While I hesitate to open up this topic since we are currently not receiving the list, in reviewing the messages posted since we have been gone, it seems as though the rating system topic has again reared it head. While not exactly related with the rating systems that many "Finders" wish to use I mused about a rating system for qualifying the Finders, and their access to some clues. This is not a new concept as it is and has been employed by Dartmoor letterboxers. To get certain clues one has to qualify as a finder of 100, and probably more to receive the really great letterbox clues. A slight twist on this concept would be to set up the qualifications with counting the number of plants a letterboxer has made. Now I realize that there will be some that immediately dismiss this idea as elitist but instead of shooting the messenger, consider the message. This would certainly encourage more plants, and it would be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of 25 letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain letterboxes., and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request other clues. Instead of worrying about increasing your F count there would be another reason to increase your P count. When traveling to certain areas you would use the "Contact the Placer" and request the clues directly from the placer.
Don (Ducking off list for another week)(No that is not Donald Duck)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Qualifying for clues
12 messages in this thread |
Started on 2004-06-23
Qualifying for clues
From: Gwen and Don Jackson (foxsecurity@earthlink.net) |
Date: 2004-06-23 15:52:25 UTC-07:00
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: red_bing (redbng@aol.com) |
Date: 2004-06-23 23:07:10 UTC
I love the idea, to a point. I'm afraid it may encourage unscrupulous
participants to post bogus boxes or unsolvable mystery boxes in an
effort to boost their P count. Oh, well, in a perfect world...
--- "Don Jackson" wrote:
< snip >
> set up the qualifications with counting the number of plants a
letterboxer has made. This would certainly encourage more plants, and
it would be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of
25 letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain
letterboxes., and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request
other clues.
participants to post bogus boxes or unsolvable mystery boxes in an
effort to boost their P count. Oh, well, in a perfect world...
--- "Don Jackson"
< snip >
> set up the qualifications with counting the number of plants a
letterboxer has made. This would certainly encourage more plants, and
it would be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of
25 letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain
letterboxes., and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request
other clues.
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: lynnieth2003 (lynnieth2003@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-06-23 23:42:36 UTC
Granted, I'm relatively new to letterboxing, but here's my take on
this: the box that we've planted & the ones we are planning to
plant, are meant to be VISITED! What's the point in putting a box
out there & restricting it so that only people who are actively
planting boxes or who have only found 100 boxes can find it? I want
someone who is on their first adventure to go find it if they so
choose. The point, in my opinion, is participation, not exclusion.
I want to visit my logbook in a year or two & find it full of
stamps, not empty & neglected. Why bother otherwise? I LOVE the
mystery boxes & the puzzles (in fact, I have solved more puzzles &
know where more boxes are then I'll ever probably go out & actually
get), but if I were new to letterboxing, found that there was a box
in my area or solved a puzzle & then contacted the placer about it &
was told that I couldn't get it because I hadn't done this enough, I
would be much less likely to try again. JMHO!
Lynnie from The Family
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
wrote:
> While I hesitate to open up this topic since we are currently not
receiving the list, in reviewing the messages posted since we have
been gone, it seems as though the rating system topic has again
reared it head. While not exactly related with the rating systems
that many "Finders" wish to use I mused about a rating system for
qualifying the Finders, and their access to some clues. This is not
a new concept as it is and has been employed by Dartmoor
letterboxers. To get certain clues one has to qualify as a finder of
100, and probably more to receive the really great letterbox clues.
A slight twist on this concept would be to set up the qualifications
with counting the number of plants a letterboxer has made. Now I
realize that there will be some that immediately dismiss this idea
as elitist but instead of shooting the messenger, consider the
message. This would certainly encourage more plants, and it would
be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of 25
letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain letterboxes.,
and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request other clues.
Instead of worrying about increasing your F count there would be
another reason to increase your P count. When traveling to certain
areas you would use the "Contact the Placer" and request the clues
directly from the placer.
>
> Don (Ducking off list for another week)(No that is not Donald Duck)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
this: the box that we've planted & the ones we are planning to
plant, are meant to be VISITED! What's the point in putting a box
out there & restricting it so that only people who are actively
planting boxes or who have only found 100 boxes can find it? I want
someone who is on their first adventure to go find it if they so
choose. The point, in my opinion, is participation, not exclusion.
