View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently 23 August 17 5:31 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
GCA Archiving - A proposal and debate. 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14550
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
djcache wrote:
Sounds GCA is getting rules...

DJ


That's why it's in the senate for the active GCA seekers and hiders for comment.

If the consensus is yes, then we proceed.
If the consensus is no, then we stay unchanged.

Better to seek community input than impose rules.


07 June 07 9:56 am
Profile E-mail WWW
500 or more caches logged
500 or more caches logged
User avatar

Joined: 22 May 06 6:56 pm
Posts: 370
Location: Adelaide SA Garmin 60CSx
GCA Found: 21
GCA Hidden: 5
Post 
As the owner of a GCA cache that gets more DNFs than finds I can assure you all that a DNF doesn't mean the cache is gone or in need of maintenance. Merely that people are looking for it in all the wrong places. :shock:


07 June 07 1:57 pm
Profile
650 or more caches found
650 or more caches found
User avatar

Joined: 12 June 06 7:48 pm
Posts: 102
Location: Wahroonga, NSW
GCA Found: 50
GCA Hidden: 1
Post 
I think some sort of automated archiving would be good but caches getting archived in 6 months rather than 3 would seem a better timeline to me.

Also it would be good if any log from the cache owner reset the counter. That way if there was a good reason a cache needed to be disabled for an extended period of time (or if its just bloody hard to find :) ) the owner would only need to log a note occasionally to keep the cache "alive".

Anyway just my 2cents.


07 June 07 4:23 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: 28 July 04 6:40 pm
Posts: 1171
Location: Mullumbimby, NSW
GCA Found: 51
GCA Hidden: 21
Post Re: GCA Archiving - A proposal and debate.
caughtatwork wrote:
eg.
1 month after a cache is marked as temporarily unavailable, an email is sent to the owner requesting action.
2 months after, a reminder.
3 months after, the cache is automatically archived by the system.
The beauty of GCA is that the owner can at any time, unarchive the cache without permission or intervention by an "appropriate authority".

Another eg.
Same scenario as above, but change temporarily unavailable with SBA.


I think you've covered both situations nicely. I thought 1 month might be a bit short a period of time to start hassling someone, but I'm a bit slack about fixing caches sometimes. :wink: Make sure the "Your cache has been archived" email includes the information that they can return their cache to its "Disabled" state if they have a need to.


07 June 07 4:58 pm
Profile
Indentured Slave
User avatar

Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
Posts: 6608
Location: Launceston, TAS
GCA Found: 156
GCA Hidden: 44
100 GCA Finds
Post 
Quote:
Sounds GCA is getting rules...

And just how does this concern you???

Thinking about it today, archiving of long term temp disabled is not even close to being a 'rule', its more about removing it from searches etc...

Implementing archiving on active caches would be rules IMO, which changes things....

I'd second that maybe the timeframe proposed be extended a little


07 June 07 7:19 pm
Profile E-mail ICQ WWW
User avatar

Joined: 28 July 04 6:40 pm
Posts: 1171
Location: Mullumbimby, NSW
GCA Found: 51
GCA Hidden: 21
Post 
CraigRat wrote:
Implementing archiving on active caches would be rules IMO, which changes things....

I was thinking about that too, maybe a combination of X number of DNFs, + no finds in the last X months + no note from owner + inactive owner (not logged in for the past X months) could trigger an email and the three month process? :shock: :lol:


08 June 07 1:52 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14550
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
http://forum.geocaching.com.au/viewtopic.php?t=8604

Interesting. We seem to have a situation that would warrant intervention.

Should we?


15 July 07 10:07 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
Indentured Slave
User avatar

Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
Posts: 6608
Location: Launceston, TAS
GCA Found: 156
GCA Hidden: 44
100 GCA Finds
Post 
Theres nothing stopping any of the concerned parties from posting a 'Needs Maint.' Log or a SBA on the cache to alert the owner.

Should it go to a vote as to if the maintainers should have authorisation to Archive the cache after a NM or SBA after say 4 weeks for Database Mainanence purposes? (this of course assumes that there have been a solid bunch of DNF's from seasoned players prior to any NM or SBA?)

This wouldn't be a rule for playing the game ...it's more about the maintenance of the data....there's no point listing something if it doesn't exist!

If an owner places it back as active, so be it.... Archiving isn't deletion...

Abandonment is the hard one to figure out what to do.....I have no suggestion for that....

As for voting for anything senate related...how the heck can we do that? I don't like the idea of using the forum polls.....


15 July 07 10:43 pm
Profile E-mail ICQ WWW
200 or more found
200 or more found

Joined: 26 April 05 10:28 am
Posts: 29
Location: Umina Beach NSW
GCA Found: 9
GCA Hidden: 4
Post Re: GCA Archiving - A proposal and debate.
caughtatwork wrote:

That does mean that abandoned or muggled and not maintained caches will remain in the system for ever.

eg.
1 month after a cache is marked as temporarily unavailable, an email is sent to the owner requesting action.
2 months after, a reminder.
3 months after, the cache is automatically archived by the system.


Just thinking of anouther dimension of this debate.

