I'm missing the backstory, but answering anyway because I keep
coming back to this topic in my head instead of simply going on. It
would depend on whether the white out carrying person was the
logbook placer or if it was a seeker carrying the cover-upper.

I wouldn't be happy reading through my book and someone has
liberally applied white out over the "infected area" of which I
might have been immune to.

More importantly than my views, what do you think?

Heh, having said that, what is the back story of rude comments?


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "whatwdastandsfor"
wrote:
>
>
> I had a pipe dream after reading this topic. How about carring
> white out to cover up the questionalable language. That would
leave
> stamps and pages in place. Since I use a magazine type log book
> taking out an offensive page might take out some other stamp.
what
> do yu think?

The backstory in a nutshell is vandalism. Individuals who think it's
cute/funny/daring (pick your adjective) to fill a page or pages of a
logbook found intentionally or accidentally with verbal garbage.

For myself (having two young children who love to look at the
journals) I would bless the person who did white out any such thing
found in one of my boxes. Better yet, tear out the pages for me as
long it didn't require you to remove any legitimate stamps.

Knit Wit

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "votremerci"
wrote:
>
> I'm missing the backstory, but answering anyway because I keep
> coming back to this topic in my head instead of simply going on.

I personally would not want anyone to white out words or rip out pages
in my logbooks. I would much rather have them notify me of the issue.
Nautilus

I would bless the person who did white out any such thing
> found in one of my boxes. Better yet, tear out the pages for me as
> long it didn't require you to remove any legitimate stamps.
>
> Knit Wit

In a message dated 3/7/2005 8:07:10 PM Central Standard Time,
ncginger2000@yahoo.com writes:
The backstory in a nutshell is vandalism. Individuals who think it's
cute/funny/daring (pick your adjective) to fill a page or pages of a
logbook found intentionally or accidentally with verbal garbage.

For myself (having two young children who love to look at the
journals) I would bless the person who did white out any such thing
found in one of my boxes. Better yet, tear out the pages for me as
long it didn't require you to remove any legitimate stamps.

Knit Wit
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Ditto for me. Anyone finding any obscenities in any of our logbooks, feel
free to white-out white-out white-out. But does anyone really carry around
white-out with them? I never would have thought of it. Another thing to add to
the backpack?

We haven't yet had any problems that way, and I'm very glad. Have had quite
a few comments from geocaching folks who seemed to think they were finding a
strange sort of geocache. And one sort of negative comment because a
legitimate letterboxer didn't seem to like my placement of a box, but it was in that
place for a particular purpose, and they likely didn't realize the history of
the site to really understand why I placed it where I did -- where we decided to
place it was sort of as a joke.

But even if it meant the loss of a stamp, enough folks around here box with
children that I'd almost rather lose the stamp if it was really necessary if it
meant losing the obscenities. So white-out is a good alternative -- if folks
carry it with them.

So I guess we've been kind of lucky here in this neck of the woods.

Pippi


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If anyone finds anything offensive in one of my letterboxes, please DO NOT
white it out, cross it out, or in anyway deface the logbook. Please contact me,
and I will either take care of it right away before tender eyes see it, or I will
post a warning in the clues.

I think we all all should be pretty careful about feeling entitled to censor
someone else's words. Leave it to the owner of the logbook, unless the
owner tells you otherwise.

Acorn

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, CountdownTo55@a... wrote:
>
> Ditto for me. Anyone finding any obscenities in any of our logbooks, feel
> free to white-out white-out white-out. But does anyone really carry around
> white-out with them? I never would have thought of it. Another thing to add
to
> the backpack?
>
> We haven't yet had any problems that way, and I'm very glad. Have had
quite
> a few comments from geocaching folks who seemed to think they were
finding a
> strange sort of geocache. And one sort of negative comment because a
> legitimate letterboxer didn't seem to like my placement of a box, but it was in
that
> place for a particular purpose, and they likely didn't realize the history of
> the site to really understand why I placed it where I did -- where we decided
to
> place it was sort of as a joke.
>
> But even if it meant the loss of a stamp, enough folks around here box with
> children that I'd almost rather lose the stamp if it was really necessary if it
> meant losing the obscenities. So white-out is a good alternative -- if folks
> carry it with them.
>
> So I guess we've been kind of lucky here in this neck of the woods.
>
> Pippi
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 3/7/2005 8:53:56 PM Central Standard Time,
l-fischer@northwestern.edu writes:
I think we all all should be pretty careful about feeling entitled to censor
someone else's words. Leave it to the owner of the logbook, unless the
owner tells you otherwise.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

I would certainly agree that it definitely should be up to each box placer as
to how they would want it to be handled, but keep in mind that the original
conversation concerned obscenities scrawled across pages of a logbook. We're
not talking "censoring" anything that wasn't done originally just out of total
malice to begin with.

