Is it time? ( to allow cache owners to edit logs)

[PesceVerde]

I 'like' the greyed-out idea (for time to communicate or cool off or whatever), with an option to then delete if the cache owner thinks it's necessary.

The current "Note" log type would also be available to leave a message.

[Trigg-A-Nomics]

The current "Note" log type would also be available to leave a message.

To leave a message for the log owner or the cache owner?

I don't think logs should be left on the cache page once we get into a "log moderation situation". As soon as that happens it should be taken into a private room and sorted out quietly, not splashed all over the cache page.

I had a rather embarassing encounter on the other site. GC.com allows you to "Delete Log" and "Permanently Encrypt". As a newbie cacher, I was a little miffed that someone had given away my (not) oh-so-tricky hide. So I deleted their log. It reappeared. I thought "Hey, didn't I delete that?", so I deleted it again. After it reappeared a third time it slowly dawned on me that the other cacher was relogging the find. I permanently encrypted the log and hoped I hadn't earnt his enduring hatred. It never occurred to me that I would be reducing his find count. It also never occurred to me to email him.

It would be great if the GCA system could be slightly more newbie-proof.

[caughtatwork]

The concept (based on what we've seen so far) will be.

Cache owner "disables" log.
When they do this, it also sends an email to the log owner and the cache owner is asked to explain what is going on.
The cache owners email address WILL be sent with the log deleting notice so the log owner can interact with you.
From that point the disabled log can ONLY be seen by the log owner.
There will be a special page that they can see the log in the event they lose the email.
Find count is decreased (if applicable).
When the cache owner and log owner sort out the details, the log owner edits their "disabled" log and "enables" it.
It comes back into the system as a "live" log.
Everyone can see it.
Find count (if applicable) is increased.

This 'could' end up in log tag. i.e. disabled, enabled, disabled, enabled, etc. Not sure how to avoid this at this point.

[Trigg-A-Nomics]

This 'could' end up in log tag. i.e. disabled, enabled, disabled, enabled, etc. Not sure how to avoid this at this point.

There's not much you can do to prevent the "I know you are, but what am I?" tit-for-tat situation without appealing to a moderator of some sort. I'm not sure that is really warranted yet.

[cantanga]

This 'could' end up in log tag. i.e. disabled, enabled, disabled, enabled, etc. Not sure how to avoid this at this point.

How about in this case both the owner and the logger are required to "enable/ approve it" prior to it being reactivated. To stop an issue where the owner just ignores it prevent a logger from getting the find perhpas a 2 week time limit for the owner to either approve or disapprove (if they disapprove comments must be made why) if they do not review in this timeframe then the log gets automatically approved and the owner cannot then disable again.

[caughtatwork]

Thought of that and it just doesn't work.

The cache owner may be diligent enough to disable the log, but may not respond to an enable.
I don't want "auto enable" of logs either.

Mind you, if the log owner gets a disabled log, then edits it to make the cache owner happy, there is still opportunity for the log owner to go back and edit the log some time in the future and set it back to what he wanted.

Let's face it, there is no perfect solution, so we'll go with was can be done reasonably, without being onerous.