Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
InkyCat

"Don't take a TB without leaving one" - WHY?

Recommended Posts

Hey geoholic.

Do you know why the word tadpole is under my picture. (the eye)

reply above yours.

20hertz

Share this post


Link to post
Hey geoholic.

Do you know why the word tadpole is under my picture. (the eye)

reply above yours.

20hertz

Once you have 10 forum posts, it will change to geocacher. If you become a premium member, you can change it to whatever you wish.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks WH

 

And Geoholic, The only reason I directed the question to you was...I thought I would quick catch you since you just posted a message.

Share this post


Link to post

I know this is an old topic but...

 

In the begining there were not that many travel bugs and I guess the hotels at once was a way for a new cacher to find travel bugs. Now with so many events and people trading travel bugs all the time I find there is less of a need of a travel bug hotel.

Maybe just a cache that is large or extra large that has a theme of travel bugs.

Share this post


Link to post

I have started seeing the 'don't take one without leaving one' comment. Hotel owners probably want to make sure a good stock is available for bug movers, but different areas have different circumstances. I view the take one leave one hotels not as hotels, but prisons, keeping bugs in there for long times, especially if it's not a particularly interesting looking bug.

 

If a person is going to take the time to set up a Travel Bug hotel, then they should also understand that the upkeep of that hotel is different than regular caches. They should be prepared to restock their hotel with more bugs should the need arise, and as an owner of a bug hotel, the need arises more often than you'd think. I think the take one leave one policy is the lazy man's way of creating a cache that needs little maintenance. Travel Bug Hotels are unique entities and should be maintained as one, not turned into prisons for bugs to languish. I have seen instructions on a number of Travel Bug Hotels, to the effect that you should not take a TB unless you can leave one - sometimes it's suggested that if you take one, you should leave two! It just doesn't make sense to me...if the goal of the TBs is to travel, the owners should be glad they're taken and moved along. Show me in the RULES where it states Hotels are take one leave one for T-Bugs? Let's say there's a TB hotel near my house, with a bug in it whose goal is to get to Florida; I'm leaving for Florida tomorrow, but I don't have a TB of my own. Do you agree I should NOT take the bug? The cache owner is setting these rules, but I would think that the TB owners would rather their bugs get moving. My take is the hotel should be a quick and easy place to drop off a bug or pick up a bug. Just because they are in your cache doesn’t mean you take ownership of then, that isn’t fair to the person that owns the bug and wants it to travel, you can’t just hold it hostage!

lemward

Share this post


Link to post

One for One trading is wrong. Harvesting bugs against their goal just to stock a cache is way beyond wrong.

 

Basically:

 

"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." - The Hermit Crabs, Dec 2 2005

 

If you can assist a bug towards it's goal, move it. If you can assist ten bugs towards their goals move'em all.

 

Anybody complains, send'em my way. I'll be right here.

Share this post


Link to post

1. Travel bugs are meant to travel. If one has a particular mission, and you can help it, do so.

 

2. Travel bugs not released by the cache owner are not the personal property of a cache owner, and said cache owner does not have the right to control the movement of travel bug in question.

 

3. Cache owners need to remember that they chose to place the cache, that providing a place for the exchange of travel bugs was taken voluntarily, and we thank them. However, if a travel bug was meant to stay in their cache, it would have been named a "homesteading bug", and would have come with an armchair and plate of nachos.

 

4. Cachers are asked to be considerate of others, and leave any TB that they cannot help on it's mission or move to a location better suited for the mission. Others want to discover and move the TBs too.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post

I just released my first travel bug today. I released it in a TB hotel. Never went to a TB hotel before, but was kind of unpleasantly surprised when I found there were no other TBs in it.

 

I was sort of expecting there would be several TBs in the cache and I could sort through them figuring out which one I could help in it's mission.

 

So, I agree TBs are meant to move, but at the same time if you are into TBs, why would you go to a TB hotel without one?

 

This TB hotel didn't have any don't take if you don't leave rule, but it seems to me that in most cases it would be a good personal policy.

 

If you don't leave one, then you leave nothing for other TB seekers to enjoy. If you simply cannot leave one I understand, but if one just goes out and grabs travel bugs without leaving any behind as a matter of routine I doubt it is because one is noble and trying to move them, but that one is selfish and trying to get numbers.

Share this post


Link to post

It seems like this is a fair topic, but one that should be discussed on a forum, not on personal cache pages. I think a friendly e-mail to the cache owner is appropriate and, if necessary, edits may be made. I haven't heard from anyone in our area that this is of huge concern, however, I've recently found a bookmark listing for this discussion placed on my cache page. I'll consider rewording the instructions, but anyone who knows how to log and move a bug knows that the "bug goals" trump the "cache goals." So, in the mean time, how do I remove a bookmark listing from "Criminal" that has been attached to my cache page?

Share this post


Link to post

Any cache is a good cache for a TB, unless it won't fit. Any easily accessible cache is a good place for someone passing through to drop off a TB. Travel bugs are not trade items. Trading one for one is not up to the cache owner. We should be helping bugs along to complete their goals. Sometimes hotels don't have any guests. Sometimes they do. Stripping the area caches of bugs, just to stock a TB hotel, is wrong. More bugs and coins go lost/stolen because of muggled/vandalized TB hotels than any other method, from all I've read here lately. If you must place a TB motel, hide it well, in a muggle free zone, and don't put requirements on bugs you do not own.

