Jump to content

Disabling Travel Bug Prisons (Hotels)


Hula Bum

Recommended Posts

What am I wrong about? (Ok, lots of things, but in this instance?!)

 

'Wrong' was just humor.

 

I don't agree that these caches need to be archived as a standard practice. I do feel very strongly about the restrictions and want to see them changed but I see results with the current efforts to make changes. Forum Debate, Requests sent to the cache owner, Bookmarks. I'd like to give it a bit more time to determine other methods. Archive seems a bit severe at this point.

Link to comment

What am I wrong about? (Ok, lots of things, but in this instance?!)

 

'Wrong' was just humor.

 

I don't agree that these caches need to be archived as a standard practice. I do feel very strongly about the restrictions and want to see them changed but I see results with the current efforts to make changes. Forum Debate, Requests sent to the cache owner, Bookmarks. I'd like to give it a bit more time to determine other methods. Archive seems a bit severe at this point.

 

I agree with your approach. It may not alway be well recieved but...it's the better way to get TB Prisons turned back into TB Hotels.

Link to comment

I've tried a couple of times to email the prison owner and have gotten a "it's my cache, I'll do what I want" response, and yes, I was very polite (I actually can be, if the need arises).

 

I hope the bookmarks stay around as I think they're great Though I know that there is a lot of strife regarding "negative" bookmarks, so I hope Jeremy doesn't cave. I think this is probably the best action right now.

 

I think the forum debates really do very little as it is such a tiny percentage of the geocaching population that is on here and I think the forum user on whole has a better grasp of the accepted practices than the average cacher (after all they spend a lot more time debating it :unsure: ).

 

Then of course there is always Criminals National clean a TB Prison Dry Day method that has it's merits. (yes, I changed the wording a little, say effect though.)

Link to comment

There is nothing wrong with a TB hotel cache. The problem is that the owners want to put stipulations on removing one. In my opinion there should be to restrictions besides if you can't help the TB, don't move it. However a lot of TB hotel cache owners want to use TB's as trade items so the hotel stays full. Rather selfish if you ask me. Well it's selfish even if you don't ask me.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment

Please don't misunderstand, I am NOT a fan of TB prisons. I simply believe there are better ways of dealing with this admittedly frustrating issue than to disable caches.

 

 

I may have missed this being stated previously somewhere along the line, but... while I see the argument against, and annoyance of, rules which prevent TBs from travelling as intended, I can't see how disabling the caches would help the TBs that are "imprisoned" in them.

 

What would happen to them after the cache is disabled, especially if the cache's owner were to be disgruntled by the disabling??

Link to comment

 

The only people that like the rules, are the controlling, cache owners, not the TB owners.

 

 

Actually I don't own a TB hotel of any kind, but I do own a TB and I have no problem with it spending time in a so called prison.

 

I really doubt it is going to take any longer to leave the 'prison' than the next nearest cache that is of comparable difficulty to get to and find. I figure those seeking the TB hotel are more likely to know what they are doing in regards to TBs than the seekers of regular caches who may have never heard of a travel bug.

 

So, please cease this practice of speaking for more than oneself when expressing one's personal opinion.

 

Your opinion isn't the same as mine. You are not fine with a 1 for 1 rule on caches where your TB might end up, I am fine with it.

 

Your opinion is worth no more and no less than mine.

 

Now, it would appear that Jeremy has seen this thread since he moved it to this forum and it doesn't look like TB 'prisons' are going to get archived or that the issue was of enough importance to him to even warrant a comment on the topic. I am sure this upsets you a bit and I understand. I suggested that public bookmarks be moderated to prevent negative, confrontational speech from spilling out of the forums and onto cache pages. While I haven't heard anything my guess is nothing will happen in that regard either.

 

So, can we all just move along now?

 

Your 'side' gets to manipulate a new feature to attack and insult owners of caches you don't like right on their own cache page and there is nothing they can do about it. Isn't that enough for you?

 

My prediction, if this ranting about 'prisons' keeps up, is that the effort will be counter productive and you will see people actively sending messages to the owner of the 'prison' bookmark so their new TB hotel can get added to the list.

Link to comment

Disabling them would be a last resort, and for the bugs currently in there, yeah, not a good situation if the person gets angry and immature, but for future bugs it is a good thing, as it wouldn't happen to them.

 

It's really pointless as I don't think Groundspeak dares to put any "restrictions" on anything, it just upsets people too much, so the only thing to do is to let each person decide how to handle it individually. Some will make bookmarks, some will go and set them all free and some will do nothing.

