Changes in policy regarding adoptions

[Team Deejay]

Groundspeak has recently changed its policy regarding cache adoptions. One person has already gotten caught by this, so I thought it would be a good idea to post here, so that everyone knows what is going on.

First, Groundspeak will no longer process “forced” adoptions except in very unusual circumstances. They haven’t really delineated what constitutes unusual, but assume that we will not be able to allow you to adopt someone’s cache without permission. We can still try, but it is not likely to be approved. The only specific exception discussed involves the death of a cacher with permission of the family.

Second, we have been instructed NOT to unarchive caches to allow someone else to adopt them, even with permission. If you want someone to adopt your listings, I would suggest you post to the forums here to ask for volunteers. We can still unarchive if you archive by mistake, change your mind, etc., but not specifically for the purpose of adoption.

Of course, you can still do your own adoptions when both sides are agreeable at http://www.geocaching.com/adopt.

Edited by Cheesehead Dave to fix the adoption page link URL.

[GrouseTales]

Good information.

Thanks for the update.

~Brian

[cheezehead]

@Team Deejay wrote:

Groundspeak has recently changed its policy regarding cache adoptions. One person has already gotten caught by this, so I thought it would be a good idea to post here, so that everyone knows what is going on.

First, Groundspeak will no longer process “forced” adoptions except in very unusual circumstances. They haven’t really delineated what constitutes unusual, but assume that we will not be able to allow you to adopt someone’s cache without permission. We can still try, but it is not likely to be approved. The only specific exception discussed involves the death of a cacher with permission of the family.

Second, we have been instructed NOT to unarchive caches to allow someone else to adopt them, even with permission. If you want someone to adopt your listings, I would suggest you post to the forums here to ask for volunteers. We can still unarchive if you archive by mistake, change your mind, etc., but not specifically for the purpose of adoption.

Of course, you can still do your own adoptions when both sides are agreeable at http://www.geocaching.com/adopt.

Thanks for the info.

I can not get the link to work thou and FYI, unless you do a search for it,there is no links on GC.com to the adoption page. I gt one of little Otters caches adopted that I was foster caring for and had a heck of a time finding the page.

[Cheesehead Dave]

@cheezehead wrote:

I can not get the link to work thou and FYI, unless you do a search for it,there is no links on GC.com to the adoption page. I gt one of little Otters caches adopted that I was foster caring for and had a heck of a time finding the page.

The link was b0rken above. The correct page is here.

[PassingWind]

A very interesting discussion. I was involved in a bit of a archive/adoption fiasco in SoCal were I placed a new cache in place of and near the location of an older cache that was burned, missing, and all but gone. Blah, Blah, Blad… to make it a short story here’s some info I received after the decsion was made by a reviewer to unarchive/adopt out caches that have been missing etc. from an unactive cacher.

…I thought I would pass on a new(existing) policy posted to one of the Reviewer forums on adoption requests:

If the owner is around they should process the adoption them self at http://www.geocaching.com/adopt/ .

If the owner is not active on the site and the cache is not archived the Reviewer will post a note on the cache page telling the owner that he has 4 weeks to respond or the cache will be either archived or adopted. (Please give both options). After the four weeks have passed if the owner has not responded send me the Information and I will process the adoption. I need the New owners account name and the GC# of the cache.

If the Old owner is still active on the site but ignoring the cache you cannot adopt the cache to someone else without permission of the owner. If they refuse to respond to a 4 week note, archive the cache. This will almost always cause them to respond to you. This assumes that there is a problem with the cache. If there is no problem then someone shouldn’t be asking to adopt the cache of an active user anyway.

With VERY few exceptions we do not adopt archived caches. If someone wants to adopt an archived cache let them place a new cache is the same place instead. Many times the logs and containers are gone on archived caches and there is nothing to adopt. To make it clear, if there is no container or log there is nothing to adopt and the adoption will not be allowed. The person requesting the adoption can place a new cache and cache page.

Grandfathered caches are not adopted. This includes Virtual caches, Moving caches and Web cams.

For purposes of this policy “active on the site” means they have logged on to the site in the last 6 months or respond to your log on their cache page.

This is nothing new. Its the way we have been doing adoptions since Jan 06. I just thought it would be nice to have it written out for all the new reviewers. Let me know if you have any questions.

[Team Deejay]

@PassingWind wrote:

A very interesting discussion. I was involved in a bit of a archive/adoption fiasco in SoCal were I placed a new cache in place of and near the location of an older cache that was burned, missing, and all but gone. Blah, Blah, Blad… to make it a short story here’s some info I received after the decsion was made by a reviewer to unarchive/adopt out caches that have been missing etc. from an unactive cacher.

…I thought I would pass on a new(existing) policy posted to one of the Reviewer forums on adoption requests:

If the owner is around they should process the adoption them self at http://www.geocaching.com/adopt/ .

If the owner is not active on the site and the cache is not archived the Reviewer will post a note on the cache page telling the owner that he has 4 weeks to respond or the cache will be either archived or adopted. (Please give both options). After the four weeks have passed if the owner has not responded send me the Information and I will process the adoption. I need the New owners account name and the GC# of the cache.

If the Old owner is still active on the site but ignoring the cache you cannot adopt the cache to someone else without permission of the owner. If they refuse to respond to a 4 week note, archive the cache. This will almost always cause them to respond to you. This assumes that there is a problem with the cache. If there is no problem then someone shouldn’t be asking to adopt the cache of an active user anyway.

With VERY few exceptions we do not adopt archived caches. If someone wants to adopt an archived cache let them place a new cache is the same place instead. Many times the logs and containers are gone on archived caches and there is nothing to adopt. To make it clear, if there is no container or log there is nothing to adopt and the adoption will not be allowed. The person requesting the adoption can place a new cache and cache page.

Grandfathered caches are not adopted. This includes Virtual caches, Moving caches and Web cams.

For purposes of this policy “active on the site” means they have logged on to the site in the last 6 months or respond to your log on their cache page.

This is nothing new. Its the way we have been doing adoptions since Jan 06. I just thought it would be nice to have it written out for all the new reviewers. Let me know if you have any questions.

Yes, this is the old policy. You will notice that the “no unarchiving to adopt” rule was part of this as well. On the other hand, the changes to forced adoptions are new. The motivation behind the change is that Groundspeak is not technically the owner of the geocache, and therefore cannot “give” it to someone else through adoption. Personally, I’m not sure this is legally correct, but it doesn’t matter what I think. Addtionally, there have been a few cases where low numbered caches were “forcibly adopted” only to have the new owner move the cache to a totally different location, just to get the low GC number.

From my perspective, it is usually better to create a new cache anyway, assuming the location is special. This gives us old timers an excuse to revisit the area and get another find, plus the history of the original cache remains intact.

[Author]

Posts