drewclan@aol.com writes:

>
> Jeremy, please don't do it!
>

Ditto! The world doesn't need another letterboxing site!

DebBee


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

I agree. Keep geocaching out of letterboxing.

drewclan@aol.com wrote: Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy (the
chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning on creating a
Letterboxing website. A few details are at

_http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888_
(http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888)

See post#15 in this thread:
"Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may
help solve some issues with the current hybrids. We'll
see."

Please join me in asking Jeremy not to do this. Post him here and on the
groundspeak forums. It would be okay if geocaching didn't improve letterboxing
with a website that solves issues with our boxes. It would be alright if this
little tiny thing stayed independent of the gigantic geocaching community.
They've already got geocaching, benchmarking, waymarking, geocoining, plenty of
other goodies to control and make money on. We could continue without their
taking us over, but only if they let us.

Jeremy, please don't do it!

Jay in CT, early geocacher too


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



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.


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





---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

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

Letterboxing and caching do overlap, but the rules are
not the same. I love to see hybrids but am reluctant
to have someone else call the shots on my box. Just
what are the issues cachers are having with hybrid
boxes? Are boxers having the same issues with hybrids?
Could the issues be dealt without creating a new
site? I also am a member of the groundspeak site, to
make sure i don't put boxes on top of caches, but have
not been able to get into the forums.

--- Debra Moore wrote:

> I agree. Keep geocaching out of letterboxing.
>
> drewclan@aol.com wrote: Here's another
> controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy
> (the
> chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list)
> is planning on creating a
> Letterboxing website. A few details are at
>
>
_http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888_
>
>
(http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888)
>
>
> See post#15 in this thread:
> "Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It
> may
> help solve some issues with the current hybrids.
> We'll
> see."
>
> Please join me in asking Jeremy not to do this. Post
> him here and on the
> groundspeak forums. It would be okay if geocaching
> didn't improve letterboxing
> with a website that solves issues with our boxes. It
> would be alright if this
> little tiny thing stayed independent of the gigantic
> geocaching community.
> They've already got geocaching, benchmarking,
> waymarking, geocoining, plenty of
> other goodies to control and make money on. We
> could continue without their
> taking us over, but only if they let us.
>
> Jeremy, please don't do it!
>
> Jay in CT, early geocacher too
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones
> from your PC and save big.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

I agree, but maybe, keep letterboxing out of geocaching. I was gifted
with a gps unit this past Christmas but I have yet to use it for
geo-anything. I am intrigued with geodashing and benchmark hunting as I
have found a couple along the way to letterboxes. But I am not interested
in geocaching. There is plenty of room in the world and internet for each
to independently coexist. Why do the geocaching folks feel a need to
expand their realm into letterboxing? What needs are not being met by the
current letterboxing websites? If it is inevitable, I foresee a movement
to obscure letterboxing. I am already planning more difficult clues for
future boxes.

I wasn't able to access the link provided, and I don't know the full
context of the comments quoted, so I'd love to hear Jeremy post something
here. If they are only working on geocache/letterbox hybrid issues, I
don't know that I would be so concerned. I don't go out of my way to hunt
hybrids. But if they branched into all the other letterboxing forms, I
wouldn't support it.

Might I suggest Jeremy create a poll or polls to get the letterboxing
community's opinion before they move foreward with any plans? Education
is better than ignorance.

~speedsquare

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

It seems as though most non-casual letterboxers will probably ignore
that site when it does come to fruition. I will probably become more
private with my clue sets proactively if I think that they will be
snarfed up by a .com.

I have always wondered why geocaching is a .com and most letterboxing
sites are .org.

It is all about the Bejamins,

LB

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, drewclan@... wrote:
>
> Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy
(the
> chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning on
creating a
> Letterboxing website. A few details are at
>
> _http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888_
> (http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888)
>
> See post#15 in this thread:
> "Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may
> help solve some issues with the current hybrids. We'll
> see."
>
> Please join me in asking Jeremy not to do this. Post him here and
on the
> groundspeak forums. It would be okay if geocaching didn't improve
letterboxing
> with a website that solves issues with our boxes. It would be
alright if this
> little tiny thing stayed independent of the gigantic geocaching
community.
> They've already got geocaching, benchmarking, waymarking,
geocoining, plenty of
> other goodies to control and make money on. We could continue
without their
> taking us over, but only if they let us.
>
> Jeremy, please don't do it!
>
> Jay in CT, early geocacher too
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Has anyone confirmed this or is it just rumor? Maybe we should check it
out before anyone gets worried about it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Lightnin Bug [mailto:rpboehme@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 7:50 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing

It seems as though most non-casual letterboxers will probably ignore
that site when it does come to fruition. I will probably become more
private with my clue sets proactively if I think that they will be
snarfed up by a .com.

I have always wondered why geocaching is a .com and most letterboxing
sites are .org.

It is all about the Bejamins,

LB

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, drewclan@... wrote:
>
> Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy
(the
> chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning on
creating a
> Letterboxing website. A few details are at
>
> _http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888_
> (http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888)
>
> See post#15 in this thread:
> "Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may
> help solve some issues with the current hybrids. We'll
> see."
>
> Please join me in asking Jeremy not to do this. Post him here and
on the
> groundspeak forums. It would be okay if geocaching didn't improve
letterboxing
> with a website that solves issues with our boxes. It would be
alright if this
> little tiny thing stayed independent of the gigantic geocaching
community.
> They've already got geocaching, benchmarking, waymarking,
geocoining, plenty of
> other goodies to control and make money on. We could continue
without their
> taking us over, but only if they let us.
>
> Jeremy, please don't do it!
>
> Jay in CT, early geocacher too
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>








Yahoo! Groups Links

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Julia Benfield"
wrote:
>
> Has anyone confirmed this or is it just rumor? Maybe we should
check it
> out before anyone gets worried about it.

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

The following text portions are taken directly from the thread
running on the geocaching forums mentioning letterbox hybrids:

*** In regard to folks discussing the issue of letterbox hybrids,
Jeremy chimed in****

March 20, 2006
'Jeremy' said:
"Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may help solve
some issues with the current hybrids. We'll see."

another cacher said:
"Does that mean letterboxes will eventually no longer be listed on
geocaching.com?"

'Jeremy' said:
"I don't have much to offer at the moment. All you would do is
speculate at this point." (then, later, after another cacher's post)
"Sorry. I missed the point. No, letterboxing hybrids will remain on
the site [gc.com]. As indicated before a letterboxing hybrid is
merely a geocache that has a stamp and a logbook instead of tradable
items. It's a way for people to understand not to, for example, take
the stamp. The other project is more letterboxer centric." [link
provided]
http://www.letterboxer.com/

--------
So it would appear to me that this is in fact something that will be
happening in the future. They aren't giving any timeline yet, and no
other details that I've seen.

mtnmudbug

since some LBers have had problems with people stealing there stamps or what not, should we be concerned about our boxes being used as close by locations for goecaches and losing items because of it? Will this website be the beginning of a problem, and if not, how can we be sure that this cheap knock-off wont ruin a great thing we have here?

worried about cheap tricks
david (team new hampshire)

mtnmudbug wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Julia Benfield"
wrote:
>
> Has anyone confirmed this or is it just rumor? Maybe we should
check it
> out before anyone gets worried about it.

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

The following text portions are taken directly from the thread
running on the geocaching forums mentioning letterbox hybrids:

*** In regard to folks discussing the issue of letterbox hybrids,
Jeremy chimed in****

March 20, 2006
'Jeremy' said:
"Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may help solve
some issues with the current hybrids. We'll see."

another cacher said:
"Does that mean letterboxes will eventually no longer be listed on
geocaching.com?"

'Jeremy' said:
"I don't have much to offer at the moment. All you would do is
speculate at this point." (then, later, after another cacher's post)
"Sorry. I missed the point. No, letterboxing hybrids will remain on
the site [gc.com]. As indicated before a letterboxing hybrid is
merely a geocache that has a stamp and a logbook instead of tradable
items. It's a way for people to understand not to, for example, take
the stamp. The other project is more letterboxer centric." [link
provided]
http://www.letterboxer.com/

--------
So it would appear to me that this is in fact something that will be
happening in the future. They aren't giving any timeline yet, and no
other details that I've seen.

mtnmudbug





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


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





---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

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

jeremy,
this is just not right. geocache if that is what you like to do. letterbox
if that is what you like to do. i, for one, have no problem with anyone
doing both. i do have a problem with a letterboxing.com
that is just not right!
shaking head in wonder
uneksia

-------Original Message-------



Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy (the
chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning on creating a

Letterboxing website. A few details are at

_http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888_
(http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888)

See post#15 in this thread:
"Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may
help solve some issues with the current hybrids. We'll
see."

Please join me in asking Jeremy not to do this. Post him here and on the
groundspeak forums. It would be okay if geocaching didn't improve
letterboxing
with a website that solves issues with our boxes. It would be alright if
this
little tiny thing stayed independent of the gigantic geocaching community.
They've already got geocaching, benchmarking, waymarking, geocoining,
plenty of
other goodies to control and make money on. We could continue without
their
taking us over, but only if they let us.

Jeremy, please don't do it!

Jay in CT, early geocacher too

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

I don't know what issues the cachers have, but as a letterboxer, I have two
about hybrids



First, all too often the stamp is missing-despite the placers best efforts
to identify it as part of the box and not a tradable item



Second, the placement and clues tend to be quite different. It Is not
unusual to find a hybrid box with the clues being the coordinates of a
drainage ditch and the clue "start turning over rocks".