Link to comment

If and when Jeremy does anything I am quite certain that it will not be done overnight because of one days worth of comments, he spends a lot more time thinking about things than that. (I don't think this is a big enough issue for him to do anything about, but that's another story.)

Link to comment

Here's the solution. We all need to create more TBs like this one. :unsure:

 

If anything that TB is proof positive of the abysmal reading comprehension of people :unsure:

 

It has yet to see any TBs 'liberated', and in one log the individual stated they dropped it off in a TB 'jail'.

 

LOL, I don't think putting it in a TB jail was the bug's goal. As luck would have it the cache the individual labeled a jail is on the 'good ones' bookmark.

 

I don't know if I should laugh or cry concerning this. On the one hand it is funnier than all get out that this bug has traveled the world already, but not a single person 'liberated' any TBs per the bug's goal. It is also downright comical that somebody put it in what they thought was a TB prison and it wasn't.

 

I think I need a beer and then I will go read the logs for that TB again. Good reading, thanks for the link.

Edited by DaveA
Link to comment

I know that I would not bother to advertise that I took all the bugs out of the cache and replaced it with that one, I would just note that I dropped that one, no need to tick the owner off and have them delete my log. Don't know if it's been used for it's intent or not, but I like the idea.

Link to comment

I know that I would not bother to advertise that I took all the bugs out of the cache and replaced it with that one, I would just note that I dropped that one, no need to tick the owner off and have them delete my log. Don't know if it's been used for it's intent or not, but I like the idea.

 

The idea isn't to put the TB *in the prison*, the idea is to take the TB *to the prison* and have it 'liberate' the TBs in it.

 

The logs for the TB are on it's own page, not the cache page of the TB hotel.

 

In other words the logs show months of heavy activity including spending time in other countries, but not one single person has yet to use the bug for it's intended purpose.

 

I am not saying there is nobody out there who would *like* to use it for that purpose, just that every single person to pick up the bug did so while completely ignoring the fact that they would not or could not help it on it's mission.

 

That's what I find sad and funny at the same time. My finding humor in the logs is entirely unrelated to the fact that I find TB hotels with rules or suggestions designed to prevent TB hording or allowing others to have the opportunity to get thier hands on a TB harmless.

 

I mean seriously, forget about the issue at hand for just a moment and look at the logs for a TB with a clearly stated goal and how the goals haven't once been met for all the travelling it has done. Isn't that hilarious in a sad way?

 

Getting back to the issue at hand, I think this TB not having once been helped on it's goal illustrates precisely why rules regarding anything released into the wild are pointless. Nobody seems to care.

 

Make a take one leave one rule with the best of intentions and people will ignore the rule either because they 'know' better or simply because they don't read.

 

Attach a goal to a TB and people will ignore the goal either because they don't care or they don't read.

 

Put a trade even, trade up or don't trade 'suggestion' on the cache page and watch the cache contents steadily degrade over time anyway.

 

Go to a cache without bringing something to write with and it pretty much guarantees the cache will have had all the writing instruments mistaken as trade items.

 

Pointless to make rules, pointless to worry about rules one doesn't much like. People will do as they please either because they feel entitled to or simply because they didn't notice the flashing neon sign listing the rule|suggestion.

Link to comment

I've always understood travelbugs to be objects to be moved on if encountered - no trade necessary.

 

If I should find a cache with several TB's (such as a TB hotel) I do grab as many as I think I can move on within the next couple of weeks. I do not trade for TB's. I trade my swag for other swag. That being said, I have no problems with my TB's placed in a "hotel". But I would like from them to be moved on ASAP.

 

Unlike ALR caches, I haven't heard of a find being deleted because of one-for-one TB trades not being done. Has this been the case somewhere? Or is the main problem just the additional trading requirements placed by the hotel owners?

Link to comment
I've always understood travelbugs to be objects to be moved on if encountered - no trade necessary.

 

You are right!

 

The term "prison" refers specifically to a cache that contains any phrase or rule that restricts or limits the movement of TB's through the cache. These types of rules are put in place by geocachers who are ignorant of the proper handling of TB's.

A "hotel" is a cache that is large enough to contain several TB's placed in a location that is convenient. There is always a danger that any cache can be lost but "hotels" tend to gather bugs together because they are large and convenient and unfortunately there are many examples of "hotels" being found by non-geocachers and many Travel Bugs are lost at one time.

