LBNA site - Land Use permits
5 messages in this thread |
Started on 2005-04-02
Re: LBNA site - Land Use permits
From: enders_angel_80 (enders_angel_80@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2005-04-02 13:41:48 UTC
well, suppose the reason you had kept your clues from being hosted on
the lbna site because you didn't want some nosy parker from the nps or
state parks dept finding out you had a box on "their" property? seems
like the little green flags would make it just a little bit easier for
those sorts of people to figure it out if they were so inclined. yea,
yea, i hear you saying budget cuts, they don't have time or resources
to do that. just ask ryan and some others, when the nps gets a bug up
about you they -find- the time and resources.
i am opposed to rules that require us to ask permission to use the
land that is held in trust for the public. i find much of the
justification they use to be patently false. i'm not a complete fool,
i do understand that land use managers have a difficult time making
the balance between allowing use of the land and preserving it for
future generations to use. however, boxers and cachers have such a low
impact on the enviroment compared to the snowmobile trails, bathrooms,
campgrounds and parking lots they build. oh yea, they get to charge
and collect money for those things. oh foolish youth.
i, for one, have no intention of ever filling out one of those land
use permits or telling the powers that be about any boxes i might
choose to place on public lands. i just wish it could stay a little
more difficult for them to figure out where these kinds of boxes might
be. maybe going back to wom only boxes is the only.
i don't understand why everyone wants all this counting stuff to
be
done online out-loud and in public. it's not a contest. and what
happened to having a little inactive and personal responsibility of
your own. like doing the work to email a placer yourself if you want
to know the status of a box and if you don't get an answer, making
your decision about going out to look for the box. surprise, surprise
even if the box isn't there, you might have been brought to a very
beautiful spot by following the clues. heck, bring a box along and
place one of your own during the trip.
enders angel
another one of the disaffect youth
Re: [LbNA] Re: LBNA site - Land Use permits
From: Armadillo Jo (jes7o@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2005-04-02 06:32:15 UTC-08:00
Absolutely, positively the smartest thing posted on
this list for a long time. I wholeheartedly agree 100%
and couldn't have said it better myself. I think the
list, the website just mirror society in general:
lazy, complacent, and obviously unable to understand
the term of "HUNT" for boxes. It's not supposed to be
easy, folks. I personally don't care what changes the
website makes, because its only purpose (for myself)
is to find *some* of the clues and print them out. The
contacting the placer function is a wonderful tool to
communicate with fellow letterboxers. I have rarely
NOT had someone write me back. Flags, no
flags...frankly...it's just a little overstimulating
for me. I don't know, maybe its time to go more
underground and get back to simplicity.
--Armadillo Jo, definately falls in the category of
"disaffected youth" and just waiting for the onslaught
of hate mail for calling the list "lazy"...
--- enders_angel_80 wrote:
>
> well, suppose the reason you had kept your clues
> from being hosted on
> the lbna site because you didn't want some nosy
> parker from the nps or
> state parks dept finding out you had a box on
> "their" property? seems
> like the little green flags would make it just a
> little bit easier for
> those sorts of people to figure it out if they were
> so inclined. yea,
> yea, i hear you saying budget cuts, they don't have
> time or resources
> to do that. just ask ryan and some others, when the
> nps gets a bug up
> about you they -find- the time and resources.
>
> i am opposed to rules that require us to ask
> permission to use the
> land that is held in trust for the public. i find
> much of the
> justification they use to be patently false. i'm not
> a complete fool,
> i do understand that land use managers have a
> difficult time making
> the balance between allowing use of the land and
> preserving it for
> future generations to use. however, boxers and
> cachers have such a low
> impact on the enviroment compared to the snowmobile
> trails, bathrooms,
> campgrounds and parking lots they build. oh yea,
> they get to charge
> and collect money for those things. oh foolish
> youth.
>
> i, for one, have no intention of ever filling out
> one of those land
> use permits or telling the powers that be about any
> boxes i might
> choose to place on public lands. i just wish it
> could stay a little
> more difficult for them to figure out where these
> kinds of boxes might
> be. maybe going back to wom only boxes is the only.
