+Don_J Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 I have had a coin sit in a cache for 18 months while dozens of people logged the cache as found. None of them felt that it was appropriate to move my coin because they didn't have anything to trade for it. And how do you know that is the reason. Because several mentioned it in their logs. They felt that they had to abide by the warden's rules. Since they did not have a traveler to trade, they simply left what was in the prison alone. Don't you think after a year you would have said something? I did. Eventually a local made a special trip and found it at the very bottom of the ammo can. He placed it in another cache where it disappeared. Quote Link to comment
+malo mystery Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 As for nanos being sized as other, I rather like that. I then know it probably is a nano and if I'm traveling or otherwise don't care to do nanos this is good indication. A good indicator of a micro/ nano is when there are no references to swag dropped or swapped, aswell as no TB/coin history other than being dipped/visiting. Quote Link to comment
+ihorn Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Now now, don't trash the cache. A little clarification with the cache owner usually takes care the the issue. I never said trash, I said trap. There is a difference between the two of them. Okay. Trapping a bug means you restrict the movement. What's trapping a cache, pray tell? Ahhh that is for me to know. I will never tell me secrets. Just TB's will appear in other caches magically. Quote Link to comment
+geodarts Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 (edited) Because I have been tested for TB due to outbreaks at prisons, I completely misread the topic. Still, I always chant, "Free the Geocoins" and "Free the Travelers." I don't mind it that much if a few of mine languish for awhile because a cache owner is being proprietary, although I appreciate it when people ignore silly restrictions except for the ones that I put with the coin case, but I do wish a few people would free some of mine from the bottom of their backpack or a box with their private collection. Edited August 17, 2010 by mulvaney Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Because I have been tested for TB LOL, I did the 9 month Isoniazid treatment. That means I am immune to Travel Bugs. Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Once you let a traveler free, you are no longer in control. I sent my Critter Cache coin out there and the the second cacher to recover it took a 7500 mile trip in their RV, through northern Mexico and Southern USA. They dipped it into about fifty caches. It gained a whole bunch of miles. Big deal! I put the coin out there to share it with others. So, in a nutshell, I have a coin that has traveled thousands of miles, yet only been shared with two cachers and is probably sitting in the glove compartment of an RV that is parked in a driveway in Texas. Quote Link to comment
+DragonsWest Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 Once you let a traveler free, you are no longer in control. I sent my Critter Cache coin out there and the the second cacher to recover it took a 7500 mile trip in their RV, through northern Mexico and Southern USA. They dipped it into about fifty caches. It gained a whole bunch of miles. Big deal! I put the coin out there to share it with others. So, in a nutshell, I have a coin that has traveled thousands of miles, yet only been shared with two cachers and is probably sitting in the glove compartment of an RV that is parked in a driveway in Texas. Same sort of disappointment on one of my TBs. It was picked up by someone in SoCal and kept going to events and flashmobs, but never changing hands or moving along. I finally prodded the holder and it's moving again. Some people don't quite get it. Still, it's better than going missing altogether. Quote Link to comment
+Prime Suspect Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 (edited) OK, the TB prison in question was published this year, 2010. Why was this not noticed during the reviewing process? Why does something like this have to be brought to a reviewers attention after the fact? I could (but won't) post links to dozens of TB prisons published this year. Just do a keyword search for "TB Hotel" or "Travel Bug", and you'll see them. I know you guys are busy, but the list keeps growing: caches that are not handicap accessable being rated as 1 star terrain, Obvious nanos listed as other size or unknown size, worthless non-hints in the hint field (i.e. "no hint" or "none" in a field that tells you if you don't have one, leave it blank) and obvious TB Prisons. Why are these things not nipped in the bud up front? It seems like they are sometimes, and with certain reviewers, but it's very inconsistent. Most of what you've listed does not rise to the level of being Guideline violations. There is a generally agreed upon convention that 1-star terrain = handicap accessible, but it's not rule, and reviewers have no authority to enforce it. All they can do is suggest to the owner that the reevaluate it. Likewise, there it nothing that requires an owner to identify the size of their cache. They can use "Other" whenever they want to. And reviewers are not the Hint police. People are given the opportunity to either create a helpful hint, or to show just what schmucks they are. Edited August 17, 2010 by Prime Suspect Quote Link to comment