Share this post


Link to post

If I have one I leave one but if I dont I still move the bug if I can help its goal

Share this post


Link to post
it would be a good personal policy

 

No it wouldn't be good personal policy, it would be a bad personal policy and it would be bad advice to suggest that trading TB's is something people should do.

 

People are helping other geocachers when they move Travel Bugs, this is good personal policy and it is good advice. This is a very very simple program, a very simple concept. TB's are not placed to reward other geocachers nor are TB's placed to be trade items, they are placed placed to travel. When you see a TB help move it along to another geocache, this is good personal policy.

 

Good personal policy would embrace the fact that TB's belong to other geocachers and helping move them is helping other geocachers. Move every travel Bug you can help, this is very simple. Never trade a TB, it isn't a Trade Item, never hinder TB movements.

Share this post


Link to post
not on personal cache pages

 

You are using your cache to trap and hold the TB's of other geocachers. Your hotel cache is restrictive and it hinders TB movements. Your approach may be rewarding to you but it is completely devoid of any respect for TB owners. Your cache page is a logical place to add a public bookmark that indicates your cache is a prison that traps and hinders TB's.

 

You imply that anyone should be able to dsiscern that the TB's goals take precednece yet you make a cache page that clearly ignores the wishes of all TB owners and attempts to restrict TB movement. If as you say it should be clear to everyone why is it not clear to you?

Share this post


Link to post
not on personal cache pages

 

You are using your cache to trap and hold the TB's of other geocachers. Your hotel cache is restrictive and it hinders TB movements. Your approach may be rewarding to you but it is completely devoid of any respect for TB owners. Your cache page is a logical place to add a public bookmark that indicates your cache is a prison that traps and hinders TB's.

 

You imply that anyone should be able to dsiscern that the TB's goals take precednece yet you make a cache page that clearly ignores the wishes of all TB owners and attempts to restrict TB movement. If as you say it should be clear to everyone why is it not clear to you?

 

As a TB owner I simply disagree with you. Yes, I want it to move, but I don't wish it to move into the hands of someone who doesn't know what a TB is and will mistake it as a trade item. I released my TB into a hotel figuring the odds are better that a finder of a TB hotel will understand what a TB is than if it is found in a regular cache filled with trade items.

 

I also don't have any problem with a 'take one leave one' policy. In my view I may be the owner of the TB, but I don't own other people's fun or experiences. I would rather my bug sat waiting for someone who would leave another bug behind so the next seeker could also enjoy picking up a bug than it fall into the hands of some numbers freak who would take 10 TBs from a cache and leave nothing behind while believing themselves to be noble rather than incredibly selfish.

 

So, please don't presume to speak for all TB owners with your comments. Your views do not represent mine.

 

I just released my first bug and have several more tags waiting to go and it is my intention to release every single one in a TB hotel and have no problem with a take one leave one policy, in fact I prefer it over the bugs being placed into random caches where they get mistaken for trade items and taken out of circulation.

Share this post


Link to post
not on personal cache pages

 

Your cache page is a logical place to add a public bookmark that indicates your cache is a prison that traps and hinders TB's.

 

 

In my opinion public bookmarks that appear on cache pages without the cache owner's consent simply take the argumentative, ill will filled nature of these forums and spill it out amongst the general caching population that doesn't bother with these forums because they are so filled with ill will and arguments.

 

I don't see any good coming from it and think TPTB would be wise to have 'approvers' for public bookmark lists just the same as they do for cache placements and forum posts.

 

Not everyone thinks the take one leave one TB hotels are good or bad and I think a public bookmark list showing up unsolicited on a cache page to slam the cache is about as helpful as allowing the general public to post political comments on cache pages.

 

It will universally anger the cache owner and cause strife and division. Fine for the forums, but not on cache pages.

 

Edited to add: If anyone disagrees with what I have said concerning public bookmark lists, please send me a list of all your caches so I can add them to my public 'lamest caches in history' list which will then show up on all your cache pages. If you wouldn't like that then please don't abuse bookmarks to express your negative opinion of other people's caches.

Edited by DaveA

Share this post


Link to post

If these forums are so full of ill will and arguments then why are you on here? And your last statement about people disagreeing and threatening to put their caches on a "lamest" list, without even having done them is just childish. People can have differing opinions, don't turn it into a playground tantrum.

Share this post


Link to post
I also don't have any problem with a 'take one leave one' policy. In my view I may be the owner of the TB, but I don't own other people's fun or experiences. I would rather my bug sat waiting for someone who would leave another bug behind so the next seeker could also enjoy picking up a bug than it fall into the hands of some numbers freak who would take 10 TBs from a cache and leave nothing behind while believing themselves to be noble rather than incredibly selfish.

How could it be considered selfish if one takes 10 travel bugs from a cache, as long as all of those travel bugs are moved to another cache within a reasonable period of time? Since travel bugs are never supposed to be kept by geocachers, there is no net change in travel bugs distributed to caches by responsible geocachers.

 

If I take 10 travel bugs from a single cache, I will move them to 10 different caches. If I don't find any travel bugs in those 10 caches, then there is no net change in travel bugs distributed to caches. This provides up to 10 geocachers (the next geocacher to visit each of these caches) with an opportunity to find each of these travel bugs.

