That FAQ needs updating because it's not accurate
anymore. You can also keep track of finds
electronically, i.e. if the letterbox is posted on the
lbna site. Of course, your logbook is the complete
record but it's also fun for some people to have an
electronic record as well.

JARS
--- Drew Family wrote:
---------------------------------
That's just the way we like letterboxing.org. We'd
prefer it without
all the finicky tweakings and workarounds. There's a
quote in the faq
that says

Q: How do I keep track of which letterboxes or
travellers that I've
found?
A: Why, in your logbook, silly!

Jay in CT

JARS wrote:
>
> Why would you like to remove the "last found" and
> "history" feature?>







SPONSORED LINKS
Gsi
outdoors Outdoors
The great outdoors


---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "letterbox-usa" on the web.

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.


---------------------------------









__________________________________________________________
Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS
wrote:
>
> That FAQ needs updating because it's not accurate
> anymore.

Not accurate for who? It is [still] completely accurate for the way
many people play the game. Just because there is another way to do
it that may be more techie or more up-to-date, doesn't mean that the
game needs to be modified to take advantage of that. Look at
letterboxing in the UK -- just because computers and web sites are
readily acessible and "fun," they have remained true to their style
of play and continue to distribute clues in a printed clue book.
That is part of the fun of the game. You don't really "get" it do
you?

> You can also keep track of finds
> electronically,

Of course you can... but why would we change the FAQ to accomodate
the way you've chosen to play the game?

> Of course, your logbook is the complete
> record but it's also fun for some people to have an
> electronic record as well.

Yes, they call that geocaching.

SpringChick

Wow I have an idea!

Why dont we all purchase one of those hand held devices that the grocery stores use to keep inventory you know, the ones that scan the products on the shelves? Then we can have all placers paste UPC codes on the bottom of each of their letterboxes.

When were walking in the woods, all we have to do is wave that electronic magic wand in the area we THINK the letterbox is hidden and it will automatically find it for us AND record the find in a letterbox in a specially devised software program sold by Letterboxing.org. We won't even get our hands dirty or have to deal with yuckky snakes or worry about closing the containers or zip lock bags.

Just wave and go!

Great idea?

Mark [with tongue firmly in cheek]

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

Let's substitute 'accurate' for 'incomplete'. The FAQ
would be more complete if it said 'The best way to
keep track is via your personal logbook. You can also
keep track electronically for those letterboxes that
are on the LBNA site.'

I don't understand why you say "I don't get it".
I get that you don't want to count your finds. Why get
angry that others like the status feature and want to
use it? Why are you angry with me because I'm pointing
out that keeping a record of your online finds is
possible and that perhaps it could be reflected in the
FAQ. Why hide the fact that this feature is available?


The changes to the site have been made and you're not
happy. But you don't have to use those features. We
all have options. I applaud the webmasters for taking
into account the whole community of letterboxers and
adapting the site as web features become available and
as the game grows. The game has evolved quite a bit
since James Perrott hid a glass jar with a calling
card in the moors of Scotland. I'm pointing out the
new features, and your angry at me for suggesting that
others know about it.

I will not acquiesce.

JARS

--- SpringChick wrote:
---------------------------------
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS

wrote:
>
> That FAQ needs updating because it's not accurate
> anymore.

Not accurate for who? It is [still] completely
accurate for the way
many people play the game. Just because there is
another way to do
it that may be more techie or more up-to-date, doesn't
mean that the
game needs to be modified to take advantage of that.
Look at
letterboxing in the UK -- just because computers and
web sites are
readily acessible and "fun," they have remained true
to their style
of play and continue to distribute clues in a printed
clue book.
That is part of the fun of the game. You don't really
"get" it do
you?

> You can also keep track of finds
> electronically,

Of course you can... but why would we change the FAQ
to accomodate
the way you've chosen to play the game?

> Of course, your logbook is the complete
> record but it's also fun for some people to have an
> electronic record as well.

Yes, they call that geocaching.

SpringChick






__________________________________________________________
Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca

FYI: The jar that started letterboxing was hidden on the moor in Dartmoor, England.

Mark

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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS
wrote:
>
> I don't understand why you say "I don't get it".
> I get that you don't want to count your finds.

Ummm, like I said...

> I applaud the webmasters for taking
> into account the whole community of letterboxers

Actually, it was pretty much an individual decision... granted there
are many people who are in favor of the changes, but it was by no
means based on a consensus.

> I'm pointing out the
> new features, and your angry at me for suggesting that
> others know about it.