I want to visit my logbook in a year or two & find it full of
stamps, not empty & neglected. Why bother otherwise? I LOVE the
mystery boxes & the puzzles (in fact, I have solved more puzzles &
know where more boxes are then I'll ever probably go out & actually
get), but if I were new to letterboxing, found that there was a box
in my area or solved a puzzle & then contacted the placer about it &
was told that I couldn't get it because I hadn't done this enough, I
would be much less likely to try again. JMHO!
Lynnie from The Family
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
> While I hesitate to open up this topic since we are currently not
receiving the list, in reviewing the messages posted since we have
been gone, it seems as though the rating system topic has again
reared it head. While not exactly related with the rating systems
that many "Finders" wish to use I mused about a rating system for
qualifying the Finders, and their access to some clues. This is not
a new concept as it is and has been employed by Dartmoor
letterboxers. To get certain clues one has to qualify as a finder of
100, and probably more to receive the really great letterbox clues.
A slight twist on this concept would be to set up the qualifications
with counting the number of plants a letterboxer has made. Now I
realize that there will be some that immediately dismiss this idea
as elitist but instead of shooting the messenger, consider the
message. This would certainly encourage more plants, and it would
be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of 25
letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain letterboxes.,
and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request other clues.
Instead of worrying about increasing your F count there would be
another reason to increase your P count. When traveling to certain
areas you would use the "Contact the Placer" and request the clues
directly from the placer.
>
> Don (Ducking off list for another week)(No that is not Donald Duck)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: Jayme (paulandjayme.duggan@verizon.net) |
Date: 2004-06-24 00:35:21 UTC
I couldn't agree more.
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "lynnieth2003"
wrote:
> Granted, I'm relatively new to letterboxing, but here's my take on
> this: the box that we've planted & the ones we are planning to
> plant, are meant to be VISITED! What's the point in putting a box
> out there & restricting it so that only people who are actively
> planting boxes or who have only found 100 boxes can find it? I
want
> someone who is on their first adventure to go find it if they so
> choose. The point, in my opinion, is participation, not
exclusion.
> I want to visit my logbook in a year or two & find it full of
> stamps, not empty & neglected. Why bother otherwise? I LOVE the
> mystery boxes & the puzzles (in fact, I have solved more puzzles &
> know where more boxes are then I'll ever probably go out &
actually
> get), but if I were new to letterboxing, found that there was a
box
> in my area or solved a puzzle & then contacted the placer about it
&
> was told that I couldn't get it because I hadn't done this enough,
I
> would be much less likely to try again. JMHO!
>
> Lynnie from The Family
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
> wrote:
> > While I hesitate to open up this topic since we are currently
not
> receiving the list, in reviewing the messages posted since we have
> been gone, it seems as though the rating system topic has again
> reared it head. While not exactly related with the rating systems
> that many "Finders" wish to use I mused about a rating system for
> qualifying the Finders, and their access to some clues. This is
not
> a new concept as it is and has been employed by Dartmoor
> letterboxers. To get certain clues one has to qualify as a finder
of
> 100, and probably more to receive the really great letterbox
clues.
> A slight twist on this concept would be to set up the
qualifications
> with counting the number of plants a letterboxer has made. Now I
> realize that there will be some that immediately dismiss this
idea
> as elitist but instead of shooting the messenger, consider the
> message. This would certainly encourage more plants, and it would
> be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of 25
> letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain
letterboxes.,
> and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request other clues.
> Instead of worrying about increasing your F count there would be
> another reason to increase your P count. When traveling to certain
> areas you would use the "Contact the Placer" and request the clues
> directly from the placer.
> >
> > Don (Ducking off list for another week)(No that is not Donald
Duck)
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "lynnieth2003"
> Granted, I'm relatively new to letterboxing, but here's my take on
> this: the box that we've planted & the ones we are planning to
> plant, are meant to be VISITED! What's the point in putting a box
> out there & restricting it so that only people who are actively
> planting boxes or who have only found 100 boxes can find it? I
want
> someone who is on their first adventure to go find it if they so
> choose. The point, in my opinion, is participation, not
exclusion.
