--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp"
wrote:

Morgun

Please reread the info that our dear Lady P has posted in the poll.
The main reason she set up the poll is due to her being bored with
the subject. Please, just let it go.
Don
>
>
> After voting I find I am in the minority - by a long ways.
>
> I do not feel it is proper for the majority to restrict the rights
of
> the minority.
>
> The feature could be added in such a way that only planters who
> wanted comments about their boxes would have this feature. The
log
> entries at the boxes are one of the most fun features of
geocaching.
> Additionally, as a planter (P19), I would love to get more
comments
> on my boxes.
>
> As for the majority, no one will hold a gun to yor head forcing
you
> to read log entries.
>
> Since I have 19 boxes planted, maybe I should get 19 votes.
People
> opposed to it, would not get one vote per box, since they would
not
> have the feature on their boxes. Since I would have the feature
> about 15 times, I should get at least 15 votes.
>
> Also, note that on Geocaching.com, the box owner has the right to
> modify or delete any comments placed for their boxes. I have
placed
> about 50 comments on Geocaching.com boxes & Travel Bugs; and no
one
> has ever flamed me (unlike here).
>
> Morgun
> Letterboxing P19F72 (includes 1 HH)
> Geocaching P1F43 (plus 1 TB) TB is a travel bug - like a
hitchhiker.
>

For those not familar with it, I present the United States
Constitution Amendment XXXIII:

A well reviewed letterbox clue, being necessary to the enjoyment of
letterboxing, the right of the people to log and review letterboxes,
shall not be infringed.


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp"
wrote:
>
>
> After voting I find I am in the minority - by a long ways.
>
> I do not feel it is proper for the majority to restrict the rights
of
> the minority.
>
> The feature could be added in such a way that only planters who
> wanted comments about their boxes would have this feature. The
log
> entries at the boxes are one of the most fun features of
geocaching.
> Additionally, as a planter (P19), I would love to get more
comments
> on my boxes.
>
> As for the majority, no one will hold a gun to yor head forcing
you
> to read log entries.
>
> Since I have 19 boxes planted, maybe I should get 19 votes.
People
> opposed to it, would not get one vote per box, since they would
not
> have the feature on their boxes. Since I would have the feature
> about 15 times, I should get at least 15 votes.
>
> Also, note that on Geocaching.com, the box owner has the right to
> modify or delete any comments placed for their boxes. I have
placed
> about 50 comments on Geocaching.com boxes & Travel Bugs; and no
one
> has ever flamed me (unlike here).
>
> Morgun
> Letterboxing P19F72 (includes 1 HH)
> Geocaching P1F43 (plus 1 TB) TB is a travel bug - like a
hitchhiker.
>

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Pungent Bob"
wrote:
>
> For those not familar with it, I present the United States
> Constitution Amendment XXXIII:
>
> A well reviewed letterbox clue, being necessary to the enjoyment of
> letterboxing, the right of the people to log and review letterboxes,
> shall not be infringed.
>
>
Hey PB

Is the LbCLU looking into this?

Don

> After voting I find I am in the minority - by a long ways.

Don't feel too bad. It's kind of a loaded question anyhow. =) The
question was posed as a way to 'review' another letterbox. And let's
face it--most people don't want their boxes honestly critiqued because
they know the boxes aren't really as good as they like to think they
are. Don't get me wrong--it can still be fun to find your typical,
average, everyday box. Most boxes, by definition, ARE average. But
nobody wants anyone pointing that out to them. Until you find a truely
exceptional letterbox--and you'll know it when you see it--it might be
hard to grasp that some boxes really are better than others.

I don't really mind admitting that most of my boxes are average, at
best. A few might be particularly noteworthy, but most really aren't.
*shrug*

As for logging comments--originally it seemed like most people were
concerned about spoilers. Which is a valid concern, but spoilers can
happen without an official comment logging area (i.e. message boards).
At least if there were an official place that someone could log
comments, it can be set up so the owner of the box can edit or delete
such spoilers which I think could be an improvement.

