Team CDCB

D'oh!! Crap, I always forget there is a different forum for TBs. Sorry... I see there is a thread for cool pics, but this thread is a bit different that that thread. I imagine it'll get moved soon by one of the very so wonderful moderators here.

In the spirit of the Cool Cache Container, I'd like to start a thread about Terrific Travel Bugs. "Terrific" is obviously open for interpretation, and its intended to be. TTBs can be bugs that are just really cool looking things... Or they can be Bugs that have a very interesting or creative mission. Or they can be Bugs that have had just an amazingly long (distance or time) travel log. Whatever the reason, what bugs do you own or have you found/helped that you think are really interesting? Here's two to start the thread: http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=502124 This one was released by my brother when he was living in SC. It was sent out by my nephew to visit my son. It traveled all the way up to Grand Rapids were I retrieved it. Now my brother is living in Colorado and I've sent Thomas the Train back to him, starting it off when I was on a business trip in Portland. And yes, my brother did take the picture with the numbers plainly showing. I'm kinda surprised it hasn't found it way around the world and back because of that! http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=82790 Paul the grasshopper has been floating around for five years now. I'll always remember him because when I was in Oregon (see above) I found him when I dropped off some bugs. I thought it was incredible that I was 3/4 of the way across the country and happen to find a bug who's mission was to return to my home town!! Paul has really racked up the miles taking two separate trips from the midwest out to the west coast and back.

Just cause I like to debate things for fun, let's take a look at this info. Let's start with this line: Of course we need to keep in mind the second part of that quote. But we have not ability to know what each and every area of the world has in terms of jurisdiction. So, let's assume the general rule above. Let's tackle the easiest first: Lost property. From Wiki: This fails on both ends of the definition. A geocache is NOT set down in a place where the owner did not intend to set it down. Plus the cache is VERY likely to be "found" by the true owner. No way can it be called lost. Okay, step two: mislaid property. From wiki: If you had to classify a geocache as misplaced, lost, or abandoned, this would seem to be the most likely classification. It isn't totally correct in that the owner didn't forget to pick it up, but intended to leave it there. If you do classify it as mislaid, the finder has no rights to it. And third: Abandoned property. Again from wiki: Now a geocache meets the first part of the definition, but fails on the back end. ...but is in such a condition that it is apparent that the true owner has no intention of returning to claim the item. Geocaches are definitely not (at least originally) left in such a condition that it is apparent that the owner isn't coming back. Some do eventually become abandon, but that isn't the rule and certainly isn't the intend of the owner. I think in a court of law you could easily prove that a cache doesn't fit the definition of abandoned. Now of course, the bigger point as others have made, is getting law enforcement involved. I can't imagine the police putting too much effort into investigating or prosecuting what amounts to very petty theft.

Funny... to me the 'old fashion way' is looking at the cache online, reading it, looking at the logs to make sure there hasn't been a bunch of DNF, printing off the paper and then going cache.

Why would you consider him not a thief? You seem to be arguing that the individual involved took what he assumed what abandon property. If this is true, then I would agree that he isn't a thief, at least in the spirit of things. If I'm walking out in the wood and discover a $20 bill in the ground and absolutely NO one around, I'm probably going to pick it up and stick in my pocket. Technically, I've taken someone else's property, but I can safely assume that finding the individual who dropped it to be nearly impossible so even if I wanted to get the money back to the owner, there's really no way to do it. On the other hand, let's say I'm out in the woods walking and I come across a wallet with a drivers license and various others things, plus a $20 bill. Now its really easy to find the owner. I should make an effort to contact the owner and get his property back to him. But let's say I didn't. Am I a thief? Perhaps not in the letter of the law. I didn't take it from the guy, he dropped it and I happen to find it later. But certainly in the spirit of a thief, I have something that doesn't belong to me. I know who the right full owner is, and it's pretty clear that this wasn't a case of intentionally abandoning property. One could argue that the first paragraph describes a muggle coming across a geocache in the woods. He doesn't know what it is. Maybe it doesn't have anything in terms of identification on it. Maybe the sheet instead got wet and isn't readable describing geocaching. Maybe he can't read the language of the cache. Who knows? However, that's not what we're talking about here. The 'seller' on ebay knew what geocaching was. He knew that he could contact the owner through geocaching if he so desired. He choose not to. He's the guy who's found a wallet in the woods and kept it instead of trying to contact the owner. Worse than that though, he's proceeded to sell the wallet on ebay. And he made up a story about how the wallet was left on his (or a friend's) property and repeated attempts where made to have it returned to (removed by) the owner to no avail. This makes him a liar and, if not technically a thief, certainly a thief in spirit. Now, having said all this, I do agree that physical confrontation with this moron is not a suitable solution.

