Jump to content

Tb Hotel


Recommended Posts

Let me just say this. This cache has NEVER been a TB prison, and for someone to arbitrarily list it as such is pathetic. I've been to this cache many times to drop/trade/take a TB and there's never been bugs that "languish" there for long. Maybe a few weeks at most, which isn't very long. The cache owner has never had a problem with swaps that I've heard of either. I'll agree with the sentiment that geocaching is supposed to be fun so if that "fun" includes only taking 6 out of 7 TB's and leaving one for someone else, why not do it? Especially in a high traffic cache like this one, it means the bug will be there for a few more days. So what? Also, I'd say that in the nature of "fun" no one should be able to list other people's caches as "prisons" and bookmark them for the entire community to see without any first hand knowledge. THAT is a joke.

 

BC Tripper :(

 

Travel Bugs Travel. Any cache with a rule that gets in the way of that goal even for a day is a TB prison. Simple as that. There are a lot of TB Hotels that double as TB Prisons. Some are well intensioned. They are still prisons.

Link to comment

 

Your sort of out in left field here.

TB Hotel rules don't take priority over someone who can help a bug along. We agree there.

But taking bugs just to torque off the TB Hotel owner doesn't serve the TBs purpose any more than the hotel did. Plus cache owners shouldn't go out with a Press Gang looking for TBs to stock a bug hotel. That's also highly frowned upon.

 

As for the OP, you are good to go.

 

hmmmm, I'll always go with the lesser evil.

 

Edited to clarify which posting I was responding to.

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment
Fact is any cache can become a prison for a travel bug if it's not visited often enough, I guess we should just stop allowing TBs to be placed in remote caches or ones not visited often enough too.

 

I think it's very poor form to put someone else's bug in a seldom-visited cache. I won't even put a bug in a cache I didn't like.

Link to comment
Fact is any cache can become a prison for a travel bug if it's not visited often enough, I guess we should just stop allowing TBs to be placed in remote caches or ones not visited often enough too.

 

I think it's very poor form to put someone else's bug in a seldom-visited cache. I won't even put a bug in a cache I didn't like.

 

You could also drop a bug in what you think is a high-traffic cache then the thing isn't visited for 4 months, stuff like this happens.

 

Also suppose the seldom-visited cache helps the TB in it's goal. For example, I went out on a maintenance run with 2 local cachers, he dropped on bug in the final of a seldom-visited 8 stage multi, the bug's goal was to visit difficult caches.

Link to comment

You could also drop a bug in what you think is a high-traffic cache then the thing isn't visited for 4 months, stuff like this happens.

 

Yep -- in October of 2004 we dropped a bug in a cache that had been visited three times in the previous month. And after us, no one went there for another six months! I felt bad about leaving the bug stranded, but the cache was 1000 miles away from us, so we couldn't go back and get it.

Link to comment
You could also drop a bug in what you think is a high-traffic cache then the thing isn't visited for 4 months, stuff like this happens.

Sure. Nobody expects you to be clairvoyant. Just make reasonably considerate decisions based on available evidence. I always imagine a bug I'm placing belongs to some kid somewhere, who's hanging on every log.

 

Also suppose the seldom-visited cache helps the TB in it's goal. For example, I went out on a maintenance run with 2 local cachers, he dropped on bug in the final of a seldom-visited 8 stage multi, the bug's goal was to visit difficult caches.

Well, yeah, if it's the bug's goal to visit the hard ones, then it's okay to leave it in a hard one.

 

 

Must. Not. Type. "Duh!"

 

 

Shoot.

 

I was never very good at resisting temptation.

Link to comment

Today I revisited a TB Hotel to place a geocoin and see what was new in town. I removed 4 TBs to move them along. I got a email from the owner, mad that i had depleted his Hotel Quota! I replied to his email that i was only interested in moving the TBs along and not worried about his quota being filled. Is moving the TBs along more important than hotels keeping it quotas? All TBs will be placed in the next few days so iam not trying to hog them. I would'nt want my TBs sitting in a hotel. What do you think about this?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...df-e65aced6104d

 

Had there not been a suggested minimum, it's doubtful you would have been able to grab as many as you did. So despite campaigning against them, you in fact take advantage of the 'hotel' status.

