T his is one of the more absurd arguments I have heard. Granted, I'm a
journalism professor and tend to come down on the side of reporters. But
consider for a moment:
-- Are there more than a handful of people on this list who would even
know about letterboxing if the Smithsonian article hand not been published?
-- Would U.S. letterboxing exist outside of New England if word of the
hobby was not spread by the media?
-- Has letterboxing in Dartmoor fallen into abject ruin because of the
hundreds of articles written about it?

Public opinion is the ultimate Pandora's box. To find out what is in
it, you have to release the spirits inside. If you think in terms of media
literacy, though, you soon realize those spirits can be evil demons or
guardian angels depending on how you treat them.

Forget about keeping your hobby a secret. With blogs, e-mail, Web sits
(not to mention the Globe and other traditional major media) in every nook
of our existence, there are no more secrets. Instead, use the media
attention to your benefit. Make your boxes harder to find (casual wannabees
give up easily). Use your 30-seconds of fame to promote the sane, graceful
lifestyle of letterboxing. Or use the mass media themselves for the hobby
-- has anyone placed clues in the "personal" ads or used the text of a
front-page article as a code sheet?

As a boy in the 1960s, I first experienced the thrill I now associate
with a letterboxing hunt thanks to the media. A radio station in my home
town hid a chest of "silver" dollars and then aired a doggerel clue each
day. I never found the treasure, but I listened for the patch of poem each
day and scoured the part of town I was sure held the chest.

If you don't want a social hobby, make up one of your own. I carve duck
decoys and throw them into rivers. And I hide coins in construction sites.
But I look for letterboxes because I'm part of a hobby community.

Beware of a wish to close the door before the world comes running in.
Someone else could just as easily slam it first -- and leave you on the
wrong side.

PS RE the Irish box thread -- Illia is my daughter and son-in-law. They
have several new boxes and would love to see visitors plant some that THEY
can find. The secret to finding Irish boxes is to click on "other
international" in the state box of the Letterboxing.org search.
--
C2B2


> From:
> Reply-To:
> Date: 17 May 2005 02:27:19 -0000
> To:
> Subject: [LbNA] Digest Number 2860
>
> I spent close to an hour on the phone with the correspondent trying
> to convince him to NOT publish an article at all. For all of our
> various and sundry reasons. I've been letterboxing since 2000, and I
> *know* what publicity does to us. You are preaching to the choir. I
> told the correspondent flat out that the very LAST thing in the world
> that a letterboxer wants to see is a print article about
> letterboxing. I told him about the damage the Time Magazine article
> did to the community, how hundreds of clues to boxes were removed
> from LbNA as a result. I appealed to him that he cannot control the
> readership of his paper.

It just amazes me how some people think! You started in 2000. That is not
that long ago and now you want to close the hobby from the world. What if
someone had thought the same way you do in 1999 and closed you out of the hobby?

I just started the letterbox hobby a few weeks ago. But I learned about it
about a year ago. I was in a coffee shop with my daughters and saw a man
carving a stamp. I stopped and asked what he was doing. He explained to us all
about letter boxing. My kids and I thought it was a really cool thing and
thought about doing it then, but we never really did anything and the idea went
away. About a month ago I was reading an article in TIME magazine and it
reminded me of the hobby. The kids and I went out and got some supplies and
started right up. Now we have already found 3 boxes and are planning a summer
vacation around the treasure hunt game. We are also learning to carve our own
stamps and will soon be leaving a few boxes of our own to share. If TIME
magazine had not run an article about Letter boxing we would not have this great
new hobby to do together as a family. Who knows, maybe it will become a family
tradition that can be passed on to future generations.



Sincerely,
SLOMAN


> From:
> Reply-To:
> Date: 17 May 2005 02:27:19 -0000
> To:
> Subject: [LbNA] Digest Number 2860
>
> I spent close to an hour on the phone with the correspondent trying
> to convince him to NOT publish an article at all. For all of our
> various and sundry reasons. I've been letterboxing since 2000, and I
> *know* what publicity does to us. You are preaching to the choir. I
> told the correspondent flat out that the very LAST thing in the world
> that a letterboxer wants to see is a print article about
> letterboxing. I told him about the damage the Time Magazine article
> did to the community, how hundreds of clues to boxes were removed
> from LbNA as a result. I appealed to him that he cannot control the
> readership of his paper.



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
_Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/B9pRWD/3MnJAA/Y3ZIAA/60TolB/TM)
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links










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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Clyde Bentley
wrote:
> T his is one of the more absurd arguments I have heard.
Granted, I'm a
> journalism professor and tend to come down on the side of
reporters.