At least for those boxes where spoilers are a concern. If you look at
the vast majority of boxes, the clues are pretty direct. 'Go down the
trail, look behind the tree on the right.' I kind of suspect if
someone made a comment 'No, the tree is on the left!', the owner
probably wouldn't be upset about the so-called spoiler. The clues are
meant to be direct, and if the clue wasn't clear or had an error, the
owner probably would appreciate the help.

Somewhere along the way, geocaching became the ugly big brother of
letterboxing and now people like to slam an idea they don't like by
comparing it to geocaching. Kind of like saying George Bush is worse
than Hilter because of invading Iraq under false pretenses. I'll
admit, I'm not a big fan of Bush, but come on, a comarison to Hitler
is not only extreme, but falls under the 'idiotic' book. If there was
a run-off between Hitler and Bush, I have no doubt which of the two
I'd prefer living under.

So then people start complaining that such a logging/review feature is
too much like geocaching. Slam! But for every difference you can name
between the two, I could name ten similiarities. For that matter, I
could probably name ten differences for every similiarity one could
name. Letterboxing is not and will not ever 'become' geocaching.
Letterboxing is about art and clues. Geocaching is about trinkets and
GPSes. Nothing is going to change that.

Some people like stats and high-tech features, some people don't.
Which is one reason I like having two letterboxing websites. LbNA is
simplier, straight-forward, and without bells or whistles. Or at least
it used to be. I'm kind of saddened by the fact that I think it's
purity isn't what it used to be. It's not virtualletterboxing.org.
It's not postalletterboxing.org. It's letterboxing.org. I'd rather
have it keep it's original purpose which it did with such simple elegance.

Then there's AQ which generally does have a lot more bells and
whistles for those that prefer them. Sophisticated city searches, trip
planners, and support for every non-traditional type of letterbox
there is. They compliment each other nicely, I think.

Is logging comments a bad thing? Yes and no. Some people like the
idea, some people don't. And some people probably don't like the idea
because of all the mud that's always thrown at the idea, but probably
would like it once they tried it.

In a nutshell, I don't think the idea is as bad as its detractors
would lead you to believe, nor do I think the idea is as good as its
supporters would lead you to believe. It's simply a tool that some
people would find useful and others would not. I'd vote for LbNA *not*
to support such a feature--it's an unnecessary bell/whistle. I kind of
*do* want AQ to support it, though--bells and whistles is what AQ is
about. Something for everyone, and everyone a website. =)

Of course, implementing it would take quite a bit of time and
resources that I'd rather spend working on other bells and whistles,
so I wouldn't count on such a feature showing up at AQ anytime soon.

Do geocachers actually 'review' other people's caches? If that's true,
I'm very surprised! An organized vote for which are the best caches
doesn't seem like a very nice thing to implement. Logging comments
doesn't bother me as much as voting on the quality of other people's
creations.

-- Ryan

Oh for crying out loud! You people are unbelievable.

Ryan, thanks for this message. Honestly, I got a little choked up. I am very happy to hear that you are considering online logs for AQ -- in case you haven't heard, I like them. ;)

In reference to your question: Do geocachers actually 'review' other people's caches? No, they don't. Caches are not rated, basically for the reasons you've outlined. I have seen cache hiders put rating systems on their own personal clue page but that's up to the individual.

JARS


rscarpen wrote: > After voting I find I am in the minority - by a long ways.

Don't feel too bad. It's kind of a loaded question anyhow. =) The
question was posed as a way to 'review' another letterbox. And let's
face it--most people don't want their boxes honestly critiqued because
they know the boxes aren't really as good as they like to think they
are. Don't get me wrong--it can still be fun to find your typical,
average, everyday box. Most boxes, by definition, ARE average. But
nobody wants anyone pointing that out to them. Until you find a truely
exceptional letterbox--and you'll know it when you see it--it might be
hard to grasp that some boxes really are better than others.