Cachers often have different mindsets and motivations-many don't understand
why a hand carved stamp placed in a single, unique location is more
appealing than a series of store bought stamps.



I happen to live in an area with a very active geocaching organization
(SWOGO) that has worked very hard to find ways for all the related hobbies
to coexist together They do a lot of good things, such as cache in trash
out events, etc. They sponsor some pretty large events, and try to find
clever ways to integrate several hobbies (geocaching, letterboxing and
orienteering, for example). Yet, despite the best efforts,(and some of them
are darn good!!) I still prefer the letterboxing community to be discreet.
We have a different focus and a different expectation. When I meet someone
who like caching, I refer them to caching sites. I wish cachers would
return the courtesy.




Mama Stork

aka Pam in Cinci

. Just
what are the issues cachers are having with hybrid
boxes? Are boxers having the same issues with hybrids?



_____



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

Dearest Letterboxers,

In considering the problem of geocachers taking over letterboxing it
occurs to her Ladyship that the problem lies with those in our ranks
who have created the hybrid box. If we don't list our letterboxes on
geocache sites and remain independent of them it would cut down on
geocachers looking for letterboxes. If we don't list coordinates in
our clues then it seems less likely that geocachers would take the
time to sort out our annoyingly old-fashioned clues. Do we really want
geocachers leaving their flotsam and detritus in our boxes? It seems
obvious that if we stop listing boxes on geocache sites and don't
create hybrids then there would be far less incentive for geochachers
to attempt to take over and make us play by their rules. We can be
cooperative and yet remain distinct. We can cross check locations to
avoid planting in geocache sites but it would be naive to think that
we are going to get the newbie or casual or stubborn geocacher to
respect our rules, as it would also be naive to believe that we are
going to get the newbie or casual or stubborn letterboxer to respect
their rules. So continued intermixing seems likely to result
letterboxers being frustrated by missing stamps and geocachers
experiencing what ever frustration it is that they have with
letterboxers finding their geocaches.

Hear! Hear! Jeremy is not necessarily trying to take over
letterboxing or even integrate the two hobbies, he is simply
responding to a growing trend that currently has no home,
geoboxes/lettercaches... whatever you want to call them. The
creation of hybrid boxes is the root of the integration. Some people
enjoy both hobbies and see this as a great way to participate in
both, but it does encourage homogeneousness. To some this is good,
to some it is not, everyone has their own interests.

As far as a letterboxing site created by Groundspeak -- just because
they create it, doesn't mean letterboxers have to use it. If we as a
letterboxing community truly want to keep separation between the two
hobbies, it is within our ability to do that simply by not supporting
or utilizing a letterboxing site created by and affiliated with
Groundspeak -- and by not continuing to marry the two hobbies by
planting hybrid boxes.

SpringChick



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee
Hedge" wrote:
>
> Dearest Letterboxers,
>
> In considering the problem of geocachers taking over letterboxing it
> occurs to her Ladyship that the problem lies with those in our ranks
> who have created the hybrid box. If we don't list our letterboxes on
> geocache sites and remain independent of them it would cut down on
> geocachers looking for letterboxes. If we don't list coordinates in
> our clues then it seems less likely that geocachers would take the
> time to sort out our annoyingly old-fashioned clues. Do we really
want
> geocachers leaving their flotsam and detritus in our boxes? It seems
> obvious that if we stop listing boxes on geocache sites and don't
> create hybrids then there would be far less incentive for
geochachers
> to attempt to take over and make us play by their rules. We can be
> cooperative and yet remain distinct. We can cross check locations to
> avoid planting in geocache sites but it would be naive to think that
> we are going to get the newbie or casual or stubborn geocacher to
> respect our rules, as it would also be naive to believe that we are
> going to get the newbie or casual or stubborn letterboxer to respect
> their rules. So continued intermixing seems likely to result
> letterboxers being frustrated by missing stamps and geocachers
> experiencing what ever frustration it is that they have with
> letterboxers finding their geocaches.
>

I won't use the letterbox.com site and don't feel there's a need for
it.

What do they say---Follow the money?


Jeremy, stick to what you know and leave the rest to those who know it
best, please.

I don't see the point of another webpage.

It's bad enough that folks feel obligated to use this format (the web)
for letterboxing in the first place, we certainly don't need to pander
to them and create a hybrid. I think that letterboxing as a
hobby/sport/historic passtime or whathaveyou lost something
fundamental in its very essence when clues got listed freeforall on
the web. This instant gratification, gotta have my clues
listed/posted/found/printed attitude frankly makes me sick.

Where's the nearest plane to Dartmoor?

phyto

I'm not particularly interested in geocaching nor the hybrid boxes.

I learned a long time ago not to get uptight about what someone else
was doing (as in competition) as you have no control over that
anyway.

There is a good possibility that some of the impetus for a different
type of letterbox site could have grown from discussions on this
list. There have been discussions regarding methods to post finders
logs on clue sheets(ala the geocaching site). Mainly
these 'suggestions' have been from new letterboxers wanting to
change the game and wanting different 'bells and whistles'. I think
the opposition to those changes may have advised something to the
order of, "leave LbNA the way it is, go start your own type of web
site." Maybe this rumor if it is true could be in response to those
sentiments. No, I'm not advocating any changes to LbNA, I like it
the way it was.

I would think that Jeremy would be rather cautious in any attempts
that might do some harm to LbNA or to those placers that have clues
posted at LbNA. He has a commercial site that is obviously
successful and if not handled properly a new site could create more
problems than he bargained for. In business you don't want to tick
off a whole bunch of folks when thinking about a new venture.
While this discussion is interesting, it may have little to do with
any concepts even if those concepts are true.

Don

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, drewclan@... wrote:
>
> Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy
> (the chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning
on > creating a Letterboxing website...

As an active geocacher (my wife and I have nearly 800 finds and nearly
100 hides), I would really hope that the geocaching website *not* try
to be all things for all people. My letterboxing is very minimal
compared to geocaching, but I enjoy it for all that. I have avoided
hybrid caches, and even refused to convert one of our hides into a
hybrid, prefering to not list it at all rather than make what we felt
were totally unnecessary changes to a hide that was really good the
way it was. We are in the process of converting it into a letterbox:
a standard, normal LB, with no geo-component at all.

So, for the record, I would encourage Jeremy Irish and the rest of
Groundspeak to consider deleting the hybrid category from geocaching
(they have deleted locationless caches, and are not approving any new
virtuals, so there is precedence), rather than try to "compete" with
standard letterboxing. I can definitely see some of the problems that
Jeremy refered to, however, and they are real. The easiest way to
take care of the problem is to eliminate it.

As for some of the concerns voiced about geocachers deliberately
looking for letterboxes to plunder them, I do not think that that is
likely. Geocaching couldn't take over all the current LBs, as they
don't have a lat-lon co-ordinate to post. As Jeremy expressed it,
there are problems with the peculiar hybrid form of the geocache, and
(as was done with locationless caches) I think they are wanting to
make a seperate section just for hybrid caches. Those who only LB
have little to worry about, as long as they don't plant a box on top
of a geocache. As I've written before on at least one of these
groups, the key is for geocachers and letterboxers to get to know each
other a little better, if only so that we understand each other. As I
do both, I have a bit of a headstart in that, I guess :-) The thing
that is so great about each of them (and geodashing fits in, too) is
that they take me places that I probably wouldn't have gone to,
otherwise.

Now, someone asked, "What needs are not being met by the current
letterboxing websites?" Well, that's a loaded question. Any
particular response will, of necessity, be reflective of one's
experience. For myself, I would really like to see more editorial
control/influence over the listings. I was out just yesterday in Red
Rock Canyon SP, a couple of hours north of Los Angeles. My main focus
was geodashing; there is a dashpoint in the northern end of the park.
I also grabbed two benchmarks and a geocache. Then I hiked in Hagen
Canyon and attempted the two letterboxes there. I got one; it was
definitely the easier of the two to figure out, although after last
year's rains, the trail is not at all easy to follow in spots. The
other... well, when one has gone eastward as far as one can go into a
box canyon, and found the dry waterfall, how can one go eastward 60
paces? Straight up 150 foot basalt cliffs?! I think not. And where
is the "saddle", mentioned as being on the left? I've not yet
communicated with the owners, so there is a fair chance that I
completely mis-read a clue, or was in the wrong box canyon (doubt that
last, though). The LB moderators could at least review each new LB
for clues that at least make a modicum of sense. When standing at a
spot, if two landmarks are to the N and NE, if one goes eastward,
those landmarks *cannot* move to the south! I know that they cannot
get everything, but I think they could make a stab at it. I also
really wish that the site would post logs from those who have found a
box. It would be very helpful if there was an *easy* (OK, I'll
acquiesce: easier) way to find out when a box was last hunted for, or
found. This is something that geocaching and geodashing do very well,
and there is really no good reason for LB not to do the same. And if
money is an issue (come on, folks! I have seen lots of .org and .net
sites that ask for donations and/or payments, and plenty of .com ones
that did not, so that's a dumb complaint), I have no problem making a
donation to the LbNA site. They could always add a link for such to
the page that has the links for decals and patches and labels and such
that we can buy. Hey, lookee, there! They sell things. I guess no
one is pure ;-)

Keep on boxing/dashing/caching!

chaosmanor

Part of our pleasure in letterboxing is solving "Mystery" clues. These
would be very difficult to exercise "editorial control/influence" over. We
love puzzles and cryptic references and have no desire to have things always
spelled out for us. We'd rather take our chances and use our own intellect
and skills rather than be "guaranteed" that directions are accurate. We'd
really rather not see comments by previous finders that might influence our
own efforts. I don't mind seeing an "Attempted" status, but we don't take
it as an indication that a box is definitely missing, it just makes a
possible find that much more satisfying.