Clyde, What might seem absurd to you may not to others. What you
fail to take into consideration is the lack of respect the general
public has for the press. The discharge of the First Amendment has
certainly suffered, and more and more folks have become aware of
this lack of truth telling. Much of the news today is blurred by
slanted comment, and unfortunately I don't even need to furnish an
example, there are several that come easily to mind. The Press has
brought this on by it's willingness to push a point of view rather
than respecting it's duty to be fair and impartial. While you
certainly make some interesting points, it is difficult to simply
discount feelings when addressing whether one should grant
interviews or not. I believe that letterboxing would have spread,
albeit much slower,by word of mouth. A slow spread doesn't mean that
it isn't successful,only that it grows slower. So while there will
always be someone looking for their "30 seconds of fame" I have
chosen not to participate and not agreeing to being interviewed by a
reporter who's only care is to sell the story. You in your position
can help change the way people look at the press by returning those
lost ethics to the journalism profession. I would certainly like to
return to believing some of what I read, hear, and watch when it
comes to the news rather than question every last bit.
Don

I understand (and even research) the distrust of the press, but please focus on the issue.
The Globe story was well-written and accurate. The critics of it simply wanted to keep
that good information to themselves. That is both ineffective and uncivilized.

BTW, I spend a great deal of time teaching ethics and also working on new ways to let the
public participate in the press. I'm an advocate of what we call "open source" journalism
where folks like you do the writing and we journalists just provide a focus. Check http://
mymissourian.com for an example -- go to the sports section and you will even find a
photo essay on a letterboxing gathering. Newspapers across the country are starting
similar sites to let readers like you tell us what the "real" news is.

Clyde (C2B2)


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "gwendontoo" wrote:
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Clyde Bentley
> wrote:
> > T his is one of the more absurd arguments I have heard.
> Granted, I'm a
> > journalism professor and tend to come down on the side of
> reporters.
>
> Clyde, What might seem absurd to you may not to others. What you
> fail to take into consideration is the lack of respect the general
> public has for the press. The discharge of the First Amendment has
> certainly suffered, and more and more folks have become aware of
> this lack of truth telling. Much of the news today is blurred by
> slanted comment, and unfortunately I don't even need to furnish an
> example, there are several that come easily to mind. The Press has
> brought this on by it's willingness to push a point of view rather
> than respecting it's duty to be fair and impartial. While you
> certainly make some interesting points, it is difficult to simply
> discount feelings when addressing whether one should grant
> interviews or not. I believe that letterboxing would have spread,
> albeit much slower,by word of mouth. A slow spread doesn't mean that
> it isn't successful,only that it grows slower. So while there will
> always be someone looking for their "30 seconds of fame" I have
> chosen not to participate and not agreeing to being interviewed by a
> reporter who's only care is to sell the story. You in your position
> can help change the way people look at the press by returning those
> lost ethics to the journalism profession. I would certainly like to
> return to believing some of what I read, hear, and watch when it
> comes to the news rather than question every last bit.
> Don

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, chdetrick@a... wrote:
If TIME
> magazine had not run an article about Letter boxing we would not
have this great
> new hobby to do together as a family.

If Time magazine had not run an article about Letterboxing maybe
Gwen & I wouldn't have lost 15 letterboxes in the next week.
If the hobby has slow growth by word of mouth, then maybe new
letterboxers would have time(no pun intended)to appreciate the
effort required to plant a letterbox rather than rushing out to nab
letterboxes without caring to rehide them properly. While you might
give the hobby the care necessary, there are some that apparantly
don't care. Several letterboxers(Placers)had some discussions on a
regional list about the notes they have received from the "Contact
the Placer" function. Frankly I thought at the time that it was a
good idea to keep those discussions off the main list, but now I'm
not to sure that it would have been even better to let the folks
that primarily find letterboxes know what kind of idiotic notes are
received from what might be considered new letterboxers.Some of them
are pretty demanding and out right rude. While that certainly is not
the case in most instances, placers do like to hear about their
letterboxes, but they don't like to be told that their clues suck,
or other such descriptions regarding their letterbox. Those notes in
most likelyhood weren't from anyone that has been boxing since 2000.

Don

And as such "Life goes on"! I just don't believe that people who read TIME
magazine are running out to steal the letter boxes. Maybe it is their teenage
kids who read the magazine because they don't have anything better to do.
Sorry your story does not hold water. I don't believe that you lost 15 boxes
the week after the TIME magazine article was written. If that was the case
why is it that you are the only one with such a catastrophic loss of boxes? If
there were so many boxes "stolen" the week after that article was published,
why are we discussing the Globe and not TIME magazine? Maybe I missed the
part of the TIME article that mentioned your specific area to direct people
there.