In either case, prison or hotel, a geocacher taking all the bugs that they could help would be the right thing to do. A Travel Bug is one of the two basic gamepieces in geocaching and when you move help a TB along in it's mission you are directly helping another geocacher.

People who place restrictions on the movement of TB's just need to read more. You would be surprised how many of the caches that get bookmarked as "prisons" have owners that show up here in the forums shortly after the cache is bookmarked. They usually want a quick fix, some way to remove the bookmark, they want to continue in their ignorance but many do read and then fix the cache.

A little reading goes a long way and once in awhile someone gets it totally right. :unsure:

Link to comment
There's nothing wrong with having a "if you take one, you have to leave one" rule.

 

You are incorrect, such a rule is clearly wrong.

 

Can you offer any valid reason why you think you have the right to restrict and hinder the Travel Bugs of other geocachers?

Why would you suggest that hindering or restricting the ability of other geocachers Travel Bugs to travel is OK?

 

There is clearly something wrong with such a rule.

Every Travel Bug belongs to another geocacher.

The owner of the Travel Bug has the right to select the mission.

No one has the right to hinder or restrict the ability of another geocacher's Travel Bug to travel.

Link to comment

 

In either case, prison or hotel, a geocacher taking all the bugs that they could help would be the right thing to do. A Travel Bug is one of the two basic gamepieces in geocaching and when you move help a TB along in it's mission you are directly helping another geocacher.

 

 

You are assuming you understand the wishes of every TB owner.

 

You clearly don't.

 

A TB hotel with a trade policy, according to the owners of such hotels that have posted in the forums, is to try and reduce the number of TBs that go missing when placed in regular caches as well as to try and maintain a place where someone trying to get started with TBs can go and find one to take when they give.

 

Regardless of how well this policy fulfills it's goal, it is a fine intent and is quite different than the claims made that they are rule mongers or TB horders.

 

I have no problem with a rule|guideline|suggestion| that might result in my TB falling into the hands of someone looking for one. I would prefer my TB not fall into the hands of someone who feels taking 10 TBs from a cache is the 'right' thing to do. In my opinion this is pure greed being justified by the greedy one as a noble act.

 

I can't control this, but I would much rather newbies be able to find my TB and get into the game than have someone with 1000 travel bug finds grab mine along with 9 other ones.

 

As I have said in other posts, please stop presuming to represent more people than you actually do. You represent only yourself, you don't represent me. My views are different than yours and are no more or less valid. You really can't say that ignoring the TB hotel policy is helping other cachers unless you know that all other cachers want that kind of help.

 

I don't.

Link to comment
You are assuming you understand the wishes of every TB owner

 

Your ability to misinterpret simple English is very well developed, what I wrote was completely correct in every respect and and contained no assumptions whatsoever. Do you even read the text you quote. I will repeat it so that it is clear.

 

In either case, prison or hotel, a geocacher taking all the bugs that they could help would be the right thing to do. A Travel Bug is one of the two basic gamepieces in geocaching and when you move help a TB along in it's mission you are directly helping another geocacher.

 

The "mission"is exactly what the other geocacher wants to have done, I am not making a single assumption but instead am doing exactly what every TB owner wants.

Is this clear to you?

 

We are not discussing your views or what you would like to see happen to your TB's. We are not discussing your opinions or your feelings. We are not discussing what TB owners might want to have happen to their TB's, we are discussing simple facts. I keep repeating them and you keep offering your feelings, opinions and mangled interpretations in counterpoint. If you want someone to restrict the ability of your Travel Bug to travel, that is your right, it is your Travel Bug.

 

Can you offer any reason why you should have the right to restrict or hinder the Travel Bugs of other geocachers? Please don't suggest that it is your right because that is how you feel.

 

I do not represent anyone and made no claims to that effect, I am telling you what the facts are. Perhaps if you addressed the facts instead of what you suspect the intentions of the owner of a prison cache might be or how you feel about your Travel Bug or what other TB owners might want you would understand this.

Link to comment
the owners of such hotels

 

have no right to hinder or restrict the Travel Bugs of other geocachers. It doesn't matter why they do it or what they post in the forums, it is clearly wrong.

 

Can you offer a single valid reason why you should be able to hinder or restrict the ability of another geocachers Travel Bug to travel?

Link to comment

No one has the right to hinder or restrict the ability of another geocacher's Travel Bug to travel.

 

Let's rephrase this so it is more accurate:

 

"No one has the right to hinder or restrict the ability of another geocacher's travel bug to accomplish it's stated goals."

 

If a TB is traveling with no stated goals then none should be presumed.

