing in action".
Someone identifies that the cache owner is MIA (how?) and the system puts the cache up for adoption. Could be a little less than desirable as now the physical cache has nominally transferred ownership as well as the lisiting. The cacher MIA may or may not appreciate their special plastic ox being given away.

These are two simple examples.

I believe that the direction should be set by the Senate rather than the developers. The developers can do anything. The question is should we and if we should, what do you think we should do.

Thank you for listening and on to the ideas and debate.


27 April 08 7:58 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
800 or more hollow logs searched
800 or more hollow logs searched
User avatar

Joined: 03 April 03 12:28 am
Posts: 2571
Location: Kalamunda, WA
GCA Found: 18
GCA Hidden: 0
Post 
I can see the situation of a cacher placing a GCA cache and then, due an unexpected case of acute teapotophobia, choosing to re-list the cache elsewhere without archiving it here.

If they didn't log on here again, but were active on GC or terraching or navicache or wherever, they wouldn't be well pleased to have their cache appropriated by someone else, just because they deemed MIA on this site.

I think an abandoned cache listing needs to just stay abandoned. If the cache itself is still there, then it doesn't need archiving or adoption. If it's gone missing or is very badly un-maintained, then it should probably be archived. If it's a great location, a new cache will probably take its place sometime soon after.

If it's just a full logbook or a missing pen or somesuch, then I reckon there's enough nice people in this game to stick a new one in the cache without needing to formally adopt it.


27 April 08 8:56 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14546
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
A most excellent start to the discussion PBL.

Very good point regarding abandonment. They may indeed have listed the cache elsewhere, so we certainly don't want a cache to transfer ownership just because we don't think they play here anymore.


27 April 08 9:24 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
6000 or more caches found
6000 or more caches found
User avatar

Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
Posts: 3966
Location: Waitara, Sydney
GCA Found: 1284
GCA Hidden: 22
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
Good points, though if a cache is moved from GCA to GC then it would be obvious from the logs that them come through if it maintained (because there would be a cache in the identical location). Of course, that doesn't cover other caching sites.

Perhaps if a cache appears to have been abandoned for a long time and is obviously MIA or badly in need of repair, it can be flagged archived. That way it won't mater if it is still listed on another site. And perhaps after 4 needs maintenance type logs the next finder should be encouraged to remove it - if there is anything left to remove.


27 April 08 11:14 pm
Profile E-mail
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14546
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
Bump :-)


11 July 08 7:20 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
User avatar

Joined: 28 July 04 6:40 pm
Posts: 1171
Location: Mullumbimby, NSW
GCA Found: 51
GCA Hidden: 21
Post 
If a cache is clearly abandoned, I can't see the harm in someone taking responsibility for it, which seems preferable to archiving it and another being listed in its place. If the absent cacher does return and want it back, surely it's not a problem to return ownership to them.


12 July 08 4:10 am
Profile
800 or more hollow logs searched
800 or more hollow logs searched
User avatar

Joined: 03 April 03 12:28 am
Posts: 2571
Location: Kalamunda, WA
GCA Found: 18
GCA Hidden: 0
Post 
zactyl wrote:
If a cache is clearly abandoned...

Who gets to decide what's "clearly" or not?
If it's been listed on Terracaching or letterboxing.org or litterunderabush.net because the owner's developed an allergy to websites starting with "geoc", would they appreciate someone else claiming ownership of their plastic box?

Especially if the new owner moves it or archives and removes it, as would be their right, according to the rules of this site (that we don't actually have, of course!)

In the greater scheme of things, all of the current geocaches combined add up to about one inconsiderate lout's trailer-load of rubbish, and we've all seen how many of those heaps there are in any patch of suburban bush. So worrying about leaving a few caches that have been archived on one particular listing site probably isn't important.


12 July 08 2:50 pm
Profile E-mail WWW

Joined: 25 May 08 3:07 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Macedon Ranges,Vic,Au
GCA Found: 13
GCA Hidden: 4
Post 
so what was the final outcome of this..? I have a cache local which needs an owner that shows some love. I've already given it a new container, fixed up the log book and restocked it - effectively replaced the whole cache. The owner hasn't logged in for ages and aren't responding to emails - so how do I adopt it.?

not listed on GC or TC or LB either..


17 December 08 8:01 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14546
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
There is no final outcome, just hanging around in the back of peoples minds. Which cache are you referring to (PM me if you think it's sensitive).


17 December 08 10:07 pm
Profile E-mail WWW

Joined: 25 May 08 3:07 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Macedon Ranges,Vic,Au
GCA Found: 13
GCA Hidden: 4
Post 
Wombat Mill : ga0144 - out at Anderson's Saw Mill in the Wombat state Forrest, no sensitivity there :-)


17 December 08 10:24 pm
Profile

GCA Found:
GCA Hidden:
Post 
So ummm you replaced the whole thing, that's not really adoption, since you aren't adopting anything?

(sorry anything but the database entry, I was speaking literally)


Last edited by Guest on 18 December 08 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.



17 December 08 11:00 pm
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14546
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
Ah, yes, I know the cache.
It's a quandry.
If the user is no longer active and the cache is up for repair (which you have done) then it could be adopted.
On the other hand, who says they won't come back to find their cache is someone elses hands.
I don't have a good answer yet. Let me think on it.
Please ask again in a week or so if I forget to get back to you.


17 December 08 11:03 pm
Profile E-mail WWW

Joined: 25 May 08 3:07 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Macedon Ranges,Vic,Au
GCA Found: 13
GCA Hidden: 4
Post 
perhaps I'm thinking to simply about it all.?

- currently, it's an unloved child, I've offering to take it under my wing.

because
a. I live quit close and can keep the maint up well
b. I think it's fair that I take ownership - adverse posession as some kind of reward for stepping up and seeing that this doesn't slide into the realms of GeoJunk.

- if the true owner does come back on the scene then it goes 100% back to them - no questions asked.

It's just A DB entry, which is actually a plastic box, we can chop and change as suits and if needed, simple right? in the case of what if what if.. we'd go around for every if we tried to have an answer for what if.

Strike the pen and make it be I say.. :-)


18 December 08 1:14 am
Profile
Indentured Slave
User avatar

Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
Posts: 6606
Location: Launceston, TAS
GCA Found: 156
GCA Hidden: 44
100 GCA Finds
Post 
Perhaps we can add a 'currently maintained by/in the care of:' field for those caches which are 'fostered' by other caches (ie caches where the original owners have fully vanished but COULD return)??


18 December 08 6:09 am
Profile E-mail ICQ WWW
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14546
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
Interesting points.
As said, it's just and entry in the database, so it can easily be changed again. I'll still think if there's a better way, but I will be back.
I'd like to avoid more DB field for "maintained by" if I can avoid it. That's confusing.


18 December 08 11:03 am
Profile E-mail WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Forum theme by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.