 

Accusing a geocacher who takes 10 travel bugs from a cache, then moves them to other caches, is like accusing a person who earns a lot of money of being selfish, even if he eventually gives all of his earned money away.

 

Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Edited by Highpointer

Share this post


Link to post

If these forums are so full of ill will and arguments then why are you on here? And your last statement about people disagreeing and threatening to put their caches on a "lamest" list, without even having done them is just childish. People can have differing opinions, don't turn it into a playground tantrum.

 

It's the latest PC trend. "You can disagree with someone's actions, but you cannot say it out loud because people will be offended. And offending people is wrong. We can't have peace unless we all get along."

 

I'm hoping at some point they realize the irony of their position.

 

edit: ie

Edited by BlueDeuce

Share this post


Link to post

If these forums are so full of ill will and arguments then why are you on here?

 

Because I haven't the slightest problem with it. Some do though and check in once and stay away. Surely if you have ever met up with any cachers you have heard the comments regarding the forums?

 

And your last statement about people disagreeing and threatening to put their caches on a "lamest" list, without even having done them is just childish.

 

I am pleased you think so. I agree. I haven't done this and have no intentions of doing this. I was giving an example of how easy it is to cause strife not simply on forums where disagreement and debate are common, but on the GC.com site where it isn't so common. The TB prison bookmark shows up on cache owner's pages whether they wish it to or not. This seems to me to be inviting discord and angst. I really doubt this was what TPTB intended when they created bookmarks.

 

The TB prison bookmark serves no constructive purpose. It exists solely to piss off cache owners whose page the bookmark appears on and cause division among cachers who would prefer to stay away from the strife.

 

People have opinions. Cache pages are not the place for freedom of speech, they are a place to list a cache and log visits. Forums are fine for strongly expressed opinions.

 

People can have differing opinions, don't turn it into a playground tantrum.

 

I haven't. I am not the one who has created a public bookmark that shows up on hundreds of cache pages bashing them without the cache owner's consent and leaving the cache owner no choice but to accept it or archive their listing here and go elsewhere.

 

The TB prison public bookmark is immature, childish, adversarial, promotes nothing constructive and in my opinion ought to be removed by the powers that be ASAP if they don't want the usual level of disagreement and angst on the forums spilling over to the relatively placid cache pages and logs.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally think the Travel Bug Prison bookmark is wonderful and constructive. I do not want to go to a cache with these rules in place and this makes it easy to spot them. If you don't care about the rules being imposed then just ignore the bookmark list, no harm no foul.

I don't think it's causing angst amongst cachers. I think most cachers take it for what it is, someone's opinions. If you like the opinion you go with it and use it, if you don't, you blow it off. I think it's causing angst amongst the forum junkies, cuz, well, that's what we seem to thrive on in here.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally think the Travel Bug Prison bookmark is wonderful and constructive. I do not want to go to a cache with these rules in place and this makes it easy to spot them. If you don't care about the rules being imposed then just ignore the bookmark list, no harm no foul.

I don't think it's causing angst amongst cachers. I think most cachers take it for what it is, someone's opinions. If you like the opinion you go with it and use it, if you don't, you blow it off. I think it's causing angst amongst the forum junkies, cuz, well, that's what we seem to thrive on in here.

 

True, forum junkies like us thrive on the angst, but are the cache pages on the GC.com site really the place for venting opinions? Seriously. Are they? Isn't that more what the forums are for?

Share this post


Link to post

Just see it different ways I guess, I don't take them to nec. be a bad thing. If someone starts bookmarking "lame" puzzles and I happen to agree with their definition of "lame" I would find it very useful. If you are the opposite and think those particular puzzles are great, then hey, use it and go do them all instead of ignoring them like me. Just like the hotel/prison one, if you like this type of cache then take his list and go find them. Just because he set it up for his purpose doesn't mean you have to use it the same way.

Share this post


Link to post

Just see it different ways I guess, I don't take them to nec. be a bad thing. If someone starts bookmarking "lame" puzzles and I happen to agree with their definition of "lame" I would find it very useful. If you are the opposite and think those particular puzzles are great, then hey, use it and go do them all instead of ignoring them like me. Just like the hotel/prison one, if you like this type of cache then take his list and go find them. Just because he set it up for his purpose doesn't mean you have to use it the same way.

 

In your above comments you appear to be falling back on a live and let live stance. That's fine, but it seems inconsistent when you previously said "And your last statement about people disagreeing and threatening to put their caches on a "lamest" list, without even having done them is just childish. People can have differing opinions, don't turn it into a playground tantrum."

 

Here is the thing: My personal opinion is that the public bookmark bashing TB hotels is beyond unconstructive. Who really needs a public bookmark pointing out that one person's opinion is they are 'prisons'?

 

How will anyone benefit from that? What will the bookmark tell them they didnt' already know? What constructive purpose does it serve?

 

So, why is it fine to have a public bookmark bashing hundreds of people's TB hotels, but I would be 'childish' and having a 'playground tantrum' if I decided to create a public bookmark list criticising the creator of the list's caches? Maybe I would call my list "The intolerant bigots caches" or something similarly inflamatory.

 

Would you then think it was OK? Constructive? Healthy to have on the main site cache pages?