I don't really mind admitting that most of my boxes are average, at
best. A few might be particularly noteworthy, but most really aren't.
*shrug*

As for logging comments--originally it seemed like most people were
concerned about spoilers. Which is a valid concern, but spoilers can
happen without an official comment logging area (i.e. message boards).
At least if there were an official place that someone could log
comments, it can be set up so the owner of the box can edit or delete
such spoilers which I think could be an improvement.

At least for those boxes where spoilers are a concern. If you look at
the vast majority of boxes, the clues are pretty direct. 'Go down the
trail, look behind the tree on the right.' I kind of suspect if
someone made a comment 'No, the tree is on the left!', the owner
probably wouldn't be upset about the so-called spoiler. The clues are
meant to be direct, and if the clue wasn't clear or had an error, the
owner probably would appreciate the help.

Somewhere along the way, geocaching became the ugly big brother of
letterboxing and now people like to slam an idea they don't like by
comparing it to geocaching. Kind of like saying George Bush is worse
than Hilter because of invading Iraq under false pretenses. I'll
admit, I'm not a big fan of Bush, but come on, a comarison to Hitler
is not only extreme, but falls under the 'idiotic' book. If there was
a run-off between Hitler and Bush, I have no doubt which of the two
I'd prefer living under.

So then people start complaining that such a logging/review feature is
too much like geocaching. Slam! But for every difference you can name
between the two, I could name ten similiarities. For that matter, I
could probably name ten differences for every similiarity one could
name. Letterboxing is not and will not ever 'become' geocaching.
Letterboxing is about art and clues. Geocaching is about trinkets and
GPSes. Nothing is going to change that.

Some people like stats and high-tech features, some people don't.
Which is one reason I like having two letterboxing websites. LbNA is
simplier, straight-forward, and without bells or whistles. Or at least
it used to be. I'm kind of saddened by the fact that I think it's
purity isn't what it used to be. It's not virtualletterboxing.org.
It's not postalletterboxing.org. It's letterboxing.org. I'd rather
have it keep it's original purpose which it did with such simple elegance.

Then there's AQ which generally does have a lot more bells and
whistles for those that prefer them. Sophisticated city searches, trip
planners, and support for every non-traditional type of letterbox
there is. They compliment each other nicely, I think.

Is logging comments a bad thing? Yes and no. Some people like the
idea, some people don't. And some people probably don't like the idea
because of all the mud that's always thrown at the idea, but probably
would like it once they tried it.

In a nutshell, I don't think the idea is as bad as its detractors
would lead you to believe, nor do I think the idea is as good as its
supporters would lead you to believe. It's simply a tool that some
people would find useful and others would not. I'd vote for LbNA *not*
to support such a feature--it's an unnecessary bell/whistle. I kind of
*do* want AQ to support it, though--bells and whistles is what AQ is
about. Something for everyone, and everyone a website. =)

Of course, implementing it would take quite a bit of time and
resources that I'd rather spend working on other bells and whistles,
so I wouldn't count on such a feature showing up at AQ anytime soon.

Do geocachers actually 'review' other people's caches? If that's true,
I'm very surprised! An organized vote for which are the best caches
doesn't seem like a very nice thing to implement. Logging comments
doesn't bother me as much as voting on the quality of other people's
creations.

-- Ryan





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


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





---------------------------------
Enrich your life at Yahoo! Canada Finance

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

Quit being so pushy, Prisspot. Just bow out of the conversation gracefully if it doesn't interest you.

Seems to me you are disrespecting one of our friends.
We won't stand for this.
I call out the legion of Pristines to defend her Ladyship's honor!

Mark

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Jeremy Irish"
Quit being so pushy, Prisspot. Just bow out of the conversation gracefully if it doesn't interest you.