Pippi


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Gwen & I usually carry several empty replacement logs with us, and
normally when we find letterboxes that have their logs filled or
nearly filled we leave them in the letterbox along with the original
log. There was one occasion when we found the log book filled with
obscenities and we pulled the book, left a replacement and notified
the Placer on our return home. We asked what they would like done
with the logbook, and we threw it away when they asked us to. I
believe that was an appropriate thing to do. I believe that leaving
the logbook in place would not be the proper thing to do with or
without the placer's approval. We (letterboxing community) have a
responsibility to keep our hobby/sport/game wholesome. Finders
should carry extra supplies (baggies[inside],log books, etc.) to
keep letterboxes dry,and supplied. To require a finder to advise
that a logbook is filled with obscene writing, and not let them deal
with it seems fairly selfish(please no flames, I'm generalizing). By
the time a Placer gets a note from a Finder about the problem there
could be several groups of Finders that have read the same filth. I
guess this was my 5 cents worth.

Don

In a message dated 3/7/2005 10:40:30 PM Central Standard Time,
foxsecurity@earthlink.net writes:
By
the time a Placer gets a note from a Finder about the problem there
could be several groups of Finders that have read the same filth.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Boy, that's the truth.

Keith came home from "box maintenance" one either Saturday or Sunday and told
me that it appeared that 3 different groups of folks had found two of our
boxes -- the Graue Mill & Fullersburg Woods ones -- all within about half an hour
of each other. Nice weather on weekends and that can happen. :-)

Pippi


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Itr appears that about half the people who have replied to this topic
would want the obscenities removed by the first boxer to see them, and
the rest (including me), would not want their logbook ever altered by
anyone without asking. So, I have a solution for those of you who
would want to keep others from seeing such filth. (note: I am very
much against filth and have never seen it in logbooks, and hope I
never do)
In order to warn the next letterboxer of the contents ofthe logbook
while you are contacting the placer to fix the problem, why not simpy
wrap a piece of paper around the logbook and write in big, bold
letters, "CATUION, OFFENSIVE MATERIAL HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN LOGBOOK,
VIEW WITH CARE." Something to that effect. That way you aren't
altering someone's logoobk who would not want you to, and you are not
failing to protect finders who follow you. Because, let's face it, we
don't need to complicate letterboxing with trying to keep track of who
wants and who doesn't want their logbooks censored. And how often do
we need to worry about that anyway?

Eli







--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "whatwdastandsfor"
wrote:
>
>
> I had a pipe dream after reading this topic. How about carring
> white out to cover up the questionalable language. That would leave
> stamps and pages in place. Since I use a magazine type log book
> taking out an offensive page might take out some other stamp. what
> do yu think?

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "eli_slider"
wrote:
>
> Itr appears that about half the people who have replied to this
topic
> would want the obscenities removed by the first boxer to see them,
and
> the rest (including me), would not want their logbook ever altered
by
> anyone without asking. So, I have a solution for those of you who
> would want to keep others from seeing such filth. (note: I am very
> much against filth and have never seen it in logbooks, and hope I
> never do)
> In order to warn the next letterboxer of the contents ofthe logbook
> while you are contacting the placer to fix the problem, why not
simpy
> wrap a piece of paper around the logbook and write in big, bold
> letters, "CATUION, OFFENSIVE MATERIAL HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN LOGBOOK,
> VIEW WITH CARE." Something to that effect. That way you aren't
> altering someone's logoobk who would not want you to, and you are
not
> failing to protect finders who follow you. Because, let's face
it, we
> don't need to complicate letterboxing with trying to keep track of
who
> wants and who doesn't want their logbooks censored. And how often
do
> we need to worry about that anyway?
>
> Eli
>
Hi Eli,
Lets say that it is not the log book that is a problem, but instead
the tupperware container is cracked, and the inside baggies are
torn, and rain clouds on the horizon. As a Placer of the letterbox
wouldn't you want the Finder to do some first aid for the letterbox?
At least until you could be contacted. Finders hopefully carry
supplies with them and should have sufficient respect for our hobby
and your box to temporarily fix it. What I was proposing was a
temporary fix for a logbook problem.