I am not angry with you or about the changes to the web site. I am
however annoyed when new players come along and have ideas that they
think will make the game better and more up-to-date and don't bother
to first try and understand why the game is as it is and how the
suggested modifications may not be in keeping with the spirit of the
game. Yes, evolution is a given and I am not against it when it
constitutes an improvement without altering the original focus.

You can play however you want to play -- you can adopt every
variation to the game that has come along as far as I am concerned...
you can even call it letterboxing if you wish... but that doesn't
necessarily make it so.

You asked the question why anyone would want the site to go back to
the way it was -- no logging features, etc. I was simply giving you
my answer to that question. If you didn't want to hear points of
view different than yours, you shouldn't have asked the question.

SpringChick

The FAQ has served a fine purpose for many years and is useful as a
reference for the entire letterboxing community thankyouverymuch.

If you wish to count *your* letterboxes electronically, digitally, by
abacus or bar code scanner or by any other method....on a website,
off a website, wherever...by all means, do so.

It would be incredibly respectful of you if you would indulge others
who count..or not...as they wish. Perhaps geocaching fills your needs
better than letterboxing and you would be happier touting that site's
features to a more interested audience.

In the grand scheme of letterboxing, what difference does it make if
someone uses an optional website feature or not and why do you have
to continue to impose your desire for folk to use these features?
You've made your point. Please get this.

Thank you in advance for dropping this topic...and *finally*
acquiescing.

Another dead lemur?

Alafair

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS
wrote:
>
> That FAQ needs updating because it's not accurate
> anymore....


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS
wrote:
>
> Let's substitute 'accurate' for 'incomplete'. The FAQ
> would be more complete

I want to hear different points of view and have an
open discussion. I appreciate that you replied to my
message. I was taken aback by the "You don't really
"get" it do you?" comment. It seemed like I was being
dismissed.

I think it's a good thing to talk about the pros and
cons of the development of letterboxing and the
development of the lbna site.

JARS

--- SpringChick wrote:
---------------------------------
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS

wrote:
>
> I don't understand why you say "I don't get it".
> I get that you don't want to count your finds.

Ummm, like I said...

> I applaud the webmasters for taking
> into account the whole community of letterboxers

Actually, it was pretty much an individual decision...
granted there
are many people who are in favor of the changes, but
it was by no
means based on a consensus.

> I'm pointing out the
> new features, and your angry at me for suggesting
that
> others know about it.

I am not angry with you or about the changes to the
web site. I am
however annoyed when new players come along and have
ideas that they
think will make the game better and more up-to-date
and don't bother
to first try and understand why the game is as it is
and how the
suggested modifications may not be in keeping with the
spirit of the
game. Yes, evolution is a given and I am not against
it when it
constitutes an improvement without altering the
original focus.

You can play however you want to play -- you can adopt
every
variation to the game that has come along as far as I
am concerned...
you can even call it letterboxing if you wish... but
that doesn't
necessarily make it so.

You asked the question why anyone would want the site
to go back to
the way it was -- no logging features, etc. I was
simply giving you
my answer to that question. If you didn't want to
hear points of
view different than yours, you shouldn't have asked
the question.

SpringChick







__________________________________________________________
Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, mjpepe1@c... wrote:
>
> FYI: The jar that started letterboxing was hidden on the moor in
Dartmoor, England.
>
> Mark
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Well Bonnie Prince Charles wanted it to be in Scotland but he failed
in his attempt(which is recorded in history books not on the LBNA site)

Don

So? You won't acquiesce. Ok...

You asked for other's opinions, you don't agree with them, so what?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I'm unsure why you need to
argue with something that is personal preference?

If you don't like how something's done, change how YOU do it to suit
yourself. I don't understand the need to argue that everyone change to
suit someone else's idea of the game?

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, JARS wrote:

> I will not acquiesce.
>
> JARS
>

I find this turn of events incredibly annoying. Why do we always have
a faction that INSISTS that everything be easy and that they be given
all the answers. Are we hiding self-esteem in the woods or letterboxes?

I don't understand why one would bother with the last finder feature
or what ever it is. Why on earth would you accept the opinion of the
masses that a box is missing? There are a lot of boxers who just
aren't up to finding some boxes. Many of us have gotten the e-mail
that says "...I KNOW for a FACT that I was in the right spot and it
wasn't there" I have to avoid asking the obvious question of how they
could know it "for a fact" since they weren't with me when I placed
it, but stupid people often ask stupid questions. What about the bad
placers too. Haven't we all had the experience of figuring out that
someone read their compass wrong, wrote left when they meant right.
Seems to me it would be a lot bigger boost to your ego finding a box
no one else could find than the hollow prize of logging into a box
that requires no thought what so ever. Life's a little richer when you
try a little harder.

