To Letterboxers All:
An interesting day of posts: My $0.02 USD (thanks Marty):

About Promotion:
I am in agreement that we need to take a proactive approach to growing
this hobby - we've gotten a great start, for sure, but all of us would
like to have more boxes to look for, and growth is the way for this to
happen. 50 in YK2

However, I am not in favor of any sort of mass-promotion, via the new
or otherwise. Small articles, as those in rubber-stamp publications,
etc, are fine, and, as Graham suggested, perhaps targeting special
interest groups (bird watchers or boy scouts) also has merit. But I am
most in favor of keeping it local.

We are each the seed of a nuculus that must grow in our respective
areas to make this work. If anyone of us can't generate enough interest
in our own backyard, we'll have nothing left to do but talk on the net
about it. I view the net primarily as a way for us to share ideas among
us about issues and experiences that we as individuals have had.

So, to that end, promotion should be an individual and LOCAL choice. We
can collectively develop some helpful "aids" to share among us, perhaps
accessed only by folks on the list, but not visable to the web page
generally? These might be for downloading/modifying/printing to pass
about as we as individuals see fit? I agree with the sentiments of keep
it simple and rubber-stampish, not glitzy or "commercial".

There are lots of local options for promotion, many of which have been
discussed, some done. Tom Cooch has already involved a library, and some
of his students. My son and two friends want to bring it to cub scouts.
These are the sorts of activities that build local 'critical mass'. So,
as we go forward, lets share experiences such as these that have (or
haven't) worked.

About Vandalism:
RE: the lost Texas boxes, I think I've concluded that someone found the
first by accident, found out about the web page thru info in the box,
and went and found clues and boxes as a result. To me, this is the only
logical conclusion. Why?
Julie seems to have eliminated natural (water, animals, etc.),
and, I just don't think there is a cross-country conspiracy (from the
previous missing boxes elsewhere), and no one is going to accidentally
find
three in so short a span, and, finally, three different accidental finds
by different persons in so short a span is unlikely. So, what other
conclusion is possible?

That said, I don't feel that having clues on the net is the problem -
they have to be published someplace and, they can always be recopied and
passed along - we really cannot hope to control whose hands they get to
forever.
I think we each make a decision: Simple clues, easily found are more at
risk but perhaps better for boxes geared for kids. Cryptic, or long and
complicated clues, are safer, and more appealing for die-hard
letterboxers. The risk/benefit realities should be clear to each of us
by now - perhaps this is a good reason NOT to state difficulty on a web
page - a web-surfing-vandal will just grab the easy ones?

I do think, however, that this 'issue' has consumed far more time than
is beneficial (no offense meant here, Julie). I am concerned that all
this discussion, including ways to make it more difficult, may just
serve to increase the 'problem' - sort of a self-fulfilling prophesy.
This may involve the same sort of mind that pulls fire alarms and calls
in danger scares to schools - fun to watch the results in the media, in
this case - us. It was good to talk it out, however.

Finally, I think it would be GREAT to have Adrian or Graham over here to
visit, hunt for boxes, and talk to the local schoolkids.

This is far too long. Please excuse muy manners!

Erik



------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com