 

If a TB is traveling with stated goals, then anyone taking the TB who won't be furthering it's stated goals is in the wrong.

 

Given that TBs routinely are grabbed and placed in other caches without any attention being paid to the stated goals, clearly ignoring the TB's goals is common practice.

 

In these discussions on TB hotels more than a couple of people have stated they will gladly violate the rules of the cache in favor of the rules of the TB. The rub is some have indicated they will cheerfully empty a cache of all TBs.

 

How is this honoring the wishes of the TB owner? Is the person grabbing 10 TBs going to ensure they can further the goals of all 10?

 

Doubtful.

 

If your sincere intent is to help TB owners the only reasonable policy is to read the stated goals of every TB one encounters and take only those having goals one can and will fulfill or further.

 

I believe you are also, again, mistaking your idea of what a TB should be for other people's ideas. Fast travel may not be the chief concern for some. Safe travel may be mor important. Travelling into the hands of someone new to TBs may be more important.

 

Please stop presuming your ideas for TBs are everyones.

Link to comment

 

I do not represent anyone and made no claims to that effect, I am telling you what the facts are. Perhaps if you addressed the facts instead of what you suspect the intentions of the owner of a prison cache might be or how you feel about your Travel Bug or what other TB owners might want you would understand this.

 

How can i be any more clear? I own a TB and don't have any problem with it going to a TB hotel with a trade policy. The argument against TB hotels with a trade policy is that it is a cache owner trumping the wishes of the TB owner.

 

In some cases this is undoubtedly true. In other cases it is undoubtedly not true.

 

To assume it is universally true is an error.

 

I object when someone refers to 'TB owners' as a likeminded group and represents their opinion as my own.

 

I object when someone tries to get a type of cache banned that isn't violating any law.

 

I object when someone takes their own view so seriously that they create an antagonistic public boomark that will show up on other people's cache pages.

 

Thats about all there is to it.

 

Evidently some believe that every TB owner values super fast travel above all else and consider themselves worthy to seek bans, place antagonistic public bookmarks on other people's caches, raid caches of all TBs while leaving nothing for anyone else behind and all the while consider themselves champions of nobility rather than self proclaimed police who claim to represent people that don't even agree with them.

Link to comment
Evidently some believe that every TB owner values super fast travel above all else and consider themselves worthy to seek bans, place antagonistic public bookmarks on other people's caches, raid caches of all TBs while leaving nothing for anyone else behind and all the while consider themselves champions of nobility rather than self proclaimed police who claim to represent people that don't even agree with them.

Dave, it's just hypocrisy. Don't sweat it too much. You'll see it a lot in here. Folks who bristle at the mere thought of a "rule", wishing to impose their own "rule" on others. Go figure.

Link to comment
Please stop presuming your ideas for TBs are everyones

 

They are not my ideas, they are facts. I am not making any presumptions, perhaps you misread my past post again? I will quote it for you

 

In either case, prison or hotel, a geocacher taking all the bugs that they could help would be the right thing to do. A Travel Bug is one of the two basic gamepieces in geocaching and when you move help a TB along in it's mission you are directly helping another geocacher.

 

As you can see I made no presumptions.

Our conversation illustrates why a "prison" bookmark list is an effective tool, there are cases where dialog proves ineffective. The Travel Bug is as I noted a basic gamepiece. Anyone can become a Travel Bug owner and they can select any mission they wish for the Travel Bug, after they select the mission they release the Travel Bug into a geocache entrusting it to the care of the geocaching community, most geocachers will help move TB's.

 

Can you offer a single valid reason why you should be able to hinder or restrict the ability of another geocachers Travel Bug to proceed?

 

Your example of ten Travel Bugs in a cache is a perfect example. Let me finish it for you.

 

A geocacher comes along on a geocache finding mission (we will call it the hunt) and finds the notorious Sing Sing TB Hotel. He picks up all ten travel bugs from the cache and continues on with the "hunt". He has the ten Travel Bugs in his possession. He doesn't even realize he has busted them out of the notorious Sing Sing TB Hotel because he just had the coords, as far as he knew it was GCXXXX. He visited ten more caches, owned by ten more geocachers and drops off the ten Travel Bugs. He logs all these finds and here is what happens; ten travel bug owners get a log indicating that their TB is fine and in a new cache and ten cache owners have a TB visiting their cache making their cache temporarily more attractive to others wishing to help the newly dropped off TB's. Meanwhile back at the first cache, the Sing Sing TB Hotel, one Muggles Peering has noticed the lack of leaf cover on the Sing Sing TB Hotel and has stolen the container to store his rock collection figuring it would do wonders for his head space. Luckily the ten TB's imprisoned in the cache earlier are safe and sound and the only things actually stolen by Muggles are a used toothpick, a broken barette, a rock and some leaf litter, oh yes, quite a few bits of grass as well.