Don

Don,
Absolutely! If the box is in danger for any reason then I would
expect an experienced boxer to do first aid. I would also trust many
boxers I know to have good enough judgment to tear out a page in my
logbook if something was offensive. BUT, I wouldn't trust EVERY boxer
to have such good judgment, and I can tell from other posts on this
topic that other Placers would trust people in general even less than
I. The idea I had was a happy medium, I thought. You don't have to
do it, I was just trying to help. Tear the pages out if you want,
even from my logbooks, I'm not going to have a cow. I just would
rather not make a blanket statement that if someone sees something
they think might not be suitable for children that they should tear it
out. But, again, first aid or any other obvious repairs a box needs,
by all means do it first, contact placer later. If we were talking
about something potentially harmful like poison pills in a letterbox,
then obviously do something immediately. I'm not trying to be
controversial, but conversely, I thought I might have had a concept
that would eliminate controversy.

Eli


> >
> Hi Eli,
> Lets say that it is not the log book that is a problem, but instead
> the tupperware container is cracked, and the inside baggies are
> torn, and rain clouds on the horizon. As a Placer of the letterbox
> wouldn't you want the Finder to do some first aid for the letterbox?
> At least until you could be contacted. Finders hopefully carry
> supplies with them and should have sufficient respect for our hobby
> and your box to temporarily fix it. What I was proposing was a
> temporary fix for a logbook problem.
>
> Don

Are all these cases of obscenities occurring in one region? I have not
seen this. Is it other letterboxers doing this? It seems more likely
to me that it would be vandals who happen upon a box.

Regarding the appropriateness of finders "correcting" the offending
material. I think you're opening up a can of worms. There are many
people in the world, and on talk lists especially, who are just
waiting to be offended. They actually seem to look for it and when
they don't find offense they imagine it. There are a lot of very thin
skins in the world. Just imagine people trying to decide what's
offensive and then making permanent "corrections". Do you really want
to see that happening? I know there are things we can all agree are
offensive - as a concept - but what's the standard and who decides it?
The courts still can't define pornography and frankly I find the
reaction to Janet Jackson's nipple to be entirely overblown and
prudish. There are also religious and political ideas that could cause
offense and an attitude that it's OK to remove offensive material from
a letterbox may cause someone to feel entitled to remove something
that may not be universally offensive although highly offensive to
them personally.

ET

In a message dated 3/8/2005 10:50:38 AM Central Standard Time,
iqladen@bellsouth.net writes:
If we were talking
about something potentially harmful like poison pills in a letterbox,
then obviously do something immediately.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Oh dear.

You mean that white powder that Keith found when he was last checking one of
our boxes might not have come from his powdered donut?

Oh dear.

Oh well. Too late now.



Whew! OK! I've got his life insurance premiums paid up to date. [1]

Pippi

[1] I'm generally very well organized when it comes to keeping current on the
necessary little details of life.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

That is exactly my point ET. Thank you for putting it more clearly
than I did. Thus, if you see something that makes you feel like
something MUST be done to save the eyes of the next finder, wrap a
warning note around the logbook to avoid stepping on the placers toes.
Or not. It's all up to the finder of course. But, as far as this
can of worms, I just wanted to help keep the lid on it.

Eli



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "mr_elsworth_toohey"
wrote:
>
>
> Are all these cases of obscenities occurring in one region? I have not
> seen this. Is it other letterboxers doing this? It seems more likely
> to me that it would be vandals who happen upon a box.
>
> Regarding the appropriateness of finders "correcting" the offending
> material. I think you're opening up a can of worms. There are many
> people in the world, and on talk lists especially, who are just
> waiting to be offended. They actually seem to look for it and when
> they don't find offense they imagine it. There are a lot of very thin
> skins in the world. Just imagine people trying to decide what's
> offensive and then making permanent "corrections". Do you really want
> to see that happening? I know there are things we can all agree are
> offensive - as a concept - but what's the standard and who decides it?
> The courts still can't define pornography and frankly I find the
> reaction to Janet Jackson's nipple to be entirely overblown and
> prudish. There are also religious and political ideas that could cause
> offense and an attitude that it's OK to remove offensive material from
> a letterbox may cause someone to feel entitled to remove something
> that may not be universally offensive although highly offensive to
> them personally.
>
> ET

> I know there are things we can all agree are offensive - as a
> concept - but what's the standard and who decides it?