> I want to visit my logbook in a year or two & find it full of
> stamps, not empty & neglected. Why bother otherwise? I LOVE the
> mystery boxes & the puzzles (in fact, I have solved more puzzles &
> know where more boxes are then I'll ever probably go out &
actually
> get), but if I were new to letterboxing, found that there was a
box
> in my area or solved a puzzle & then contacted the placer about it
&
> was told that I couldn't get it because I hadn't done this enough,
I
> would be much less likely to try again. JMHO!
>
> Lynnie from The Family
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
>
> > While I hesitate to open up this topic since we are currently
not
> receiving the list, in reviewing the messages posted since we have
> been gone, it seems as though the rating system topic has again
> reared it head. While not exactly related with the rating systems
> that many "Finders" wish to use I mused about a rating system for
> qualifying the Finders, and their access to some clues. This is
not
> a new concept as it is and has been employed by Dartmoor
> letterboxers. To get certain clues one has to qualify as a finder
of
> 100, and probably more to receive the really great letterbox
clues.
> A slight twist on this concept would be to set up the
qualifications
> with counting the number of plants a letterboxer has made. Now I
> realize that there will be some that immediately dismiss this
idea
> as elitist but instead of shooting the messenger, consider the
> message. This would certainly encourage more plants, and it would
> be easy to verify through the letterboxer list. A planter of 25
> letterboxes would be able to request clues for certain
letterboxes.,
> and a planter of 50 or more would be able to request other clues.
> Instead of worrying about increasing your F count there would be
> another reason to increase your P count. When traveling to certain
> areas you would use the "Contact the Placer" and request the clues
> directly from the placer.
> >
> > Don (Ducking off list for another week)(No that is not Donald
Duck)
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: rscarpen (RiskyNil@pocketmail.com) |
Date: 2004-06-24 02:37:16 UTC
> if I were new to letterboxing, found that there was a box
> in my area or solved a puzzle & then contacted the placer about it
> & was told that I couldn't get it because I hadn't done this
> enough, I would be much less likely to try again. JMHO!
I'm not a big fan of those sorts of boxes myself, truth-be-told, but
I'm not bothered by the concept either. There's a place for 'hard-to-
get' clues. Requiring someone to find X number of boxes or place Y
number of boxes is just part of the hoops you have to jump through to
get the letterbox. That's not a whole lot difference than my Walking
Tour boxes where they have to solve a mind-numbingly boring puzzle to
get the letterbox. That's just part of the game. =)
Every box you find or plant gets you one step closer to the clue you
want. It's like going after two boxes at once! Once, with the
immediate gratification, and one with a delayed gratification.
In that sense, it's more like a bonus box than anything new or
different. Nobody get upset if you tell them they have to get ABC
box to find the clue for XYZ box--which is quite common. Instead,
you'd be telling them, "Well, now you have to get ABC, BCD, CDE, DEF,
etc. boxes before you can have the clue." It's more work, but not
really any different in the grand scheme of things.
And some people like the change of pace or having a goal to reach.
=) Some people don't like those kind of boxes--which is fine, boxes
have intended audiences, which doesn't mean *everyone*--and those
people who are interested can go for it and those that don't, won't.
No sleep lost either way. JIMOH. ;o)
-- Ryan
> in my area or solved a puzzle & then contacted the placer about it
> & was told that I couldn't get it because I hadn't done this
> enough, I would be much less likely to try again. JMHO!
I'm not a big fan of those sorts of boxes myself, truth-be-told, but
I'm not bothered by the concept either. There's a place for 'hard-to-
get' clues. Requiring someone to find X number of boxes or place Y
number of boxes is just part of the hoops you have to jump through to
get the letterbox. That's not a whole lot difference than my Walking
Tour boxes where they have to solve a mind-numbingly boring puzzle to
get the letterbox. That's just part of the game. =)
Every box you find or plant gets you one step closer to the clue you
want. It's like going after two boxes at once! Once, with the
immediate gratification, and one with a delayed gratification.
In that sense, it's more like a bonus box than anything new or
different. Nobody get upset if you tell them they have to get ABC
box to find the clue for XYZ box--which is quite common. Instead,
you'd be telling them, "Well, now you have to get ABC, BCD, CDE, DEF,
etc. boxes before you can have the clue." It's more work, but not
really any different in the grand scheme of things.
And some people like the change of pace or having a goal to reach.