 

Don't worry, I could do it, but I won't|wouldn't. I am not that childish to misuse a great new feature to take my personal opinions off the forums and start ruining the experience for hundreds of cache owners at a time on the main site. That there are some who justify|support this use of bookmarks just confounds me.

Edited by DaveA

Share this post


Link to post
one person's opinion

 

You seem incapable of grasping the fact that every TB is owned by another geocacher, this is not an opinion, it is a fact. The owner of every TB is free to set whatever mission they want, this is a fact as well. If you want your TB to sit around until someone puts another TB in it's place then you are free to set that as the mission because it is your TB. If I want your TB to sit around until it is replaced by another TB I am infringing on your rights because it is your TB, this is very simple stuff and it is factually correct.

There are two basic gamepieces in geocaching, Geocaches and Travel Bugs. If you own a Travel Bug, you set the mission for that Travel Bug, whatever it might be, no one has any right to place restrictive covenants on your Travel Bug's movements. A Travel Bug that has had it's ability to travel restricted has been imprisoned, the term is factually correct, it is what has happened to the Travel Bug.

I am not sure how you expect these simple facts to be set aside for the notions you are offering.

 

Your opinion indicating it is "good policy" to trade TB's is wrong, new geocachers need to know that it is good policy to help TB's in the missions selected by the owners, this is a simple way of showing respect to others and it is an infallible guideline.

Share this post


Link to post
How will anyone benefit from that? What will the bookmark tell them they didnt' already know? What constructive purpose does it serve?

 

So, why is it fine to have a public bookmark bashing hundreds of people's TB hotels, but I would be 'childish' and having a 'playground tantrum' if I decided to create a public bookmark list criticising the creator of the list's caches?

 

You seem to be confusing TB hotels and TB prisons. A TB hotel is a large roomy cache placed in a convenient location where the cache owner has stated it is suitable for facilitating the easy movement of TBs, a TB Prison is a cache that attempts to impose restrictions on the movement of Travel Bugs, they are completely different situations. Are you complaining about bookmarks which list TB hotels or is your complaint about bookmarks which identify TB prisons?

 

The Bookmark indicating that a cache restricts Travel Bug movements, that it imprisons them, is simply a conveneient visible reprise of the information already in the cache listing, it makes it easy for geocachers to identify the caches that imprison TB's. The owner of such a bookmark might choose to call the bookmark list "Caches That Restrict the Movement of Travel Bugs" but that is just a long way of saying "TB prison". The "TB prison" bookmark helps geocachers quickly identify situations where there is an attempt to restrict the movement of Travel Bugs and they can avoid placing TB's in that cache. The public bookmark ensures that every geocacher visiting the cache is aware that the cache has restricitve covenants that attempt to limit the movemnt of TB's, it is in fact a TB Prison. The constructive purpose is the eventual elimination of caches that seek to impose restrictions on the movements of Travel Bugs.

 

The bookmark list you are contemplating would simply be your personal opinion and would not be a reflection of any factual information. Making your opinion of another geocacher a public bookmark would serve no constructive purpose and convey no information, it would simply be a personal attack.

 

I hope this clarifies things for you.

Share this post


Link to post
one person's opinion

 

You seem incapable of grasping the fact that every TB is owned by another geocacher, this is not an opinion, it is a fact. The owner of every TB is free to set whatever mission they want, this is a fact as well. If you want your TB to sit around until someone puts another TB in it's place then you are free to set that as the mission because it is your TB. If I want your TB to sit around until it is replaced by another TB I am infringing on your rights because it is your TB, this is very simple stuff and it is factually correct.

 

 

I grasp the point you are making. I simply think you are being presumptuous in a couple ways. First you are assuming the average TB owner really cares one way or another if their TB spends time in a cache 'with rules' or not. If their TB spends 30 days in a cache with rules and it spends 40 days in a cache with no rules do you think they mind their TB having been in the cache with rules?

 

Secondly you are assuming that a TB spends more time, on average, in a TB hotel with a 1-1 trade policy than it does in other nearby caches of comparable difficulty. Given that TB hotels attract people who are interested in TBs, it would seem this is unlikely to be the case.

 

My point in explaining that I own a TB and don't care if it gets put in a TB hotel with rules isn't to say my opinion is 'better' than yours. The point is that you are assuming you are fighting some noble battle on behalf of TB owners everywhere and you may not be.

 

Unless someone can come up with some solid, non cherry picked stats that show TBs remain longer in TB hotels with rules than they do in comparable caches in the area I think this entire crusade is a waste of energy.

 

If they do, in fact, sit longer in TB hotels with rules then you have a point.

 

So, does anyone have any actual stats on this? Is it possible for someone behind the scenes to run a query against the database to show what the truth actually is? Cuz if, on average, TBs move at the same rate or better in TB hotels with rules as they do in other area caches of comparable difficulty I don't see the problem.

Edited by DaveA

Share this post


Link to post

Hmm, so because my stats don't support your theory they are bogus? I have never been to a cache that is visited regularly and found a bug that has been sitting there for 4 months.

 

How many people have?

 

I believe that these rules actually have the reverse affect and do keep bugs longer than an equivelant cache (in terms of difficulty/terrain, people dropping tb's off at the top of a 13 mile hike is a whole different story.)

Share this post


Link to post

Hmm, so because my stats don't support your theory they are bogus?