 

As for the 'prison' status, I haven't run the numbers <yet>, but I would guess that the following stats are probably true (compared to the median values for that TB);

TBs stay for a shorter period of time in this cache,

TBs jump a longer distance when leaving this cache,

TBs jump a longer distance into this cache than the median

Maybe not true for all TB Hotels, but given the location of this (walking distance from one of the 50 busiest airports in the world) it gets very good volume.

 

Signed;

The Cache Owner

Link to comment

Had there not been a suggested minimum, it's doubtful you would have been able to grab as many as you did. So despite campaigning against them, you in fact take advantage of the 'hotel' status.

 

As for the 'prison' status, I haven't run the numbers <yet>, but I would guess that the following stats are probably true (compared to the median values for that TB);

TBs stay for a shorter period of time in this cache,

TBs jump a longer distance when leaving this cache,

TBs jump a longer distance into this cache than the median

Maybe not true for all TB Hotels, but given the location of this (walking distance from one of the 50 busiest airports in the world) it gets very good volume.

 

Signed;

The Cache Owner

 

so please don't take travel bugs unless there are more than five

 

It's had 240 bugs in a little over a year. Seems like it's doing pretty well.

 

Does it needs a rule? Would it move bugs through better without one? (Isn't that the purpose of the cache, keep them bugs moving?)

 

I could see why you might argue that your rule didn't hurt bugs, but I think it never needed one in the first place. Restrictions don't add anything to moving bugs.

 

I say keep it open and let them go crazy with bug drops. (at least try it)

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment
Had there not been a suggested minimum, it's doubtful you would have been able to grab as many as you did. So despite campaigning against them, you in fact take advantage of the 'hotel' status.

It's only "taking advantage" if handling as many bugs as possible is the cacher's goal. It certainly isn't for me. Quite the opposite: I prefer to take fewer and do more with them. I only grab several at a time because I believe concentrating bugs in one place is risky (and slows them down, even if this particular cache may have a good flow-through rate).

 

Judging from this forum (and my own preferences), TB owners don't like TB hotels. That really is 'nuff said. You didn't buy the tags; what right do you have to dictate how they move?

Link to comment
You didn't buy the tags; what right do you have to dictate how they move?

 

Well said. I just placed my first TB today and would not want to see it stay in one place for too long. It has one simple goal; to travel. Thanks to someone else visiting the cache shortly after I left, it is on its way.

Link to comment

"I almost almost did that once... I was looking at old toys in the cellar for potential travel bugs, and came upon a set of plastic farm animals, including four sheep. There's a four-bug-minimum hotel near me, and I got the bright idea to turn these into TBs called "Sacrificial Lamb #1 - #4", with instructions to always stay in that cache so other bugs could travel feely.

But then I decided I didn't want to spend $20 worth of tags on the idea."

 

You could still do that, just use those travelER Tags. Numbers can be had for free and seldom are they logged as they aren't as easy to use as the GC tb's.

 

As a tb owner I bought them with the hope that they would travel, silly to think that I guess considering the name.

If the tb swap shop is in a good location it shouldn't need any prison rules, break them out at will.

Link to comment

Newbie here.

 

I'm assuming that the Travel Bug Hotel Cache owners believe that a larger bug population in a cache will generate additional traffic. I'm also assuming this may be true, due to the additonal icon on the local cache listings.

 

If in fact that is the case then why wouldn't the cache owner buy/make a few bugs of his own. Log them into his cache virtually, but not physically.

 

Technically it would still generate the extra traffic (assuming the extra icon(s) make them more attractive).

 

Personally, I think the easy access, easy find, high traffic cache location makes much more sense.

What do I know.

 

 

Hotel Clerk to Tourist: :D

"I'm sorry sir, but we can't check you out"

 

Tourist: :)

"What do you mean I can't check out".

 

Hotel: :D

"Well, your the last one here"

 

Tourist: :D

"So?"

 

Hotel Clerk to Tourist: B)

"Well, if you leave, then there'll be no one left"

 

Tourist: ;)

"So, what does that have to do with me?"

 

Hotel Clerk to Tourist: B)

"Well, if you're not here, then the hotel won't look as busy, less appealing"

 

Tourist: :D

"If you want appealing, move yourself to the beach!

I just came here for the night. I've got places to go, People to Meet."

 

Hotel Clerk to Tourist: :D

"I'm sorry about that sir, it's out of my control.

The owners have made the rules, I just need to follow them"

 

Tourist: :)

"Follow them? Follow THIS!"

Link to comment

 

Holy ....!

