Am I responsable for TBs in my cache?

[+swirvin-irv]

I received an e-mail and a note logged on my cache page the other day and it has bothered me ever since. A TB owner(from Europe) sent me a message that said, in a nutshell, "Owner/cacher, My TB has been in your cache for 4 weeks, please move it to the next cache". My question is, am I responsible to move TBs in my cache? I thought the idea of TBs was to just leave them do their thing "naturally". I'm just looking for comments. I'm not moving it. Am I wrong? Thanks for listening. Swirvin-Irv

[+T.D.M.22]

On one hand you could be nice and move it along, since you were asked to. On the other, there's no rule saying you have to. If you go to the cache and its not there you can mark it as missing, but that's where your job ends. And 4 weeks isn't that long considering they can go missing a lot. I personally wouldn't, since it's not my job to do so, and it appears IMO the owner is being a bit impatient about it(just my opinion, from what you td us he said- it could be a different story if he was nice about it)

[+Isonzo Karst]

In my opinion, managing TBs isn't the job of cache owners, with the exception of self styled TB Hotels.

 

Note is polite enough, but misguided. I've received similar requests. I privately email the TB owner and tell them if it's still there next time I get to the cache, I'll try to remember to move it. I'll offer no time frame.

No response at all is okay too.

 

Occasionally Marking Missing those TBs that are wrongly in the cache inventory is the end of your job, and you don't even have to take on that. It is a courtesy to cachers to do it, but that responsibly rests with the TB owner.

 

The only way you can avoid having trackables in your caches is to place hides too small to take them. If you don't want to place micros, you're stuck with TBs. Not by choice... not your job.

[+Bear and Ragged]

IF I had a maintenance visit due, or was in the area anyway, I might move it.

Wouldn't make a special trip to do so.

 

(These days caching is a little slow for me, and most of my finds are too small for TBs... Do you really want me to hold on to a TB I can't place 'soon'? )

[+TriciaG]

At this point - middle of winter - I'm not doing much caching, either. So it'd be in my possession for quite a while before I'd move it, if I were inclined to do so.

 

This isn't exactly peak Geocaching season. I'm not surprised that it's been in the cache for 4 weeks. Is it winter friendly? How about responding, "I don't move TBs out of my caches; the visitors do that. Right now the cache is buried under a blanket of snow. It'll probably be spring before it gets moved. Happy caching!"

[Pup Patrol]

I received an e-mail and a note logged on my cache page the other day and it has bothered me ever since. A TB owner(from Europe) sent me a message that said, in a nutshell, "Owner/cacher, My TB has been in your cache for 4 weeks, please move it to the next cache". My question is, am I responsible to move TBs in my cache? I thought the idea of TBs was to just leave them do their thing "naturally". I'm just looking for comments. I'm not moving it. Am I wrong? Thanks for listening. Swirvin-Irv

 

Trackable owner is confused as to the role of the cache owner. No matter what the season is, it's not the cache owner's responsibility to move trackables on.

 

http://coord.info/GC5HBCZ

 

Dear Owner or Cacher 4 Weeks are gone,please send the TRAVEL Herz to the next Cache Happy New Year and best regards from Germany / Cuxhaven mel from melmichajustin

 

If it were me, I would email the trackable owner and explain that it's not the cache owner's responsibility to move trackables.

 

If it's convenient, one could email the trackable owner and explain this to him/her.

 

4 weeks is definitely not a long time. The cache is new, not many people have found it. And, yes, I suppose that it might be a factor that it is winter now and the cache might not be found often until spring.

 

If it's convenient, you could check the cache to ensure that the trackable is still there. It it's not, then you can mark it as missing.

 

Bottom line: cache owner is not responsible for the movement, or non-movement, of trackables in their cache.

 

The trackable owner should know that, as he/she owns 8 caches.

 

After contacting the trackable owner, I would delete the note on the cache page.

 

 

B.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Pup Patrol

[+cerberus1]

If I received a note from the TO asking to move his side-game TB out of my cache for him, I'd treat it the same as a "TB missing" log from a cache finder, or the TB's TO.

- When I do maintenance on the hide, I'll check.

I check ammo cans every six months or so. The "5" ones once a year.