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

Jeremy Irish wrote: Geocaching.com doesn't have reviews either for many of the same reasons already posted in this thread, so the opinions over there are eerily similar to the ones here. Instead our approach will be to reward the best listings by allowing users to nominate their favorites. People now use bookmark lists which are similar to Amazon lists for commenting on particular caches now (without giving anything away). It works quite well and doesn't take away from the surprise at the end.I really like the 'bookmark list' feature. I used one on a Tucson trip and might have missed the devious and hilarious Silny boxes if it wasn't for someone's bookmark list of recommended caches in the area.

I have my own bookmark lists (winter-friendly; urban; scenic or unique).

JARS


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

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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Jeremy Irish" wrote:
>
>
> Geocaching.com doesn't have reviews either for many of the same
> reasons already posted in this thread, so the opinions over there
are > eerily similar to the ones here. Instead our approach will be to
> reward the best listings by allowing users to nominate their
> favorites. People now use bookmark lists which are similar to Amazon
> lists for commenting on particular caches now (without giving anything
> away). It works quite well and doesn't take away from the surprise at
> the end.


I'll try this again. My email account is really messing up the
formatting. So I'll post again via the yahoo group site:

I really like the 'bookmark list' feature. I used one on a Tucson trip
and might have missed the devious and hilarious Silny boxes if it
wasn't for someone's bookmark list of recommended caches in the area.

I have my own bookmark lists (winter-friendly; urban; scenic or unique).

JARS

> Anyway, IMO letterboxing.org should go back to its roots and start
removing features instead of adding them. The AtlasQuest guys can deal
with the scope creep and the troglodytes can be happy going back to
sending clues via the postal service. Stop using email already. It's
way too 20th century for you.
>
> Jeremy

Great ideas! Jeremy. I normally use smoke signals for the bulk of my
communication, but today is a 'rain'day.

Don

The first part of this is a grand idea. The logic of the second part
escapes me. I certainly don't want to be cheated out of my 202 nay
votes! Funhog


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp" wrote:

> Since I have 19 boxes planted, maybe I should get 19 votes. People
> opposed to it, would not get one vote per box, since they would not
> have the feature on their boxes. Since I would have the feature
> about 15 times, I should get at least 15 votes.

Oooooooooooh......when does the polling close????

I have to quick quick quick hurry and re-register my measley 14 boxes!

And wait! I have quite a few retired boxes. If I re-register them
too...........woo hoo!

Oh dear. Most of the retired ones I adopted from Pippi tho..........so
might I need a proxy form from her?

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of funhog1
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 6:52 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: re Poll on box log entries similar to Geocaching.com


The first part of this is a grand idea. The logic of the second part
escapes me. I certainly don't want to be cheated out of my 202 nay
votes! Funhog


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp" wrote:

> Since I have 19 boxes planted, maybe I should get 19 votes. People
> opposed to it, would not get one vote per box, since they would not
> have the feature on their boxes. Since I would have the feature
> about 15 times, I should get at least 15 votes.











Yahoo! Groups Links

Ooooo, yeah. It works both ways, don't it?????

I like the sound of that, Funhog!

Knit Wit

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "funhog1" wrote:
>
> The first part of this is a grand idea. The logic of the second
part
> escapes me. I certainly don't want to be cheated out of my 202 nay
> votes! Funhog
>
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp" wrote:
>
> > Since I have 19 boxes planted, maybe I should get 19 votes.
People
> > opposed to it, would not get one vote per box, since they would
not
> > have the feature on their boxes. Since I would have the feature
> > about 15 times, I should get at least 15 votes.
>

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp" wrote:
> After voting I find I am in the minority - by a long ways.
> I do not feel it is proper for the majority to restrict the rights of
> the minority.
>



LOL- that's a good one!

Thing is this--you are not voting on whether there *will* be a log
entry feature on the Letterboxing.org site- only whether you think
there should or shouldn't in the realm of discussion ON THIS LIST
(which, btw, is completely separate from the site albeit complimentary).