If there's no log to sign, then it isn't a Geocache! Seriously though, cool story.

Another idea is to place other caches nearby. A few years back I "discovered" a biking/walking trail along a creek that I never knew was there. I make a multi out of it where they have to traverse nearly 3/4 of the trail to get to the ammo box conclusion. It was hit a number of times initially, then sorta died... but then later it started getting hit again more often. Come to find out that others put traditional caches along the route between where my stages where. People would do some of the traditionals and then hit my multi as well.

Interestingly, I think your reasoning behind the validity of high terrain difficulty caches can also be applied to puzzle caches: Challenges people? Check. Pushes them out of their comfort zone? Check. When do, is there a feeling of accomplishment? Check. Is it rewarding? Check. To the hider? As long as there is a good log, check. Take you to interesting place? Physically - sometimes. Mentally - also sometimes. Hey, Puzzle caches aren't for everyone. High terrain difficulty aren't always things I can do, both due to the time involved and a somewhat limited body (not that I don't try, just that I end up paying for it later if I do to much). But a Puzzle cache can be quite fun as I mentally try to solve the puzzle, and then get the sense of accomplishment once I've figured out how it works. I think you could say this about Lamp Post Micros as well. And yet, there are people who like 'em. So, why worry about it? In a word, Yes.

DRAT! Should've looked over all the forums first. Sorry. Thanks for the link though.

Okay, I'm going to release a TB soon here that has a semi-complex mission. I want it to visit a large number of different locations, but the order isn't important. To that end, it might be hard for someone to know what has or hasn't been done. So, I'm going to make this TB out of a DeCon container with a sort of 'check list' inside of it that people can check off when a goal is done. Now, I'm wondering the best was to "decorate" this little guy. I'm thinking of epoxying the dog tag to the inside lid of the container so that: A. It won't get lost. B. The Container won't be very usable for other things and won't get stolen. But I figure I also need to label it on the outside so people know what it is when they start looking through the cache as well. Anyone know if they make Travel Bug stickers? What marker/paint would hold up best over the long haul? Any suggestions? Thanks.

See, I think I would contact the owner first, privately. Obviously it needs to be done in a polite manner. But even then some people will take it as an attack. I guess I see going to the reviewer as 'escalating' the issue. Kinda like going and complaining to a workers boss without first talking to the worker. Of course, the problem with this approach is if you don't feel you've received a satisfactory response from the owner and then go to the reliever the owner will easily know who it was who complained and if they are vindictive sort it could cause problems.

While this is a good rule of thumb, I think we need to be careful in making that judgement. I'm thinking of the first cache I put out where finder needed to go to three different playground to count equipment to solve the problem. All three were within half a block of each other, which is what I found interesting. I also live in the neighborhood and have young kids, so I'm often at the playgrounds and have no problem feeling very comfortable. That said, I was informed (not very politely, unfortunately) that some people are very uncomfortable around playgrounds as they don't want to look like pedophiles. After talking with others here, I came to realize that this could be a real issue with some people and modified my cache to avoid the playgrounds. So, the point (Yes! There is one!!) is that what is understood as completely acceptable to one person, group, area, might look like a real no-no to someone not from the same background or area.

Private property with permission of the owner? If so, then I'd say go for it. If not, then nope.

If you travel to Grand Rapids, MI, the homer in my says do The Liger, but that's probably because it's mine! I'd probably say that Iserv Fone Fun was pretty cool just because of the unique method of obtaining the final coords.