+baloo&bd Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 The Rules for this cache State "If you take a TB, then you HAVE to Leave a TB". That alone is an ALR. Correct. A finder, like the OP, can bring this matter to the attention of the local reviewer and you will see the "Rules" disappear from the cache page. If that is the case, see this bookmark for a bunch of ALRs. However, I do not agree it is an ALR, it is request I enjoy ignoring as often as possible. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 OK, the TB prison in question was published this year, 2010. Why was this not noticed during the reviewing process? Why does something like this have to be brought to a reviewers attention after the fact? I could (but won't) post links to dozens of TB prisons published this year. Just do a keyword search for "TB Hotel" or "Travel Bug", and you'll see them. I know you guys are busy, but the list keeps growing: caches that are not handicap accessable being rated as 1 star terrain, Obvious nanos listed as other size or unknown size, worthless non-hints in the hint field (i.e. "no hint" or "none" in a field that tells you if you don't have one, leave it blank) and obvious TB Prisons. Why are these things not nipped in the bud up front? It seems like they are sometimes, and with certain reviewers, but it's very inconsistent. Most of what you've listed does not rise to the level of being Guideline violations. There is a generally agreed upon convention that 1-star terrain = handicap accessible, but it's not rule, and reviewers have no authority to enforce it. All they can do is suggest to the owner that the reevaluate it. Likewise, there it nothing that requires an owner to identify the size of their cache. They can use "Other" whenever they want to. And reviewers are not the Hint police. People are given the opportunity to either create a helpful hint, or to show just what schmucks they are. Guidelines violations? No. Well, except the TB prisons, and it seems in many cases nothing is being done there. So what if they're not guideline violations, we're just going to have thousands of incorrectly listed caches, and have some reviewers nip these little "wrong" things in the bud up front on a highly inconsistent basis? Because I have seen that some reviwers are the one star terrain is handicap accessable police. And some reviewers are the worthless hint police. As far as the nano's, we can have HQ state "35 mm and smaller is a micro" until they're blue in the face, but still 90%+ of the nanos I see listed in the NE U.S. and Ontario are listed as "other" or "not listed". Are 90%+ of the smalls listed as such? Quote Link to comment
+thelanes Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 ...It's like getting stuck at a 4 way stop and not being allowed to go until someone else comes up to the intersection. One could be stuck there for a LONG time. That is funny. There was an intersection on my way home that the light would only turn green when someone came up to the light from the other direction. When coming home at 2AM, I could have to wait a long time. I usualy just ran the Red. Back on topic, I would have to try realy hard not to send that CO some nasty flame mail. TB's and GC's are made to move. If I find one, I take it. If I go to a "TB Hotel", I go there with the intention of taking at least one TB. If there a lot of TB's, I grab the ones I like regardless of the number I take or leave behind. I would not respond back to the CO. All that is going to do is get you in an e-mail writing contest, which is a waste of time. I think you are in the right on this one. Quote Link to comment
+Devil Hunter Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 The Rules for this cache State "If you take a TB, then you HAVE to Leave a TB". That alone is an ALR. Correct. A finder, like the OP, can bring this matter to the attention of the local reviewer and you will see the "Rules" disappear from the cache page. So u are saying any "rules" on the cache page is an "ALR" even it isnt a logging requirement rule? I'm jumping into this halfway, and haven't read the remainder of the thread, but I felt compelled to reply to this one. Any ALR that is not directly geocaching related is going against the new cache regulations. There is a little "wiggle room" that is left for interpretation, there, but it's pretty straight forward. Quote Link to comment
+Scubasonic Posted August 18, 2010 Author Share Posted August 18, 2010 (edited) I would not respond back to the CO. All that is going to do is get you in an e-mail writing contest, which is a waste of time. Not a waste of time at all there was some mud slung back and forth when I emailed the CO which for me is no big deal, but at the end of the day the CO removed the rules thus making it a normal "TB Hotel" instead of a Prison and now understands and all is well. If everyone took the attitude that you suggest nothing would have changed, and there still would have been a "TB Prison" out there with 10 trackables prisoners in it. I never was the one to take the path of less resistance....... Scubasonic Edited August 18, 2010 by Scubasonic Quote Link to comment
+ihorn Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Attica, Attica, Attica. Sorry just had to since no one else has yet. Quote Link to comment