 

go paste this as a note:

 

"If a travel bug hotel is in a good spot for the quick and easy exchange of travel bugs, then an empty hotel won't stay empty long. People are always looking for a convenient place to drop bugs off. The owner of a well-placed hotel should actually be pleased if the hotel is occasionally empty, since it shows that the hotel is serving its purpose: to get bugs moving quickly. And if a hotel does stay empty for long periods of time without the cache owner continually raiding other caches to re-stock it, then it's not a good place for a travel bug hotel."

Link to comment

 

Holy ....!

 

go paste this as a note:

 

"If a travel bug hotel is in a good spot for the quick and easy exchange of travel bugs, then an empty hotel won't stay empty long. People are always looking for a convenient place to drop bugs off. The owner of a well-placed hotel should actually be pleased if the hotel is occasionally empty, since it shows that the hotel is serving its purpose: to get bugs moving quickly. And if a hotel does stay empty for long periods of time without the cache owner continually raiding other caches to re-stock it, then it's not a good place for a travel bug hotel."

But maybe add about thirty exclamation points, in keeping with the style of the page. :unsure:

Link to comment

What I find funny, is that there are caches out there that get more TB traffic than so-called TB Hotels (with or without limits). The Sands Of Waikiki has had 3 times as many TBs pass through than Honolulu International TB Resport & Spa, and currently has 5 TBs listed as opposed to none in the "Hotel".

 

Everytime I've been to Hawaii the Sands gets a visit from me, for drop offs and pick ups. The cache is a very active one, and is a much better place to drop a TB. The Hotel is in an awful location, not really worth visiting, and not really any more accessible than the one on the beach.

Link to comment

What I find funny, is that there are caches out there that get more TB traffic than so-called TB Hotels (with or without limits). The Sands Of Waikiki has had 3 times as many TBs pass through than Honolulu International TB Resport & Spa, and currently has 5 TBs listed as opposed to none in the "Hotel".

 

Everytime I've been to Hawaii the Sands gets a visit from me, for drop offs and pick ups. The cache is a very active one, and is a much better place to drop a TB. The Hotel is in an awful location, not really worth visiting, and not really any more accessible than the one on the beach.

 

I've wondered about that. I don't know about other people but when I am on my way to or from an airport I don't have time to stop and look for a cache. Once checked in at my hotel then I can spend time hunting.

Link to comment

We just had a find/log deleted because we took a coin and didn't leave one. Needless to say we won't be visiting any more of the hiders caches. We are firm believers in TRAVEL bugs. Shucks, I feel guilty if I keep them more than seven days.

 

That's unfortunate.

 

This wouldn't happen to be in West MI would it? Too bad it's empty, I'm going past there this weekend.

 

Perhaps I can still log a find. :laughing:

 

edit: excuse me, lower west Michigan?

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment

Add this one to the TB Prisons list.

 

I took 8 bugs from this cache and moved them to the west coast and brought 16 back a couple weeks later. That had been my intention all along.

 

I don't know what people are thinking when they take 8 travel bugs and leave 1, when this is a "trading post"!!! (MUST BE A NUMBERS THING). I'm "disabling" the cache until I can figure out how to fix the problem, but will most likely archive this one because it's not working out the way I hoped it would!! I hope all the bugs that were taken get closer to their missions. This cache had 12 bugs in it and now it has 1!! I'll move along that 1 travel bug soon!! Sorry to all of you who have followed the rules and traded up!! LUCKYSTRIKE1

 

I made no issue with the TB Hotel owner's wrongful ASSumption about my motive, because these types of people will only SEE when they are ready to.

 

I'm sending a link to this TB Prison owner in hopes that this thread will enlighten him, or at least spark some entertaining debate.

 

BTW- THIS is from my latest TB hotel that was listed just last night:

 

There's no rules at my TB caches. Trade bugs, take bugs, leave bugs, or just use the "discovered it" option..... It's all kosher. Bugs are meant to TRAVEL after all, not sit in caches.
Link to comment

Today I revisited a TB Hotel to place a geocoin and see what was new in town. I removed 4 TBs to move them along. I got a email from the owner, mad that i had depleted his Hotel Quota! I replied to his email that i was only interested in moving the TBs along and not worried about his quota being filled. Is moving the TBs along more important than hotels keeping it quotas? All TBs will be placed in the next few days so iam not trying to hog them. I would'nt want my TBs sitting in a hotel. What do you think about this?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...df-e65aced6104d

 

Confess: Didn't even read the thread.