Anyway, the next day ten cachers go on ten cache "hunts" and find the ten different TB's, the intital retrieval continues to spawn good things and everyone is happy. The only unhappy geocacher is the owner of the Sing Sing TB Hotel who ends up complaining about how much work it was to capture and imprison the Travel Bugs of ten other geocachers and then write a rule up on his cache page that emphasized the Travel Bugs of other geocachers were subject to his whims, because. He is planning a new cache where all the TB's have to stay forever so they don't get stolen and he will meet every visitor right near the cache to make sure they leave ugly TB's as well as the cool ones.

Link to comment

Now you're using words like "super fast", nobody said anything about rates of speed, just simple movement without restriction. Once again, why are you arguing that a travel bug should move? Get back to the basics of it.

 

I used the phrase 'super fast travel' because other where talking about 'restricting' movement.

 

My question is this: does imposing an unenforceable trade rule on a TB hotel result in movement that is slower than in other caches, on the average?

 

I don't know the answer.

 

Neither do you.

 

Thus, I see no reason to worry about it.

 

You are also assuming TB owners don't prefer restrictions on movement. If the restriction results in the TB moving only into the hands of those who know what a TB is and the hands of those who will help it on it's specific goal rather than just move it willy nilly is this a bad thing?

 

I like the idea of a TB hotel with some rules, at least in theory. I like the idea that my investement is being handled by those who know what TBs are rather than those who mistake it as a trade item. I favor rules that result in people leaving my TB sit and wait for someone who will help it fulfill it's goal rather than just move it a couple miles to the next cache on their multiple cache foray.

 

In other words I do not value movement for the sake of movement.

 

The argument against TB hotels with rules is that the rules limit movement in ways the TB owner doesn't like.

 

My argument is that sometimes this is true, other times it is not.

 

If someone doesn't want their TB in a TB hotel with rules, then let them state that on the instruction sheet accompanying thier TB. Of course that instruction sheet will go unread and ignored, but this just illustrates the pointlessness of worrying about other people's rules and the futility of championing counter rules.

Link to comment

There is nothing wrong with a TB hotel cache. The problem is that the owners want to put stipulations on removing one. In my opinion there should be to restrictions besides if you can't help the TB, don't move it. However a lot of TB hotel cache owners want to use TB's as trade items so the hotel stays full. Rather selfish if you ask me. Well it's selfish even if you don't ask me.

 

El Diablo

 

I am still relatively new to this game, so please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I agree with El Diablo. I travel to different cities in the pacific northwest for work and family. I envision the hotels as a layover spot. If I see a TB in our local hotel and know that its heading towards the coast and I'm heading that way, then I run and grab it and take it to a hotel at my destination. And visitors to our area can drop TB's off for that same reason. I know our hotel is about a minutes drive from the main freeway through here and actually wish we had one at each or our main entrances/exits to our area.

 

As far as restrictions from the cache owners, its a layover spot and should not have any.

Link to comment

 

The only people that like the rules, are the controlling, cache owners, not the TB owners.

 

 

Actually I don't own a TB hotel of any kind, but I do own a TB and I have no problem with it spending time in a so called prison.

 

I really doubt it is going to take any longer to leave the 'prison' than the next nearest cache that is of comparable difficulty to get to and find. I figure those seeking the TB hotel are more likely to know what they are doing in regards to TBs than the seekers of regular caches who may have never heard of a travel bug.

 

So, please cease this practice of speaking for more than oneself when expressing one's personal opinion.

 

Your opinion isn't the same as mine. You are not fine with a 1 for 1 rule on caches where your TB might end up, I am fine with it.

 

Your opinion is worth no more and no less than mine.

 

Now, it would appear that Jeremy has seen this thread since he moved it to this forum and it doesn't look like TB 'prisons' are going to get archived or that the issue was of enough importance to him to even warrant a comment on the topic. I am sure this upsets you a bit and I understand. I suggested that public bookmarks be moderated to prevent negative, confrontational speech from spilling out of the forums and onto cache pages. While I haven't heard anything my guess is nothing will happen in that regard either.

 

So, can we all just move along now?