 

What stats? Have you posted stats and I missed them? Are you referring to where you said you looked at some TB 'prisons' and some had fast movement and some had some TBs sitting awhile?

 

If so I did see that, but I don't see that your belief or mine are proven by that. If anything your 'stats' simply say that 'In some caches TBs move fast and in others they move quickly'.

 

There is no comparison with other caches in the area to see what the norm for an area is. It also doesn't take into account the time of year or climate. If a TB sits for 4 frigid, snow covered months that isn't difficult to understand. Really, I don't think you, I, or anyone else without access to the database can pull any meaningful stats on this. Maybe instead of petitioning for the archival of a cache type you don't like you might want to petition the powers that be to run some queries to try and get a reasonable idea of whether or not TB hotels with a 1 for 1 rule are detrimental to the goal of keeping TBs moving or not?

 

I have never been to a cache that is visited regularly and found a bug that has been sitting there for 4 months.

 

How many people have?

 

With respect, your sample size is too small to be relevant. You are, I believe, falling into the temptation of wanting to believe something is true.

 

I believe that these rules actually have the reverse affect and do keep bugs longer than an equivalent cache (in terms of difficulty/terrain, people dropping tb's off at the top of a 13 mile hike is a whole different story.)

 

I believe you believe what you say you believe, but I doubt what you believe is factually accurate. I have no evidence that your are correct or incorrect in your belief, and neither do you.

 

Your petition for the archival of caches you do not like is based upon a solid lack of any evidence that these hotels are causing the harm you *believe* they are.

 

Change your goal from getting a cache type archived to petitioning the powers that be to run some queries to generate meaningful stats and I will gladly sign *that* petition.

 

Unless, until we all have some actual data to go on this is all speculative hot air.

Edited by DaveA

Share this post


Link to post

I believe it was in the other thread regarding this that I posted some dates regarding how long bugs have sat. Of the 40 something bugs I looked at, 25 of them had been stuck for between 1 and 3 months, all in caches that have been found often and recently.

 

Between my husband and I we have over 1100 finds, and in those 1100 neither of us have seen a bug sit in a simple cache for as long as these 25 have in just 5 prisons. Those numbers say something. I think 1100 caches gives me the ability to make these statements. On the other hand you have 47 finds and are questioning me about my numbers and their validity?

Share this post


Link to post

Between my husband and I we have over 1100 finds, and in those 1100 neither of us have seen a bug sit in a simple cache for as long as these 25 have in just 5 prisons. Those numbers say something. I think 1100 caches gives me the ability to make these statements. On the other hand you have 47 finds and are questioning me about my numbers and their validity?

 

Don't take what I am saying personally, I am not trying to insult you in any way. I am not 'questioning your numbers or their validity'. I am pointing out that without stats from the database you cannot make any statements concerning how long TBs stay in any cache type on average.

 

It really doesn't matter how many finds you have. Basing a belief on personal experience is like saying "I think so and so will easily win the next presidential election because EVERYONE I know is voting for him|her".

 

Given that TBs go missing for months with no explanation, some never to reappear is a TB hotel policy really that significant?

 

Given that a TB with the stated goal of 'liberating' TBs from TB prisons has gone around the world already (see other thread) and hasn't once actually resulted in the liberation of any TBs enough evidence that very few people are actually doing anything to 'respect the TB owner's wishes' in regards to the TB's goal?

 

Honestly I don't see what all the fuss is about and I think calling for archival or the immature 'prison' bookmark are just over the line in a controlling, rule making way.

 

Play our way or we will make you sorry.

 

Make all the rules you want and people still aren't going to feel any need to play your way, my way or any way other than their own.

Share this post


Link to post

In this case, finds equals experience which equals knowledge, get back to me when you have it.

Share this post


Link to post
the average TB owner really cares

 

I haven't made that assumption at all, facts don't require that assumptions be made. Your opinion that "you don't care about your TB" being generalized to the "average TB owner doesn't care" is just that, your generalized opinion. The feelings of the average TB owner do not determine facts, in fact, feelings play no part in the process.

Correcting your errors is not a crusade, it just takes a few minutes and it may even be effective. If you want facts to support your crusade to establish your feelings as meaningful you may find them in short supply, the TB's really do belong to other geocachers, the owners have the right to select the mission for the TB. No one has the right to restrict the movement of your Travel Bugs, I haven't seen a single valid response contradicting this fact, have you?

Every TB belongs to another geocacher, helping Travel Bugs in the mission selected by the owner is the right thing to do, this is an infallible guideline, your opinions to the contrary are at odds with this fact. No one needs to give you any stats to establish that every Travel Bug is owned by a geocacher and no one has the right to restrict the movement of your TB.

 

It is very constructive to spread this information around, new geocachers like yourself can get a good start on the proper handling of Travel Bugs. If you see bad advice like "it is good personal policy to trade Travel Bug for Travel Bug" you can correct that geocacher and the bad advice can be replaced by good advice like "Treat Travel Bugs with respect, every Travel Bug is owned by another geocacher, never restrict the movement of any Travel Bug, if you can help it in it's mission then do help because you are helping another geocacher."