Wisconsin Hiker

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of Jim Carleton
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:49 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, drewclan@... wrote:
>
> Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy
> (the chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning
on > creating a Letterboxing website...

As an active geocacher (my wife and I have nearly 800 finds and nearly
100 hides), I would really hope that the geocaching website *not* try
to be all things for all people. ....
Now, someone asked, "What needs are not being met by the current
letterboxing websites?" Well, that's a loaded question. Any
particular response will, of necessity, be reflective of one's
experience. For myself, I would really like to see more editorial
control/influence over the listings. I was out just yesterday in Red
Rock Canyon SP, a couple of hours north of Los Angeles. My main focus
was geodashing; there is a dashpoint in the northern end of the park.
I also grabbed two benchmarks and a geocache. Then I hiked in Hagen
Canyon and attempted the two letterboxes there. I got one; it was
definitely the easier of the two to figure out, although after last
year's rains, the trail is not at all easy to follow in spots. The
other... well, when one has gone eastward as far as one can go into a
box canyon, and found the dry waterfall, how can one go eastward 60
paces? Straight up 150 foot basalt cliffs?! I think not. And where
is the "saddle", mentioned as being on the left? I've not yet
communicated with the owners, so there is a fair chance that I
completely mis-read a clue, or was in the wrong box canyon (doubt that
last, though). The LB moderators could at least review each new LB
for clues that at least make a modicum of sense. When standing at a
spot, if two landmarks are to the N and NE, if one goes eastward,
those landmarks *cannot* move to the south! I know that they cannot
get everything, but I think they could make a stab at it. I also
really wish that the site would post logs from those who have found a
box. It would be very helpful if there was an *easy* (OK, I'll
acquiesce: easier) way to find out when a box was last hunted for, or
found. This is something that geocaching and geodashing do very well,
and there is really no good reason for LB not to do the same. ....
Keep on boxing/dashing/caching!

chaosmanor





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

I agree with Wisconsin Hiker.

The suggestion letterboxes can be moderated is suggesting that the
moderators would possess the ability to judge them by some predetermined
criteria, or perhaps, that the boxes be more homogeneous for seekers.
Letterboxes are as individual as the letterboxers who place them.
Letterboxers, for the great majority, do not use the objective and
homogenous instrument, gps device.

As far as the argument "no good reason not to," I will give my reason not
to post logs ... "it's not Just About the Prize." If that is the
motivation to seek a cache/letterbox, then something important has been
lost. For me, it's about the journey and discovery.

speedsquare

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

for the past 3 months, i have been looking for a box that is located in the town next to me and i haven't found it yet. the clues make no sense, but thats because i haven't gotten deep enough into the mind of the placer. just because i cant find it, doesn't mean im going to ask for change. i feel evey boxer should , if they feel like it, have thier own identity. i don't have to change. you just have to box like me. i cheer for challenge.

happy with how things are!
david (team new hampshire)

Jim Carleton wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, drewclan@... wrote:
>
> Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy
> (the chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning
on > creating a Letterboxing website...

As an active geocacher (my wife and I have nearly 800 finds and nearly
100 hides), I would really hope that the geocaching website *not* try
to be all things for all people. My letterboxing is very minimal
compared to geocaching, but I enjoy it for all that. I have avoided
hybrid caches, and even refused to convert one of our hides into a
hybrid, prefering to not list it at all rather than make what we felt
were totally unnecessary changes to a hide that was really good the
way it was. We are in the process of converting it into a letterbox:
a standard, normal LB, with no geo-component at all.

So, for the record, I would encourage Jeremy Irish and the rest of
Groundspeak to consider deleting the hybrid category from geocaching
(they have deleted locationless caches, and are not approving any new
virtuals, so there is precedence), rather than try to "compete" with
standard letterboxing. I can definitely see some of the problems that
Jeremy refered to, however, and they are real. The easiest way to
take care of the problem is to eliminate it.

As for some of the concerns voiced about geocachers deliberately
looking for letterboxes to plunder them, I do not think that that is
likely. Geocaching couldn't take over all the current LBs, as they
don't have a lat-lon co-ordinate to post. As Jeremy expressed it,
there are problems with the peculiar hybrid form of the geocache, and
(as was done with locationless caches) I think they are wanting to
make a seperate section just for hybrid caches. Those who only LB
have little to worry about, as long as they don't plant a box on top
of a geocache. As I've written before on at least one of these
groups, the key is for geocachers and letterboxers to get to know each
other a little better, if only so that we understand each other. As I
do both, I have a bit of a headstart in that, I guess :-) The thing
that is so great about each of them (and geodashing fits in, too) is
that they take me places that I probably wouldn't have gone to,
otherwise.

Now, someone asked, "What needs are not being met by the current
letterboxing websites?" Well, that's a loaded question. Any
particular response will, of necessity, be reflective of one's
experience. For myself, I would really like to see more editorial
control/influence over the listings. I was out just yesterday in Red
Rock Canyon SP, a couple of hours north of Los Angeles. My main focus
was geodashing; there is a dashpoint in the northern end of the park.
I also grabbed two benchmarks and a geocache. Then I hiked in Hagen
Canyon and attempted the two letterboxes there. I got one; it was
definitely the easier of the two to figure out, although after last
year's rains, the trail is not at all easy to follow in spots. The
other... well, when one has gone eastward as far as one can go into a
box canyon, and found the dry waterfall, how can one go eastward 60
paces? Straight up 150 foot basalt cliffs?! I think not. And where
is the "saddle", mentioned as being on the left? I've not yet
communicated with the owners, so there is a fair chance that I
completely mis-read a clue, or was in the wrong box canyon (doubt that
last, though). The LB moderators could at least review each new LB
for clues that at least make a modicum of sense. When standing at a
spot, if two landmarks are to the N and NE, if one goes eastward,
those landmarks *cannot* move to the south! I know that they cannot
get everything, but I think they could make a stab at it. I also
really wish that the site would post logs from those who have found a
box. It would be very helpful if there was an *easy* (OK, I'll
acquiesce: easier) way to find out when a box was last hunted for, or
found. This is something that geocaching and geodashing do very well,
and there is really no good reason for LB not to do the same. And if
money is an issue (come on, folks! I have seen lots of .org and .net
sites that ask for donations and/or payments, and plenty of .com ones
that did not, so that's a dumb complaint), I have no problem making a
donation to the LbNA site. They could always add a link for such to
the page that has the links for decals and patches and labels and such
that we can buy. Hey, lookee, there! They sell things. I guess no
one is pure ;-)

Keep on boxing/dashing/caching!

chaosmanor









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


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





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2/min or less.

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

being a fellow new hampshirite...... wanna share which box it is you are
looking for?
smile
uneksia

-------Original Message-------


for the past 3 months, i have been looking for a box that is located in the
town next to me and i haven't found it yet. the clues make no sense, but
thats because i haven't gotten deep enough into the mind of the placer. just
because i cant find it, doesn't mean im going to ask for change. i feel evey
boxer should , if they feel like it, have thier own identity. i don't have
to change. you just have to box like me. i cheer for challenge.

happy with how things are!
david (team new hampshire)

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

How could clues be obtained without the web? How was it done in the
good old days?
Goose Chaser

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Phyto" wrote:
>
> I don't see the point of another webpage.
>
> It's bad enough that folks feel obligated to use this format (the web)
> for letterboxing in the first place, we certainly don't need to pander
> to them and create a hybrid. I think that letterboxing as a
> hobby/sport/historic passtime or whathaveyou lost something
> fundamental in its very essence when clues got listed freeforall on
> the web. This instant gratification, gotta have my clues
> listed/posted/found/printed attitude frankly makes me sick.
>
> Where's the nearest plane to Dartmoor?
>
> phyto
>

I agree, too. I'm pretty new to letterboxing, but when I learned
about it, I learned about geocaching at the same time. Letterboxing
has much more appeal to me, because of the old fashion style of
clues. I like having to use my intellect to figure out cryptic
messages and vague clues, even doing some homework and searching for
local information before I ever leave the house. Letterboxing
should be left as it is.
Goose Chaser


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, ruhlette wrote:
>
> I agree with Wisconsin Hiker.
>
> The suggestion letterboxes can be moderated is suggesting that the
> moderators would possess the ability to judge them by some
predetermined
> criteria, or perhaps, that the boxes be more homogeneous for
seekers.
> Letterboxes are as individual as the letterboxers who place them.
> Letterboxers, for the great majority, do not use the objective and
> homogenous instrument, gps device.
>
> As far as the argument "no good reason not to," I will give my
reason not
> to post logs ... "it's not Just About the Prize." If that is the
> motivation to seek a cache/letterbox, then something important has
been
> lost. For me, it's about the journey and discovery.
>
> speedsquare
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

Goose Chaser,

The best way to learn about this hobby in the US is to read the history yourself. If you look at the messages, starting from October of 1998 you will see who the founders of this hobby were. Also Mark Pepe has a wonderful video on his website of the very first Letterbox gathering showing the people who worked so hard to make this great hobby what it is today. As early as Nov. 1998 the founders were working on a website to share information. In the words of Daneil Servatius:

"The way I see it there are two separate, but necessary sentiments among our
members. One is the yearning to see the hobby grow both in number of people
involved and in number of letterboxes available to find. The other sentiment is
that we present information to people in a way that makes it easy for them to
learn about letterboxing and to become involved, thereby helping to fulfill the
first sentiment."