Now I do agree with the comments about contacting the letterbox hider with
rude remarks. That type of activity is not called for. Maybe some boxes have
easy clues so small children can participate with their families. What is
easy for one person may be very difficult for another.

SLOMAN

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, chdetrick@a... wrote:
If TIME
> magazine had not run an article about Letter boxing we would not
have this great
> new hobby to do together as a family.

If Time magazine had not run an article about Letterboxing maybe
Gwen & I wouldn't have lost 15 letterboxes in the next week.
If the hobby has slow growth by word of mouth, then maybe new
letterboxers would have time(no pun intended)to appreciate the
effort required to plant a letterbox rather than rushing out to nab
letterboxes without caring to rehide them properly. While you might
give the hobby the care necessary, there are some that apparantly
don't care. Several letterboxers(Placers)had some discussions on a
regional list about the notes they have received from the "Contact
the Placer" function. Frankly I thought at the time that it was a
good idea to keep those discussions off the main list, but now I'm
not to sure that it would have been even better to let the folks
that primarily find letterboxes know what kind of idiotic notes are
received from what might be considered new letterboxers.Some of them
are pretty demanding and out right rude. While that certainly is not
the case in most instances, placers do like to hear about their
letterboxes, but they don't like to be told that their clues suck,
or other such descriptions regarding their letterbox. Those notes in
most likelyhood weren't from anyone that has been boxing since 2000.

Don




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
_Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/2xaSZB/SOnJAA/Y3ZIAA/60TolB/TM)
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links












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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, chdetrick@a... wrote:
>
>
I don't believe that you lost 15 boxes
> the week after the TIME magazine article was written. If that
was the case
> why is it that you are the only one with such a catastrophic loss
of boxes? If
> there were so many boxes "stolen" the week after that article was
published,
> why are we discussing the Globe and not TIME magazine? Maybe I
missed the
> part of the TIME article that mentioned your specific area to
direct people
> there.
>
>
> SLOMAN
>

I, too, had several boxes 'disappear' after the article debuted.
I'm also located in an opposite corner of the country than Don. So,
despite elevating the popularity of letterboxing to caring and
astute letterboxers ou there, it did impact me negatively, as well.
I've since just about stopped planting boxes--especially in urban
areas for this very reason.

dvn2r ckr

He wasn't!! Maybe you should check the archives
before shoving your foot in your mouth. A
journalist...I believe it. Take that chip on your
shoulder and your snotty attitude and go away. Maybe
you should talk to Warrior Woman before responding to
this post. By the way, not the best choice of people
to take shots at there...uhh...genius. You are a
newbie aren't you? Now please go away!! Isn't there
some insignificant detail that you need to exploit or
sensationalize somewhere?

Consider yourself CORRECTED. And think twice about
coming after me tough guy.

--- chdetrick@aol.com wrote:
>
>
> And as such "Life goes on"! I just don't believe
> that people who read TIME
> magazine are running out to steal the letter boxes.
> Maybe it is their teenage
> kids who read the magazine because they don't have
> anything better to do.
> Sorry your story does not hold water. I don't
> believe that you lost 15 boxes
> the week after the TIME magazine article was
> written. If that was the case
> why is it that you are the only one with such a
> catastrophic loss of boxes? If
> there were so many boxes "stolen" the week after
> that article was published,
> why are we discussing the Globe and not TIME
> magazine? Maybe I missed the
> part of the TIME article that mentioned your
> specific area to direct people
> there.
>
> Now I do agree with the comments about contacting
> the letterbox hider with
> rude remarks. That type of activity is not called
> for. Maybe some boxes have
> easy clues so small children can participate with
> their families. What is
> easy for one person may be very difficult for
> another.
>
> SLOMAN
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com,
> chdetrick@a... wrote:
> If TIME
> > magazine had not run an article about Letter
> boxing we would not
> have this great
> > new hobby to do together as a family.
>
> If Time magazine had not run an article about
> Letterboxing maybe
> Gwen & I wouldn't have lost 15 letterboxes in the
> next week.
> If the hobby has slow growth by word of mouth, then
> maybe new
> letterboxers would have time(no pun intended)to
> appreciate the
> effort required to plant a letterbox rather than
> rushing out to nab
> letterboxes without caring to rehide them properly.
> While you might
> give the hobby the care necessary, there are some
> that apparantly
> don't care. Several letterboxers(Placers)had some
> discussions on a
> regional list about the notes they have received
> from the "Contact
> the Placer" function. Frankly I thought at the time
> that it was a
> good idea to keep those discussions off the main
> list, but now I'm
> not to sure that it would have been even better to
> let the folks
> that primarily find letterboxes know what kind of
> idiotic notes are
> received from what might be considered new
> letterboxers.Some of them
> are pretty demanding and out right rude. While that
> certainly is not
> the case in most instances, placers do like to hear
> about their
> letterboxes, but they don't like to be told that
> their clues suck,
> or other such descriptions regarding their
> letterbox. Those notes in
> most likelyhood weren't from anyone that has been
> boxing since 2000.
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> What would our lives be like without music, dance,
> and theater?
> Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network
> for Good!
> _Click Here!_
>
(http://us.click.yahoo.com/2xaSZB/SOnJAA/Y3ZIAA/60TolB/TM)
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Is it possible to keep this civil?

