TB Hotels should have their own cache type

[+Bass Brigade]

Just as a Letterbox does, I believe TB Hotels should have their own Cache Type and Icon. These types of caches are popping up more and more, and while a pocket query filtered to TBs will narrow it down some, the TB Hotel should have its own cache type.

[+T.D.M.22]

Just as a Letterbox does, I believe TB Hotels should have their own Cache Type and Icon. These types of caches are popping up more and more, and while a pocket query filtered to TBs will narrow it down some, the TB Hotel should have its own cache type.

 

I disagree. As you know, finding a letterbox is not the same as finding a traditional, therefore it is it's own cache type. A TB hotel is just another cache that happens to be called a TB hotel and may or may not have trackables in it. It's really no different than a traditional-or a puzzle if you have to solve to unlock it.

 

A Pocket Query would be more useful in finding TB's-all though there's a chance there may be none in the hotel. But even then it has it's limits, as all too often people don't log trackables properly no matter what cache they get put in or taken from.

Edited June 29, 2014 by T.D.M.22

[+GeoTrekker26]

Just as a Letterbox does, I believe TB Hotels should have their own Cache Type and Icon. These types of caches are popping up more and more, and while a pocket query filtered to TBs will narrow it down some, the TB Hotel should have its own cache type.

 

Why?

 

If they are "popping up more and more" they should be easy to find. Run a PQ searching for regular and large caches. More importantly there is no such thing as a travel bug hotel. It is merely a regular or larger size cache that the CO has self declared to be a TB hotel. Why is it any different than the ammo box 1/2 mile away? A letterbox hybrid is a different type of cache.

[+niraD]

How would this "TB Hotel" type be any different from the existing "Regular" or "Large" sizes?

[+cerberus1]

Just as a Letterbox does, I believe TB Hotels should have their own Cache Type and Icon. These types of caches are popping up more and more, and while a pocket query filtered to TBs will narrow it down some, the TB Hotel should have its own cache type.

Why?

 

If they are "popping up more and more" they should be easy to find. Run a PQ searching for regular and large caches. More importantly there is no such thing as a travel bug hotel. It is merely a regular or larger size cache that the CO has self declared to be a TB hotel. Why is it any different than the ammo box 1/2 mile away? A letterbox hybrid is a different type of cache.

+1

[+geocat_]

Just as a Letterbox does, I believe TB Hotels should have their own Cache Type and Icon. These types of caches are popping up more and more, and while a pocket query filtered to TBs will narrow it down some, the TB Hotel should have its own cache type.

 

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

[+GeoLog81]

There's nothing like TB Hotel. It's just a name. Adding filtering by name would be fair enough.

[+wfillier1979]

I think that adding a cache type for TB Hotels would make it easier for a person to search for them easier.

[+L0ne.R]

I can't remember the last time I actually saw travel bugs in a TB hotel. They are always filled with regular swag even when the CO asks people not to leave regular swag. Look for regular size caches and there will be plenty of room to leave TBs. Another thing you can do is use google to find tb hotels. Here's my search for tb hotel ontario geocaching.com https://www.google.c...geocaching.com. You can start your own bookmark list and you may find other to bookmarks on tb hotel cache listings.

[etarace]

I see a lot of new people commenting about TB Hotels. I wonder if they all realize something... you are not required to find a TB hotel in order to place a travel bug.

TB hotels are just traditional caches. They happen to be regular-to-large size to be big enough to hold TB's. They are typically at or near Rest Areas, Airports, Bus or Train Stations in hopes that travelers can travel further.

 

Personally, I don't think I would ever use a TB hotel for placing a TB. I put TB's out in the woods, a nice hike away. It may sit for a longer time, but with less activity there is less chance of it vanishing.

 

Now... if a TB Hotel were a puzzle-box cache that required cachers to properly answer every question in a short quiz on travel bug etiquette in order for the box to open ... then that could have its own icon. And then maybe not so many TB's would vanish.

[kanchan]

Why? Some TB hotels involve puzzle solving. Some TB hotels involve letterboxing-like experience. Some may involve multiple stages. I think such TB hotels should be listed as Unknown/Mystery, Letterbox Hybrid or Multicache respectively, rather than as the suggested TB hotel type. If we really have to identify them, I think an attribute suffices or works even better. But I might be missing something as it's not clear to me why the OP thinks the own cache type is needed.

[+niraD]

I think that adding a cache type for TB Hotels would make it easier for a person to search for them easier.

How would searching for the "TB Hotel" type be any easier than searching for large or regular (or perhaps small) size caches?

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I think that adding a cache type for TB Hotels would make it easier for a person to search for them easier.

How would searching for the "TB Hotel" type be any easier than searching for large or regular (or perhaps small) size caches?

 

I don't think it a bad idea given so many cachers enjoy trackables....TB Hotels are usually close to interstates or other highways for easy access and max. exposure. While any reg or small cache may hold bugs I would think the Hotel would be the best place to find them ( it is in my area).....do a search for Hotels and there they are. The new cache type might encourage hiding more Hotels which would be welcome regulars in a sea of micro's.

