with respect to the Time article/etc, the newbies who are here and
reading this are not the ones who are the issue/problem. I don't
want any of the new people here to think that we aren't glad that
they are here, because they are the ones that are taking the time to
join the list, and read up on the hobby and are the responsible
letterboxers. The ones who just read the article and look up some
clues to go "check it out" without studying up are the ones who are
causing the problems. So, if you are a newbie here as a result of
the Time article, welcome and we're glad to have you...don't take
this discussion personally.
Tara
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Alafair"
> Don,
>
> Though I rarely post, I wanted to respond to your concerns about
> publicity because your posts over the years have always been
> respectful of others, cogent and thoughtfully written.
>
> I was involved with the "Time" reporter and article. Like you, I
> hestitated about doing this at all. I exchanged emails with the
> others who were mentioned, all veteran letterboxers, and, I think
I
> can speak for all involved. We felt that if we didn't do this and
> emphasize the traditions associated with the game, the wrong
> impression would have been given to the reading public and, sadly,
> even more letterboxes would go missing. Doing this was truly a
double
> edged sword.
>
> Further, we invited the writer of the piece, Deirdre Van Dyk, to
> Connecticut to letterbox with those of us in the East who had done
> phone interviews with her. Deirdre graciously gave up her one day
a
> week off and joined us. Before we set one foot on a trail, we sat
> with her at lunch and discussed in great detail the nuances of the
> game and how playing it runs along a continuum from complete
stealth
> and anonymity to others who are much more open. Incidentally, in
> advance of Deridre's coming to Connecticut and writing the piece,
she
> read Randy Hall's book. Most of us had several telephone
> conversations with her and we emailed back and forth constantly
> because she was committed to painting as accurate a picture as she
> could. Shortly before publication, her editor reduced her allotted
> space to 99 lines so she had to cut quite a bit of content from
the
> piece.
>
> While we all were letterboxing with Deirdre, we happened upon some
> technical scenarios that, I feel, helped her understand how the
game
> is played and some of the issues we all face and discuss on the
talk-
> lists. We came upon a poorly hidden letterbox, some clues that
were
> written in such a way as to cause undesirable impact to the
> environment and a box hidden in plain sight of a family gathering
> that we decided to pass on. We took the time to point these things
> out to her and I feel she achieved a more balanced perspective
that
> most letterboxers are sensitive to the environment and LNT, are
> thoughtful and respectful people who would pass up a letterbox
rather
> than compromise its location to non-boxers.
>
> Whether the piece was 99 lines or 9 pages, it would have attracted
> people to our beloved game who had both good and bad intentions,
> some who will stay and become great and interesting players or
others
> who will try it, lose interest and fade away. In that regard, if
> the "Time" article was to happen at all, ironically, we probably
have
> the writer's editor to thank for preventing too much from being
> written about it. The downside is that regional media sources who
> picked up on the piece are now clammoring for their own spin, as
many
> of you have already found out. Best kept secrets aren't secrets
for
> very long.
>
>
> I think we are all saddened by the loss of a letterbox,
particularly
> when it happens at the hand of man. While art is ephemeral, it
still
> smarts and makes us ask why anyone would be so thoughtless. This
is
> one reason so many of us harp "ad nauseum" on the importance of
> rehiding a box carefully and making good choices about hiding
spots.
> These things need to be reiterated over and over somewhere so that
> those who are new to the game of letterboxing follow on with
respect
> for the efforts by and hard work from every boxer who preceded
them.
> It's also just one reason why so many of us are not publishing our
> clues any longer and making them WOM.
>
> Your comment about media people having their own agendas is
true.The
> nature of the press is that, in theory, it may strive for balance,
> but the end result is always presented with a point of view. It
was
> extremely important for those of us who were involved with "Time"
to
> make sure that the article was as balanced as it could be. If it
had
> to happen at all, I, for one, am thankful to have worked with a
> reporter who was generous of herself and her time, understood our
> delimma and attempted to write about letterboxing as fairly as
> possible.
>
> Don and Gwen, I am very sorry for the loss of your letterboxes.
>
> Alafair
>
>
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
>
> ... We were contacted by the Time writer, but we chose not to
> respond. Not only do I think that the game is better served by
word
> of mouth, I have a great distrust of most news folks as they will
> always follow THEIR agenda. ...Publicity for this game can be
> detrimental to the viability of the planted letterboxes. That is
just
> the way it is. For those that only "Find" the missing letterbox is
an
> inconvenience. For those that "Plant" the missing letterbox is
more
> than that, and a little part of you is gone... Don