Another Example Of A TB Prison Gone Wrong

[+Team CLDK]

This TB Hotel/Prison was re-opened today. All of the original TB's are still in it so he got them back. Maybe some one in the area should go liberate them?

[+the hermit crabs]

This TB Hotel/Prison was re-opened today. All of the original TB's are still in it so he got them back. Maybe some one in the area should go liberate them?

I can't get the gc site to come up (server busy), so I can't see the cache page, but when you saw the reactivated page did you happen to notice whether or not he still had the 10-bug minimum and one-for-one hostage-swap rule?

[Keystone]

Hi, I'm the reviewer who listed the relocated TB Hotel. It's in a fine spot within a local park. And I noticed that the owner modified the text to say that one-for-one bug swaps were encouraged but this was "just a guideline." I didn't see a 10-bug minimum or any other restriction. This was a very easy review.

 

So, good job! More of a hotel than a prison, and in a location that looked way less prone to problems. A nice ending.

[+BlueDeuce]

Alright! A big thumbs up.

 

[+ODragon]

This cache is an easy cache and dash find. It’s located right near the exit ramp so travelers can easily exchange Travel Bugs. Please trade at least one for one Travel Bug (This is just a guideline NOT a rule) so that the supply remains the same. Reservations are required. For reservations dial R to 25, L past 25 to 35, R to 21.

[+Highpointer]

This cache is an easy cache and dash find. It’s located right near the exit ramp so travelers can easily exchange Travel Bugs.

 

In my opinion, I don't recommend leaving travel bugs in a cache with this description, because such a cache has a high risk of being found accidentally by a non-geocacher and becoming lost. When a cache becomes lost with travel bugs inside, then all of those travel bugs become lost as well. Particularly with this cache, it is likely to be removed by highway maintenance workers or the roadside cleanup crew.

 

Even it the container itself it lockable, the lock doesn't do much good if a non-geocacher could easily find the cache, pick it up and carry it away.

 

Therefore, I don't think this is a very good cache because it is not likely to last very long.

 

We need to discourage the placement of caches that have a high risk of being muggled. Caches should be well-hidden in good locations so that when I seek to find one, I should be confident that the cache is in place. It is annoying to waste a lot of time trying to find a cache and not finding it, only to learn when I get home that no matter how long I spent looking, there was no way I would find the cache because the cache had been removed.

 

Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Edited March 4, 2006 by Highpointer

[+BlueDeuce]

Therefore, I don't think this is a very good cache because it is not likely to last very long.

 

I agree but I think the only viable solution is to address it on a peer level. A personal peer level.

[+blackjack65]

This TB Hotel/Prison was re-opened today.

All of the original TB's are still in it so he got them back.

Maybe some one in the area should go liberate them?

Only 6 of the original 10 TBs are in the cache.

I wonder what happenned to the other 4.

[+Huntcliff]

GCH2FN is another one that looks to be gone - 9 bugs (including one of mine) appear to have bitten the dust. The owner hasn't even gone to check on it yet (learned via email to owner)

[+Highpointer]

Is there anyone out there who agrees with me that "travel bug hotels" should be banned, or at least be approved only with specific restrictions in place, such as being in a secure location (i.e. on private property with permission) or being lockable and securely attached to a fixed object in such a way that it cannot be easily removed?

 

Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Here is another example of a "travel bug hotel" that I really hope the owner will remove, or move it to a better location and deactivate its "travel bug hotel" status:

 

Signal Glass Hill TB Hotel

It is less than 100 meters from the highway and is too likely to be muggled. Here is the log of the most recent geocacher to find this cache, who found it laying uncovered on the ground.

 

I really wish that the administrators who approve geocaches to not approve any new "travel bug hotels" unless specific rules are in place to ensure that such caches have at least a reasonable level of security. Caches like this one and the short-lived Travel Bug Transit Center - missing less than three weeks after being placed in a clump of grass at the end of a road in an industrial area of Phoenix just south of Sky Harbor International Airport, with the loss of approximately six travel bugs - should never have been approved as "travel bug hotels".

 

Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Edited March 28, 2006 by Highpointer

[+Pink Paisley]

If you feel strongly enough about TB Hotel / Prisons the answer is simple. Move bugs out of them and distribute them into other caches. Since my bad experience which convinced me that they were a bad thing I have never added to a TB H/P. I make a point though, whenever I can, if there is more than one TB in a H/P that I visit to move 25% on if I can. TBs are meant to travel. The Stargate system seems to be a bit of a cheat / risk as well.

 

PP

 

PP

[+BlueDeuce]

If you feel strongly enough about TB Hotel / Prisons the answer is simple. Move bugs out of them and distribute them into other caches. Since my bad experience which convinced me that they were a bad thing I have never added to a TB H/P. I make a point though, whenever I can, if there is more than one TB in a H/P that I visit to move 25% on if I can. TBs are meant to travel. The Stargate system seems to be a bit of a cheat / risk as well.

 

PP

 

PP

 

I feel strongly enough about TB Hotels that I tell everybody to simply treat them like any other cache. If you can help them, move them.

 

Concerning Stargate, I've never heard any complaints yet and I understand it requires owner permission anyway. As for me, I'll mail my bugs and coins anywhere I darn well please. If Stargate wants to help me out, z'all good.

[+Highpointer]

Here is another cache that appears to be an unsecure "travel bug hotel" with trading restrictions inposed by the cache owner. The cache owner started this cache with 17 travel bugs and wants to have 25 travel bugs in this cache. What are your opinions about this geocache?

 

Red Rock Travel Bug Resort

Even if the cache is a very secure cache (and I don't feel that this one is, even though I haven't visited the area), having a large number of travel bugs in a single cache presents a great risk of multiple travel bug losses should the cache be muggled.

 

If I visited this cache, I would disregard the trading restrictions and take all of the travel bugs in it. I feel that I would be fully justified doing this, because I would move all of these travel bugs to a variety of different caches. Last weekend, in Yavapai and Gila counties in Arizona, I moved 25 travel bugs to 25 different caches. (I picked up 10 of those travel bugs from a cache on residential property in Tempe, a cache now temporarily disabled because the cache owner is moving from the property).

 

Personally, this is an example of the type of cache that should not be approved. What do others think about this?

 

Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Edited July 31, 2006 by Highpointer

[+Highpointer]

Another "travel bug hotel" lost - after only TWO DAYS of activity!

 

Come Fly With Me - - Airport TB Hotel

This cache should never have been approved. The loss of this cache resulted in the loss of three trackable items.

 

While reviewing caches on my watch list, I saw that this cache, located west of Phoenix, has also become lost, resulting in the loss of seven trackable items:

 

Buckeye's TB Rest Area

Geocache reviewers, please do not approve "travel bug hotels" like these that are easily muggable. These caches should have been REJECTED!

Edited December 26, 2009 by Highpointer