This, to me, is a winner.

I've used as by itself for caching quite a bit. However, as others have noted, I do suspect I'm not getting quite as accurate a location as if I was using a dedicated GPSr unit. I do know that the GPS in my phone can be temperamental at times, but I really love the interface of GeoScout.

My understanding is that isn't officially condoned by TPTB. Apparently this program 'scraps' data from geocaching.com and program like this are not allowed according to geocaching.com Terms of Use (TOU for short). My best guess on why this isn't allowed is scraping doesn't generate ad revenue to geocaching.com and so you're using their servers without them getting any revenue in exchange. There's also a thought that because GeoScout is a pay for program that this other company is making money using the data of another company. However, I've heard that even free programs that 'scrap' data are not allowed, so I think it's more than just the above. I've heard people on the forums say that even mentioning these other 3rd party program has gotten them a warning from TPTB and that topics like this have been deleted. However, I've seen a number of topics like this recently and I've participated in a number of the discussions (even started one) and I haven't received a warning, so they may not be coming down quite so hard on this anymore. Now, having said all of this, I've used GeoScout and I've found it to be a pretty nice application. My brother has an iPhone and it some ways that program is really slick and runs smoothly. GeoScout seems to be a bit more sluggish in it's response time and I've had it a few times when it doesn't seem to recognize that I'm moving at all... like it stopped working with the GPS. A reset of my SmartPhone corrected that. I've also found that if you turn your "off" your smartphone the program will lose it's GPS lock and you usually will not start it up again when turned back on. This might be an issue with my phone though, not the program.

Wow, that's a neat idea 3Js... might if I copy it?

I'm not a huge cacher... still under 100 finds. But I'm been doing it on and off for a number of years now, and I've got 7 of my own hides out there. The more I've played, the more I've learned to listen and obey the creed of "To each his own." You play the game the way you want to, and I'll play the game the way I want to. And we can both be happy geocachers. To that end, if you want to leave a TFTC log, so be it. I'm certainly not going to send you a nasty note and I'm bummed that one of the above posters got that. Now, having said this, I will say from my own experience, I enjoy a longer, thought out log. These logs make me feel like the finder had fun. They make me feel happy, like I've touched someone else in a positive way. They make me want to put more caches out. Reading through this thread I think I'm not the only one to feel this way. So, this is my opinion on writing logs: If you like the cache, take the time to write a nice log. Do it for selfish reasons. If you write a nice log, the hider is more apt to put out more caches of this type.

I'm with you there bud. Short hand is great in a time crunch, or when using a less than easy input method (cell phone), but why not just spell things out? The use of acronyms makes it harder for people unless they are very much up on the lingo. "Hey, honey, remember that cache we placed? Well some yahoo just gave away the location! He posted a log that just says ROOT. Idiot, now everyone knows it's at the base of the tree under that root. I'm gonna delete that log..."

It might help a metal container last a bit longer, but I don't see it adding significantly to the life. Really solidly built containers (ammo boxes, and others designed to be left in the elements) are, of course, already weather proof to an extent. They'll tend to rust the worst when the get damaged (scrapped, dented, etc.) and if that happens this plastic coating will get ripped or damaged and expose the metal anyway. You might see maybe a 10% longer life (maybe), but I've got an ammo box that has been out for YEARS had has a cider block resting on top that scraps it occasionally and it's still in very good shape. A little rust on the outside, but otherwise perfect. In other words, I wouldn't say it was worth it. On poorly built containers (Altoids tins, and others NOT designed to be left in the elements) you'd see a definite lengthening of life, *IF* you can coat the whole contain and ensure that the coating isn't scraped away. However, this would be very hard if not impossible to do. I can't see how you could coat the inside effectively and if you just coat the outside and the box isn't weather sealed, it'll just rust from the inside out. Even if you do find a way to coat the inside and outside, you probably aren't going to be able to coat where the lid closes as this is already a tight fit. Which means it'll just start rusting there. Even if you are able to coat the whole thing, I can't see that it'll last long without getting scrapped, torn, or ripped off. You might see a 10% longer life (maybe), but the life of these things is so short anyway, it's like taking a hamster to the vet. Cheaper and much less hassle to get a new container than try to length the life of the existing.

