Maintenance

Discussion about the Geocaching Australia web site
Post Reply
User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 17015
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Maintenance

Post by caughtatwork » 19 April 22 9:38 am

Geocaching Australia has a "Needs Maintenance" log which you can use to indicate that a cache needs maintenance. We don't track anything about this log though, so if the owner ignores it, the cache falls further and further into disprepair.

I am thinking we need something like the secondary site such that when a "Needs Maintenance" is logged, a flag is set and the cache goes into "Maintenance needed" mode where the cache page is flagged so you can easily see there is an issue when you visit the page. We may also be able to add to the cache description in GPX files as the start of the description to indicate the same. We can also set a flag for the API and the various apps to know about it too.

The only way the flag can be cleared is a "Maintained" log by either the owner or a "Maintenance Administrator". Even if the original "Needs Maintenance" is deleted, the flag is still set. Whether we keep the original log somewhere "hidden" if it gets deleted or not is subject to debate.

We would know the date the "Needs Maintenance" was logged so after a period of time we could have a "Maintenance Administrator" check those which are greater than 30 days and take action such as archive the cache if the "Needs Maintenance" indicated it or put it into disabled mode which would then trigger the disabled maintenance administration functions.

The original intent was to have the content creators maintain their own listings and for the site to be a place to facilitate caches happening. Over time we are seeing lots of caches that have "Needs Maintenance" which are not being attended to either through a lack of interest or the owner no longer playing.

We would likely NOT try and automate archives or disables through too many DNF's as that is far to restrictive and 5 DNF's by one team on one day does not mean the cache is missing. i.e. This would be an administrative review process (would need volunteers) to try and keep the caches that "Needs Maintenance" off the search lists.

I am interested in your opinion and how this could play out in the real world so that I can take all views into account.

User avatar
Just a cacher
Posts: 630
Joined: 03 July 10 3:01 am
Location: Northside, Canberra, Australia

Re: Maintenance

Post by Just a cacher » 19 April 22 10:38 am

I was working on the premise that "needs maintenance" was a way to alert the cache owner to an issue without making it official, whilst "needs archiving" was a more official action.

Exactly what happens if someone logs "needs archiving", now? Can you explain in simple terms what the difference is to the cache owner, and to GA, officially?

Also, while we're discussing logs and archiving and maintenance, why does GA write official logs on our movable caches, saying that they 'seem' or 'seem not' to be in place? I mean, what criteria are used to decide when such a log is written? Why are some followed up within days, and some left like that for more than a year? Why was one of my movables archived after one DNF, and it was still in place? (And no, I can't remember it's name or number right now.)

-- I am not making a complaint, just wondering how the system works... I feel I need to understand more about how it all actually functions before discussing changes.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 17015
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Maintenance

Post by caughtatwork » 19 April 22 11:51 am

Just a cacher wrote:
19 April 22 10:38 am
I was working on the premise that "needs maintenance" was a way to alert the cache owner to an issue without making it official, whilst "needs archiving" was a more official action.
Needs maintenance is a notification to the owner than maintenance is needed. If the owner simply ignores it, the next person to find the cache finds an ever increasing mess. Needs maintenance should be actionable by the owner, but if they miss or ignore the email nothing happens. By flagging the cache, it will always show up until the owner does some maintenance. It could also be used to slow down the rate of new hides by a cache if they have too many caches that are in need of maintenance.
Just a cacher wrote:
19 April 22 10:38 am
Exactly what happens if someone logs "needs archiving", now? Can you explain in simple terms what the difference is to the cache owner, and to GA, officially?
An administrator reviews them every now and then and decides if they need to be archived if the ache owner doesn't step in.
Just a cacher wrote:
19 April 22 10:38 am
Also, while we're discussing logs and archiving and maintenance, why does GA write official logs on our movable caches, saying that they 'seem' or 'seem not' to be in place? I mean, what criteria are used to decide when such a log is written? Why are some followed up within days, and some left like that for more than a year? Why was one of my movables archived after one DNF, and it was still in place? (And no, I can't remember it's name or number right now.)