It's possible his TB might be moved along before then...

[+cerberus1]

I received an e-mail and a note logged on my cache page the other day and it has bothered me ever since. A TB owner(from Europe) sent me a message that said, in a nutshell, "Owner/cacher, My TB has been in your cache for 4 weeks, please move it to the next cache". My question is, am I responsible to move TBs in my cache? I thought the idea of TBs was to just leave them do their thing "naturally". I'm just looking for comments. I'm not moving it. Am I wrong? Thanks for listening. Swirvin-Irv

 

Trackable owner is confused as to the role of the cache owner. No matter what the season is, it's not the cache owner's responsibility to move trackables on.

 

http://coord.info/GC5HBCZ

 

Dear Owner or Cacher 4 Weeks are gone,please send the TRAVEL Herz to the next Cache Happy New Year and best regards from Germany / Cuxhaven mel from melmichajustin

 

If it were me, I would email the trackable owner and explain that it's not the cache owner's responsibility to move trackables.

 

If it's convenient, one could email the trackable owner and explain this to him/her.

 

4 weeks is definitely not a long time. The cache is new, not many people have found it. And, yes, I suppose that it might be a factor that it is winter now and the cache might not be found often until spring.

 

If it's convenient, you could check the cache to ensure that the trackable is still there. It it's not, then you can mark it as missing.

 

Bottom line: cache owner is not responsible for the movement, or non-movement, of trackables in their cache.

 

The trackable owner should know that, as he/she owns 8 caches.

 

After contacting the trackable owner, I would delete the note on the cache page.

 

 

B.

I agree with all, especially the (part I) bolded

[+J Grouchy]

Honestly, if a TB is listed in a cache and the CO can confirm it isn't in there, I'd LIKE them to mark it missing. To me, it's a part of cache maintenance. Many disagree with that, but the CO is in a position to both confirm AND actually do something about it. Until Groundspeak implements a way for cachers to affect the inventory of a cache, I personally think it's a part of routine maintenance.

 

As for moving the TB...not your job. You can ignore such requests.

Edited January 8, 2015 by J Grouchy

[4wheelin_fool]

I received an e-mail and a note logged on my cache page the other day and it has bothered me ever since. A TB owner(from Europe) sent me a message that said, in a nutshell, "Owner/cacher, My TB has been in your cache for 4 weeks, please move it to the next cache". My question is, am I responsible to move TBs in my cache? I thought the idea of TBs was to just leave them do their thing "naturally". I'm just looking for comments. I'm not moving it. Am I wrong? Thanks for listening. Swirvin-Irv

 

If I got a note like that, I'd immediately mark it as missing without even checking to see if it was there or not.

[+kunarion]

I received an e-mail and a note logged on my cache page the other day and it has bothered me ever since. A TB owner(from Europe) sent me a message that said, in a nutshell, "Owner/cacher, My TB has been in your cache for 4 weeks, please move it to the next cache". My question is, am I responsible to move TBs in my cache? I thought the idea of TBs was to just leave them do their thing "naturally". I'm just looking for comments. I'm not moving it. Am I wrong? Thanks for listening. Swirvin-Irv

Is it still there? Don't make a special trip to go check, but if items are going missing with no notice, that's important cache info for you. TBs cost more than most Geocaches, so it's unusual for one to remain in a cache that people are regularly finding.

 

You don't have to manage TBs. If it's a lonely cache, it would be good to specify that TBs don't move much at that cache, which cachers can see anyway (there's a lonely TB inside). That makes it a good cache to place a TB, if a placer doesn't want it immediately stolen.

Edited January 8, 2015 by kunarion

[+edscott]

Reminds me a bit of a situation with one of my caches a couple years ago. A cacher camping in the area stopped by one of my hides and a TB that was listed as being there was missing. He insisted that if I didn't mark it as missing on the cache page he was going to take the cache to the nearest dumpster. Didn't happen, but there are a few crazies out there.

[+kunarion]

He insisted that if I didn't mark it as missing on the cache page he was going to take the cache to the nearest dumpster.

Well, it's useful to know how that cacher deals with things he finds. Caches... Travel Bugs...

 

there are a few crazies out there.

No way! Really?