In Dartmoor the clues are published in a catalog that you can only get once you have found 100 boxes, I believe. But they usually do not carve thier own stamps, they have them made. Image how cranky some of our carvers here in the US would be if we decided to do it exactly like Dartmoor?

jojoma22 wrote:
How could clues be obtained without the web? How was it done in the
good old days?
Goose Chaser

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Phyto" wrote:
>
> I don't see the point of another webpage.
>
> It's bad enough that folks feel obligated to use this format (the web)
> for letterboxing in the first place, we certainly don't need to pander
> to them and create a hybrid. I think that letterboxing as a
> hobby/sport/historic passtime or whathaveyou lost something
> fundamental in its very essence when clues got listed freeforall on
> the web. This instant gratification, gotta have my clues
> listed/posted/found/printed attitude frankly makes me sick.
>
> Where's the nearest plane to Dartmoor?
>
> phyto
>






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.


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





---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "jojoma22" wrote:
> How could clues be obtained without the web? How was it done in the
> good old days?


Hikers-n-Hounds had a great suggestion, reading up on the history of
this fascinating hobby will only serve to continue the legacy. But,
it's more than that. I have come to realize that the most wonderful
facets of letterboxing are the unspoken, unwritten, unpublished
nuances that can only be learned through finding other people's boxes,
and through time and some perseverance.

When I first stumbled across this notion there were very few boxes to
be found, but the ones that were in existence set the stage for the
future. The rest was history as they say. Once I found some of the
early boxes in Maine, I knew that I had something to contribute,
special places that I wanted to share with those who were willing to
take the time to listen and to walk the same paths through my eyes and
words and see it in the carvings that I shared. I was willing to share
a part of myself with a larger community of people.

Now that our community is growing so much larger, it is important to
step back and reflect on the elements that make letterboxing so
interesting. It's not the number of boxes that makes it interesting to
me, it's the way in which others have chosen to create art or to share
their experience with others. It's a sort of modern storytelling in a
way. However, there is still a chance to preserve the art of
storytelling through words and images before it is translated into a
completely electronic form. Use your imagination on that, but remember
to honour the ones who came before you because they have truly blazed
the path. Now it is your turn to make history.

With respect to the elders,
Phyto

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, ruhlette wrote:
>
>What needs are not being met by the current letterboxing websites?

The only thing I have a complaint about the LbNA and it really isn't a
complaint, more like a feature I'd love to see; an easy way to use a PDA.

It would be very easy to implement, just a print-friendly list with
links that go directly to print-friendly clues. Simple. I can set my
reader to collect those pages and off I go. (I'm very disorganized
when it comes to using paper. The paper print-outs end up in the
floorboard or tucked between the seats, and then I can't find them.)

You know Jeremy is going to offer that--for a fee--just like for
geocaches.

A bit more complicated version of my suggestion is one that lists the
clues under sub-directories based on county or city. This way, if I'm
in Columbia, I can look up boxes near Columbia without wading through
the other boxes. (BTW, I can help with that if you want.)

As for logs on boxes, while I plan on offering such on my privately
listed boxes, I don't see that it is necessary. My solution isn't so
much logs, but feedback or comments kind of like a blog. The real
issue I see with logs is whether the box is still there or not. I
think this is mostly a hold-over from geocaching where most want a
slam-dunk find. There, knowing that the cache is still there is
important because of the accuracy of the GPS unit and general lack of
end-game guidance. This results in destruction of the area as
overzealous searchers try every possible hiding place until the cache
is found. This is rarely the case in letterboxing.

Additionally, I really don't see Groundspeak gaining much traction
because they are going to want to charge for the use of some of the
features. That's not to mention they will want to "review" the box
before "approving" its listing. Me, I want to get my clues out to
folks unencumbered with fees and the like.

I see other hurdles for Groundspeak to overcome before gaining traction.

My concern is the migration of geocachers into the letterboxing world
without the benefit of the indocrination that letterboxers typically
get. (I see that as a problem in the geocaching world itself, but I
am routinely ignored when I bring it up.) I don't see a problem with
Groundspeak coming into the letterboxing world, I see the problem of
the users Groundspeak will bring to the letterboxing world.

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

> ...The suggestion letterboxes can be moderated is suggesting that
> the moderators would possess the ability to judge them by some
> predetermined criteria...
>
> Letterboxes are as individual as the letterboxers who place them...
>
> ... "it's not Just About the Prize." If that is the motivation to
> seek a cache/letterbox, then something important has been
> lost. For me, it's about the journey and discovery.


Looking over the responses to my previous post, I can see that I'm in
a distinct minority, and I'll accept that. The above seems to
best-encapsulate the general trend of replies, so let me say only a
couple of things, and then I'll shut up until I gain enough experience
to press my points better. Which might never happen ;-)

First off, it is always about the journey. In writing to the owners
of Dry Waterfall, I made a point to thank them for showing me a place
that I would likely never have visited without them showing it to me.
The best caches and boxes and whatnot are those which take us to neat
places that we wouldn't likely find on our own.

Still, "the Prize" must have some value, else why carry around a
personal stamp and log and all that? We seek the letterbox in order
to find it, right? If not, then why keep track at all? Nestled in
amongst the posts on this thread are a few about some letterboxers who
are getting close to 10,000 finds. Amazing!! But if the numbers mean
nothing (as implied by the above statement that if the motivation for
seeking a box is to find it, then that's the wrong motivation), then
why hide the thing in the first place? Just post a few simple
directions and say, "Neat place, huh?" at the end of the directions.
Let us be honest about this: the prize *is* the reason for the hunt.
What we see along the way *should* often be more important than the
actual find, but we can't know that until we actually get there. And
the find is the "validation" that we found the right place.

I love the format of letterboxing. I love doing puzzle caches, too,
which are the rough geocaching equivalent of the obscure directions to
many LBs. My complaint is that there are times when the clues, no
matter how you look at them, do not make sense. Physical
impossibilities in clues serve no purpose. Either the clues are
poorly written, or else an actual error has been made. Perhaps there
is no solution to this. But denying the problem isn't going to work,
either. And making clues even more obtuse than the "obtusest" of them
already are is only going to make things less attractive. Of course,
perhaps that's what the die-hard LBer wants. If so, I'll never be a
die-hard. But that's OK. There is enough at the lower ends of this
hobby to keep me happy :-)

Thanks to all for your patience with my posts on this. Your responses
were direct, thoughtful and without rancor. Which is, alone,
sufficient reason for me to keep letterboxing :-) If there is one
thing about geocaching that really irks me, it is that there are some
yay-hoos who think that a flame is the only way to respond to a
comment with which they disagree. I've yet to see a flame-throwing
letterboxer :-D

chaosmanor

. I've yet to see a flame-throwing
> letterboxer :-D
>
> chaosmanor
>

Well we have those too! Just check the chatlist archives. Some of
those may not necessarily be real flames. They could be clues.

Don

> My complaint is that there are times when the clues,
> no matter how you look at them, do not make sense.
> Physical impossibilities in clues serve no purpose.
> Either the clues are poorly written, or else an actual
> error has been made.

Yes, I'm sure this does happen sometimes, just as I know that geocaches as occasionally posted with incorrect coordinates, but it would be very difficult for an overseeing body to realize such erros without physically checking out all clues, which just is not feasible.

I really think it happens less often than you may think. I consider myself a fairly capable letterboxer in terms of figuring out some of the more cryptic clues, but still I cannot count the times that I have been frustrated because I got to a point in the clues where it was just a physical impossibility. I recall a time that to follow the indicated bearing and paces would have required me walk a fair distance out into Lake Michigan. In the majority of those situations going back to an earlier point in the clue and thinking outside my original line, often revealed another solution. One thing about letterboxing that you do not encounter with geocaching via coordinates is that clues can often be made to fit your surroundings based on your focus. Because of this, it is not unusual to misinterpret the intent of the clue and end up in the wrong place even though you appear to have followed everything verbatim. This is not usually an intentional misleading or even an attempt to be obtuse on the part of the clue-writer, simply difference in human perspective.

> And making clues even more obtuse than the "obtusest"
> of them already are is only going to make things less
> attractive.

I daresay you might find a fair number of letterboxers who disagree with this statement. There are those who hunt only mystery boxes and likewise those who create only this type of box. Were Mapsurfer to release clues to a new letterbox today along the same lines as his previous cryptic/puzzling/obtuse clues, I would bet there would be a lot of people burning the midnight oil trying to figure that thing out tonight.

The nice thing about letterboxing is that there is enough flexibility in the loose structure of the *rules* that each person can play their way, choosing and planting boxes that are of interest to them, and invariable no matter what type of box that is, obtuse clues or driveby directions, there are many other letterboxers who will be interested in finding it.