-- I am not making a complaint, just wondering how the system works... I feel I need to understand more about how it all actually functions before discussing changes.
Moveable Maintenance
Lists moveable caches which were last found more than 90 days ago and have have no log with co-ordinates since.
Open the cache and check the latest logs to see where the moveable geocache may be located.
If the geocache needs archiving, then place an archived log.
This will be listed as having been done by Geocaching Australia to protect your identity.
If the geocache seems to still be in place, then place an ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW log on the geocache with a meaningful log and with the LAST KNOWN CO-ORDINATES.
This will be listed as having been done by Geocaching Australia to protect your identity.
It will also create a trigger that will suppress the geocache from the listing as there will be a log after the last find with co-ordinates.

e.g. https://geocaching.com.au/cache/ga7882 is in play or has it ben taken? A review will decide what steps to take next and if it looks like it's been removed from the location and it's "long enough ago" it gets archived.

User avatar
Just a cacher
Posts: 630
Joined: 03 July 10 3:01 am
Location: Northside, Canberra, Australia

Re: Maintenance

Post by Just a cacher » 19 April 22 1:45 pm

Thank you. That's very clear.

User avatar
Just a cacher
Posts: 630
Joined: 03 July 10 3:01 am
Location: Northside, Canberra, Australia

Re: Maintenance

Post by Just a cacher » 19 April 22 3:55 pm

If you track 'Needs Maintenance' logs and the caches with NM logs, wouldn't it mean more work for you, in checking them and reading the logs and deciding whether they are fixed or need archiving? I mean that your suggestion includes some work for someone to do - it wouldn't be automated at that point.

I think it's an excellent idea, I'm just not sure that you should really be adding to your workload... You already do a LOT of work.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 17015
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Maintenance

Post by caughtatwork » 19 April 22 4:26 pm

That's not my role.

If we decide that this is a good idea, we would call for some volunteers.

We have the following roles, not all of which are covered by me. They are spread around.

//People who can Approve Users and see the SBA (Should be archived) review etc.
//The developers
//Our Betatesters, use this to open up testing features
//Log Administrators (this lets them edit and delete logs)
//dZ Administrators (this lets them recalculate zones, caches and cachers and allows them to update new and tips and multiplier periods.)
//Rewards Administrators
//Quiz Masters
//Daily Mail Administrators (this lets them set up new messages for the daily email.)

We simply add a new role when the volunteers put up their hands.

User avatar
Just a cacher
Posts: 630
Joined: 03 July 10 3:01 am
Location: Northside, Canberra, Australia

Re: Maintenance

Post by Just a cacher » 19 April 22 5:42 pm

In that case, I'm right behind it.

User avatar
mattyrx
850 or more found!!!
850 or more found!!!
Posts: 264
Joined: 21 May 10 9:57 pm
Location: The Channon, NSW
Contact:

Re: Maintenance

Post by mattyrx » 19 April 22 10:07 pm

I like the idea. I think it makes it easier for new cachers to see if there’s a problem with a cache before going out and chasing it, and it will keep the database accurate. I think it would be handy to be able to include/exclude these caches in a Query by selecting a relevant checkbox.

I think implementing a system like this doesn’t breach the free and open ethos of GCA, and only helps to ensure people get more enjoyment from the game.

Team737
Posts: 121
Joined: 07 October 14 10:12 pm
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lee.drury.71066/
Location: Newcastle

Re: Maintenance

Post by Team737 » 20 April 22 7:46 am

Sounds good to me....

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 17015
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Maintenance

Post by caughtatwork » 20 April 22 9:11 am

mattyrx wrote:
19 April 22 10:07 pm
I like the idea. I think it makes it easier for new cachers to see if there’s a problem with a cache before going out and chasing it, and it will keep the database accurate. I think it would be handy to be able to include/exclude these caches in a Query by selecting a relevant checkbox.

I think implementing a system like this doesn’t breach the free and open ethos of GCA, and only helps to ensure people get more enjoyment from the game.
We could add a selector to include / exclude if the "Needs Maintenance" flag is set or the "Should Be Archived" flag is set to narrow your results to exclude those with potential issues. Good idea and if we proceed, we should be able to make that work.

Post Reply