Really, what happens to the letterboxing.org site is not being decided
here. That's left up to the people who actually do the work (free, I
might add) to give you enjoyment. Of course they listen to suggestions
and sometimes implement them if they feel it would be a good thing, but
this poll isn't about that.

The poll is to register your thoughts so this dead horse can finally be
buried cause it's stinking to high heaven!

There is a saying somewhere that "No matter how many times you run
over a flat cat, it is still a flat cat."

LB

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "alwayschaos"
wrote:
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "morgunjp" wrote:
> > After voting I find I am in the minority - by a long ways.
> > I do not feel it is proper for the majority to restrict the
rights of
> > the minority.
> >
>
>
>
> LOL- that's a good one!
>
> Thing is this--you are not voting on whether there *will* be a log
> entry feature on the Letterboxing.org site- only whether you think
> there should or shouldn't in the realm of discussion ON THIS LIST
> (which, btw, is completely separate from the site albeit
complimentary).
>
> Really, what happens to the letterboxing.org site is not being
decided
> here. That's left up to the people who actually do the work (free,
I
> might add) to give you enjoyment. Of course they listen to
suggestions
> and sometimes implement them if they feel it would be a good thing,
but
> this poll isn't about that.
>
> The poll is to register your thoughts so this dead horse can
finally be
> buried cause it's stinking to high heaven!
>

Are you sure? I thought it would become a dead lemur!

BL



--- Lightnin Bug wrote:

> There is a saying somewhere that "No matter how many
> times you run
> over a flat cat, it is still a flat cat."
>
> LB
>


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

I had heard there was more than one way to skin a cat but I didn't
know there are those out there who do multiple drive-overs (as opposed
to drive-bys)!

We see a lot of roadkill in PA, but I've yet to see a lemur beside the
road. Still, I keep looking...

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Lightnin Bug"
wrote:
> There is a saying somewhere that "No matter how many times you run
> over a flat cat, it is still a flat cat."
>
> LB

Sing it, sister!

I find if you put your fingers in your ears and yell "Lalalala" at the
top of your lungs people tend to move away and leave you alone.

Of course I don't know the equivelent for email.

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee
Hedge" wrote:
>
> Oh for crying out loud! You people are unbelievable.
>

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, mjpepe1@... wrote:
>
> Seems to me you are disrespecting one of our friends.
> We won't stand for this.
> I call out the legion of Pristines to defend her Ladyship's honor!
>
> Mark

Thank You Mark Dearest for the call to arms however I think you'll
find that the Prissteens have been well trained not to engage in
debate with one who's only rhetorical skills are hyperbole and ad
homonym attacks.

Hominy? Hominy? Did someone say hominy?

Oooooooooooh, I hate grits!

~~ Mosey ~~


-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Lady Hydrangea
Prisspott nee Hedge
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:01 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: re Poll on box log entries similar to Geocaching.com


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, mjpepe1@... wrote:
>
> Seems to me you are disrespecting one of our friends.
> We won't stand for this.
> I call out the legion of Pristines to defend her Ladyship's honor!
>
> Mark

Thank You Mark Dearest for the call to arms however I think you'll
find that the Prissteens have been well trained not to engage in
debate with one who's only rhetorical skills are hyperbole and ad
homonym attacks.







Yahoo! Groups Links

I hit the "delete" button repeatedly. =)

Sheba

alwayschaos wrote:
I find if you put your fingers in your ears and yell "Lalalala" at the
top of your lungs people tend to move away and leave you alone.

Of course I don't know the equivelent for email.


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

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

---> At least if there were an official place that someone could log
> comments, >
>
> -- Ryan
>
I always thought that the best place to log comments was in the
log book inside the letterbox. I enjoy reading all the comments after
I find the letterbox but I never would want to read those comments on
the clue sheet before I even began the search. To me that would be
like reading the last page of a book first, certainly would take all
the fun and mystery out of the journey.
Prairie Girl

Yes. For me at least. I didn't realize it until you said it, but that's
sort of how I look at it too.