 

Your 'side' gets to manipulate a new feature to attack and insult owners of caches you don't like right on their own cache page and there is nothing they can do about it. Isn't that enough for you?

 

My prediction, if this ranting about 'prisons' keeps up, is that the effort will be counter productive and you will see people actively sending messages to the owner of the 'prison' bookmark so their new TB hotel can get added to the list.

 

Jeremy has stated his opinion on the issue twice. Both times, he has disagreed on the practice, but he has not instituted any changes yet.

 

My response to TB Prisons is to "Lead by Example," and hide a TB friendly Resort. Here are my rules:

 

Please don't leave any trade items in the cache. Multiple trips to this cache, for the purpose of moving TBs is fine by me. You do not have to leave a travel bug, in order to take one.

 

More than once, the cache had no travel bugs, and it did not bother me. When TBs stay in my resort too long, I personally retrieve them, and place them in a more active cache.

 

I dislike TB Prisons, but would rather force the ommittance of the restrictive rules, rather than archiving the caches.

Edited by Kit Fox
Link to comment

My response to TB Prisons is to "Lead by Example," and hide a TB friendly Resort. Here are my rules:

 

Please don't leave any trade items in the cache. Multiple trips to this cache, for the purpose of moving TBs is fine by me. You do not have to leave a travel bug, in order to take one.

 

 

Would you delete my log if I left a trade item in your cache? Would you delete my log if I visited when there were travel bugs in the cache and I didn't take one?

Link to comment

 

I envision the hotels as a layover spot. If I see a TB in our local hotel and know that its heading towards the coast and I'm heading that way, then I run and grab it and take it to a hotel at my destination. And visitors to our area can drop TB's off for that same reason.

 

That's how most of the TB "hotels" around here work; they're located near Park and Ride lots for I-95, which makes it easy for TBs to get routed in the right direction, and I don't think they have any "restrictions".There IS one near my S.O.'s house that's acting as somewhat of a "prison", but I think that's more because it's in a more obscure area than because of the cache's rules.

 

It's also poorly located and hidden WRT being "muggled", unfortunately; two TBs (both of which were toys that local teens, who hang out nearby to drink, would think were "cool") have gone missing, and the other two currently have been there for several months.

I'm contemplating messaging the remaining TBs' owners, and asking if they'd like me to pull their bugs out and put them in one of the more active and more secure "hotels" - or another cache - to get them moving again, and the heck with the cache's hider. I should add that said hider has moved hundreds of miles away, hasn't provided for maintenance AFAICT, and hasn't responded eitiher to logs or to the local reviewer WRT another nearby cache which was destroyed back in July.

Link to comment

...There IS one near my S.O.'s house that's acting as somewhat of a "prison", but I think that's more because it's in a more obscure area than because of the cache's rules.

 

It's also poorly located and hidden WRT being "muggled", unfortunately; two TBs (both of which were toys that local teens, who hang out nearby to drink, would think were "cool") have gone missing, and the other two currently have been there for several months.

I'm contemplating messaging the remaining TBs' owners, and asking if they'd like me to pull their bugs out and put them in one of the more active and more secure "hotels" - or another cache - to get them moving again, and the heck with the cache's hider. I should add that said hider has moved hundreds of miles away, hasn't provided for maintenance AFAICT, and hasn't responded eitiher to logs or to the local reviewer WRT another nearby cache which was destroyed back in July.

 

Given that situation I wouldn't hesitate to go get all the bugs out of it and leave a note warning future TB-droppers that the TB may get stranded there.

 

Keep bugs moving!

 

I have never seen a bug with the mission of sitting in somebody's cache!

 

Ed

Link to comment

I think that the root of the problem you are having Dave is you don't seem to understand the word "travel". That is a travel bugs objective plain and simple, that's not opinion, that's fact.

 

Yes and no.

Travel in a way to help it's goals. Yes.

Travel for the sake of travel even if it means moving away from it's goals. No.

Unless of course travel for the sake of travel is the bugs goal, or the bug has no goal...

 

Wasn't this a simple question?

Link to comment

Of course, I never would take a bug away from its goals, but even those want to travel (it just may not be in the direction I'm going). I guess that part just seems obvious to me, but made that's a big part of my problem, I assume that people have common sense.

Link to comment

My response to TB Prisons is to "Lead by Example," and hide a TB friendly Resort. Here are my rules:

 

Please don't leave any trade items in the cache. Multiple trips to this cache, for the purpose of moving TBs is fine by me. You do not have to leave a travel bug, in order to take one.