SpringChick



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

drewclan@aol.com wrote on 3/23/2006, 1:29 PM:

> Here's another controversial topic for us. Rumor has it that Jeremy (the
> chief of geocaching.com and a member of this list) is planning on
> creating a
> Letterboxing website. A few details are at
>
> _http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888_
> (http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=126888)
>
> See post#15 in this thread:
> "Actually we're working on a letterboxing site. It may
> help solve some issues with the current hybrids. We'll
> see."
>
> Please join me in asking Jeremy not to do this. Post him here and on the
> groundspeak forums. It would be okay if geocaching didn't improve
> letterboxing
> with a website that solves issues with our boxes. It would be alright
> if this
> little tiny thing stayed independent of the gigantic geocaching
> community.
> They've already got geocaching, benchmarking, waymarking, geocoining,
> plenty of
> other goodies to control and make money on. We could continue
> without their
> taking us over, but only if they let us.
>
> Jeremy, please don't do it!
>
> Jay in CT, early geocacher too

Get over yourself. Who cares if someone wants to make another site.
You DON'T have to use it.

--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com

"Sometimes I amaze even myself"

Phyto wrote on 3/24/2006, 1:52 PM:

> I don't see the point of another webpage.
>
> It's bad enough that folks feel obligated to use this format (the web)
> for letterboxing in the first place, we certainly don't need to pander
> to them and create a hybrid. I think that letterboxing as a
> hobby/sport/historic passtime or whathaveyou lost something
> fundamental in its very essence when clues got listed freeforall on
> the web. This instant gratification, gotta have my clues
> listed/posted/found/printed attitude frankly makes me sick.
>
> Where's the nearest plane to Dartmoor?
>
> phyto

ANNND, why are you posting here then? You want it done the old
fashioned way, then do it that way. If you want letterboxes to be few
and far in between, more power to you, just stop using the system that
is set up online.

Personally, if American letterboxing were anything like Dartmoor
letterboxing, I think I would be bored out of my mind.
--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com - Now with an online logbook

"Sometimes I amaze even myself"

Who pissed in your cherrios?

Somethings are better left unsaid, and everything you've said today
qualifies. Perhaps you need to go back to bed and try getting up on
the other side next time.

Why can't you respect the fact that opinions other than yours are
just as valid.

Or here's an idea, if you don't like reading other's opinions, create
a yahoogroup of your own and post there. That would be, after all,
taking your own advice and we all wouldn't have to be subjected to
your rudeness and arrogance. You've added nothing constructive to
the conversation.

Geesh!

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Brown"
wrote:
ANNND, why are you posting here then? You want it done the old
> fashioned way, then do it that way. If you want letterboxes to be
few and far in between, more power to you, just stop using the
system that is set up online.
>
> Personally, if American letterboxing were anything like Dartmoor
> letterboxing, I think I would be bored out of my mind.
> --
> Nathan Brown
>
> AKA Cyclonic
> Penncoasters.com - Now with an online logbook
>
> "Sometimes I amaze even myself"
>

> Were Mapsurfer to release clues to a new letterbox
> today along the same lines as his previous
> cryptic/puzzling/obtuse clues, I would bet there would
> be a lot of people burning the midnight oil trying to
> figure that thing out tonight.

Hey :-) Rumours of my demise have been greatly exaggerated ...

I'm still here, I'm just operating well below the radar.
I'm disenchanted with what Yankee letterboxing has become
(as some of you know), and still play the same game I
fell in love with in '98, where the idea of a website
was simply an on-line print catalog, where words, not
website operators and functionality, define the game.

If no one wants to play with me, that's their loss, not
mine :-) I do what I do, and I enjoy it. I stay true
to my beliefs about how the game should be played, and
if I'm marginalized, so be it.

Can't people who don't like the idea of Jeremy's prospective
letterboxing website simply ignore it?

Cheers
Randy aka mapsurfer

Isn't that just what I did, expressed my opinion. And my opinion is is
that this particular one is stupid. If you don't like that, too bad.

I think Randy just summed it up best. The game has no rules. Sure,
there is some etiquette, but there are no rules as to how it is played.
We all do things differently. Randy does his thing, I do my thing,
you do your thing, and Jeremy does his thing. SO WHAT! They live or
die on their own.

There are a bunch of you houdy toudy types that think things should be
done your way. You don't like any new ideas. Well, that is just too
bad, new things are going to be tried, be it on the trail or on the
internet. You are going to have to learn to live with it. The whole
lot of you are crying over this new site idea, which you don't even
really know about. The simple answer is right there in front of you,
just don't use it. Keep doing your own thing, no one is stopping you.
Jeez, you folks just seem to need something to cry over, don't you.

Oh, and I stand by the Dartmoor comment. Yeah, I know some folks don't
like that either.

One other thing, I don't much care for Cherrios, more of a Raisin Bran
man myself.

alwayschaos wrote on 3/25/2006, 7:49 PM:

> Who pissed in your cherrios?
>
> Somethings are better left unsaid, and everything you've said today
> qualifies. Perhaps you need to go back to bed and try getting up on
> the other side next time.
>
> Why can't you respect the fact that opinions other than yours are
> just as valid.
>
> Or here's an idea, if you don't like reading other's opinions, create
> a yahoogroup of your own and post there. That would be, after all,
> taking your own advice and we all wouldn't have to be subjected to
> your rudeness and arrogance. You've added nothing constructive to
> the conversation.
>
> Geesh!
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Brown"
> wrote:
> ANNND, why are you posting here then? You want it done the old
> > fashioned way, then do it that way. If you want letterboxes to be
> few and far in between, more power to you, just stop using the
> system that is set up online.
> >
> > Personally, if American letterboxing were anything like Dartmoor
> > letterboxing, I think I would be bored out of my mind.


--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com

"Sometimes I amaze even myself"

You have a right to express your opinion. When you've been
letterboxing as long as Jay Drew, I might even listen to you.

Knit Wit

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Brown"
wrote:
>
> Isn't that just what I did, expressed my opinion. And my opinion is
is
> that this particular one is stupid. If you don't like that, too bad.
>

Yup, you did express your opinion and you have every right to it, as
does anyone else has the right to theirs. Not arguing that.

But why not just state your opinion and leave it at that instead of
calling people names and telling them their opinions are stupid? Is
that too difficult?

You'll make people think more about what you have to say if you use a
little tact and reasoning in your discourse.

Of course, if you don't care what people think about what you have to
say, why be here at all if not just to stir the pot???

Maybe you'll feel better after a good night's sleep.




--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Brown"
wrote:
Isn't that just what I did, expressed my opinion. And my opinion is
is that this particular one is stupid. If you don't like that, too
bad.
>

LOL!! Oh, Jim, if you only knew!! But even when the flames come, and they will, hang in there anyway. It's worth it.

Jim Carleton wrote: there is one
thing about geocaching that really irks me, it is that there are some
yay-hoos who think that a flame is the only way to respond to a
comment with which they disagree. I've yet to see a flame-throwing
letterboxer :-D

chaosmanor






---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

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

alwayschaos wrote on 3/25/2006, 10:30 PM:

> Yup, you did express your opinion and you have every right to it, as
> does anyone else has the right to theirs. Not arguing that.
>
> But why not just state your opinion and leave it at that instead of
> calling people names and telling them their opinions are stupid? Is
> that too difficult?
>
> You'll make people think more about what you have to say if you use a
> little tact and reasoning in your discourse.
>
> Of course, if you don't care what people think about what you have to
> say, why be here at all if not just to stir the pot???
>
> Maybe you'll feel better after a good night's sleep.

Oh, I subscribe to the list purly for the entertainment value, I've said
so several times.

I see someone come up with a new idea, or in this case, just the rumor
of something new, and the whole lot of you go screaming and yelling, and
in the end crying about it, and I just sit back a laugh.

But, I figure every once in a while someone has to just say how stupid
you are being, and, well, I ain't much for tact.

I read through this whole made up issue, and that what it is, it is all
in your minds, and I find it the same names that sit there and impune
it, say oh how terrible it is, cry out for Jeremy to please, please
don't create a letterboxing site, that there are already some many out
there, and how terrible it would be, and how evil it would be if he were
to make a buck on it, and all I can think is what a bunch of elitist,
stuck up snobs. So, I figure I am going to say so, since no one else does.
--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com

"Sometimes I amaze even myself"

I guess so!!

> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Hikers_n_ Hounds wrote:
>
> LOL!! Oh, Jim, if you only knew!! But even when the flames come, and
> they will, hang in there anyway. It's worth it.
>
> Jim Carleton wrote: ... I've yet to see a
> flame-throwing letterboxer :-D

I feel that maybe *I* am to blame for the little flame flurry between
Cyclonic and alwayschaos :-o After all, it started right after I said
that I hadn't seen any flaming! Isn't that a corollary of Murphy's
Law? As soon as you mention how something bad hasn't happened in a
while, it happens ;-) Mea culpa.

Jim

Jim Carleton wrote on 3/25/2006, 11:20 PM:

> I guess so!!
>
> > --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Hikers_n_ Hounds wrote:
> >
> > LOL!! Oh, Jim, if you only knew!! But even when the flames come, and
> > they will, hang in there anyway. It's worth it.
> >
> > Jim Carleton wrote: ... I've yet to see a
> > flame-throwing letterboxer :-D
>
> I feel that maybe *I* am to blame for the little flame flurry between
> Cyclonic and alwayschaos :-o After all, it started right after I said
> that I hadn't seen any flaming! Isn't that a corollary of Murphy's
> Law? As soon as you mention how something bad hasn't happened in a
> while, it happens ;-) Mea culpa.
>
> Jim

Don't worry Jim, that's all me. Alwayschaos just steps right in it.

