[Az-Geocaching] Re: More on abandoned Caches

[Mike Schwarz]

At 05:35 PM 5/16/02 -0700, Scott Nicol wrote:
>>From: Mike Schwarz <malthusian@mindspring.com>
>
>>As far as I'm concerned, the biggest problem is people just plain
>>dropping out of geocaching, whether they live close to their Caches
>>or not.  Then they won't do anything for their Caches, regardless of
>>what happens.  Off tip-off to a possible dropout: if the date they
>>last logged in to Geocaching.com is quite some time ago, they've
>>probably dropped out.  You can see this if you check someone's
>>profile, if you're logged in.
>>
>
>Ok. I was going to stay out of this one (even though my post on Bass 
>Ackwards Cache started it and even though my post had nothing to do with the 
>subject this thread has become! :) LOL
>
>Anyways, I think Mike brings up a good point. Perhaps Jeremy I. Should 
>consider requiring a cacher to log in to their geocaching.com account at 
>least once every 30 days (or 60 days perhaps). This to keep their account 
>active. If they dont, then their account is deleted and their caches are 
>automatically archived.
>
>Does this seem realistic? Any thoughts on this? I think it seems like a good 
>idea.
>
>This would accomplish two things:
>1:)It would save space on the Geocaching.com server as there is probably a 
>ton of space being used up by inactive accounts that really arent being used 
>anymore. They are just sitting there taking up space.
>2:)It will simply help active cachers know that the caches that are out 
>there are likely current and being kept up by the cache owners.
>
>Any thoughts on this? I think that anyone that is an active cacher easily 
>checks into their account at least once a month (and probably several times 
>daily! :)
>
>I know my Hotmail email account must be checked into at least once every 60 
>days (or something like that) to remain active. Otherwise, my account would 
>close and I would lose all my emails.
>

Mike:
Scott, I agree with a lot of this.  An expiration interval should be
60 days, not 30 days.  If no logins for 60 days, then the account
should be archived somehow (in a way that it could be restored).
The fate of their caches is debatable, though.  You certainly wouldn't
want to archive caches that are still being found weekly.  Ones that
have not had a find in months, however, should at least be disabled,
maybe archived.

There isn't any process right now for area geocachers to "adopt" any
"orphaned" caches that are still being found.  Some process like this
needs to be set up.  If the admin people at geocaching.com find somebody
hasn't logged in for 2 months, they send them an email, and its invalid,
THen if they have caches that haven't been found for over 60 days, 
they might be archived, unless they are 3.5 or above in difficulty.

Maybe the admin people can post a note on the cache's web page, asking
for local geocachers to "adopt" them, if they're still being found (like 
the "Careful the Neighbors are Watching" Cache somebody mentioned).
Then wait a few weeks for a reply.  If someone volunteers, the 
geocaching site needs to have some way of transferring ownership.


>-------------------
>
>On the subject of cache owners checking on their caches regularly: I 
>understand that many cachers cannot check on them on the drop of a note. It 
>just isnt realistic. I got an email from a cacher that has two caches in the 
>East Valley/Mesa area and he is a snowbird. Lives in Minnesota in the 
>summer. Here in the winter. The email asked me if I would watch over his two 
>caches while he was gone. I responded a bit late to that email and he 
>already found someone willing to do so. But, I told him I would certainly go 
>check on one if needed. I have found both of those caches. They are both not 
>more than 30 minutes from my house. I am not going to keep a watchful eye on 
>them or the cache pages. The cache owner is very capable of watching the 
>internet to see how his caches are doing. However, if he see's a few no find 
>logs and emails me asking me if I would go check on them... I certainly 
>would.
>

Mike:
   Yeah, Minnesota Jack, didn't think about him.  He monitors from
afar also.

>I do feel it is the cache owners responsibility to see that their caches are 
>kept current. However, I do think it is just fine for a cache owner to ask 
>of another geocacher to check on their cache if they cant get over to it 
>quick enough. If there are several no find logs, the cache owner could at 
>least post a note saying the cache is currently unavailable until they or 
>someone else can check on it. Then, if another cacher wants to take a chance 
>searching for a cache that is potentially missing (has several no find 
>logs).. well, they have been pre-warned. They would do better to simply wait 
>a few weeks until it can be updated.
>
>There is a cache up in north Phx that Libby planted- Winter Wonderland. It 
>is very well hidden in some really deep rocks. A large area of rocks. When I 
>was there and logging my visit in the cache logbook, a gust of wind knocked 
>the lid off the rocks and into the rocks. It went WAY down! I couldnt find 
>it after nearly 20-30 minutes of searching. It was seemingly gone! Anyways, 
>as soon as I got home, I emailed Libby and told her what I had done and how 
>clumsy I am (! LOL). I offered to replace the lid for her. I live in the 
>east valley probably over 40 miles from this particular cache. But, I felt 
>it was MY responsibility to go back up and replace the lid. Libby has alot 
>of caches hidden and it is nearly impossible for her to keep a daily check 
>on them all. So, I felt it was my duty to do my part to replace the lid. In 
>the meantime, I had covered it up with a mat that was laying nearby and put 
>a rock over it to protect in. About 2 days later, I ran by Libby's and 
>picked up a new lid she had left out for me and I went up and replaced the 
>lid while on my way to a few other caches that day.
>
>I am sure any other geocacher would have done the same thing if that had 
>happened to them. At the very least, a note for the next geocacher to bring 
>a lid could be posted. Then, I am sure the next cacher would bring a lid if 
>they had one available. I know one cacher that actually carry's spare 
>logbooks in case he finds one is full.
>
>These are just little things we all can do to help maintain the 'currency' 
>of OUR geocaches.
>
>Scott
>Team Ropingthewind
>
>

Mike:
   Well thanks for going to all that effort for the cache lid.  I took
a new logbook to a cache recently because of a note the owner posted
requesting one.  One occasional problem I see is people putting 
big items in caches that are too small for the item.  Sometimes the 
lid is bulging outward, sometimes even pushed loose.  When I see this,
I always take the offending item, and leave something much smaller.  
I think its good to even take 2 items and leave 1, in situations like 
this- the "packed can" syndrome.

In fact, Club 2400 has this syndrome, so I may take a slightly bigger
can up there next week, and remove an item or 2, so there is some
space in the can.  No one has logged that for about 4 weeks,
which seems a bit strange, so I'll check it out before the end of May.