Forum: Using The Website
Topic: Freshness of data?
started by: jerryc
Posted by jerryc on June 15 2006,8:36 pmAs I am going through the caches in my area, I'm noticing two things.
First is that many of them dont have any log entries for two years or more, OR have been listed for just as long with no log entries at all.
Second is that many of them are truly missing or have otherwise been eliminated.
Except for posting a note log entry, there doesn't seem to be any way of bringing these to anyone's attention. I almost have to assume that the owners of these caches listed them, and are not logging in and maintaining them.
What can be done about stale data?
Posted by PC Medic on June 16 2006,4:58 amOne thing to remember is that often a cache may be searched and logged (in its log book), but not on the listing site(s). I have two caches that the most recent activity on the site is from last year (2005), yet show more recent entries in their log books.
If you feel a cache is truly 'missing' then you should either a) attempt to contact the owner and bring this to their attention, or b) contact the Admins for them to investigate.
I have a cache that is very difficult only because of odd GPS reception that on several occasions has had log entries that 'this cache is no longer here', only to get out there and find it was safe and sound. For this reason you should not post logs that the cache is missing unless you are 100% sure. Doing so may prevent others from looking for a legitimate exisiting cache that you were simply unable to find.
Posted by jerryc on June 16 2006,5:27 pmThats what I'm asking for. When logging a (missing) cache, there should be some type of log entry besides found it and note. Unless notes are followed up on??
There should be some type of Missing log entry or something that will raise the flag so that owners can check, and if owners dont check then the site should probably remove the listing.
In my area (Kansas City) there seem to be a lot of caches with NO log entries. References can be found in other places that indicate clearly that these caches are indeed missing.
There is one called "Daphne" (waypoint N0014A). The tree that is refered to has been missing since 2002, making this cache pretty much impossible to find.
If either "note" log entries were reviewed or if there were a seperate type of log that would force a review I think that would help clear this situation.
Also, as a side note, when someone logs a cache, does the owner of the cache get an automatic email? If so, then there are at least three caches I've posted notes on that are being ignored.
Posted by PC Medic on June 16 2006,7:23 pm
A log entry with mention that 'this cache may be missing' should be red flag enough for not only the cache owner (as they receive an email report of any log entry made to a cache), but also a warning to other geocachers that the cache may be missing should they be planning on searching for it. And YES, cache owners should always follow-up and then either post a 'note' that the cache is still available or retire the listing.
I can look through many cache logs with several 'Did Not Find' logs in a row and then a 'Found It'. So a 'Missing' log type as I mentioned before could be more harm than good. I have personally experienced numerous cases where a cache that was still in place would have log entries such as 'missing do not search for this cache' simply because that individual was unable to find it.
Are there cases where caches are in fact missing, unfortunately yes and that is why owners should always follow up on such log entries. If they do not and other local cachers truly feel the cache is missing, then they should contact the Admins for follow up. If we do not receive a response from the cache owner in a reasonable period of time indicating the cache has been confirmed to be in place, then we will retire the listing.
Remember, no log entry on the site is not always indicative of a missing cache. Take my < Redwing Treasure cache > for example. No log entries on the cache page since 02/05, yet when I went to check on it and collect the container last month, it was intact with half a dozen log entries in the logbook since then. Also, note the very first log entry on that same cache.
Then shame on the cache owners for not maintining their listings.
This cache owner allows for email contact, was any attempt made to contact them? Was any concern forwarded to the Admins via the < Contatc Us > form?
If you knew the number of logs made daily and how many 'false alarms' this would possibly result in, you may change your mind on this method
Yes they do and if they have been ignored and you have concerns about a particular cache please use the contact form to let us know.
Posted by whiteurkel on July 26 2006,8:45 am
I'm just quoting the OP here, but I read PCMedic's responses with great interest, and they definately helped me to understand the complications involved here. I myself took the initiative to "clean up" the listings in my area (which arguably could be considered the Navicache hotbed of America ). I did this by using the "contact us" link, and I was looking at I believe 11 caches by 3 placers, none of which ever answered my emails. All caches were definately long since archived on Geocaching.com, and almost all were verified as missing or removed by the owners.
I think the bottom line is many people list some caches here, and never think to come back and retire them here upon archival on geocaching.com
That is not to say archival on geocaching.com automatically means a cache doesn't exist any more. Not by any means. I do remember, relatively recently hearing the same complaint about Navicache on the GC.com forums regarding the N.Y. City area though. So I think a perceived "staleness of Navicache data" does exist out there.
Posted by jimear1e on July 27 2006,4:46 pmInput from cachers is imperative for a cache owner to maintain his cache and itís listing. I went after one today that hadnít been logged since 7/12/03. It was my choice to attempt it since I saw the last log. I posted a comment and have emailed the owner through the system. This has always worked well for me.