--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com - Now with an online logbook

"Sometimes I amaze even myself"

Nathan Brown wrote:
There are a bunch of you houdy toudy types that think things should be
done your way. You don't like any new ideas. Well, that is just too
bad, new things are going to be tried, be it on the trail or on the
internet. You are going to have to learn to live with it. The whole
lot of you are crying over this new site idea, which you don't even
really know about. The simple answer is right there in front of you,
just don't use it. Keep doing your own thing, no one is stopping you.
Jeez, you folks just seem to need something to cry over, don't you.

you know, im going to be completely honest with you. i may have had some problems with some of the people here on this message board, but i learned to understand that the veterans lend a voice for a reason. and that is for the best of letterboxing. letterboxing has evolved and everyone who contributes to this messageboard, except yourself, is trying to keep the art of letterboxing from becoming something it shouldn't be. that is screwed up by others who don't know what they are talking about or doing. you obviously haven't a clue and should not be here talking about how messed up you think we are. those flakes in your cereal bowl are getting soggy. kinda like your opinion here!

not crying here! Are you still amazed with yourself?
david (team new hampshire)
proud letterboxer




---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

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

It's time to take a breather. This thread should end if nothing
constructive can be said. These personal attacks must stop!

If I remember correctly, this is a hobby. Everyone is entitled to
their own opinion. That's how this list was built. Read the early
records. Even they disagreed but never resorted to name calling.

Furthering the idea of elitism and "houdy toudy" types does nothing
constructive. Every time a flame appears, we loose more letterboxers
who don't want to deal with this.

If you can't write something respectful, then please do not post at all.

Mark Pepe


> Nathan Brown wrote:
> There are a bunch of you houdy toudy types that think things should be
> done your way. You don't like any new ideas. Well, that is just too
> bad, new things are going to be tried, be it on the trail or on the
> internet. You are going to have to learn to live with it.

If I second it will the motion pass? Then I so do motion. Can I see a show of hands. Team Dakota

Mark Pepe wrote: It's time to take a breather. This thread should end if nothing
constructive can be said. These personal attacks must stop!

If I remember correctly, this is a hobby. Everyone is entitled to
their own opinion. That's how this list was built. Read the early
records. Even they disagreed but never resorted to name calling.

Furthering the idea of elitism and "houdy toudy" types does nothing
constructive. Every time a flame appears, we loose more letterboxers
who don't want to deal with this.

If you can't write something respectful, then please do not post at all.

Mark Pepe


> Nathan Brown wrote:
> There are a bunch of you houdy toudy types that think things should be
> done your way. You don't like any new ideas. Well, that is just too
> bad, new things are going to be tried, be it on the trail or on the
> internet. You are going to have to learn to live with it.





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


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





---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

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

Perhaps the veterans might consider creating a bare bones website. Go back to the way it was in 1998 where clues are submitted to a yahoo group and posted on a website. No setting up profiles, no logging finds. Just a simple webpage with a long list of clues that can be printed off so someone can create their own personal Dartmoor like catalog.

Or get together and create a catalog that finders must purchase via a cheque (no PayPal or an other electronic payment system). And the only way to find out about the catalog is by word of mouth. Then remove your clues from all online databases.

Wouldn't that be easier then trying to stop the development of other letterboxing databases or the changes in the current databases?

You might want to consider that once the groundspeak letterboxing site gets going perhaps LBNA can go back to the old 1998 format and those who prefer more features can move their clues to the new site. The new database may be a blessing in disguise.

david baril wrote: Nathan Brown wrote:
There are a bunch of you houdy toudy types that think things should be
done your way. You don't like any new ideas. Well, that is just too
bad, new things are going to be tried, be it on the trail or on the
internet. You are going to have to learn to live with it. The whole
lot of you are crying over this new site idea, which you don't even
really know about. The simple answer is right there in front of you,
just don't use it. Keep doing your own thing, no one is stopping you.
Jeez, you folks just seem to need something to cry over, don't you.

you know, im going to be completely honest with you. i may have had some problems with some of the people here on this message board, but i learned to understand that the veterans lend a voice for a reason. and that is for the best of letterboxing. letterboxing has evolved and everyone who contributes to this messageboard, except yourself, is trying to keep the art of letterboxing from becoming something it shouldn't be. that is screwed up by others who don't know what they are talking about or doing. you obviously haven't a clue and should not be here talking about how messed up you think we are. those flakes in your cereal bowl are getting soggy. kinda like your opinion here!

not crying here! Are you still amazed with yourself?
david (team new hampshire)
proud letterboxer



---------------------------------
Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos

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

In a message dated 3/26/06 7:43:54 AM, teamdakota5@yahoo.com writes:


> If I second it will the motion pass? Then I so do motion. Can I see a show
> of hands. Team Dakota
>
> Mark Pepe wrote: It's time to take a breather. This
> thread should end if nothing
> constructive can be said. These personal attacks must stop!
>

Hear, hear! One big AYE from down here! Surely we can disagree without
calling each other names.

DebBee


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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, J A R S wrote:
>
> You might want to consider that once the groundspeak letterboxing
site gets going perhaps LBNA can go back to the old 1998 format and
those who prefer more features can move their clues to the new site.
The new database may be a blessing in disguise.
>
---------------------------------------------

This could very well be true.

However, as I've stated before, and I may have not been clear, we do
not box in a vacuum.

I'm an avid geocacher and "ignore the way others play" is not a way to
go. What happens, no matter how you try to ignore the other players,
is they interfere with YOUR play. While I'm sure some folks won't
understand how that happens without it being explained to them, it's
the same with earlier geocachers.

As I've said, my main concern is not the site itself, it's the
cross-over players. Geocachers are going to come to the letterboxing
world with geocaching notions. While the vast majority of geocachers
will be respectful of letterboxing decorum, I foresee enough who will
not to be a serious problem.

Remember, the majority of those who use the Groundspeak boxing site
will not be pure letterboxers. They will be geocachers first, boxers
second, and will have learned how to letterbox from Jeremy Irish.

Okay, so the more traditional boxers take their play to a less public
level. You know Groudspeak will shout it from the rooftops. The next
thing you know there will be many times the number of Groundspeak
letterboxers than traditional boxers. "Might Makes Right" and that
will then go to Groundspeak. You really want to see Jeremy Irish on
some show talking about HIS form of letterboxing? That will happen if
the traditionists go underground.

No, the sky is not falling. But there IS trouble on the horizon.

CR

Whatever! I should know better than feed the troll. My bad!

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Brown"
wrote:
Don't worry Jim, that's all me. Alwayschaos just steps right in it.

> Nathan Brown

Cissy,

You make very good points and sum it up very nicely.

I think the real question becomes, then, what is the true definition
of letterboxing? Don't we need to look at our history (both here and
Dartmoor) to help define it?

In my opinion/experience it's nothing like geocahcing, which is
centered on technology. It's an entirely different game with an
entirely different focus.

We've tried to use a technological tool to more easily carry
letterboxing to a greater audience, but does that distort what
letterboxing is about? With the move to the underground by some of
our brightest and best players, that conclusion can be an easy one to
arrive at.

Does this water down what is the true essence of the game when we try
to add more and more bells and whistles to satsify more people?

Should we satisfy more people? Doesn't that change the game?

Can a geocacher add value to the game, or will it detract from it
(which I'm afraid it will)? Should we move to a model where our boxes
would have to be approved by someone else before we can place them?

Is that really what this game is about?

I would hope we all could think on these things and move away from
the childish name calling which accomplishes nothing.

Thanks for bringing this up!



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Sissy n CR" wrote:
> Remember, the majority of those who use the Groundspeak boxing site
> will not be pure letterboxers. They will be geocachers first,
boxers second, and will have learned how to letterbox from Jeremy
Irish.
>
> Okay, so the more traditional boxers take their play to a less
public level. You know Groudspeak will shout it from the rooftops.
The next thing you know there will be many times the number of
Groundspeak letterboxers than traditional boxers. "Might Makes
Right" and that will then go to Groundspeak. You really want to see
Jeremy Irish on some show talking about HIS form of letterboxing?
That will happen if the traditionists go underground.
>
> No, the sky is not falling. But there IS trouble on the horizon.
>
> CR
>

alwayschaos wrote: In my opinion/experience it's nothing like geocahcing, which is
centered on technology. It's an entirely different game with an
entirely different focus.

I see letterboxing and geocaching as quite similar. At the essence they are both hide 'n seek games. Boxers and geocachers have the same goal, to find a hidden box.

Geocachers seek it using lat/long coordinates and letterboxers seek the box using written directions. Both geocachers and letterboxers log their finds by noting their visit in a physical logbook. Geocachers write a note in the logbook, letterboxers stamp their signature stamp in the logbook. Most geocachers log their find online too, some letterboxers log their find online.

JARS



---------------------------------
Make Yahoo! Canada your Homepage Yahoo! Canada Homepage

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

Geocacheing & letterboxing are similar but not the same. I don't want to use
or buy a GPS. I can bearly use a compass. Let each enjoy there own. If
you do both that's good for you. I JUST WANT TO BE A LETTERBOXER.

STAR:W+S=DRR


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

> Perhaps the veterans might consider creating a bare
> bones website. Go back to the way it was in 1998
> where clues are submitted to a yahoo group and
> posted on a website. No setting up profiles, no
> logging finds. Just a simple webpage with a long
> list of clues that can be printed off so someone
> can create their own personal Dartmoor like catalog.

We did have a pretty bare bones web site at letterboxing.org until about a year and a half ago. Granted we had moved past submitting the clues to a Yahoo group and placing all of the work for posting them onto a couple of webmasters, but other than that, it was pretty much as you describe -- just a simple website with lists of clues to print off.