Edited January 8, 2015 by kunarion

[+Harry Dolphin]

Honestly, if a TB is listed in a cache and the CO can confirm it isn't in there, I'd LIKE them to mark it missing. To me, it's a part of cache maintenance. Many disagree with that, but the CO is in a position to both confirm AND actually do something about it. Until Groundspeak implements a way for cachers to affect the inventory of a cache, I personally think it's a part of routine maintenance.

 

As for moving the TB...not your job. You can ignore such requests.

 

It would be nice, but it is not a responsibility of the CO. It is not part of maintenance.

Of course, many COs do not realize that they can do that. I suggested that a CO mark the TB missing. She said she couldn't do it. I explained the procedure, and she did mark it missing.

[4wheelin_fool]

Requesting for someone to visit their cache and move a TB after only 4 weeks is unreasonable. Marking it as missing even if it is there, solves that problem and may prevent the cacher from repeating it on others. First they panic, then later the TB shows up, and from the cache it should be in. Then they think about the chain of events, and don't do it anymore.

Edited January 8, 2015 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Bear and Ragged]

I *might* consider moving it, if it was a high rated D/T Unknown or Multi cache, with few visits...

But at 4 weeks? No!

 

But, the fact there IS a TB in the cache *might* get cachers want to find the cache!

Edited January 8, 2015 by Bear and Ragged

[+J Grouchy]

Honestly, if a TB is listed in a cache and the CO can confirm it isn't in there, I'd LIKE them to mark it missing. To me, it's a part of cache maintenance. Many disagree with that, but the CO is in a position to both confirm AND actually do something about it. Until Groundspeak implements a way for cachers to affect the inventory of a cache, I personally think it's a part of routine maintenance.

 

As for moving the TB...not your job. You can ignore such requests.

 

It would be nice, but it is not a responsibility of the CO. It is not part of maintenance.

Of course, many COs do not realize that they can do that. I suggested that a CO mark the TB missing. She said she couldn't do it. I explained the procedure, and she did mark it missing.

 

Like I said, I personally believe it to be. I don't say that from any published guideline, but from the perspective of a CO AND as a cacher that has been frustrated by missing trackables. As a CO, I've never been in a situation where there is a potentially missing trackable, but if I was seeing logs about missing TBs, I would check if possible and mark them missing. It's a consideration not only for the owners of the trackables, but also for cachers visiting the cache that may be expecting to move a trackable. Cachers also may be expecting a log they can sign and a container that isn't broken and the COs are expected to maintain those. They also are able to update the description, the hint, the title, the D/T ratings and the waypoints on the cache page...keeping up with that stuff is all a part of owning a cache.

[4wheelin_fool]

I *might* consider moving it, if it was a high rated D/T Unknown or Multi cache, with few visits...

But at 4 weeks? No!

 

But, the fact there IS a TB in the cache *might* get cachers want to find the cache!

 

So they pick up the TB and a week later get an email asking why they haven't dropped it yet. So they drop it in another cache and 4 weeks later that CO gets a email, asking him to move it. Seems like the TB owner might need a sedative. Now if it's marked missing every time the TB owner does that, eventually they may stop.

[+Twentse Mug]

If you have a TB-hotel, then you are responsible for the TB's. Not with other caches. That is the concept of TB-hotels in the first place.

[+swirvin-irv]

I have been watching this thread unfold all day and I must say that the opinions expressed here are great. There is a definite trend towards no CO intervention other than routine maintenance. I agree with that. But it struck me that maybe a trackable friendly rating system for your cache may be a good idea.

We rate our caches for difficulty and terrain, why not for trackable friendliness? Lets say 0 for a micro or I don't want any to 5 which is a travel bug hotel.

My personal opinion about the message I received is, I just think the TO is impatient. I don't have any hard feelings toward them, it is their trackable and they can do or ask as they please. They are also 4000? miles away so they may not understand our environment/weather, or caching practices here in the U.S.

This all started when I bought a new cache container and made arrangements to go out this weekend to change it out. I struggled with the idea of moving it to another cache. I thought about where I would move it especially now that caching has slowed significantly

I'm going to leave it, and per the advise expressed here, I'm going to email the TO and assure them that the trackable is fine (if it is indeed fine of course).