 

Your suggestion that we should all assume the average gecacher doesn't care is just not a sufficient response, that is my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
the average TB owner really cares

 

I haven't made that assumption at all, facts don't require that assumptions be made. Your opinion that "you don't care about your TB" being generalized to the "average TB owner doesn't care" is just that, your generalized opinion. The feelings of the average TB owner do not determine facts, in fact, feelings play no part in the process.

 

Correct, which is why I plainly have said (mulitiple times) that my opinion is worth no more or less than yours or anyone else's. I am not the one claiming *my* experience is representative of anyone elses nor am I the one who is using language to suggest my view is everyone's view. I have pointed out several times now where some in the camp of 'archive TB hotels with rules' are the one's making statements that assume universal agreement.

 

Correcting your errors is not a crusade, it just takes a few minutes and it may even be effective. If you want facts to support your crusade to establish your feelings as meaningful you may find them in short supply, the TB's really do belong to other geocachers, the owners have the right to select the mission for the TB. No one has the right to restrict the movement of your Travel Bugs, I haven't seen a single valid response contradicting this fact, have you?

 

Yes. There is no evidence showing that in an average case a TB in a TB hotel with rules sits longer than TBs elsewhere. Cherry picking can produce any result one wishes.

 

There is no evidence that all TB owners have a problem with TB hotels with rules, but there is evidence that *some* Tb owners aren't in the least bit bothered by such caches.

 

There are reasons to appreciate TB hotels with rules. Among them are a belief that this will allow more new people to encounter a TB, that the average TB IQ of a person seeking a hotel is higher than that of those seeking a traditional cache and therefore there is less risk of the TB being mistaken as a trade item to be kept and other reasons. You can't presume to speak for anyone other than yourself what the goals for a TB are. For mine, the goal is for people (including myself) to have some fun with them. That's it.

 

Every TB belongs to another geocacher, helping Travel Bugs in the mission selected by the owner is the right thing to do, this is an infallible guideline, your opinions to the contrary are at odds with this fact. No one needs to give you any stats to establish that every Travel Bug is owned by a geocacher and no one has the right to restrict the movement of your TB.

 

You don't have the right to assume anything about *everyone*. You are assuming that all TB owners value fast movement above safe movement or movement to new folks rather than TB hounds looking to up their stats.

 

It is very constructive to spread this information around, new geocachers like yourself can get a good start on the proper handling of Travel Bugs.

 

It's funny how people's stats are compared in discussions like this. My stats are better than your stats so my opinion is right :unsure: . Here is a clue for you, take a look at the join date associated with this account. Compare it to your own. Try to avoid judging a book by it's cover as there is a lot between the covers that you simply don't know. Same goes for you, Hula, since you also not only presume to speak for everyone, but also felt the need to pull out the "I am right by virtue of superior stats.' card.

 

If you see bad advice like "it is good personal policy to trade Travel Bug for Travel Bug" you can correct that geocacher and the bad advice can be replaced by good advice like "Treat Travel Bugs with respect, every Travel Bug is owned by another geocacher, never restrict the movement of any Travel Bug, if you can help it in it's mission then do help because you are helping another geocacher."

 

So, taking something many seek after and leaving nothing of it's kind for the next person is a 'good policy'? Wow. In this discussion I see a premium emphasis on the presumed wishes of the TB owner which would be fine if anyone understood the priorities of all TB owners, but what about the cachers who would like to find a TB? Do they not count? TB owners (myself included) certainly ought to understand that without other cachers their TB wouldn't ever move anywhere. Certainly letting them have some fun is a fair payment for the moving along? Is it really terrible to suggest that leave one take one potentially spreads the fun of TBs a bit further? At least one TB hotel owner stated the reason for their having a trade policy suggestion was due to folks who seem to feel entitled to empty a cache of all TBs regardless of how many there are in the cache and leave nothing behind for the next person. I think most of the time those who say they would grab 10 (or whatever number) of TBs from caches to 'help them on their goal' are simply deceiving themselves.

 

If one really cared about moving TBs and not simply about their own stats it would be easy enough to wait a few weeks after a TB has been put into a cache and then go retrieve it. This would allow new folks to grab a TB as well as ensure that no TB sat too long. Just going out and grabbing every one without leaving any is pure selfishness no matter how hard one tries to justify the action in their own mind as being noble rather than selfish.

 

As a TB owner I would rather the horders leave mine behind for the new person seeking to find their first TB or the person who wants to help the TB fulfill it's goal than end up in the hands of a hoarder who is just going to dump it off somewhere without helping it on it's mission.

 

Your suggestion that we should all assume the average gecacher doesn't care is just not a sufficient response, that is my opinion.

 

This isn't my suggestion. It was my suggestion that you don't speak for all TB owners therefore you should avoid language in your posts that suggests you do.

Share this post


Link to post

I am not one at all to use how many caches found or how long you've been a member as a base for anything generally, in fact I don't think I've ever used it. In this case however I do think it's relevant as some things just take experience and knowledge of which you clearly do not have.

As I stated in the other forum the word is "travel" and there is no way to mistake that it says anything else. TB's are there to move, plain and simple.

 

Move them if you can help them, that's it, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE TO IT.

Share this post


Link to post

I am not one at all to use how many caches found or how long you've been a member as a base for anything generally, in fact I don't think I've ever used it. In this case however I do think it's relevant as some things just take experience and knowledge of which you clearly do not have.

 

You don't know that, you assume that by looking at the stats associated with the account I am posting from.