Perhaps those who want bells and whistles and logging capabilities could create their own website and letterboxing.org could revert back to its simpler form. Oh wait, Ryan already created that site -- AtlasQuest. Now if we could just keep the powers that be at letterboxing.org from trying to keep pace with AtlasQuest, we'd be all set. Two sites for two different groups of interest -- everyone is happy.

SpringChick



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

In a sense, this is happening more and more as boxers do abandon LbNA and
Atlasquest. It's a shame in a way because out of the 15 absolutely best
boxes that I found in the country last year, only one was on LbNA and
Atlasquest. The others I found on individual blogs and by word-of-mouth.

Now I'm for sure not counting myself among the best of box-makers at this
point in my boxing life -- but I'm always optimistic for the future :-) --
but last fall I pulled my boxes off LbNA and Atlasquest and next month will
be putting this year's clues on a very simple blog since I don't feel the
bells and whistles of the two sites are what boxing is about for me. My
enjoyment is in the artwork of making the box and the clues. Whether masses
and masses of people find one of my boxes is irrelevant to me.

And I like simplicity. The internet is an incredibly useful tool. But for
me, I like to use it in the simplest form I can find. I would be a total
disaster trying to set up my own website, but this blog idea seems just
perfect. Putting the clues in files in my own yahoogroup worked for *me*
but it meant folks had to subscribe to the group and some folks want nothing
to do with giving any of their information to yahoo. So this blog idea
seems about as simple as one can get. A person only has to find the site
and there will be the clues. No bells and whistles and no hoops to jump
thru. :-)

Sometimes simplicity carries with it perks that aren't immediately apparent
when attempting to cater to the masses. In the long run, the masses might
end up missing the best. On the other hand, they probably won't know what
they've missed anyway. Or maybe won't care. To me, it's just more dumbing
down of the American culture. We all too often seem to be trotting along
trying to find the lowest common denominator. I don't expect the American
populace to treat letterboxing any differently in the long run. It's just a
matter of time.

~~ Mosey ~~



-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of J A R S
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:48 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing


Perhaps the veterans might consider creating a bare bones website......

Here I go with another (dumb) question. What's a blog, can you
please explain it to me?
Goose Chaser


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "xxxx"
wrote:
>
> In a sense, this is happening more and more as boxers do abandon
LbNA and
> Atlasquest. It's a shame in a way because out of the 15
absolutely best
> boxes that I found in the country last year, only one was on LbNA
and
> Atlasquest. The others I found on individual blogs and by word-
of-mouth.
>
> Now I'm for sure not counting myself among the best of box-makers
at this
> point in my boxing life -- but I'm always optimistic for the
future :-) --
> but last fall I pulled my boxes off LbNA and Atlasquest and next
month will
> be putting this year's clues on a very simple blog since I don't
feel the
> bells and whistles of the two sites are what boxing is about for
me. My
> enjoyment is in the artwork of making the box and the clues.
Whether masses
> and masses of people find one of my boxes is irrelevant to me.
>
> And I like simplicity. The internet is an incredibly useful tool.
But for
> me, I like to use it in the simplest form I can find. I would be
a total
> disaster trying to set up my own website, but this blog idea seems
just
> perfect. Putting the clues in files in my own yahoogroup worked
for *me*
> but it meant folks had to subscribe to the group and some folks
want nothing
> to do with giving any of their information to yahoo. So this blog
idea
> seems about as simple as one can get. A person only has to find
the site
> and there will be the clues. No bells and whistles and no hoops
to jump
> thru. :-)
>
> Sometimes simplicity carries with it perks that aren't immediately
apparent
> when attempting to cater to the masses. In the long run, the
masses might
> end up missing the best. On the other hand, they probably won't
know what
> they've missed anyway. Or maybe won't care. To me, it's just
more dumbing
> down of the American culture. We all too often seem to be
trotting along
> trying to find the lowest common denominator. I don't expect the
American
> populace to treat letterboxing any differently in the long run.
It's just a
> matter of time.
>
> ~~ Mosey ~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of J A R S
> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:48 AM
> To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing
>
>
> Perhaps the veterans might consider creating a bare bones
website......
>

One of the major big blog sites is at blogger.com Mark and Sue Pepe have
a large place there. Just do a search under "letterboxing." Mine
(moseyingalong) is tiny yet, so I don't know if it would even come up in any
search or not. But if you check out Mark and Sue's, it'll give you a sense
of what you can with it as far as letterboxing is concerned.

People use blogs for all sorts of things -- it's kind of like a small
personal website but very easy to set up for folks like me who aren't all
that computer savvy.

~~ Mosey ~~
http://moseyingalong.blogspot.com


-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of jojoma22
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:53 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing


Here I go with another (dumb) question. What's a blog, can you
please explain it to me?
Goose Chaser


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "xxxx"
wrote:
>
> In a sense, this is happening more and more as boxers do abandon
LbNA and
> Atlasquest. It's a shame in a way because out of the 15
absolutely best
> boxes that I found in the country last year, only one was on LbNA
and
> Atlasquest. The others I found on individual blogs and by word-
of-mouth.
>
> Now I'm for sure not counting myself among the best of box-makers
at this
> point in my boxing life -- but I'm always optimistic for the
future :-) --
> but last fall I pulled my boxes off LbNA and Atlasquest and next
month will
> be putting this year's clues on a very simple blog since I don't
feel the
> bells and whistles of the two sites are what boxing is about for
me. My
> enjoyment is in the artwork of making the box and the clues.
Whether masses
> and masses of people find one of my boxes is irrelevant to me.
>
> And I like simplicity. The internet is an incredibly useful tool.
But for
> me, I like to use it in the simplest form I can find. I would be
a total
> disaster trying to set up my own website, but this blog idea seems
just
> perfect. Putting the clues in files in my own yahoogroup worked
for *me*
> but it meant folks had to subscribe to the group and some folks
want nothing
> to do with giving any of their information to yahoo. So this blog
idea
> seems about as simple as one can get. A person only has to find
the site
> and there will be the clues. No bells and whistles and no hoops
to jump
> thru. :-)
>
> Sometimes simplicity carries with it perks that aren't immediately
apparent
> when attempting to cater to the masses. In the long run, the
masses might
> end up missing the best. On the other hand, they probably won't
know what
> they've missed anyway. Or maybe won't care. To me, it's just
more dumbing
> down of the American culture. We all too often seem to be
trotting along
> trying to find the lowest common denominator. I don't expect the
American
> populace to treat letterboxing any differently in the long run.
It's just a
> matter of time.
>
> ~~ Mosey ~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of J A R S
> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:48 AM
> To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing
>
>
> Perhaps the veterans might consider creating a bare bones
website......
>







Yahoo! Groups Links

It's nice living in a small town along the Delaware. I can go out and
take a late night stroll along the river and basin, which is what I did
last night. I stood there, leaning against a graffiti ridden
information sign along the basin, watching a ship slowly ply its way
down the river, and just contemplated things.

Know what I came up with? Well, I think what I said was dead on right.
It may have not been tactful or graceful, but sometimes brute force is
what is needed.

There are an awful lot of folks that don't see things even when they are
staring them in the face, and I think this is one of them. This is
captialism at work. If you don't like a site that has been created,
don't use it, there are many other ways to get clues out there, even
right here, use them. Instead, I see things like this,

"They will be geocachers first, boxers
second, and will have learned how to letterbox from Jeremy Irish."

Now, I don't know Jeremy, and have never done any Geocaching, but I
would think that if someone is going to go to all the trouble and
expense to set up a site on letterboxing then not explain anything about
it. I think far too many people get far too emotional about changes in
the game. Things are not always as they seem all the time.

They don't understand the evolution, and further, they don't understand
that they don't have to evolve with it. Set up your own site. If you
want letterboxing to be very elitist, then make your version that way,
and I think that is what a bunch of you folks really seem to want. So
go ahead, detach yourselves from the community, create your own site,
keep it a secret, give the clues only to those you want to have clues.
That is what some of you folks seem to want, so take the action, instead
of bemoaning and complaining about what Jeremy Irish might be doing.

Some people just need to get a clue.

--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com

"Sometimes I amaze even myself"

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Brown"
wrote:
>

> Now, I don't know Jeremy, and have never done any Geocaching, but I
> would think that if someone is going to go to all the trouble and
> expense to set up a site on letterboxing then not explain anything
about it.


> Some people just need to get a clue.

Yes, some people do need to get a clue.

First, you admit you know nothing about that which you speak then make
an assumption about it.

What you "think" is irrelevant.

One thing I've always admired about the letterboxing community is its
indocrination of the new hobbyists. That is something geocaching
lacks. The community tries to do it, but when it is without the
"official sanction" of the site many times the community is ignored.
The letterboxing community goes to great pains to let new players know
what is expected of them. In geocaching, you're given coordinates and
let loose.

Yes, one would "think" as you do. Reality is different story, though.

Well, now that the flames have dies down a bit...

First, I'm not a newbie 'boxer. I've been boxing for a year and a
half. If there were more hours in the day (especially sunlight) and
more letterboxes nearby, I'd have a super-duper F-count (but would
anyone care?). (Personally, I think I lost rookie status after
trekking along the southeastern shore of Conanicut Island to find the
two boxes out there--and those were only #5 and #6--and gained veteran
status after one year and 100 Finds.)