I'll continue to watch this thread and post any updates.

Thanks again for the great posts! Happy Caching 8D

[Pup Patrol]

If you have a TB-hotel, then you are responsible for the TB's. Not with other caches. That is the concept of TB-hotels in the first place.

 

Say what???????

 

A "tb hotel" is just a regular cache. It's no different than any other cache, other than the name assigned to it by the cache owner.

 

The owner of a so-called "tb hotel" has no more responsibility towards the trackables dropped in it than any other cache not named as such.

 

A cache owner can not be held responsible for trackables dropped into, or retrieved from, or stolen from, their cache.

 

 

B.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

If you have a TB-hotel, then you are responsible for the TB's. Not with other caches. That is the concept of TB-hotels in the first place.

 

Say what???????

 

A "tb hotel" is just a regular cache. It's no different than any other cache, other than the name assigned to it by the cache owner.

 

The owner of a so-called "tb hotel" has no more responsibility towards the trackables dropped in it than any other cache not named as such.

 

A cache owner can not be held responsible for trackables dropped into, or retrieved from, or stolen from, their cache.

 

 

B.

 

 

In theory, you're right. A TB Hotel is really no different than any other cache. However, my opinion is that any CO who opts to place a TB Hotel should be willing to be a caretaker for the TB's that land in their cache. You don't HAVE to place a TB Hotel, you choose to and by choosing to, you're saying, either directly or indirectly, that your cache is a good place for TB's to be dropped and picked up. A Hotel owner doesn't control what TB's check in or out but they can do things to make the Hotel more secure and to ensure that the inventory is correct. If a TB should happen to languish, they should also take it upon themselves to move it to another cache and get it moving again. None of these things are "required" but a Hotel owner should take it upon themselves to do them if they wish to list their cache as a TB Hotel.

 

 

[Pup Patrol]

If you have a TB-hotel, then you are responsible for the TB's. Not with other caches. That is the concept of TB-hotels in the first place.

 

Say what???????

 

A "tb hotel" is just a regular cache. It's no different than any other cache, other than the name assigned to it by the cache owner.

 

The owner of a so-called "tb hotel" has no more responsibility towards the trackables dropped in it than any other cache not named as such.

 

A cache owner can not be held responsible for trackables dropped into, or retrieved from, or stolen from, their cache.

 

 

B.

 

 

In theory, you're right. A TB Hotel is really no different than any other cache. However, my opinion is that any CO who opts to place a TB Hotel should be willing to be a caretaker for the TB's that land in their cache. You don't HAVE to place a TB Hotel, you choose to and by choosing to, you're saying, either directly or indirectly, that your cache is a good place for TB's to be dropped and picked up. A Hotel owner doesn't control what TB's check in or out but they can do things to make the Hotel more secure and to ensure that the inventory is correct. If a TB should happen to languish, they should also take it upon themselves to move it to another cache and get it moving again. None of these things are "required" but a Hotel owner should take it upon themselves to do them if they wish to list their cache as a TB Hotel.

 

I respectfully disagree.

 

A "tb hotel" is not a type of cache. It's simply a name. In my experience, it would be more correctly titled "trackable blackhole" or "welcome to the thieves", but that's a different topic.

 

Strike the "tb hotel" from the name, and it's just another larger sized cache.

 

I have a hard time believing that people who stick that name on their cache are thinking that they have some sort of extra responsibility for the trackables.

 

I think they simply want to help a side-game that is difficult to play, since there is an ever-increasing amount of caches that are too small to be of any use to the trackable game.

 

 

B.

[+dprovan]

A "tb hotel" is not a type of cache. It's simply a name. In my experience, it would be more correctly titled "trackable blackhole" or "welcome to the thieves", but that's a different topic.

 

...

 

I have a hard time believing that people who stick that name on their cache are thinking that they have some sort of extra responsibility for the trackables.

If, as you suggest, calling a cache a TB hotel invites problems, then one would hope that someone calling their cache a TB hotel would, indeed, feel some sort of extra responsibility.

[+J Grouchy]

A "tb hotel" is not a type of cache. It's simply a name. In my experience, it would be more correctly titled "trackable blackhole" or "welcome to the thieves", but that's a different topic.

 

...