I always thought it a weak argument to say that because there are
"gray areas", we can't do anything abou the "pitch black" ones. Most
people, for instance, would think the term FUCK YOU or NIGGERS ARE
FAGS very offensive in a logbook. Perhaps there is a handful of
people out there who think it's funny and appropriate, but I bet we
could take a poll and find, lo-and-behold, out of 1,000 people, a
measily 2 might think that's appropriate in a logbook. And they'd
probably vote that way just to be different.

And if it's on a page, all by itself, is it really a big deal to tear
it out?

I'm smart enough to recognize that other comments or drawings do fall
into gray areas. For instance, someone might write, "What a damn fine
view!" which some people might feel is offensive and others might
consider--hey, it's not a big deal. In a case like that--even if I
thought it was inappropriate--I wouldn't tear out the page since I can
recognize that it may not be offensive to everyone and the owner of
the box may not appreciate such "help".

Just because some crimes fall into gray areas (e.g., stealing food
because you're hungry) doesn't mean we should let murderers off the
hook. And just because there are gray areas in what people find
acceptable in a logbook doesn't mean we should allow everything to
slide by either.

-- Ryan

PS. I am very apologetic if the blunt language used in this post has
offended everyone, but in context it does seem appropriate. In that
sense, this post is a "gray area", but I think most people would be
okay with it under the circumstances. However, if those offensive
phrases were used in a post all by itself, it would quickly be deleted
and myself likely banned for using it. And rightly so!

We experienced this very thing recently on a trip up the CA coast.


One of the letterboxes we found included a gorgeous and expensive
commercially bound and leather-like covered logbook. It was hidden
in an absolutely gorgeous location that many 'non-letterboxing'
folks frequent. The letterbox itself was GIGANTIC and very
difficult, in fact, impossible, to hide in the unique venue--crags
atop a bluff/200' cliff overlooking a beautiful cove along the
Central CA Pacific Coast. When we found the letterbox it was
obvious that many non-letterboxers had found it. In fact, we
thought we'd found a geocache instead of a letterbox because the
container was more like a Rubbermaid Action Packer than any tiny
little letterbox container we normally find.


Anyways, this 500+ page commercially bound logbook (think fancy
diary/journal type book) had many interesting entries into it.
Looked like only about a dozen letterboxers ever found it but there
had been over a hundred entries by other 'non-letterboxers' who had
stumbled upon it. Most of the comments were very interesting and
inspirational--just comments folks added to describe how they were
personally affected by such a glorious spot--like soul nurturing
type effects. But, there were several other not-so-family oriented
entries. Had it not been such a lovely journal I would have
immediately ripped out those pages (they were UTTERLY DISGUSTING and
in some cases violent--many mentioned violent 'crimes' people had
committed and other entries described last words/thoughts before
they 'supposedly' jumped off the nearby cliff and that sort of stuff-
-I figured they were mostly comments from vandals who thought they
were being funny) but I knew it would have ruined the journal to do
so. Since I didn't know these planters from Adam I let the journal
go as it was--hoping most visitors would simply ignore those awful
comments--and whenever the original planters returned to check on it
that they would eliminate the entries as they saw fit.

In other letterbox logs, if I was able to remove
such 'violent'/'awful' comments without damaging the logbook in
anyway I have done so--but only for individuals who I know very well
would appreciate me removing those comments. Otherwise, I've let
the comments stay.

The only other time I have 'altered' a logbook in any way is when I
noticed 'mystery letterbox clue revealing' entries in a hitchhiker
in the very venue where the mystery letterbox was located. I
blacked out the 'spoiler' info on the HH log and sent it on its way.