 

Quota? Unless the Travel Bug has a mission to be in a specific cache and not move, you are helping them do what they are supposed to do -- move along. Hotels are nice. Sometimes they have 100% occupancy (high season) and sometimes they are vacant (low season). If the owner wants a certain number of Travel Bugs in the cache -- they better buy some tags.

 

From the cache page:

**IF YOU TAKE A BUG....REPLACE WITH A BUG or something of similar trade value!!!******

.........PLEASE!!!!PLEASE!!!!!PLEASE!!!!!!PLEASE!!!!!!!!

 

Given that Travel Bugs are NOT trade items and hence have ZERO trade value -- are visitors supposed to leave nothing? I think that the *spirit* of the cache is that the placer wants to make it a fun place to visit and a good place for Travel Bug drops and grabs. The attempt at placing rules on this activity may come across incorrectly. I do believe in the trade fair guildeline and the "always leave a cache better" idea -- but Travel Bugs are not trade items.

Edited by Lemon Fresh Dog
Link to comment

And every time prominent well respected cachers like Lemon Fresh Dog or Snoogans restate the facts, the more progress we make as a community in helping TB's to move along.

 

Listen up all you newcomers and cache owners :

 

Travel Bugs are never trade items, every travel bug is owned by another geocacher who wants your help in moving the TB closer to a goal, the goal is selected by the owner. You can help other geocachers by taking and moving their Travel Bugs, they can help you by taking and moving your Travel Bugs.

 

Anyone restricting or hindering a Travel Bug in any fashion, even a simple restriction like "don't take the last TB from this cache" is demonstrating that they do not understand the general parameters of the game. Politely help them out by explaining that they are hindering or restricting a TB and that they are not helping other geocachers when they do this, maybe they will stop.

 

If you are a cache owner who has a TB hotel with restrictions of any kind then you are demonstrating your basic ignorance in regards to Travel Bugs, you have no right to hinder or restrict Travel Bugs, every Travel Bug is owned by another geocacher.

 

Never trade for Travel Bugs, they are not trade items.

Never trade a bug for a bug, they are not trade items.

Never hinder or restrict a TB, help if you can.

Ignore any rule that restricts or hinders TB's.

If you find a cache that has restrictive covenants, never place a Travel Bug in that cache.

Place a Travel Bug Hotel in your area and use the same wording described above, this will emphasize that your cache is designed to help Travel Bugs.

Link to comment

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?

 

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)

Link to comment

The cache should be approved; there is nothing wrong with the cache. It is always good to find a box in the desert.

 

However, the owner of the cache requests some additional requirements on travel bugs. Since there are no regulations set for travel bugs, it is up to the visitor of the cache if he/she wants to follow these rules.

 

There are no regulations set for travel bugs. If there is a rule, it must be to let them travel. If you think you can let the bugs travel better than the travel bug hotel/resort can, please do so. If you want to take all the travel bugs at once, this is allowed. It is. It really is. The desire of the travel bug owner overrules the wish of the cache owner.

 

Coming back to your original question, the cache should be allowed. Even with the supposed illegitimate extra travel bug rules. It is up to the individual cacher if he/she wants to obey.

 

I have some mixed feelings over this cache: The Hitchhiker’s ride to Legacy – TB Museum

This one is only an example, there are more travel bug musea around the world. I do not know the owner, neither have I contacted him.

What is nice in this museum is the display of rare geocoins. Everyone can look at them, feel them, discover them or drool over them. Most of the coins are donated by the coin owner. This is a very nice, social gesture towards the geocaching community. Cool I love this.

Less nice in this museum there are the items on display without the owner’s given permission. Like the Jeeps.

 

If I were to visit this museum, I would drool over the coins and take the Jeeps. And put them ASAP in a next cache.

 

Zilvervloot.

Link to comment
My goal is to find more travel bugs so there is always at least 25 in there.

 

The person who who set up the Red Rock Travel Bug Resort is just ignorant, there is no crime in being ignorant but it is not an excuse to crap all over other geocachers.

This person has already taken and kept the Travel Bugs of 17 geocachers, apparently in this case the word "goal" is interpreted very narrowly as in "screw the goals of all these TB owners".

The worst thing about this person is they intend to compound their ignorance, they clearly state that they are ready to go "find" more Travel Bugs, they will then "ignore" the goals of the owner and the stated mission of the TB and stick it into this prison cache they have made.

 

This person is displaying a lack of understanding that is quite thorough and might well be deliberate.