 

I have a hard time believing that people who stick that name on their cache are thinking that they have some sort of extra responsibility for the trackables.

If, as you suggest, calling a cache a TB hotel invites problems, then one would hope that someone calling their cache a TB hotel would, indeed, feel some sort of extra responsibility.

 

I agree...which is why I would never actually create a "TB Hotel" cache. Just yesterday I went to check a cache that had a few DNFs and a trackable listed. Turns out it was gone. I disabled it and marked the trackable missing. Me being the type that feels that is all part of the regular maintenance, I would never willingly create a cache that was meant to hold (and inevitably lose) trackables.

Edited January 9, 2015 by J Grouchy

[+TriciaG]

1. I agree that if you call your cache a TB hotel, you should keep the inventory correct. I don't agree that you should move along the TBs if they've been they're a while.

 

2.

We rate our caches for difficulty and terrain, why not for trackable friendliness? Lets say 0 for a micro or I don't want any to 5 which is a travel bug hotel.

I would not go for this, for the reason that the TB-friendliness of a cache can change quickly and over time. If a cache is rated as 5-star TB friendly, and the CO disappears from the game or doesn't watch its TB rating, and the cache gets muggled or becomes a TB thief's cache of choice, then the 5-star TB rating will lure cachers to place TBs there, to the demise of the TBs. Then who is "responsible"?

[4wheelin_fool]

A "tb hotel" is not a type of cache. It's simply a name. In my experience, it would be more correctly titled "trackable blackhole" or "welcome to the thieves", but that's a different topic.

 

...

 

I have a hard time believing that people who stick that name on their cache are thinking that they have some sort of extra responsibility for the trackables.

If, as you suggest, calling a cache a TB hotel invites problems, then one would hope that someone calling their cache a TB hotel would, indeed, feel some sort of extra responsibility.

 

They feel much more than responsibility, as they very often develop a loving relationship with each of the travel bugs that visit. Historically this is why many TB hotels tend to turn into prisons, as so much responsibility morphs into possession, caring, and nurturing. I believe there is one hotel which is specially setup where you can drop a bug but not retrieve any, as only the owner can do that. A locked box of some sort. It reminds me of a big Barbie dream house where Ken, G.I.Joe, and stretch Armstrong can all party with the owner for extended visits.

[+Twentse Mug]

There is no such type of cache as a "TB-hotel". There is no special icon for it either. However, with 300+ TB's out I have noticed that reviewers (at least in my country) see TB-hotels differently as a special type of cache. Example: logging rules like "always leave TB's behind in the cache" are approved with these caches by the reviewers.

My point is that a box in the woods named TB-hotel is just like any other box in the woods that may contain trackables. So that is why I expect from a TB-hotel extra care because that is the concept of a TB-hotel in the first place.

[4wheelin_fool]

I have noticed that reviewers (at least in my country) see TB-hotels differently as a special type of cache. Example: logging rules like "always leave TB's behind in the cache" are approved with these caches by the reviewers.

 

That's a rather serious allegation you are making against your local reviewers. Logging rules that create TB prisons have been restricted for some time now. "Always leave TB's behind in the cache", seems to be an obvious attempt to create a loophole around it.

[+Djoekster]

Are these rules against " TB-prisons" somewhere documented? I couldn't find it, even not the "rule" that a cache owner should mark TB's as missing when they are not in the cache.

 

I'll do that 'cause I think its my responsibility but most of the CO's won't do this kind of maintanance.

[+cerberus1]

Are these rules against " TB-prisons" somewhere documented? I couldn't find it, even not the "rule" that a cache owner should mark TB's as missing when they are not in the cache.

 

I'll do that 'cause I think its my responsibility but most of the CO's won't do this kind of maintanance.

I find the help center difficult to gather info too.

- But right in the pinned topic, " What should new geocachers know about trackables?" in this forum, #8 explains it.

 

I don't believe it's written anywhere that COs should mark trackables missing, only that they can.

In the travel Bug FAQ it just says, "Cache owners also have the ability to move the Travel Bug listed on their cache page to an unknown location" (missing).