dvn2r ckr

Thank You dvn2rckr this is exactly my point. You write pasionately
about how "UTTERLY DISGUSTING" you found these entries and seem quite
confident that they were repugnant to anyone and should be dealt with.
I however find those entries fascinating as well as disturbing. What
do they tell us about society? Why would someone be motivated to do
that? At the point the first person posted something disturbing how
did the remaining poeple react and did that lead to people trying to
out do the disturbing entries. What is it about human nature that
brings out this dark side. I would be very upset to find out that
someone had removed this material from a log books, even if it was on
a page by itself or in a book that wasn't a fine leather bound
journal. It's a glimpse of the real world and what people do and think
when they are annonymous and not watched. The situation of stumbling
an a log book that is obviously repeatedly viewed but your entry wil
go entirely unwitnessed and be entirely annonymous grants a fredom not
often found and how people react to that tells us something about
human nature even if it is troubling and disturbing. Like I said it's
a big can of worms, and there will always be someone that finds
something offensive. As to Ryan and gray areas, society has agreed to
the judicial system as a mechanism to sort out the gray areas and deal
with the rare black and white but, using your own example, the Supreme
Court is strugling with how to deal with even such obvious crimes as
murder murder in their recent decision on how to punish minors. So
even this is not always black and white. These Log books are so
trivial that I don't think we need to set up a letterboxing judicial
system to deal with it, just respect the endless varied points of
view in the world.

I think Eli had the best solution. Wrap a warning around the book for
the next finder and notify the owner. This would not offend me at all
and is a very wise solution in my opinion.

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "mr_elsworth_toohey"
wrote:
>
> Thank You dvn2rckr this is exactly my point. You write pasionately
> about how "UTTERLY DISGUSTING" you found these entries and seem
quite
> confident that they were repugnant to anyone and should be dealt
with.
> I however find those entries fascinating as well as disturbing.

The comments/drawings referred to rape, murder & suicide--in some
cases going into much 'hopefully fictitious' graphic detail. I
certainly hope most of society would find those entries disgusting.
This is why I don't let my kids peruse the logbooks first before I
get a chance to thumb through it (especially now that one of them is
reading fairly efficiently). Yes, I find it interesting 'why'
somebody opted to dedicate time to writing such comments--I was even
more flabbergasted that those very individuals didn't just chuck the
entire letterbox over the cliff instead of just tossing their,
hopefully, fictitious 'victims' over...

Yes, exploring why these particular individuals were led to make
some comments in such a 'public venue' would certainly serve as an
interesting sociology experiment--but I'd rather not have young kids
exposed to this stuff before they're able to clearly discern between
common mores/norms and psychological/psychiatric psychosis. It's
just a hobby--nothing more, nothing less. Real life, especially in
this day and time, is WAY more important than debates over piddly
vandals' comments in letterboxing logbooks.

dvn2r ckr

> using your own example, the Supreme Court is strugling with how to
> deal with even such obvious crimes as murder murder in their recent
> decision on how to punish minors. So even this is not always black
> and white.

Now that's not nice--you took an example of a crime and twisted it
into a grey area called "captial punishment". Nobody is suggesting
that minors should be allowed to kill people willy nilly--that's NOT
what the Supreme Court is dealing with. They are dealing with issues
of capital punishment which, because I have more common sense than the
average fruit fly, let's me realize that while some people might find
such a thought offensive, it does not give me the right to tear out
pages in a logbook supportive of capital punishment.

Murder one is NOT a gray area. How to punish those guilty of it,
however, certainly is controversial.

-- Ryan

On Wednesday, March 9, 2005, at 05:11 PM, dvn2rckr wrote:
>
> Yes, exploring why these particular individuals were led to make
> some comments in such a 'public venue' would certainly serve as an
> interesting sociology experiment--but I'd rather not have young kids
> exposed to this stuff before they're able to clearly discern between
> common mores/norms and psychological/psychiatric psychosis. It's
> just a hobby--nothing more, nothing less. Real life, especially in
> this day and time, is WAY more important than debates over piddly
> vandals' comments in letterboxing logbooks.

At the risk of stirring up a whole new hornet's nest, why assume that
people involved enough with their kids to box with them would allow
those same kids to run through a notebook full of obscenities without
knowing what was up? If a glimpse is gotten by a child who opens the
book before you can say boo, it's easy enough to deal with, but I can't
imagine anyone here (or, frankly, anyone I've met on the trails) just
allowing a young kid to sit and read these diatribes and not know what
was up until the kid had read for an hour and asked a question.......
If I was the kind of person to look for something to be offended about,
it might be the assumption that parents are just so darn uncaring
towards their kids or that we'd be grateful for someone assuming that
their personal decisions are the right ones for everyone. Your Black
and White might be someone else's teaching moment........