Many thanks to JARS for reminding me how much I liked the bare bones
version of the LbNA site. I do much prefer being able to enter my own
boxes rather than having to deluge the poor volunteer webmasters with
the task of entering them for us but all the bells and whistles on the
latest revision are not all my cup of tea.

This latest thread has convinced me to turn off the status of my boxes
as displayed on the site. Up to this point, I was allowing this to be
shown as a favor to others with the desire to keep an electronic eye
on my letterboxes, something that I do not care to do. However, JARS
insistence on their point of view being the valid one and their
inability to accept the views of others have annoyed me enough to
change my preference. That's 191 more boxes that have no status
display. Many thanks to Choi for making that option available to me.
Funhog

It would be nice to have a feature similar to "contact the placer" to
be able to "contact the finder."

I have had people log an "Attempted" status and I wanted to ask them
questions, to improve the clue. If the finder has not placed any boxes,
there is no way to contact them through LbNA.

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "mr_elsworth_toohey"
wrote:
>
> I don't understand why one would bother with the last finder feature
> or what ever it is.

> Seems to me it would be a lot bigger boost to your ego finding a box
> no one else could find ... Life's a little richer when you
> try a little harder.

I agree! But it's fine by me if others have diffent priorities.
Letterboxing should be a "big tent" and with as close to no rules as
possible.

Choi

I've been thinking of doing the same thing. While pondering this
possibility this morning, I looked through my boxes (placed under
Brett and Penny) and found that more folks have found some of my boxes
than I knew. I'm not in the habit of checking the logged finds on
LbNA. Even with my relatively few number of planted boxes, it is kind
of a pain to go through them all. I much prefer that finders drop me a
note when they find my boxes. Many do, and thanks to all that have.
But a lot do not. The question I'm asking myself is whether those
folks that don't send email would be more inclined to send one if I
turn off status on my boxes or if I'd just never know that they've
logged in unless I get a chance to visit the box myself. I'd love to
be able to regularly visit all my boxes, but I cannot do so. So my
decision is still pending, but tilting towards turning status off.

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "funhog1" wrote:
> This latest thread has convinced me to turn off the status of my
boxes as displayed on the site.

I wholeheartedly agree with your theory and think that logging a
status on LbNA is the quick way out of dropping the placer an e-
mail. If you can figure out how to turn off the ability for people
to log status on your boxes, let me know. I have both Letterbox
Status (Mine) and Letterbox Status (Others) disabled and still have
people logging status on a continual basis. Apparently those
settings don't work in the way I thought they would and I, as a
placer, do not have the ability to prevent people from logging status
on my boxes, only the ability to prevent it from publicly displaying.

SpringChick


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Pungent Bob"
wrote:
>
> I've been thinking of doing the same thing. While pondering this
> possibility this morning, I looked through my boxes (placed under
> Brett and Penny) and found that more folks have found some of my
boxes
> than I knew. I'm not in the habit of checking the logged finds on
> LbNA. Even with my relatively few number of planted boxes, it is
kind
> of a pain to go through them all. I much prefer that finders drop
me a
> note when they find my boxes. Many do, and thanks to all that have.
> But a lot do not. The question I'm asking myself is whether those
> folks that don't send email would be more inclined to send one if I
> turn off status on my boxes or if I'd just never know that they've
> logged in unless I get a chance to visit the box myself. I'd love
to
> be able to regularly visit all my boxes, but I cannot do so. So my
> decision is still pending, but tilting towards turning status off.
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "funhog1" wrote:
> > This latest thread has convinced me to turn off the status of my
> boxes as displayed on the site.
>

i find it is so hard to first contact the placer...... then find it
even harder to wait days for a response, if you ever get one. i like
the idea, for it could be used in many ways. lets worry about the
placer issue first...... ive been waiting 3 weeks to hear back from
a placer and i am just a bit bothered by people who pick up the
sport of letterboxing and drop it like trash on the ground. you
place a box, you should take care of it. i have 4 boxes right now,
and im glued to my computer like stick on poop, for any emails about
my boxes..... sorry if i seem upset.....

david (team new hampshire)
pembroke, nh

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Rick in Boca"
wrote:
>
> It would be nice to have a feature similar to "contact the placer"
to
> be able to "contact the finder."
>
> I have had people log an "Attempted" status and I wanted to ask
them
> questions, to improve the clue. If the finder has not placed any
boxes,
> there is no way to contact them through LbNA.
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "mr_elsworth_toohey"
> wrote:
> >
> > I don't understand why one would bother with the last finder
feature
> > or what ever it is.
>

Yikes. I'm only pointing out that some like certain
features and some don't. Those that don't like the
status feature don't have to use it. I didn't say my
point of view was the only point of view. Some of the
discussion seemed to suggest that certain LBers would
like to see the status feature removed from the site
so no one could use it. Those who don't like the
features can turn them off, as you did.