I remember reading a story about one that got run over my a lawn mower, but I forget the circumstances of that. Worst case I've personally seen: Cacher error. Someone left the top of my cache unsealed. (I visited it a few days later and noticed it. Thinks were a bit damp on the inside, but not soaked. Fortunately hadn't been real rainy the last few days.) Just goes to show you that even the best of containers can be foiled by a careless cacher.

The "for what?" in my opinion is to draw new interest to existing cachers to revisit existing caches. There's a cache in a park not too far from where I live. One of the first I did as a geocacher. I've never visited the cache again. I've got a cache that's right by my house, one of the first I hid. I got a lot of new finds when it was first placed. Now it get's hit maybe once a month if I'm lucky. There just isn't a reason to visit old caches. There isn't a draw for a cacher to revisit unless he or she is specifically looking for a specific travel item, and that just doesn't happen all that often. There just isn't a reason to do it. But if I see a new cache pop up near my location, I much more motivated to go visit it if I can log a new find. That's the reason for a travel cache. Now, all that said, I've learned a lot here and I realize that even if there is some good PROs for this type of cache (in my ever so humble opinion), the CONs that it would introduce really do out weigh the PROs. It's just an idea that I wanted to explore, and it seems to be one that just doesn't make sense when everything is considered.

I can see this being a problem. I think some education on the part of the land owners should solve 95% of the problems here, but I also realize that the more complicated a situation becomes, the more likely a land owner is just going to say: "No." Reviewer: "Okay, so we're in agreement that only one cache per park. No problem. Oh, but well, there might be two sometimes cause someone might place a travel cache with the regular cache." LO: "Well, I don't want that. Just one cache please." Reviewer: "Oh, no, it'll only be one cache, the other will be inside of the first." LO: "I don't understand. I thought there were limits on how close caches could be?" Reviewer: "Yeah, there are, but this is a special kind of cache." LO: "I'm not sure I want a bunch of "special" caches here. Can't you just say no special caches in my park?" Reviewers: "Well, no not exactly, cause I can't monitor what everyone does, but it really won't be a problem see, but cause it'll be totally inside of the other cache." LO: "Yeah, ya know what? Let's just say no caches in my park, okay?" I can see that totally. And if this new type of cache would end up causing more issues that it's worth, I certainly won't want to force it out there. I appreciate all the time that volunteers put into this game and I don't want to make your burden greater, that's for sure. I'm looking for the name "Team CDCB" to be praised for it's creativity and contributions to the game, not for moderators to start using CDCB as a swear word!!

BTW, I think the biggest hurdle to overcome here would be to distinguish a travel cache from a travel bug. Both would need to be logged with a tag number, both would need to be 'housed' in an existing cache. Both would get picked up by cachers and moved to new caches. So what's the difference? Here's my opinion: 1. A travel cache would not have a goal or tasks. The only idea is for it to move. Of course, this would likely be short lived as people would assign goals to their caches unless there where REALLY strict guidelines, which makes a lot more work for reviewers and then you start getting "cache police" who tattle on people who make their travel cache sound like it has a goal and people nitpick on what exactly a goal is or isn't. (Don't believe me? Ever read a thread on what a 'pointy object' is??) So this is pretty weak. 2. A travel cache has it's own separate log book. Of course, a travel bug has a separate log page online, so, what's the big diff?? Okay, so this is pretty weak too. 3. Biggest difference: A travel cache, when it was moved into an area, would show up in a person's cache list if you looked at what caches where in a specific area. This, I think, would get people to revisit old caches. Right now I have virtually no reason to go visit a cache that I've already been too unless there is a specific travel bug that I want that is in that cache, and that is exceedingly rare. Once I find a cache, it's done for me. I just don't see a need to really go back and visit. BUT, if there was another cache in a cache I already did, then I'd be very motivated to visit again because now I can get another find. I guess that's one of the reasons this appeals to me. I just feel that right now caches are a one shot deal. After I've done it, I don't have reason to revisit. This would give me a reason.