[+TriciaG]

I don't agree with a "TB Hotel" cache type. I might be supportive of a "TB Friendly" attribute, IF the attribute could be easily removed if/when a CO goes missing or the cache proves unfriendly to TBs.

[+GeoLog81]

I don't agree with a "TB Hotel" cache type. I might be supportive of a "TB Friendly" attribute, IF the attribute could be easily removed if/when a CO goes missing or the cache proves unfriendly to TBs.

 

How would it differ from size attribute?

[+cerberus1]

I've already seen very small, almost micro caches claiming to be TB Hotels, so I don't believe that even most would be, "regulars in a sea of micros" if there was a new cache type icon to be gained.

 

Many are already experiencing going to hides to find the trackable supposedly inside no longer there.

Between folks (and not just the new ones...) not having a clue of what to do with trackables and the outright thieves, is advertising a TB Hotel ("Come an' get 'em !") really a smart idea today?

[+TriciaG]

I don't agree with a "TB Hotel" cache type. I might be supportive of a "TB Friendly" attribute, IF the attribute could be easily removed if/when a CO goes missing or the cache proves unfriendly to TBs.

 

How would it differ from size attribute?

 

It would hopefully differ in the following ways:

- Away from muggles, or secure from muggles (e.g. a lock or other security mechanism)

- Close to major highways, airports, etc. and easy to get to

- Cache owner keeps inventory accurate & regularly maintains the cache

 

That last one is, of course, a pipe dream. That's one reason why I would support the attribute IF it could be removed if/when that is no longer the case (the CO goes missing, the cache is no longer maintained, and/or it becomes unsafe for TBs).

[team tisri]

I've already seen very small, almost micro caches claiming to be TB Hotels, so I don't believe that even most would be, "regulars in a sea of micros" if there was a new cache type icon to be gained.

 

Many are already experiencing going to hides to find the trackable supposedly inside no longer there.

Between folks (and not just the new ones...) not having a clue of what to do with trackables and the outright thieves, is advertising a TB Hotel ("Come an' get 'em !") really a smart idea today?

 

I remember visiting a cache in PA hoping to find a geocoin I'd never seen before, only to find it wasn't there. When I went to write a note on the coin's page to say it was missing I noticed the note I wrote two years previously saying it was missing. Neither the cache owner nor the coin owner had done anything about it. So I really wouldn't hold out hope that inventories will be closely watched. So making a "TB friendly" attribute looks like it would create more work for reviewers while offering no benefit. Throw in a few hotel owners who expect people to only take a TB if they leave a TB and I'd be inclined to discourage TB hotels.

 

Why would a cache not be TB friendly? If it's a micro it obviously won't have space for TBs (with the possible exception of the microcoins that were popular for a time), but if it's big enough to take trackables and isn't suitable for trackables doesn't that mean it's unlikely to stick around? Any cache could be muggled/stolen/eaten by squirrels/whatever but if the cache is designed with longevity in mind and well hidden what reason would it have for not being TB friendly?

 

Round my way the majority of caches are micros, so anything Small or larger makes a welcome change and is a relatively rare opportunity to move trackables. The size attribute alone should be all that's needed.

[+niraD]

Why would a cache not be TB friendly?

I know cache owners who would probably like to mark their caches as Not TB Friendly, because they're tired of being nagged to update the trackable inventory, or even having NM logs posted because a trackable isn't in the cache. Such an attribute might allow them to hide larger-than-micro caches (for those who like trade items), without the undesired (to them) side effect of encouraging trackables.

[+GeoLog81]

I know cache owners who would probably like to mark their caches as Not TB Friendly, because they're tired of being nagged to update the trackable inventory, or even having NM logs posted because a trackable isn't in the cache.

 

NM logs because some trackable is not in the cache is the misuse of the NM flag and complete misunderstanding how the trackables work.

 

Updating the trackable inventory is also not the task of the owner. What can the owner do if some TB is marked as being dropped there, but someone has taken it? It's not possible without tracking numbers of the TBs.

 

If you think special attribute is needed because people don't understand what is NM log, it won't work. They will not understand the attributes as well.

[team tisri]

I know cache owners who would probably like to mark their caches as Not TB Friendly, because they're tired of being nagged to update the trackable inventory, or even having NM logs posted because a trackable isn't in the cache.

 

NM logs because some trackable is not in the cache is the misuse of the NM flag and complete misunderstanding how the trackables work.

 

Updating the trackable inventory is also not the task of the owner. What can the owner do if some TB is marked as being dropped there, but someone has taken it? It's not possible without tracking numbers of the TBs.

 

If you think special attribute is needed because people don't understand what is NM log, it won't work. They will not understand the attributes as well.

 

I thought cache owners could mark a TB as missing if it's showing as present in their cache?

 

I agree it's a misuse of the NM log, which I'd say warranted an instant Owner Maintenance log to say there are no reported issues with the cache itself and the TBs will be checked next time the owner is there.