Now, I don't know Jeremy Irish (has anyone out there ever met him?
know what he looks like?), but I have found a couple of geocaches. I
don't have a GPS, though. One cache find was paced out, written down
and handed to me WOM by the cacher (who's also a 'boxer). One was so
easy to find it was ridiculous. The last was totally by accident at
Stone Mountain. I've also used the geocaching website to find and log
geodetic benchmarks and stuff. To ice this cake I'm building, I even
used the geocaching site's resources to track down a geocacher who
lives nearby a certain letterbox and who was kind enough to rescue it
from impending doom last year. He also replanted it after I sent it back.

MORAL: Letterboxers and geocachers CAN live together in peace and can
benefit from each other's existence.

I've got a letterboxing website. Two, in fact. One is my own and the
other is for my region. There are more letterboxing websites out there
than anyone can find with a Google search in one night. (That's only
because it's relatively easy to hide things from Google, and you don't
even have to know how...)

So will another letterboxing site bother me? To be honest, it ruffled
my feathers a bit at first, but then I considered what I just said in
the above paragraph. If Irish wants to create a site for hybrids, let
him get it done. It won't bother me... unless...

... the only time I (or any of you out there) should have a legitimate
problem with Irish's site is if:

1. site users begin publishing clues to letterboxes that are not
theirs, just to log a find.

2. the site's content features an official "rulebook" for letterboxing
AND those rules break the rules that we all know "don't exist" but are
there to guide us, nonetheless.

3. clues to geoboxes mention, describe, or otherwise jeopardize a
traditional letterbox that does not belong to the geoboxer.

Now THAT's the kind of response we 'boxers need to provide. A
clear-cut, sane, non-emotional list of strong suggestions for keeping
the peace while maintaining creative avenues.

StarSaels
PFX???

I agree with you completely with one exception...

> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "StarSaels" wrote:
>
> ... the only time I (or any of you out there) should have a
> legitimate problem with Irish's site is if:
...
> 3. clues to geoboxes mention, describe, or otherwise jeopardize a
> traditional letterbox that does not belong to the geoboxer.

As I and others have mentioned earlier, there is a *definite* reason
for actually wanting to mention if a letterbox is near a geocache, and
vice versa. Mentioning that there is a pre-existing letterbox nearby
(say, within 100 feet/30 meters) to a geocache, or a pre-existing
geocache to a letterbox, will make it that much more likely that those
hunting for the one will not mistake the other for the one. Having
found my first LB while searching for a geocache, I know only too well
how easy it can be to mistake one for the other, especially if neither
the LBer nor the cacher know of the other's existence, and if the box
and/or cache aren't well labeled, both of which were the case in my
example. I knew that I had found a letterbox, but the five people
before me had not. As much as some people hate the techno-route, it
cannot be ignored that it is popular. Hiding from it won't help anyone.

Thus, proper labeling of our boxes is important. I also feel really
strongly that, if an LBer knows that a geocache is within 100 feet of
an existing geocache, they should at least mention the fact that the
general area has at least one geocache in it, so practice even more
stealth than normal. And I think that any geocacher who hides a cache
within a 100 feet or so of a known LB has an obligation to warn all
cachers, in the cache write-up, that there is a letterbox within the
same general area, and to be sure not to mistake it for the cache.
Giving any information about the LB would *definitely* be a no-no, but
not mentioning it at all would, IMHO, be immoral, or at least
questionable ethics. As you say, we can co-exist, and we both are
proof of it. Anything we each can do to help and protect the other is
even better :-)

chaosmanor

> Read the early records. Even they disagreed but never resorted to
> name calling.

Hey, now, I resent that. I've been called many a name on this list in
the past. ;o)

-- Ryan

Jim,

I totally agree with you. In trying to keep my statements short and sweet after rambling on
and on and occasionally losing my train of thought, I left out some crucial info.

Allow me to restate item #3...

3. clues to geoboxes mention a specific letterbox by name, describe an LBX's hiding spot,
or paraphrase the clues to an LBX or utilize and LBX's hiding spot as part of the clues to
the geoboxes

Your prose leads to a fourth statement:

4. geoboxes (and geocaches) planted within eyesight or a hundred feet or so of a
*preexisting* letterbox should have listed, within their clues, that "a letterbox is nearby"
(notice, no name or spoiler) and that nothing is traded nor left in letterboxes other than
stamp impressions and log entries

Dadgummit, I'd better stop! It sounds like I'm writing a rule book!

StarSaels



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Carleton" wrote:
>
> I agree with you completely with one exception...
>
> > --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "StarSaels" wrote:
> >
> > ... the only time I (or any of you out there) should have a
> > legitimate problem with Irish's site is if:
> ...
> > 3. clues to geoboxes mention, describe, or otherwise jeopardize a
> > traditional letterbox that does not belong to the geoboxer.
>
> As I and others have mentioned earlier, there is a *definite* reason
> for actually wanting to mention if a letterbox is near a geocache, and
> vice versa. Mentioning that there is a pre-existing letterbox nearby
> (say, within 100 feet/30 meters) to a geocache, or a pre-existing
> geocache to a letterbox, will make it that much more likely that those
> hunting for the one will not mistake the other for the one. Having
> found my first LB while searching for a geocache, I know only too well
> how easy it can be to mistake one for the other, especially if neither
> the LBer nor the cacher know of the other's existence, and if the box
> and/or cache aren't well labeled, both of which were the case in my
> example. I knew that I had found a letterbox, but the five people
> before me had not. As much as some people hate the techno-route, it
> cannot be ignored that it is popular. Hiding from it won't help anyone.
>
> Thus, proper labeling of our boxes is important. I also feel really
> strongly that, if an LBer knows that a geocache is within 100 feet of
> an existing geocache, they should at least mention the fact that the
> general area has at least one geocache in it, so practice even more
> stealth than normal. And I think that any geocacher who hides a cache
> within a 100 feet or so of a known LB has an obligation to warn all
> cachers, in the cache write-up, that there is a letterbox within the
> same general area, and to be sure not to mistake it for the cache.
> Giving any information about the LB would *definitely* be a no-no, but
> not mentioning it at all would, IMHO, be immoral, or at least
> questionable ethics. As you say, we can co-exist, and we both are
> proof of it. Anything we each can do to help and protect the other is
> even better :-)
>
> chaosmanor
>

Where you from Mark? I went to school in New Jersey with a Mark Pepe.

----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Pepe
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 12:55:56 AM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Geocaching Swallows Letterboxing

It's time to take a breather. This thread should end if nothing
constructive can be said. These personal attacks must stop!

If I remember correctly, this is a hobby. Everyone is entitled to
their own opinion. That's how this list was built. Read the early
records. Even they disagreed but never resorted to name calling.

Furthering the idea of elitism and "houdy toudy" types does nothing
constructive. Every time a flame appears, we loose more letterboxers
who don't want to deal with this.

If you can't write something respectful, then please do not post at all.

Mark Pepe


> Nathan Brown wrote:
> There are a bunch of you houdy toudy types that think things should be
> done your way. You don't like any new ideas. Well, that is just too
> bad, new things are going to be tried, be it on the trail or on the
> internet. You are going to have to learn to live with it.






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.

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

Oops, forgot to mention two things...

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Carleton" wrote:
>
> found my first LB while searching for a geocache, I know only too well
> how easy it can be to mistake one for the other, especially if neither
> the LBer nor the cacher know of the other's existence, and if the box
> and/or cache aren't well labeled, both of which were the case in my
> example. I knew that I had found a letterbox, but the five people
> before me had not.
> Thus, proper labeling of our boxes is important.

I've labeled all but the first two of my plants with "THIS IS NOT A GEOCACHE" in permanent
marker on the inside of the transparent cover. More recent boxes have this statement in
numerous places. And I STILL find trinkets and stuff in a few of them...

> strongly that, if an LBer knows that a geocache is within 100 feet of
> an existing geocache, they should at least mention the fact that the
> general area has at least one geocache in it, so practice even more
> stealth than normal. And I think that any geocacher who hides a cache
> within a 100 feet or so of a known LB has an obligation to warn all
> cachers, in the cache write-up, that there is a letterbox within the
> same general area, and to be sure not to mistake it for the cache.

Too cool. I thought of this, too, then thought... in many cases, it's very hard for a
letterboxer to know that there's a geocache nearby. Remember, we're not usually carrying
those handy-dandy GPS units around. (Aside: I want one, not so I can geocache,
necessarily, but just because the technology is cool.)

Planters in "uncharted" areas may not know of geocaches when they're out a-planting, and
may not ever know unless someone, a Finder or cacher, tells them.

Perhaps it would be wise to just amend our clues (for letterboxes, geocaches and
everything in-between) with a disclaimer such as, "Remember, there's other things out in
these here woods besides letterboxes/geocaches!"

StarSaels

Hi Cheryl:

Sorry - wasn't me. Born, bred and still a CT boxer.

Mark

PS. Welcome to letterboxing!

-------------- Original message --------------
From: Cheryl Vacchiano
Where you from Mark? I went to school in New Jersey with a Mark Pepe.

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

'S okay to write rules for geocachers....

StarSaels wrote: 4. geoboxes (and geocaches) planted within eyesight or a hundred feet or so of a
*preexisting* letterbox should have listed, within their clues, that "a letterbox is nearby"
(notice, no name or spoiler) and that nothing is traded nor left in letterboxes other than
stamp impressions and log entries

Dadgummit, I'd better stop! It sounds like I'm writing a rule book!



---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

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