 

In my opinion, the primary fault in your position is you simply assume too much about others without any solid evidence that the 'others' are as you think they are.

 

As I stated in the other forum the word is "travel" and there is no way to mistake that it says anything else. TB's are there to move, plain and simple.

 

And you have yet to show that TBs in hotels with rules, on average, move less often than TBs not placed in them. You have yet to show that TBs in hotels with rules disappear more often than TBs in other caches. You have yet to show that fast travel is a greater priority among TB owners than (perceived greater) safe travel.

 

You have presented 'facts' based upon your own interpretation of your experiences and nothing more.

 

And based upon your opinions you promote the archiving and banning of caches you don't like as well as antagonistic bookmarks appearing on cache pages without the cache owner's consent.

 

If you had some actual hard data to present to show that TB owners were being routinely screwed over with TBhotels with a trade policy/suggestion then you would have a leg to stand on.

 

As it is your entire position is based upon speculation. And upon that speculation you are not only supporting, but promoting bans and antagonistic bookmarks on other people's cache pages.

 

Congratulations, you have appointed yourself as a geo cop.

 

Move them if you can help them, that's it, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE TO IT.

 

Agreed, which is why I find it odd that some are championing the idea of cleaning out "TB prisons" as a matter of principle. If moving just any old place is the goal of the TB then fine, but otherwise the noble TB avenger is just moving the TB for the sake of moving (and getting a stat boost) rather than actually furthering the TB's stated goals.

 

Why don't we all just be honest with each other? The primary reason to oppose a policy resulting in the controlled release of TBs to a larger group of people is because some people are stats mongers and don't wish to leave any TBs behind for someone else to play with?

 

It is pure selfishness masquerading as nobility in my opinion.

 

If your *sincere* goal is helping other TB owners move/fulfill it's goal then don't raid TB hotels of all TBs. Visit them with a TB and swap for a TB whose goal you can help fulfill. If you can't or won't help fulfill it, leave it behind for someone else. If a TB sits for a long time because it has a goal few are willing/able to help it meet, that is the problem of the TB owner for setting such a goal.

 

Fast travel isn't the only issue. Safe travel and travel to those willing/able to meet the goals is also important.

Share this post


Link to post

You do realize that many of these owners go around snatching TB's to put into their cache? That's ok though right?

 

Travel bugs are meant to travel, that is not speculation, and you have yet to explain how it is anything other than fact. Still waiting.....

 

Long winded responses full of fluff when stripped down show no answers.

 

You are right, I am assuming that you are new and just don't know any better. I'm hoping that my assumption is right, otherwise it's a bummer that you could be so misguided.

Share this post


Link to post

You do realize that many of these owners go around snatching TB's to put into their cache? That's ok though right?

 

Why not? If movement for the sake of movement is the goal, the TBs moved, right? When you say 'many' hotel owners snatch up TBs for their hotels, what is the actual percentage? Do you know or are you cherry picking stats that fit your view? (rhetorical question since it is now obvious you have researched nothing before formulating your views).

 

Travel bugs are meant to travel, that is not speculation, and you have yet to explain how it is anything other than fact. Still waiting.....

 

You don't know why anyone other than yourself spends money on TB tags, attaches them to some item and places them out in public areas. Sure, having them move is probably a goal most, if not all of the time, but again, you are mistaking movement for the sake of movement with quality of movement. Movement that doesn't advance the TB's goals is not desired by TB owners with specific goals. That a TB hotel imposes a restriction on movement isn't inherently bad. If it results in a cacher showing up with a TB to trade for another TB it might just work out really well. There might be 10 TBs in the cache and the visitor can only trade 1 for 1 which means they will have to sort through the 10 in the cache and determine which one has goals they can actually help rather than just grab it and move it any old place.

 

You are right, I am assuming that you are new and just don't know any better. I'm hoping that my assumption is right, otherwise it's a bummer that you could be so misguided.

 

Given that my join date is two years before yours I would say your track record for making assumptions is pretty poor. I encourage you to start looking for actual facts instead of relying upon your assumptions which are clearly divorced from reality.

 

You are on a crusade over an issue you have no actual facts on. You rely upon surface judgements and speculation and even then you use language to suggest more people agree with you than appear to. Your entire position is based upon an assumption you apparently can't be bothered to fact check. And you seem to be eager to assume your presumptions are correct and call for banning/archiving caches and making derogatory public bookmarks.

 

In summary you are calling for a rule against a rule and your basis is simply non fact checked speculation.

 

Nice.

Share this post


Link to post
No one has the right to restrict the movement of your Travel Bugs, I haven't seen a single valid response contradicting this fact, have you?

 

Yes. There is no evidence showing that in an average case a TB in a TB hotel with rules sits longer than TBs elsewhere.

 

:unsure::blink::unsure:

Share this post


Link to post

I did a search for travel bugs using the key words "Travel Bug Hotel". Then I scrolled through to see how many were archived/disabled, many still with multiple bugs in them. It's not a pretty picture. I stopped counting lost bugs after page three. The total came to 150 out of 398 Travel Bug Hotels that were archived or disabled. That's 37.68%. Personally, I just don't think it's wise to put all of our eggs in one basket. Any cache is a good cache for a travel bug. Wisely hidden caches are better. And it would seem that the words "Travel Bug Hotel" on a cache title might make it a target. I didn't even begin to count the ones that were called "TB rest stop", or some other name.