In the interests of Treading Lightly, maybe we need to think about getting removing abandoned and archived caches removed from their hiding spots and not remain in the envioment for ever.

My thoughts are that either:
A) there could be a list by state of caches that have been archived by the above process.
B) They could still come up in the normal listing on the website but with a "remove me " type status.

Cachers could see there is a old cache in the area, remove it and then log that is has been removed and then fully archive it.

Or a local could may log that they will take ownership of a particular cache and be responsible for either adopting it, or removing from the enviroment.

Just a thought


16 July 07 10:37 am
Profile
1300 or more caches found
1300 or more caches found
User avatar

Joined: 04 April 03 11:48 pm
Posts: 1868
GCA Found: 169
GCA Hidden: 38
100 GCA Finds
Post 
Supermosie's ideas are a very sound method of management, as local cachers will know if the site has been attended or not a lot more than interstate admins.

I second the motion for voluntary "I can no longer maintain this cache" type of cache log. with the option of adopting or cache check and removal.

None of my earlier posts were intended to bring into being a "rule" applied to the placement and or management of a cacher its content, just merely a method of cleaning up the the embarasing detritus of cache litter ,and even more so ,webpage data litter.
Zactyls options of x number of DNF and no responce from owner is a great method of deciding. I sitill like the idea of automatic archive in these cases, as it would even remind me to attend to that cache that is going unfound for what ever reason Even if it is just that its too hard, or too remote.

The chance to bring these to your attention, and have owners make a decision to have it set to "please retrieve or adopt" would help. then if no responce to a RoA (Retrieve or Adopt) would then lead to archive and relevant notifications.
and as has been said many times in these posts... Archived is not Gone forever.


16 July 07 12:34 pm
Profile E-mail ICQ YIM
1300 or more caches found
1300 or more caches found
User avatar

Joined: 04 April 03 11:48 pm
Posts: 1868
GCA Found: 169
GCA Hidden: 38
100 GCA Finds
Post 
CraigRat wrote:
I wouldn't support even the notion of auto disabling of active caches in any way... it starts to veer the direction of this site in a direction I wouldn't be too keen on going...

(edited after re-reading the posts above)


what is the definition of an active cache? one that is /has been hunted for and found in the last day, or week, or month or year? just how long do you wait?
my main concern is with what can cbe considered inactive caches, left behind by inactive owners.


16 July 07 12:47 pm
Profile E-mail ICQ YIM
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14550
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post 
I would suggest that an active cache is one that does not have 4 DNF's without a maintained log.

If it's got 4 DNF's in a row and there is no maintained log, then it, for all intents and purposes, is probably gone. If it's that far gone, there's probably nothing left at the site anyway.

If it's still there, then all the owner has to do it log a maintained log indicating it is still actually there. That stops the process until another 4 DNF's are logged. This allows very difficult finds to remain active.


16 July 07 1:28 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 Re: GCA Archiving - A proposal and debate.
SuperMoosie wrote:
In the interests of Treading Lightly, maybe we need to think about getting removing abandoned and archived caches removed from their hiding spots and not remain in the envioment for ever.

Careful with this idea. They might've been archived on GCA and re-listed on gc.com or another listing site, so you'd be removing an active cache!

In the greater scheme of things, if we all pick up the occasional bit of rubbish on the way to and from caches, geocaching's eco-karma can accomodate a few abandoned boxes, I think.

caughtatwork wrote:
I would suggest that an active cache is one that does not have 4 DNF's without a maintained log. ... This allows very difficult finds to remain active."

We could even code part of this. Allow 2*Difficulty DNFs before prompting for a maintenance check/log.


16 July 07 4:21 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
User avatar

Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Posts: 14550
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 1040
GCA Hidden: 265
100 GCA Finds500 GCA Finds1000 GCA Finds
Post Re: GCA Archiving - A proposal and debate.
Papa Bear_Left wrote:
caughtatwork wrote:
I would suggest that an active cache is one that does not have 4 DNF's without a maintained log. ... This allows very difficult finds to remain active."

We could even code part of this. Allow 2*Difficulty DNFs before prompting for a maintenance check/log.

I don't disagree with the thought, but I wouldn't expect that there would be many caches with 6 consecutive DNF's. i.e. a diff 3 x 2 = 6
Once a cache gets three or so DNF's, there are few to no attempts after that.
I'd hazard a guess that there wouldn't be too may with 4 DNF's either, but it's a place to start.


16 July 07 7:32 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
1400 or more caches found
1400 or more caches found
User avatar

Joined: 18 June 04 3:58 pm
Posts: 463
Location: Melbourne
GCA Found: 130
GCA Hidden: 5
100 GCA Finds
Post 
I've got a dashboard thingy that tracks Victorian caches and have found that 3 DNF's in a row generally indicate that the cache has a problem. The only twist is sometimes you get a false positive when teams are caching together and all log a DNF; doesn't necessarily mean it's missing.

You could look for 3 DNFs on different days?

Of course some caches just get lots of DNF's even if they are a-okay eg. this evil tree one


16 July 07 9:28 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Forum theme by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.