Of course, I am radical enough to believe that it's also my
responsibility to monitor my kid's books and TV and such. As with this
issue, a discussion and a heads-up that something contains certain
material is fine and often helpful. Banning an adult book or show
because a kid *might* see it isn't. If this happened to my logbook, I'd
be ok with a warning note being included and I'd be happy to get an
email letting me now what was up so I could make any changes I wanted
to. Although I might ultimately make the same editing choices you
would, I'm not so sure I'd be fine with someone besides me editing my
logbook. If you have been *told* that someone is ok with you editing
their book, then that's their choice.

.00000003 of a cent

As an organism that inhales oxygen, I offend every carbon dioxide
molecule that I exhale. As a human, any opinion I have (even if
it's something as piddly as a favorite color or favorite type of
chocolate or an experience along the letterboxing trail) is bound to
offend some other living organism out there who also holds an
opinion. This, too, is why so many folks have refrained from
participating on the LBNA-usa discussion board for so many years.
It's difficult to discuss things in this venue without being
considered a cad somewhere along the way.

Sorry if I've offended anybody--which I'm quite certain I have. I'd
much rather be one that develops and holds an opinion and defends it
than one who merrily toes the line with the masses without any
consideration for why they opine the way they do. Not my intent--
just participating in a lively discussion. Guess this isn't the
venue for that. Back to the 'abyss'...

dvn2r ckr

On Wednesday, March 9, 2005, at 06:28 PM, dvn2rckr wrote:

> Sorry if I've offended anybody--which I'm quite certain I have.

Not me. You're entitled to your opinion, as is everyone here. I
personally enjoy a good and reasoned discussion with people of various
viewpoints. I merely pointed out that I don't want my property
destroyed without my permission and I do not wish someone else's
decision forced upon me.

> I'd
> much rather be one that develops and holds an opinion and defends it
> than one who merrily toes the line with the masses without any
> consideration for why they opine the way they do.

Any particular reason you think your view hasn't been considered even
by those who disagree? Just as, hopefully, you have considered various
opinions before forming yours, so have many who disagree with you.

> Not my intent--
> just participating in a lively discussion. Guess this isn't the
> venue for that.

I had assumed it was, hence my post. If a polite and explained
disagreement is reason to just leave, then it's not a discussion you
were looking for....... I haven't read any flames or unreasonable
attacks yet.

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rscarpen" wrote:
>
> > I know there are things we can all agree are offensive - as a
> > concept - but what's the standard and who decides it?
>
> I'm smart enough to recognize that other comments or drawings do fall
> into gray areas. For instance, someone might write, "What a damn fine
> view!" which some people might feel is offensive and others might
> consider--hey, it's not a big deal.

-- or - "Eats Shoots and Leaves?"

In a case like that--even if I
> thought it was inappropriate--I wouldn't tear out the page since I can
> recognize that it may not be offensive to everyone and the owner of
> the box may not appreciate such "help".
>
-- Ryan

I agree with Ryan. Language, like many other things, can be used for good or evil. We
post on "discussion boards," where there ought to be free exchange of perspectives. We
run into trouble when it is dominated by opinion and without healthy, thoughtful
discourse.

speedsquare

I agree completely that we should be able to use the reasoning ability
you obviously possess to decide whether or not a page would be best
torn out. I have that ability, and I would guess most of us
discussing this topic do as well (demonstrated by the depth of thought
some of these posts have reached). I guess what some people were
saying is that they feel hesitant to trust that everyone will have
such good judgment. As you said, there are likely those who share our
hobby who would consider yanking a page because it said "damned fine
view". Perhaps I misinterpreted this topic as an attempt to define a
safe course of action we could follow in the event of discovering
potentially scarring filth in logoobks. If people are worried about
the placer's wishes, then perhaps you could use my suggestion.
Obviously, as we always come back to, there are no rules governing all
of us. So, even if we did all agree on a modus operandi, those who
were mentioned above would very likely not even know about it, and if
they did, very likely decide they possess the reasoning faculties to
deem a page worthy of destruction. The concept just popped into my
head as a way to "safely" warn future finders (for those of us who
would care so muc about others of us), and to avoid logbook editing
that might potentially upset the creator of said logbook. Anyway, I'm
done posting/reading about this topic :) It has been quite thought
provoking. Perhaps to the point of mental exhaustion on the subject.