[Pup Patrol]

There is no such type of cache as a "TB-hotel". There is no special icon for it either. However, with 300+ TB's out I have noticed that reviewers (at least in my country) see TB-hotels differently as a special type of cache. Example: logging rules like "always leave TB's behind in the cache" are approved with these caches by the reviewers.

My point is that a box in the woods named TB-hotel is just like any other box in the woods that may contain trackables. So that is why I expect from a TB-hotel extra care because that is the concept of a TB-hotel in the first place.

 

The cache owner could have changed the cache page after it was published. The Reviewer wouldn't be aware of the change.

 

At least, that's what I hope. I would be disturbed to find out that a Reviewer knew about such restrictions, but published the cache any way.

 

 

B.

[Pup Patrol]

It's not a "rule" for cache owners to mark trackables as "missing" from caches they own.

 

It is something they can do, as part of the cache maintenance, to update the trackable inventory on their cache.

 

Help Center → Trackables → Fancier Features

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=152

 

2.5. Mark Missing - Trackable on page but not there physically.

 

Sometimes, a Trackable has been physically removed from a geocache, but the finder does not log it online. The Travel Bug or Geocoin icon on remains the geocache page, and geocachers can be frustrated when they arrive at the geocache to find it missing.

 

Don't despair if a Trackable goes missing. In many cases it has been moved to another geocache but the last person didn't know how to log it. The next geocacher who finds it will log the find.

 

If you are the owner of the Trackable, or the owner of the geocache where the Trackable is listed, you can mark the item as missing. This will remove it from the geocache inventory, and place the Trackable in an "unknown location." This will not effect the mileage of the Trackable. Later, if the Trackable is found, it can be grabbed and placed into the correct location. Mileage will be calculated from its previous location.

 

To do this, go to the Trackable's page, and choose from among the "Trackable Item Options." If you are the Trackable owner, it will say "Recalculate distance." Click on this menu and select "Mark bug missing". If you are the geocache owner, the menu will already be on the "Mark bug missing" option. Click "Go" and when the page refreshes, at the top it will ask "Are you sure you want to mark this Travel Bug missing?" Click "Yes" to complete the action.

 

When you mark a Trackable missing, a log to the Trackable's page will be auto-generated under your name, explaining the Mark Missing log.

 

If you are not the Trackable owner or geocache owner and notice that a Trackable is not in a geocache, you can use the Trackable's reference number to log a note to the Trackable listing telling the owner that the Trackable is not there. Or you can email the geocache owner or the Trackable owner and point them to this Knowledge Book page. As a courtesy, it is nice to email the Trackable owner first.

 

 

B.

[+Shop99er]

If you have a TB-hotel, then you are responsible for the TB's. Not with other caches. That is the concept of TB-hotels in the first place.

 

Where did you get this from? CO's are not responsible to move travelers out of their caches, regardless of what the cache is called, including TB Hotels.

 

That being said, for the OP, I'm not making a special trip just cause a traveler owner is in a hurry. If I'm doing maintenance on a cache and see that a traveler has been there for a while, I'll grab it and move it along.

 

I would send him a note, delete his note on my cache page, and go on about my business.

[+3MonkeyCircus]

As a CO, I actually see it the other way. I get a kick out of creating caches for the enjoyment of others and making sure it a quality experience for them. That means I don't take TBs out of my caches as that is something that folks enjoy getting when they find a cache. I will drop off TBs (or launch my own) in my caches, but I leave the ones that find their way there alone so that someone else can enjoy them. To a degree, TBs are like an enticement to get folks to visit my caches.

[+Twentse Mug]

If you have a TB-hotel, then you are responsible for the TB's. Not with other caches. That is the concept of TB-hotels in the first place.

 

Where did you get this from? CO's are not responsible to move travelers out of their caches, regardless of what the cache is called, including TB Hotels.

 

That being said, for the OP, I'm not making a special trip just cause a traveler owner is in a hurry. If I'm doing maintenance on a cache and see that a traveler has been there for a while, I'll grab it and move it along.

 

I would send him a note, delete his note on my cache page, and go on about my business.

 

I already explained, in my view there is no such thing as a Tb-hotel as a special type of cache. No special icon or whatever. Just another cache with a size big enough to hold trackables. From a cache pretending designed especially for travel bugs I expect some extra care and service from the cache owner.