 

You decide. Me, I'd prefer camping out over hotels any day. Send my bugs to a regular ol' cache please. And don't let my travel bug languish because of a cache owner's "rules". Take as many as you can help along in a reasonable period of time.

 

You've heard the phrase "You're not the boss of me"? Well cache owners are not the boss of other cacher's TB's. Restrictive rules are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post

Just an FYI Dave, I have been a caching member since June of 2003, I just split off and formed my own account last year, which if numbers are important to you also makes my finds count very different than reality.

 

I know lots of cachers, we meet regularly and the 50 or so that I know personally all want their bugs to move freely, it's been a topic with us before. It also seems to be pretty much agreed on here as well.

 

If you notice you are the only one arguing with me.............

 

Here's an idea, because I'm sure Earth's stats are "cherry picked" too, why don't you find me (us) some stats that show that I (we) are wrong.

Edited by Hula Bum

Share this post


Link to post

I had a whole post typed up here, but got distracted by my real job and it didn't go through. I'll try to remember it all....

 

Dave,

Please read the forum guidelines. Whether a person has one post or 1000, one find or 10,000, they still deserve the same amount of respect that you would wish for yourself. Please read those guidelines, and do not assume that higher numbers equals more knowledge.

If you have something personal to discuss with another person, take it to private discussion.

 

The key word in Travel bugs is TRAVEL. Groundspeak wouldn't be selling very many "Languishing Bugs", "Prisoner Bugs" or "Sit Here Until Someone Can Trade For Me Bugs". There's no market in that. Restrictive rules are wrong, and if folks don't teach this to new cachers they bring into the game, they won't learn, because probably 90% of cachers never venture into the forums (that number is cherry picked)

 

My statistics above were based on this morning's search for caches with the Keywords "Travel Bug hotel" in their title. There were 401 of them, but three of those were duplicate submissions, thus the 398 count. Almost every page had 7 or 8 of those caches archived or disabled on it, and many of those still had bugs listed in them. Some were legitimately archived, simply because the owners wished to, but a lot were muggled or destroyed. I ran out of time to start counting those and to start adding up the number of lost bugs before work. This doesn't include caches that are labelled "TB Rest Stop, TB Layover, TB Airport Cache, TB near the train cache, Easy on/off TB cache" or anything like that, so those numbers are probably much larger. So, yes, perhaps cherry picked, but how much time should I have to put into this just to explain that travel bugs are meant to travel, as per their owners' wishes, and not to sit forlornly in a cache waiting to be traded, according to a cache owners arbitrary rules? What if all the other bugs were cuter and more appealing? Is this lonely TB supposed to wait forever? No, move it along.

Share this post


Link to post
...The key word in Travel bugs is TRAVEL. Groundspeak wouldn't be selling very many "Languishing Bugs", "Prisoner Bugs" or "Sit Here Until Someone Can Trade For Me Bugs"...
LOL! I would like to purchase a dozen "Sit Here Until Someone Can Trade For Me Bugs" please. I know of some bugs that would like to be liberated...

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
...The key word in Travel bugs is TRAVEL. Groundspeak wouldn't be selling very many "Languishing Bugs", "Prisoner Bugs" or "Sit Here Until Someone Can Trade For Me Bugs"...
LOL! I would like to purchase a dozen "Sit Here Until Someone Can Trade For Me Bugs" please. I know of some bugs that would like to be liberated...

 

:)

 

Rocks can be travel bugs right? Throw in a bunch of rocks and take the current TBs. Ooooh, they have to be trackable on gc.com? Sorry cache owner, not a requirement.

Share this post


Link to post

I had a whole post typed up here, but got distracted by my real job and it didn't go through. I'll try to remember it all....

 

Dave,

Please read the forum guidelines. Whether a person has one post or 1000, one find or 10,000, they still deserve the same amount of respect that you would wish for yourself. Please read those guidelines, and do not assume that higher numbers equals more knowledge.

If you have something personal to discuss with another person, take it to private discussion.

 

 

Unsure why you are addressing this to me. I didn't pull the 'my numbers are greater than yours therefore I am right' routine. It was pulled on me ;)

 

Back to the topic, I am not in favor of restrictive rules either. My issue is that geocaching.com is allowing a public bookmark which is derogatory in nature (TB prisons) to be placed on other people's cache pages without their consent. This seems to fly against everything I had thought Groundspeak wanted on the main site. I see no difference between derogatory public bookmarks appearing on cache owner pages and derogatory logs on the cache page. The only difference is the cache owner would be able to remove the offending logs at their discretion, but they cannot do so with public bookmarks. Just how much latitude do people have with the derogatory bookmarks? How far will it be allowed to go?

 

My other issue is that I am not sure a TB hotel with a trade policy actually results in TBs sitting for a longer period of time than they do in other caches. I am not sure this isn't the case either, but I think before people go all jihad on other members (most of whom I am sure had the best of intentions with their TB hotels) there ought to be some facts instead of speculation. Going through "some" caches and comparing them to "some" other caches isn't meaningful. The stats would have to be gathered from the database which no regular or premium member can do. I am not suggesting it is necessary to do this, but I would think people would be a little nicer to each other when they don't have facts supporting their jihad.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8

×
×
  • Create New...