+Prime Suspect Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Guidelines violations? No. Well, except the TB prisons, and it seems in many cases nothing is being done there. So what if they're not guideline violations, we're just going to have thousands of incorrectly listed caches, and have some reviewers nip these little "wrong" things in the bud up front on a highly inconsistent basis? Because I have seen that some reviwers are the one star terrain is handicap accessable police. And some reviewers are the worthless hint police. As far as the nano's, we can have HQ state "35 mm and smaller is a micro" until they're blue in the face, but still 90%+ of the nanos I see listed in the NE U.S. and Ontario are listed as "other" or "not listed". Are 90%+ of the smalls listed as such? Your error is considering "Other" as a being wrong, instead of a what it actually is, a choice the owner is free to make. There is no rule that says the owner has to reveal the size or type of the cache. Quote Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 I would not respond back to the CO. All that is going to do is get you in an e-mail writing contest, which is a waste of time. Not a waste of time at all there was some mud slung back and forth when I emailed the CO which for me is no big deal, but at the end of the day the CO removed the rules thus making it a normal "TB Hotel" instead of a Prison and now understands and all is well. If everyone took the attitude that you suggest nothing would have changed, and there still would have been a "TB Prison" out there with 10 trackables prisoners in it. I never was the one to take the path of less resistance....... Scubasonic Some people are not ready for that fight and that's okay. As Eartha says, The goal of the Travel Bug supersedes the wishes of the cache owner. They are meant to move. You may move them. Any problems, send them to me. Quote Link to comment
Andronicus Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 ... If that is the case, see this bookmark for a bunch of ALRs. However, I do not agree it is an ALR, it is request I enjoy ignoring as often as possible. Your list needs some updating as at least one of those caches have relaxed their "rules" somewhat (see http://coord.info/GCMJEJ). Quote Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 (edited) ... If that is the case, see this bookmark for a bunch of ALRs. However, I do not agree it is an ALR, it is request I enjoy ignoring as often as possible. Your list needs some updating as at least one of those caches have relaxed their "rules" somewhat (see http://coord.info/GCMJEJ. BUT do not leave it empty Not good enough. (Edit: which I'm sure you agree) Edited August 18, 2010 by BlueDeuce Quote Link to comment
+baloo&bd Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 ... If that is the case, see this bookmark for a bunch of ALRs. However, I do not agree it is an ALR, it is request I enjoy ignoring as often as possible. Your list needs some updating as at least one of those caches have relaxed their "rules" somewhat (see http://coord.info/GCMJEJ. BUT do not leave it empty Not good enough. (Edit: which I'm sure you agree) Yep, still qualifies. Quote Link to comment
+NYPaddleCacher Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Once you let a traveler free, you are no longer in control. I sent my Critter Cache coin out there and the the second cacher to recover it took a 7500 mile trip in their RV, through northern Mexico and Southern USA. They dipped it into about fifty caches. It gained a whole bunch of miles. Big deal! I put the coin out there to share it with others. So, in a nutshell, I have a coin that has traveled thousands of miles, yet only been shared with two cachers and is probably sitting in the glove compartment of an RV that is parked in a driveway in Texas. Same sort of disappointment on one of my TBs. It was picked up by someone in SoCal and kept going to events and flashmobs, but never changing hands or moving along. I finally prodded the holder and it's moving again. Some people don't quite get it. Still, it's better than going missing altogether. Discussion of trackable items seem to come up quite frequently in the Geocaching Topics forum and inevitably the discussion leads to stories of disappointment about how TBs are handled by other geocachers. I think it's about time to recognize those that keep trackables moving, helping a TB achieve it's goal, place them in "safe" caches and rescue them from prisons, and generally take a Golden Rule approach in how they treat someone else property. A short time after I started geocaching I bought a TB tag and then tried to come up with an idea for it. Because I do a lot of work with the international agriculture community (I work for one of the largest agriculture libraries in the world) I've collect a fair amount for foreign coins that I've put in box to create a collection for my son. I found a little plastic pig, cut a coin slot in the top, painted it pink, attached a TB tag to it and sent it out with a goal to collect foreign coins. I got to a cache about 60 miles north and was stuck there for several months before it was rescued by a team called "MaxB On The River". The took the Piggy TB to a few events, not make it available for others to discover, but because they do sort of a TB Roadshow. The took lots of photos, moved it to a few different caches before sending it on it's way. It spent the next couple years mostly in MIchigan but made a short trip south then ended up in Indiana. Someone that moved it there mentioned that it was getting heavy so I edit the listing and changed the goal, asking finders to try to start moving it back to Ithaca. A couple of weeks ago I got email from a team called "thedisco". They had picked up the Piggy TB in a cache in Indiana and was going to be vacationing about 50 miles from here and said they'd drop it off in a cache when they got here. I got email from them a couple of days ago. They said that they'd were extending their vacation a bit, were planning on visiting my town, and asked which cache I'd prefer to have the TB dropped. It's here yet but it's really nice to see geocachers take care of others TBs this way. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.