[+KatnissRue]

I would check the cache to make sure it's there, if it wasn't much of an inconvenience. Other than that, I'd let it do its thing.

[+Malemotives]

WOW! This thread has enlightened this newbie to how very nice and/or very nasty some geocachers can be.

[+terratin]

One of our trackables once ended up in a really long high D multi. And it remained there for several months. During that time one person did this cache and did not take the trackable out. Oh well.. happens. In the end someone had mercy and freed it.

[+Pinki24]

As a CO, I actually see it the other way. I get a kick out of creating caches for the enjoyment of others and making sure it a quality experience for them. That means I don't take TBs out of my caches as that is something that folks enjoy getting when they find a cache. I will drop off TBs (or launch my own) in my caches, but I leave the ones that find their way there alone so that someone else can enjoy them. To a degree, TBs are like an enticement to get folks to visit my caches.

 

My sentiments exactly!

[+firennice]

If you choose to call a cache a TB-Hotel you do have some responsibility. You are claiming your cache is the correct size and a little better protected than many of the other caches in the area. In my opinion, you are promising to check on it a little more often than the micro, and make sure there are no issues, etc.

 

In my area there are a few weeks in the year when youth programs teach about geocaches and send youth and families out to find them. Mine is on their list. I go out and gather the TB's up for a week or two and move them inside. The new people trying caching for the weekend tend to grab them and take them on the only day of their life they will ever cache. (sad experience taught me this) I felt I owe the TB owners a little more.

 

I do not think it is my responsibility to go get them, or move them along. Sometimes my geocache gets crowded with trackables. Then people tend to move the cool ones (coins and interesting objects) and leave some they consider lame (paper proxies, moldy items, broken stuff etc) I eventually feel pity and move them on.

 

In other words if you are going to call it a TB hotel I think you are promising something to visitors, but you are not required to do all the moving into or out of the cache.

[+Seaglass Pirates]

I have noticed that reviewers (at least in my country) see TB-hotels differently as a special type of cache. Example: logging rules like "always leave TB's behind in the cache" are approved with these caches by the reviewers.

 

That's a rather serious allegation you are making against your local reviewers. Logging rules that create TB prisons have been restricted for some time now. "Always leave TB's behind in the cache", seems to be an obvious attempt to create a loophole around it.

 

I discovered it's no allegation. But then this isn't a court of law either so the phrase "serious allegation" is hilarious. Our tb sat in a TB hotel in Germany for months. The owners response when I asked him to let me go free was "I can't make people take it". No but by the same token you can't hold them enmass either and actively go around collecting them from every cache to fill up your hotel.

 

And it gets worse. The hotel is in his stationary shop. And as if that was t random enough ... If the shop is shut, you can still log their cache ... By signing the other Log book 50 feet down the road which is the same cache. The TB's are not permitted to leave unless you swap them. The lady behind the counter gets them out for you to select which ones you will swap. Hence they said they couldn't make people choose ours.

I asked that ours be released and the owner was very pleasant it has to be said. But was also confused as to why we had a problem. They said uglier or less nice TB's tend to stay longer. I think ours was just over two months. We used TB rescue to implement a rescue.

 

Looking at it now google translate has made a real mash up of words but I still have the email correcting me that it isn't in a cinema as translate translated. It is in fact in a stationary shop hence the opening hours. It also used to say one for one TB - dunno if it still does.

 

So serious allegation - hmmm - GCVAG2 - not really.

 

In fact when I satrted a thread about "what the flipping heck" or something like that - those in the know stated its very common on the continent.

 

Edited to correct distance of the other "out of hours" log book.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Seaglass Pirates

[+Seaglass Pirates]

In fact if you needed any further proof that TB hotel owners run amok try this long long list. The last time I looked I found that the first 7 pages had at least 4 caches on each page that either restricted or prevented TB free movement. There is even a hit list of offending TB hotels but I can find that right now. I looked at the top three on the first page and this one red says the message isn't getting out there -

 

http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=3e10e494-31e7-4f10-8b8f-93c0e1f30b6e

 

From GC32958 in red text at the top - "PLEASE help keep a supply of TB's available for the next person to find and trade. If you DON'T have any bugs to drop off here.... PLEASE ONLY TAKE ONE. If you DO have bugs to drop off here Please trade (one for one), (5 for 5)... so on & so on. TY"

 

There are several local to us that state similar phrases. All approved.