 

Every Travel Bug belongs to another geocacher and the owner of the Travel Bug sets the goals for that Travel Bug. Respect other geocachers and respect the Travel Bugs they own. Never trade for a Travel Bug, they are never trade items, they are always the property of another geocacher and they have been entrusted to the care of the geocaching community. Geocachers entrust TB's to the geocaching community in the hopes that other geocachers will help the Travel Bug along in a mission, it is really displaying ignorance when someone takes these items and decides they exist to satisfy some personal need. The ignorance displayed by this person reflects poorly on the community. This person even has the gall to use the word "my goals" and in every case has totally ignored the "goals" of other geocachers. This has not been done once but at least 17 times and the person states that they are ready to go and find more TB's, this is simply ignorant. This ignorance may be an oversight, the cache owner might be ignorant of the fact that they are ignorant.

 

Travel Bugs should never be restricted or hindered.

Travel Bugs are never trade items.

Travel Bugs should never be traded, they are never trade items.

Take all the Travel Bugs you can help, all the time.

Ignore any rules which restrict or hinder Travel Bugs in any way.

If you see any rule which hinders or restricts Travel Bugs on a cache, make sure you do not leave any Travel Bugs in that cache.

Edited by wavector
Link to comment

Ok, we'll see how long I can take the heat from this one... <_<

 

My Travel Bug Prisons shared public bookmark list.

 

Feel free to contact me and send me other caches with travel bug trading ratios or quotas that should be listed here. Also, I will happily remove any and all caches from this list if the cache owner abolishes their travel bug trading "rules"!

 

You could also do a 5 Star Hotel list. The ones that actually help bugs travel.

Link to comment

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?

 

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)

 

The cache is fine. Owners can set rules if they like. Travel bug hotels can become prizons but at the same time if following the hotel rules is simple enough (you have a bug and want a bug) there is no reason not to follow them. It's only when the bugs travel goals are hindered by the hotel that the hotel rules are suspended.

 

If in taking 25 bugs and moving them, you move 22 of them the wrong direction, you would have done more harm than the hotel. Only raid the hotel when you do have the ablity to do the bug some good. Part of the purpose of a hotel is to provide easy drop of and pick up access for people wanting to help bugs reach their goals.

Link to comment

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?

 

 

*** content deleted to save space ***

 

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)

 

I agree that the cache is fine and should have been approved as a regular cache, but not as a "travel bug hotel." Let me reitterate my position clearly - I firmly believe that caches with descriptions that imply that they are "travel bug hotels" should not be approved unless the cache description is edited to remove the "travel bug hotel" description. "Travel bug hotels" are not needed because there are plenty of caches to drop off travel bugs. Most "travel bug hotels" are too easy to find and are too accessible, making them highly risky to be found by non-geocachers and thus likely to be ransacked or stolen by muggles. Leaving multiple travel bugs in a single cache presents a great risk of multiple travel bug losses when the cache is muggled.

 

So far, in the City of Phoenix alone, at least two "travel bug hotels" became lost during the first half of 2006 (one after lasting less than three weeks) and many other such caches thoughout Arizona became lost during earlier years. Most "travel bug hotels" are placed in highly exposed locations, which makes them accessible and easy to find, but an easy and accessible cache is not the ideal place to drop a travel bug, and it is particularly not a good place to leave multiple travel bugs.

 

(Personally, I don't like to leave any cache with more than one travel bug in it, and I find it more fun to drop off travel bugs in as many caches as I can. It is a lot more enjoyable to drop off 10 travel bugs in 10 different caches than it is to drop all of them off in a single cache).

 

There are several things I have noticed about "travel bug hotels". First, many such caches are placed by inexperienced geocachers who do not, or may not, realize that placing a geocache in an easily-accessible location is also a cache that is more likely to become lost or stolen. Second, I have observed that many travel bugs placed in "travel bug hotels" become lost because they are picked up by geocachers who don't log them properly and who don't place them in another cache. (However, I am not sure if a travel bug, placed in a "travel bug hotel", is statistically more likely to become lost because of geocacher incompetence than a travel bug placed in an ordinary cache).

 

Therefore, let's encourage the placement of more quality caches, especially in rural areas and in the backcountry, but let's please discourage caches that claim to be "travel bug hotels". If you are a geocacher with multiple travel bugs in your inventory, then go out and find more caches, rather than dropping all of them in a "travel bug hotel".

 

Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...