=) Some people don't like those kind of boxes--which is fine, boxes
have intended audiences, which doesn't mean *everyone*--and those
people who are interested can go for it and those that don't, won't.
No sleep lost either way. JIMOH. ;o)
-- Ryan
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: Poison Ivy (poisonivy@haveashittyday.com) |
Date: 2004-06-24 13:25:59 UTC
I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
(X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
(X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: cpascott (seh-letterbox@comcast.net) |
Date: 2004-06-24 13:30:52 UTC
Quite new to letterboxing here, but I'm eager to place boxes. I
think in many ways figuring out a great place to put a box and how to
write clues in order to make finding the box a challenge but not
impossible will be fun. The challenge I'm having, however, is that
living in New England, much of the area around me is already
saturated with boxes.
I've thought of a seemingly countless number of places to put boxes
where I grew up (in the Finger Lakes section of New York State) but
the issue in placing boxes there is that they may be orphaned
directly after placing. I visit there from time to time (a few times
a year) but wouldn't be overly interested in spending all my time
there checking on the status of my boxes. Perhaps I'll find
another 'boxer who'll be willing to adopt them if I decide to place
them there.
My point, though, is that for some the fun is in the find, not the
place and even for those who like to place space is running out in
some areas. Thus, I'd have to voice my opinion to disagree with any
method that requires a certain P count in order to get clues.
CPAScott
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
think in many ways figuring out a great place to put a box and how to
write clues in order to make finding the box a challenge but not
impossible will be fun. The challenge I'm having, however, is that
living in New England, much of the area around me is already
saturated with boxes.
I've thought of a seemingly countless number of places to put boxes
where I grew up (in the Finger Lakes section of New York State) but
the issue in placing boxes there is that they may be orphaned
directly after placing. I visit there from time to time (a few times
a year) but wouldn't be overly interested in spending all my time
there checking on the status of my boxes. Perhaps I'll find
another 'boxer who'll be willing to adopt them if I decide to place
them there.
My point, though, is that for some the fun is in the find, not the
place and even for those who like to place space is running out in
some areas. Thus, I'd have to voice my opinion to disagree with any
method that requires a certain P count in order to get clues.
CPAScott
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Re: [LbNA] Re: Qualifying for clues
From: Doodle & Deedle Bug (doodle_n_deedle@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-06-24 06:47:46 UTC-07:00
Come plant them in Cleveland! I'll look after them for you :)
Doodle.
cpascott wrote:
Quite new to letterboxing here, but I'm eager to place boxes. I
think in many ways figuring out a great place to put a box and how to
write clues in order to make finding the box a challenge but not
impossible will be fun. The challenge I'm having, however, is that
living in New England, much of the area around me is already
saturated with boxes.
I've thought of a seemingly countless number of places to put boxes
where I grew up (in the Finger Lakes section of New York State) but
the issue in placing boxes there is that they may be orphaned
directly after placing. I visit there from time to time (a few times
a year) but wouldn't be overly interested in spending all my time
there checking on the status of my boxes. Perhaps I'll find
another 'boxer who'll be willing to adopt them if I decide to place
them there.
My point, though, is that for some the fun is in the find, not the
place and even for those who like to place space is running out in
some areas. Thus, I'd have to voice my opinion to disagree with any
method that requires a certain P count in order to get clues.
CPAScott
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Yahoo! Groups Links
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Doodle.
cpascott
Quite new to letterboxing here, but I'm eager to place boxes. I
think in many ways figuring out a great place to put a box and how to
write clues in order to make finding the box a challenge but not
impossible will be fun. The challenge I'm having, however, is that
living in New England, much of the area around me is already
saturated with boxes.
I've thought of a seemingly countless number of places to put boxes
where I grew up (in the Finger Lakes section of New York State) but
the issue in placing boxes there is that they may be orphaned
directly after placing. I visit there from time to time (a few times
a year) but wouldn't be overly interested in spending all my time
there checking on the status of my boxes. Perhaps I'll find
another 'boxer who'll be willing to adopt them if I decide to place
them there.
My point, though, is that for some the fun is in the find, not the
place and even for those who like to place space is running out in
some areas. Thus, I'd have to voice my opinion to disagree with any
method that requires a certain P count in order to get clues.
CPAScott
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Yahoo! Groups Links
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [LbNA] Re: Qualifying for clues
From: Hikers_n_ Hounds (hikers_n_hounds@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-06-24 08:25:24 UTC-07:00
ohmygod you are too funny...Ha!