But turning the feature off should be a personal
preference, not an act of spite. It's not going to
bother me if you don't choose to use the feature. I
like the feature and I use it and I like it when
finders use the feature on my clue pages. If you don't
like the status feature you have every right not to
use it.

JARS


--- funhog1 wrote:
--------------------------------
Many thanks to JARS for reminding me how much I liked
the bare bones
version of the LbNA site. I do much prefer being able
to enter my own
boxes rather than having to deluge the poor volunteer
webmasters with
the task of entering them for us but all the bells and
whistles on the
latest revision are not all my cup of tea.

This latest thread has convinced me to turn off the
status of my boxes
as displayed on the site. Up to this point, I was
allowing this to be
shown as a favor to others with the desire to keep an
electronic eye
on my letterboxes, something that I do not care to do.
However, JARS
insistence on their point of view being the valid one
and their
inability to accept the views of others have annoyed
me enough to
change my preference. That's 191 more boxes that have
no status
display. Many thanks to Choi for making that option
available to me.
Funhog






__________________________________________________________
Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "funhog1" wrote:
>
> This latest thread has convinced me to turn off the status of my boxes
> as displayed on the site.

Yes, this thread has prompted me to reconsider how my boxes are listed
also. I have always had the status disabled because I think it
detracts from the intrigue of the box to have a log of who was there
(and when) before you. I am now at the point of seriously considering
completely removing all of my boxes from both LbNA and AtlasQuest and
just leaving the clues posted on my personal web site.

If this means less people look for them, so it is. The clues are out
there, available to anyone who cares to venture to my web site for
them. As I see it, there are a couple of other positives about this --
I feel like I am encouraging another aspect of the game that many do
not understand or appreciate -- the hunt for the clues themselves, and
also I suspect that although the boxes may see fewer overall visitors,
those who do bother to hunt down the clues will tend to be more serious
and seasoned letterboxers, which seems to directly correlate to fewer
missing boxes.

SpringChick

And I can see the loggings on all your boxes.

Choi, can you expalin how the disables work?

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "SpringChick"
wrote:
> I have both Letterbox Status (Mine) and Letterbox Status (Others)
disabled and still have people logging status on a continual basis.

If you read through the archives, this topic has been around the block a few
times.

Don't assume that just because someone doesn't contact you in return, that
that person has "dropped the sport of letterboxing like trash."

1. If the person contacts you back, the contacter then has their email
address. Some placers don't necessarily want others to have their email
address, especially if they don't know/recognize the contacter. Some people
don't have a variety of email addresses and don't want to go thru the bother
of setting up "throwaway email addys." If someone has a certain trailname
as a finder, they might place boxes under an entirely different name. Some
people use several different names for both finding and planting. They
might cherish that anonymity.

2. Some folks believe that once a box is out there, it's out there. They
have no desire to ever be contacted. I try to email each person who
contacts me, even if I don't really want to, :-), but I don't expect that in
return. I just had one person email me asking when two of the boxes that
I'd temporarily taken out of service for maintenance work would be back.
And it wasn't a polite asking. It was written as a demand that it was my
"duty" to get my boxes back out there. That was actually the straw that
broke the camel's back, and now all of my boxes are off LbNA. They can
still contact me since they didn't use LbNA in the first place to contact
me -- they already had my email address. But that was the second time in
one week that someone has gotten grumpy about my boxes not being available
right when they want them to be available. Sorry. Letterboxing is
definitely a small sideline. It isn't my life.

3. People have lives outside of letterboxing. They could be dealing with a
family crisis, they could be suddenly working 80 hours a week, they could be
on an extended vacation, the doctor could have just told them they have
cancer, they might have lost their job and have been concentrating on
finding a new one, etc.

4. Many people don't even check their email but once a month or so.

5. The placer's computer might be down so they're offline for now.

The thing is -- if you have a question about a box and it's not answered,
don't go searching for any more of their boxes if that lack of an answer
isn't to your liking. We recently went looking for a box placed by someone
we've never heard of before because it was located really close so there
wasn't much cost in gasoline. They only have that one box listed on LbNA.
We couldn't find it. We emailed them to let them know. If we don't hear
back, we might go looking for future boxes if they place any. We might not.
I'm not doing much of any "finding" right now anyway until the gas prices
come down a bit more.