 

 

Would you delete my log if I left a trade item in your cache? Would you delete my log if I visited when there were travel bugs in the cache and I didn't take one?

 

The answer is a resounding no on both accounts.

Link to comment

My response to TB Prisons is to "Lead by Example," and hide a TB friendly Resort. Here are my rules:

 

Please don't leave any trade items in the cache. Multiple trips to this cache, for the purpose of moving TBs is fine by me. You do not have to leave a travel bug, in order to take one.

 

 

Would you delete my log if I left a trade item in your cache? Would you delete my log if I visited when there were travel bugs in the cache and I didn't take one?

 

The answer is a resounding no on both accounts.

 

Thanks Bill, just wanted to be sure when I go out that way to find coggins' new cache :)

Link to comment
Just because a cache page states some silly TB rule doesn't obligate anyone to actually follow it.
Yes, but how many people know that? Certainly not the cache owner who is in a position to place restrictions beyond the control of the bug owner.

At first I wasn't sure what you meant, after all how can anyone actually enforce any of these unfortunate TB trade restrictions? Then I read on...

 

...One person stated they will delete your find if you do not follow their bug logging rule...

:)

 

Wow, it never dawned on me that someone would actually do something like that! I guess I have been lucky in as much as I have not experienced that kind of pettiness among geocachers. The idea that a cache owner would delete a find because of a TB trade rule is just absurd. Sheesh! Is having an occasionally empty TB hotel such a bad thing?!? No. Seems to me that if someone wants a frequently visited TB hotel, focusing on finding an excellent location and preparing a suitably large cache container will do far more than imposing some goofy rules and making childish threats...

 

As for me, I will continue to ignore TB trade restrictions and help those bugs move! If I get a log or two deleted in the process so be it...

Link to comment

 

Keep bugs moving!

 

I have never seen a bug with the mission of sitting in somebody's cache!

 

Ed

 

You are assuming you understand the wishes of every TB owner.

 

You clearly don't.

 

Please stop presuming your ideas for TBs are everyones.

 

Read my sig line, Brian! I speak for no one but me, and go out of my way to make that clear.

 

To the point, can you show me a single bug with the mission of sitting in someone's cache for long periods of time?

 

I may not understand the wishes of every TB owner, but I would bet there are no 'let me sit here' wishes among them.

 

When you tell everyone else to stop voicing their opinion in these forums then I will as well.

 

Until then I will do as does every other poster here and state my opinions and ideas when and where I think they will be of value!

 

Ed

Link to comment
after all how can anyone actually enforce any of these unfortunate TB trade restrictions?

 

Actually, this is the root of the problem. (Yes, there was really a cacher that listed they would delete finds on their cache page and it has since been removed. No Hamsters were hurt in the process.)

 

People feel an obligation to follow the requirements posted by a cache owner. And as long as it is within gc.com guidelines I don't disagree. Answers for virtuals, photos for webcams, signing the log, whatever. Cool by me.

 

Now we have travel bugs. A cache owner says that to log travel bugs through their cache you need to do, XYZ. The majority of people think they need to follow the guidelines set down by the cache owner. I understand that mindset. Not following the owner’s requirements to log their cache is a "one off". The problem is that the owner was never in a position to set requirements for a TB they didn't release themselves. They may think they have the right, but they don't.

 

So we have people setting a requirement that others will tend to follow. And in my opinion, saying that it’s okay to place the restriction because people don’t have to follow it is bordering on being a despicable person and a liar. It’s an excuse to keep their rule and laying the responsibility on the finder to stand up to them.

 

I can focus on educating people that they do not have to follow the restrictions concerning travel bugs and hope they feel empowered enough to stand up to an owner who sends them complaining emails that they aren’t being fair to other cachers. Or I can address these few owners and remove these unwarranted restrictions placed on travel bugs release by the community. I’m willing to take the heat.

 

(cue music)

Link to comment

Well said Blue Deuce.

 

There are a few hundred Prisons out there spreading this wrong information, and no doubt thousands of cachers that don't know any better, which is the more productive solution? These hotels are generally found often, as they are conveniently located, so when you do the math, you can see how quickly this information spreads. 200 caches get hit 4 times in one month by people that take this to be how it is and there are 800 more cachers who think that TB's are trade items and not to be moved otherwise. Sure, the number is going to jump up and down, but most hotels get hit more than once a week and even if they don't, that's just a number for a month, do it for a year.

 

Doing something about these few hundred caches would be far more effective than trying to reach out to the geocachers of the world.