catbead

...and off list?

catbead1 wrote:Is it possible to keep this civil?

catbead


---------------------------------
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.




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour

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

Just out of curiosity, How many people have lost multiple boxes within one
week after the globe or Time magazine articles were run?




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

I've read the FAQ a couple times, but I can't find the section about
"omnipotent veterans" berating newbies. Can someone point me in the right
direction. Thanks.


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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, chdetrick@a... wrote:
>
>
> And as such "Life goes on"! I just don't believe that people who
read TIME
> magazine are running out to steal the letter boxes.

Nor did I say such a thing. What I did say was that in the next week
we "lost" 15 of our letterboxes. At the time it was approximately
10% of our total placed. The losses I believe came from new
letterboxers that failed to be stealthy, or failed to rehide
letterboxes properly. I believe new boxers did not take the time to
consider the way they should approach this game.


> Sorry your story does not hold water. I don't believe that you
lost 15 boxes
> the week after the TIME magazine article was written.

Well I guess that is your right. We currently have a P count of
183, I rarely use PFX in a post, but do so here to help make a
point. We occasionally have boxes go missing and in fact have a
fairly accurate accounting, so we monitor our boxes and when 15 go
missing(not stolen) in one week we recognize it as being somewhat
remarkable. I realize that to many a 15 letterbox loss would be much
more significant, but even in our position 15 letterboxes amounts to
a sizeable portion of time and effort.

If that was the case
> why is it that you are the only one with such a catastrophic loss
of boxes?

I believe you should check the list's archives for the lively posts
at the time and I'm sure that you will find there were several
placers that had similar losses. There was much discussion at the
time, and this current discussion is like beating the dead horse.
Why don't you go back through the list and read it for yourself.

If
> there were so many boxes "stolen" the week after that article was
published,

Your inference about "stolen" seems to be an attempt to ridicule
what I have previously written. If you wish to quote me so be it,
but please do so correctly. I wrote "lost", and that has an entirely
different connotation.


> why are we discussing the Globe and not TIME magazine? Maybe I
missed the
> part of the TIME article that mentioned your specific area to
direct people
> there.

We were discussing publicity, and I believe that both Time and the
Globe fall into that category


>
> Now I do agree with the comments about contacting the letterbox
hider with
> rude remarks. That type of activity is not called for. Maybe
some boxes have
> easy clues so small children can participate with their families.
What is
> easy for one person may be very difficult for another.


> SLOMAN

Well I am glad that we can agree on something, but I do fail to see
the corelation between rudeness and the difficulty of clues. Having
difficult clues is a great part of this game, and families with
small children could use difficult clues a a "Life's lesson", and
shouldn't use them as an excuse to be a jerk.

If you wish to continue this discussion I can be reached directly.

Don
Without Rancor

Ok - enough!

We all have our own opinions about publicity and letterboxing.

Maybe it's time to all cool off and go outside and find a letterbox!



Mark

One of the Moderators - tracking IP numbers!







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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Hikers_n_ Hounds
wrote:
> ...and off list?
>
> catbead1 wrote:Is it possible to keep this civil?
>
> catbead

Sorry H&H and Catbead, I posted again before I read this.

If anyone wishes to continue beating on this topic please contact me
off list.

Don

I can't complain about the Time article because it was how I found out about
Letterboxing. I have noticed something of a trend for some of the more
experienced boxers to take their best boxes off the internet and switch them
to WOM. It makes me think that the internet based clues are sort of the
"minor leagues" for letterboxing. Some people may think I'm be pejorative
but then I still consider myself a newbie.

Choi

It makes me think that the internet based clues are sort of the
"minor leagues" for letterboxing.


Nothing could be truer.

Brian
TeamGreenDragon

Who never said "Alright! Let's stamp in!!"

I totally disagree with that.
missmoon



It makes me think that the internet based clues are sort of the
"minor leagues" for letterboxing.



Choi

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