>
> i don't understand why everyone wants all this
> counting stuff to
> be
> done online out-loud and in public. it's not a
> contest. and what
> happened to having a little inactive and personal
> responsibility of
> your own. like doing the work to email a placer
> yourself if you want
> to know the status of a box and if you don't get an
> answer, making
> your decision about going out to look for the box.
> surprise, surprise
> even if the box isn't there, you might have been
> brought to a very
> beautiful spot by following the clues. heck, bring a
> box along and
> place one of your own during the trip.
>
> enders angel
> another one of the disaffect youth
>
>
>
>
this list for a long time. I wholeheartedly agree 100%
and couldn't have said it better myself. I think the
list, the website just mirror society in general:
lazy, complacent, and obviously unable to understand
the term of "HUNT" for boxes. It's not supposed to be
easy, folks. I personally don't care what changes the
website makes, because its only purpose (for myself)
is to find *some* of the clues and print them out. The
contacting the placer function is a wonderful tool to
communicate with fellow letterboxers. I have rarely
NOT had someone write me back. Flags, no
flags...frankly...it's just a little overstimulating
for me. I don't know, maybe its time to go more
underground and get back to simplicity.
--Armadillo Jo, definately falls in the category of
"disaffected youth" and just waiting for the onslaught
of hate mail for calling the list "lazy"...
--- enders_angel_80
>
> well, suppose the reason you had kept your clues
> from being hosted on
> the lbna site because you didn't want some nosy
> parker from the nps or
> state parks dept finding out you had a box on
> "their" property? seems
> like the little green flags would make it just a
> little bit easier for
> those sorts of people to figure it out if they were
> so inclined. yea,
> yea, i hear you saying budget cuts, they don't have
> time or resources
> to do that. just ask ryan and some others, when the
> nps gets a bug up
> about you they -find- the time and resources.
>
> i am opposed to rules that require us to ask
> permission to use the
> land that is held in trust for the public. i find
> much of the
> justification they use to be patently false. i'm not
> a complete fool,
> i do understand that land use managers have a
> difficult time making
> the balance between allowing use of the land and
> preserving it for
> future generations to use. however, boxers and
> cachers have such a low
> impact on the enviroment compared to the snowmobile
> trails, bathrooms,
> campgrounds and parking lots they build. oh yea,
> they get to charge
> and collect money for those things. oh foolish
> youth.
>
> i, for one, have no intention of ever filling out
> one of those land
> use permits or telling the powers that be about any
> boxes i might
> choose to place on public lands. i just wish it
> could stay a little
> more difficult for them to figure out where these
> kinds of boxes might
> be. maybe going back to wom only boxes is the only.
>
> i don't understand why everyone wants all this
> counting stuff to
> be
> done online out-loud and in public. it's not a
> contest. and what
> happened to having a little inactive and personal
> responsibility of
> your own. like doing the work to email a placer
> yourself if you want
> to know the status of a box and if you don't get an
> answer, making
> your decision about going out to look for the box.
> surprise, surprise
> even if the box isn't there, you might have been
> brought to a very
> beautiful spot by following the clues. heck, bring a
> box along and
> place one of your own during the trip.
>
> enders angel
> another one of the disaffect youth
>
>
>
>
[LbNA] Re: LBNA site - Land Use permits
From: texasluvbug1 (texasluvbug@hotmail.com) |
Date: 2005-04-03 17:32:09 UTC
Once again the list is not lazy or complacent. You obviously, along
with enders angel, have an abundance of time on your hands. For the
ones of us who utilize the time saving features of the list, please
don't offend us by calling us lazy or complacent. Most of us are
hard working individuals with busy families and lives who have found
the awesome hobby of letterboxing. The list makes it much easier
and lots of times possible to be able to enjoy this hobby and still
keep up with our responsiblities.