[+Twentse Mug]

With 300+ trackables out running I have discovered that reviewers have different policies in different countries. In Austria reviewers do everything they can to make trackables keep travelling. In USA likewise. But here in the Netherlands tb-hotel owners who have these crazy hostage rules in the listing are protected by the reviewers. For me as a TB-owner it is very frustrating.

[+J Grouchy]

If you choose to call a cache a TB-Hotel you do have some responsibility. You are claiming your cache is the correct size and a little better protected than many of the other caches in the area. In my opinion, you are promising to check on it a little more often than the micro, and make sure there are no issues, etc.

...

In other words if you are going to call it a TB hotel I think you are promising something to visitors, but you are not required to do all the moving into or out of the cache.

 

I think this is where the confusion is.

 

Nobody makes such a promise just by creating a "TB Hotel"...but many have such an expectation of COs. The only part of what you said above that I believe to be true is regarding the container size.

[+dprovan]

Nobody makes such a promise just by creating a "TB Hotel"...but many have such an expectation of COs.

I suppose I agree with you, but the way I'd put it is that anyone that creates a TB hotel makes that promise, it's just that many TB hotel owners don't understand that. After all, how else am I do interpret "TB Hotel" in the title if not implying that this cache is a good place to put TBs? To say they aren't promising anything is like saying that a real hotel doesn't promise a nice place to stay, so I shouldn't complain about my miserable room.

[+J Grouchy]

Nobody makes such a promise just by creating a "TB Hotel"...but many have such an expectation of COs.

I suppose I agree with you, but the way I'd put it is that anyone that creates a TB hotel makes that promise, it's just that many TB hotel owners don't understand that. After all, how else am I do interpret "TB Hotel" in the title if not implying that this cache is a good place to put TBs? To say they aren't promising anything is like saying that a real hotel doesn't promise a nice place to stay, so I shouldn't complain about my miserable room.

 

I don't know about that comparison.

 

If you choose to call a cache a TB-Hotel you do have some responsibility. You are claiming your cache is the correct size and a little better protected than many of the other caches in the area. In my opinion, you are promising to check on it a little more often than the micro, and make sure there are no issues, etc.

...

In other words if you are going to call it a TB hotel I think you are promising something to visitors, but you are not required to do all the moving into or out of the cache.

 

I don't get where the "better protected" bit is coming from...or the part about checking on it more.

I've never gotten the impression that COs ever even have implied such things. If anything, they tend to be in higher traffic areas where TBs are more likely to get picked up or dropped off (near airports or high traffic points of interest). To me that doesn't say "better protected". On the contrary, it seems like they are more likely to get unwanted traffic in such places.

 

Also, the cache page inventory is almost always wildly inaccurate - something that could easily be maintained if the CO was checking on it "a little more often".

Edited February 2, 2015 by J Grouchy

[+NanCycle]

In fact if you needed any further proof that TB hotel owners run amok try this long long list. The last time I looked I found that the first 7 pages had at least 4 caches on each page that either restricted or prevented TB free movement. There is even a hit list of offending TB hotels but I can find that right now. I looked at the top three on the first page and this one red says the message isn't getting out there -

 

http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=3e10e494-31e7-4f10-8b8f-93c0e1f30b6e

 

From GC32958 in red text at the top - "PLEASE help keep a supply of TB's available for the next person to find and trade. If you DON'T have any bugs to drop off here.... PLEASE ONLY TAKE ONE. If you DO have bugs to drop off here Please trade (one for one), (5 for 5)... so on & so on. TY"

 

There are several local to us that state similar phrases. All approved.

 

Here's another one, fortunately now archived because the CO got upset that people didn't "play by the rules" and the cache was usually emptied within a few days after they restocked it from their raids of other caches. Personally, I think it wasn't so much ordinary cachers that were emptying it, but somebody local who was raiding it and stealing the trackables; one of mine went missing from this cache.

 

I got into a rather nasty email exchange with the CO precipitated by my posting a note on the cache page giving my permission for anyone to take my TB without trading for it.