Poison Ivy wrote:I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
(X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Poison Ivy
I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
(X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: Kim (kstar1200@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-06-24 21:42:32 UTC
I feel that there are some places that should not encourage
planting... I am a firm believer in not overdoing something.
Planting used to be needed in order to "grow" the hobby... which is
indeed still needed in some places, but certainly not everywhere.
planting... I am a firm believer in not overdoing something.
Planting used to be needed in order to "grow" the hobby... which is
indeed still needed in some places, but certainly not everywhere.
Re: [LbNA] Re: Qualifying for clues
From: dave & diane (vonderinsel@cox.net) |
Date: 2004-06-25 07:28:14 UTC-04:00
New England is densely boxed in many parts, but there are still uncharted territories (besides libraries, of course). Historic markers on the side of the road so often get ignored, and point the way to a neat thing of interest nearby. Most town greens have gazebos (A tip of the hat to the wonderful CT Gazebo Series!). And of course, the challenge of urban planting. The harvest is plenty - the planters needn't be few.
For the challenge of planting, consider the Qualifying for Clues to be not much more different than solving a code. For some folks, that's darn-near impossible. Diane and I have put more time into solving one particular code than we do planting! When we *do* find this verschlugginer box, the work will be rewarded with satisfaction commensurate (sp?) with the effort.
Dave
The von der Insels
P10 F201 X93 H5 E1
----- Original Message -----
From: cpascott
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 9:30 AM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Qualifying for clues
Quite new to letterboxing here, but I'm eager to place boxes. I
think in many ways figuring out a great place to put a box and how to
write clues in order to make finding the box a challenge but not
impossible will be fun. The challenge I'm having, however, is that
living in New England, much of the area around me is already
saturated with boxes.
I've thought of a seemingly countless number of places to put boxes
where I grew up (in the Finger Lakes section of New York State) but
the issue in placing boxes there is that they may be orphaned
directly after placing. I visit there from time to time (a few times
a year) but wouldn't be overly interested in spending all my time
there checking on the status of my boxes. Perhaps I'll find
another 'boxer who'll be willing to adopt them if I decide to place
them there.
My point, though, is that for some the fun is in the find, not the
place and even for those who like to place space is running out in
some areas. Thus, I'd have to voice my opinion to disagree with any
method that requires a certain P count in order to get clues.
CPAScott
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
For the challenge of planting, consider the Qualifying for Clues to be not much more different than solving a code. For some folks, that's darn-near impossible. Diane and I have put more time into solving one particular code than we do planting! When we *do* find this verschlugginer box, the work will be rewarded with satisfaction commensurate (sp?) with the effort.
Dave
The von der Insels
P10 F201 X93 H5 E1
----- Original Message -----
From: cpascott
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 9:30 AM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Qualifying for clues
Quite new to letterboxing here, but I'm eager to place boxes. I
think in many ways figuring out a great place to put a box and how to
write clues in order to make finding the box a challenge but not
impossible will be fun. The challenge I'm having, however, is that
living in New England, much of the area around me is already
saturated with boxes.
I've thought of a seemingly countless number of places to put boxes
where I grew up (in the Finger Lakes section of New York State) but
the issue in placing boxes there is that they may be orphaned
directly after placing. I visit there from time to time (a few times
a year) but wouldn't be overly interested in spending all my time
there checking on the status of my boxes. Perhaps I'll find
another 'boxer who'll be willing to adopt them if I decide to place
them there.
My point, though, is that for some the fun is in the find, not the
place and even for those who like to place space is running out in
some areas. Thus, I'd have to voice my opinion to disagree with any
method that requires a certain P count in order to get clues.
CPAScott
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: Qualifying for clues
From: Tara (tarasdsu@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-06-27 00:13:54 UTC
Poison Ivy...you crack me up!
Tara
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)
Tara
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Poison Ivy"
wrote:
> I try to maintain my own personal goal of 1P to 10F.
> I'm at that now, I just need to post some of the clues. Oops.
>
> I work diligently to increase my P-ness size
> so as not to appear to be just an F-ing whore.
>
> P17 F160 X56 = PFX233
> (X=X47 + T9) E17 (F = M5 + H15 + F140)