I guess what it comes down to for me is that I really don't feel that any
placer "owes" any searcher anything. I have things that I might gripe
about. Like I wish that placers would mention it in the clues if the stamp
is store-bought. Do I think they "owe" that to me tho? Nope. I might
grumble under my breath when they don't. But I don't feel it's "an issue to
address" as far as the website is concerned.

As far as the fact that if a placer placed a box, they should take care of
it......sez who? A lot of people plant boxes along a vacation route or they
place boxes and then move a couple of states away a few months later. They
might return to an area once or twice a year or possible never again. They
might find someone locally who would be willing to maintain the box. They
might not be able to find someone. They might not even *try* to find
someone to help maintain it. It might be nice if they did, but there's no
obligation there.

Place your own boxes and take care of them exactly how you wish to take care
of them. That's pretty much the only thing each letterboxer has any control
over in their letterboxing life. Other than that, it becomes a case of that
old saying "don't sweat the small stuff and it's all small stuff."

~~ Mosey ~~



-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of gingerbreadjunk
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 1:25 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Find Counters


i find it is so hard to first contact the placer...... then find it
even harder to wait days for a response, if you ever get one. i like
the idea, for it could be used in many ways. lets worry about the
placer issue first...... ive been waiting 3 weeks to hear back from
a placer and i am just a bit bothered by people who pick up the
sport of letterboxing and drop it like trash on the ground. you
place a box, you should take care of it. i have 4 boxes right now,
and im glued to my computer like stick on poop, for any emails about
my boxes..... sorry if i seem upset.....

david (team new hampshire)
pembroke, nh

> I have both Letterbox
> Status (Mine) and Letterbox Status (Others) disabled and still have
> people logging status on a continual basis. Apparently those
> settings don't work in the way I thought they would and I, as a
> placer, do not have the ability to prevent people from logging status
> on my boxes, only the ability to prevent it from publicly displaying.
>
> SpringChick

You're right. It used to work to turn it off. I must have broken it along
the way and not noticed. I'll work on it.

Choi

SpringChick,

You're correct. I just checked into the option for disabling your status and
it doesn't remove people's ability to mark one of your boxes as found but it
hides all status info from people viewing your box's clue page. So, if you
don't want people to be influenced by seeing the the most recent status was
attempted, then this option works. The purpose in allowing finders to mark
one of your boxes as found so that it can be hidden on the search results.

There is a separate preference to disable e-mail for finders when they set
your status.

Choi

> I have both Letterbox
> Status (Mine) and Letterbox Status (Others) disabled and still have
> people logging status on a continual basis. Apparently those
> settings don't work in the way I thought they would and I, as a
> placer, do not have the ability to prevent people from logging status
> on my boxes, only the ability to prevent it from publicly displaying.
>
> SpringChick

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "John Chapman" wrote:
> it doesn't remove people's ability to mark one of your boxes as found
but it
> hides all status info from people viewing your box's clue page.

No, it doesn't. Even though I have both of these options disabled,
other users are able to see the status logging history on my
letterboxes by clicking on the little flag.

> The purpose in allowing finders to mark one of your boxes as
> found so that it can be hidden on the search results.

Makes sense.


SpringChick

Ouch. You got me. Should be easy to fix that.

Choi

----- Original Message -----
From: "SpringChick"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 08:44
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Status Logging (was Find Counters)


> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "John Chapman" wrote:
> > it doesn't remove people's ability to mark one of your boxes as found
> but it
> > hides all status info from people viewing your box's clue page.
>
> No, it doesn't. Even though I have both of these options disabled,
> other users are able to see the status logging history on my
> letterboxes by clicking on the little flag.
>
> > The purpose in allowing finders to mark one of your boxes as
> > found so that it can be hidden on the search results.
>
> Makes sense.
>
>
> SpringChick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

SpringChick,

Fixed. Please check.

Choi

>> No, it doesn't. Even though I have both of these
>>options disabled,
>> other users are able to see the status logging history
>>on my
>> letterboxes by clicking on the little flag.
>>
>> > The purpose in allowing finders to mark one of your
>>boxes as
>> > found so that it can be hidden on the search results.
>>
>> Makes sense.
>>
>>
>> SpringChick

Hey Choi, looks like it is working now! Thanks for fixing that!

SpringChick


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> SpringChick,
>
> Fixed. Please check.
>
> Choi
>
> >> No, it doesn't. Even though I have both of these
> >>options disabled,
> >> other users are able to see the status logging history
> >>on my
> >> letterboxes by clicking on the little flag.
> >>
> >> > The purpose in allowing finders to mark one of your
> >>boxes as
> >> > found so that it can be hidden on the search results.
> >>
> >> Makes sense.
> >>
> >>
> >> SpringChick
>