Texas Luvbug P5F10
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Armadillo Jo
wrote:
> Absolutely, positively the smartest thing posted on
> this list for a long time. I wholeheartedly agree 100%
> and couldn't have said it better myself. I think the
> list, the website just mirror society in general:
> lazy, complacent, and obviously unable to understand
> the term of "HUNT" for boxes. It's not supposed to be
> easy, folks. I personally don't care what changes the
> website makes, because its only purpose (for myself)
> is to find *some* of the clues and print them out. The
> contacting the placer function is a wonderful tool to
> communicate with fellow letterboxers. I have rarely
> NOT had someone write me back. Flags, no
> flags...frankly...it's just a little overstimulating
> for me. I don't know, maybe its time to go more
> underground and get back to simplicity.
>
> --Armadillo Jo, definately falls in the category of
> "disaffected youth" and just waiting for the onslaught
> of hate mail for calling the list "lazy"...
>
>
> --- enders_angel_80
> >
> > well, suppose the reason you had kept your clues
> > from being hosted on
> > the lbna site because you didn't want some nosy
> > parker from the nps or
> > state parks dept finding out you had a box on
> > "their" property? seems
> > like the little green flags would make it just a
> > little bit easier for
> > those sorts of people to figure it out if they were
> > so inclined. yea,
> > yea, i hear you saying budget cuts, they don't have
> > time or resources
> > to do that. just ask ryan and some others, when the
> > nps gets a bug up
> > about you they -find- the time and resources.
> >
> > i am opposed to rules that require us to ask
> > permission to use the
> > land that is held in trust for the public. i find
> > much of the
> > justification they use to be patently false. i'm not
> > a complete fool,
> > i do understand that land use managers have a
> > difficult time making
> > the balance between allowing use of the land and
> > preserving it for
> > future generations to use. however, boxers and
> > cachers have such a low
> > impact on the enviroment compared to the snowmobile
> > trails, bathrooms,
> > campgrounds and parking lots they build. oh yea,
> > they get to charge
> > and collect money for those things. oh foolish
> > youth.
> >
> > i, for one, have no intention of ever filling out
> > one of those land
> > use permits or telling the powers that be about any
> > boxes i might
> > choose to place on public lands. i just wish it
> > could stay a little
> > more difficult for them to figure out where these
> > kinds of boxes might
> > be. maybe going back to wom only boxes is the only.
> >
> > i don't understand why everyone wants all this
> > counting stuff to
> > be
> > done online out-loud and in public. it's not a
> > contest. and what
> > happened to having a little inactive and personal
> > responsibility of
> > your own. like doing the work to email a placer
> > yourself if you want
> > to know the status of a box and if you don't get an
> > answer, making
> > your decision about going out to look for the box.
> > surprise, surprise
> > even if the box isn't there, you might have been
> > brought to a very
> > beautiful spot by following the clues. heck, bring a
> > box along and
> > place one of your own during the trip.
> >
> > enders angel
> > another one of the disaffect youth
> >
> >
> >
> >
[LbNA] Re: LBNA site - Land Use permits
From: rscarpen (letterboxing@atlasquest.com) |
Date: 2005-04-03 18:44:22 UTC
> Once again the list is not lazy or complacent.
Why must people use lazy or complacent like dirty words? There's
nothing wrong with lazy or complacent. I am lazy and complacent and
most people are jealous! Jealous, I tell you! *insert evil laugh
here*
-- Ryan
[LbNA] Re: LBNA site - Land Use permits
From: grumpygrinchy (ffuselier@comcast.net) |
Date: 2005-04-04 00:59:07 UTC
Being Newly Retired, we are working very hard at being lazy and
complacent! It takes a lot of effort to do it right.
Grumpy Grinch
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rscarpen"
wrote:
>
> > Once again the list is not lazy or complacent.
>
> Why must people use lazy or complacent like dirty words? There's
> nothing wrong with lazy or complacent. I am lazy and complacent and
> most people are jealous! Jealous, I tell you! *insert evil laugh
> here*
>
> -- Ryan