Peace out.
Eli




>
> I'm smart enough to recognize that other comments or drawings do fall
> into gray areas.
> -- Ryan
>
>

Come on ya'll - if a page is offensive TURN IT and move on! If you have
kids TURN IT and move on! DO NOT ALTER ANOTHERS box. The majority of
bad is nothing compared to all that is good:)

eli_slider wrote:

>
> I agree completely that we should be able to use the reasoning ability
>
> you obviously possess to decide whether or not a page would be best
> torn out. I have that ability, and I would guess most of us
> discussing this topic do as well (demonstrated by the depth of thought
>
> some of these posts have reached). I guess what some people were
> saying is that they feel hesitant to trust that everyone will have
> such good judgment. As you said, there are likely those who share our
>
> hobby who would consider yanking a page because it said "damned fine
> view". Perhaps I misinterpreted this topic as an attempt to define a
> safe course of action we could follow in the event of discovering
> potentially scarring filth in logoobks. If people are worried about
> the placer's wishes, then perhaps you could use my suggestion.
> Obviously, as we always come back to, there are no rules governing all
>
> of us. So, even if we did all agree on a modus operandi, those who
> were mentioned above would very likely not even know about it, and if
> they did, very likely decide they possess the reasoning faculties to
> deem a page worthy of destruction. The concept just popped into my
> head as a way to "safely" warn future finders (for those of us who
> would care so muc about others of us), and to avoid logbook editing
> that might potentially upset the creator of said logbook. Anyway, I'm
>
> done posting/reading about this topic :) It has been quite thought
> provoking. Perhaps to the point of mental exhaustion on the subject.
>
> Peace out.
> Eli
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I'm smart enough to recognize that other comments or drawings do
> fall
> > into gray areas.
> > -- Ryan
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
[click here]

>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> The majority of bad is nothing compared to all that is good:)

Okay, maybe the fruit fly has an edge here, but I'm not really sure I
understand that sentence. =) The majority of bad what?

-- Ryan

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "dvn2rckr" wrote:
>
> We experienced this very thing recently on a trip up the CA coast.
>
>
> One of the letterboxes we found included a gorgeous and expensive
> commercially bound and leather-like covered logbook. It was hidden
> in an absolutely gorgeous location that many 'non-letterboxing'
> folks frequent. The letterbox itself was GIGANTIC and very
> difficult, in fact, impossible, to hide in the unique venue--crags
> atop a bluff/200' cliff overlooking a beautiful cove along the
> Central CA Pacific Coast. When we found the letterbox it was
> obvious that many non-letterboxers had found it. In fact, we
> thought we'd found a geocache instead of a letterbox because the
> container was more like a Rubbermaid Action Packer than any tiny
> little letterbox container we normally find.
>
>
> Anyways, this 500+ page commercially bound logbook (think fancy
> diary/journal type book) had many interesting entries into it.
> Looked like only about a dozen letterboxers ever found it but there
> had been over a hundred entries by other 'non-letterboxers' who had
> stumbled upon it. Most of the comments were very interesting and
> inspirational--just comments folks added to describe how they were
> personally affected by such a glorious spot--like soul nurturing
> type effects. But, there were several other not-so-family oriented
> entries. Had it not been such a lovely journal I would have
> immediately ripped out those pages (they were UTTERLY DISGUSTING and
> in some cases violent--many mentioned violent 'crimes' people had
> committed and other entries described last words/thoughts before
> they 'supposedly' jumped off the nearby cliff and that sort of stuff-
> -I figured they were mostly comments from vandals who thought they
> were being funny) but I knew it would have ruined the journal to do
> so. Since I didn't know these planters from Adam I let the journal
> go as it was--hoping most visitors would simply ignore those awful
> comments--and whenever the original planters returned to check on it
> that they would eliminate the entries as they saw fit.
>
> In other letterbox logs, if I was able to remove
> such 'violent'/'awful' comments without damaging the logbook in
> anyway I have done so--but only for individuals who I know very well
> would appreciate me removing those comments. Otherwise, I've let
> the comments stay.
>
> The only other time I have 'altered' a logbook in any way is when I
> noticed 'mystery letterbox clue revealing' entries in a hitchhiker
> in the very venue where the mystery letterbox was located. I
> blacked out the 'spoiler' info on the HH log and sent it on its way.
>
> dvn2r ckr

I appologized on the list, but I want to do it again. It was my first time posting and i didn't
realize I sent the message only to you. My bad.

Clue reader