Edited by Hula Bum
Link to comment

 

Keep bugs moving!

 

I have never seen a bug with the mission of sitting in somebody's cache!

 

Ed

 

You are assuming you understand the wishes of every TB owner.

 

You clearly don't.

 

Please stop presuming your ideas for TBs are everyones.

 

Read my sig line, Brian! I speak for no one but me, and go out of my way to make that clear.

 

To the point, can you show me a single bug with the mission of sitting in someone's cache for long periods of time?

 

I may not understand the wishes of every TB owner, but I would bet there are no 'let me sit here' wishes among them.

 

When you tell everyone else to stop voicing their opinion in these forums then I will as well.

 

Until then I will do as does every other poster here and state my opinions and ideas when and where I think they will be of value!

 

Ed

OOHH, I thought he was joking.

:):):)

 

Gotta use more SMILIES next time, BrianSnat :):) (unless you weren't kidding.... and then, in that case... :) )

Link to comment
...A cache owner says that to log travel bugs through their cache you need to do, XYZ. The majority of people think they need to follow the guidelines set down by the cache owner. I understand that mindset. Not following the owner’s requirements to log their cache is a "one off". The problem is that the owner was never in a position to set requirements for a TB they didn't release themselves. They may think they have the right, but they don't... I can focus on educating people that they do not have to follow the restrictions concerning travel bugs and hope they feel empowered enough to stand up to an owner who sends them complaining emails that they aren’t being fair to other cachers. Or I can address these few owners and remove these unwarranted restrictions placed on travel bugs release by the community.
...There are a few hundred Prisons out there spreading this wrong information, and no doubt thousands of cachers that don't know any better, which is the more productive solution?... Doing something about these few hundred caches would be far more effective than trying to reach out to the geocachers of the world.
Ahhh, I see your point and I must agree. If an effective way is found to educate the minority of offending cache owners, surely that would be an easier solution than trying to educate the majority of geocachers who simply don't know better. I can easily imagine that if I were a new cacher and saw one of these TB prisons I might mistake it as being the correct way of doing things, blindly follow its 'rules' and even possibly emulate it in creating a cache of my own... Definitely bad mojo!

 

I am still kinda shocked that someone would use threats of deleted finds to enforce such silliness; however, I am quite relieved about the Hamsters!

 

:)

 

(Edited for bad spelling... Yikes!)

Edited by Team Snorkasaurus
Link to comment

So let me see if I have this right. GC sells us a travel bug that is sold under the ideal of being a trackable item that moves from place to place, picking up stories along the way. TPTB state pretty clearly that travel bugs are meant to travel, hence the name. So everyone from the buyer to the seller are on the same page. Now GC allows cache owners to put stipulations on their cache pages which appear to supercede the travel bug owners rights. Sure there will always be a few people who won't adhere to the cache page rules, but aren't we suppose to as good cachers? Seems to me the only thing we are lacking is TPTB stating this practice is no longer acceptable. Worked fine when they got rid of pocket caches. How about it GC? Seems rather simple to me.

Link to comment

There's nothing wrong with having a "if you take one, you have to leave one" rule. It's not much different from the trading rule for regular caches. In fact, there's a name for TB Hotels that don't have a rule of this type...

 

 

 

 

 

"Empty"

 

What exactly is wrong with an "Empty" TB Hotel?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...10-d5aae19ced75

 

I'm perfectly fine with it's occasional "Empty" status.

 

By the way trading rules DO NOT apply to travel bugs. You will never convince me that they do.

Never said the trade rule applied to travel bugs. But the reason behind it applies to tbug hotels - making sure there's always something there for visitors.

Link to comment

I feel like a travel bug prison is just a stage on a bug's journey. It might be interesting to see how fast someone trades for my bug. Then if it sits there too long, I'll ask the cache owner to move it along for me. Would anyone refuse, really?

Link to comment

There's nothing wrong with having a "if you take one, you have to leave one" rule. It's not much different from the trading rule for regular caches. In fact, there's a name for TB Hotels that don't have a rule of this type...

 

 

 

 

 

"Empty"

 

What exactly is wrong with an "Empty" TB Hotel?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...10-d5aae19ced75

 

I'm perfectly fine with it's occasional "Empty" status.

 

By the way trading rules DO NOT apply to travel bugs. You will never convince me that they do.

Never said the trade rule applied to travel bugs. But the reason behind it applies to tbug hotels - making sure there's always something there for visitors.

 

That's what the regular trade items are for.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...