I'm an avid reader. And letterboxing is a journey that's similar to the
journey of reading a novel. Imagine Dickens' "A Tale of Two Cities" if you
read the ending first. My favorite book. Re-reading it is great, but it's
because the same feelings return as when I first read it. But if I'd read
the ending first in the first place...........ooooh, no goose bumps. Not
good.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Nancy
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 1:45 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: re Poll on box log entries similar to Geocaching.com


I always thought that the best place to log comments was in the
log book inside the letterbox. I enjoy reading all the comments after
I find the letterbox but I never would want to read those comments on
the clue sheet before I even began the search. To me that would be
like reading the last page of a book first, certainly would take all
the fun and mystery out of the journey.
Prairie Girl






Yahoo! Groups Links

> I always thought that the best place to log comments was in the
> log book inside the letterbox.

Depends on the comment. =) I mean, you could write that the stamp is
broken in two or the logbook is water-logged and needs to be replaced,
but it's not very helpful when you're holding the pieces of stamp or
the water-soaked logbook at the time.

If you want to write about how great the weather was or wonderful the
stamp is, that can be written in the logbook.

Unless, of course, if the logbook is missing or water-logged and
unable to take messages. Logbooks are not immortal.

My point being--and I do have a point!---online comments have their
uses and it's not in any way a replacement for a traditional logbook.

-- Ryan

I agree 100% Read the comments in the log box. That's part of the fun.

STAR:W+S=-DRR


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

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rscarpen"
wrote:
>
> > I always thought that the best place to log comments was in the
> > log book inside the letterbox.
>
> Depends on the comment. =) I mean, you could write that the stamp
is
> broken in two or the logbook is water-logged and needs to be
replaced,
> but it's not very helpful when you're holding the pieces of stamp
or
> the water-soaked logbook at the time.
>

Isn't this what the "contact the placer" function is for? After
all, the placer really is the person who needs to be informed of a
damaged stamp/box/log, not the general public.

SpringChick

> Isn't this what the "contact the placer" function is for?

Assuming you actually can cantact the placer. Many people change their
e-mail address without updating their account, e-mails bounce, drop
out of letterboxing altogether, placers move or otherwise cannot
maintain a box themselves....

Contact the placer is not a solution for everything. Sometimes help
from the public at large is needed.

-- Ryan

-- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rscarpen"
wrote:
> > Isn't this what the "contact the placer" function is for?
> Assuming you actually can cantact the placer. Many people change their
> e-mail address without updating their account, e-mails bounce, drop
> out of letterboxing altogether, placers move or otherwise cannot
> maintain a box themselves....
> Contact the placer is not a solution for everything. Sometimes help
> from the public at large is needed.
>
> -- Ryan


And so they email this list and ask if anyone has seen the placer.
Usually someone puts them in touch with the placer or knows that the
placer has left the hobby. Then an adoption of the box can occur.

It works well enough.

I think the lemur is beyond dead, this isnt' a function that many will
agree is useful, can we move on to something else??

> And so they email this list and ask if anyone has seen the placer.

Which works great when there's a hundred thousand boxes in the wild
and I have to weed through a bunch of posts about a box I know nothing
about and can't do anything about.

> I think the lemur is beyond dead, this isnt' a function that many
> will agree is useful, can we move on to something else??

It's a function that people love to hate, and I'm bothered by the
irrational fear people have of it. I'll admit, I'm *this* close to
implementing it on AQ just to prove the fears unfounded--especially
when people start making unjustified comparisons to geocaching or fear
of spoilers--neither of which hold any substance so far as I can see.
The only reason I haven't implemented it is because I'm not convinced
it's really a compelling feature and I'd rather work on the compelling
ones, but I so want to prove all those nay-sayers wrong.

Like I said before, it's not as good as supporters say it is, but it's
not as bad as the opponents would lead you believe. The lemur dies
when people stop arguing with me. ;o)

-- Ryan

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rscarpen"
wrote:
>
> I'll admit, I'm *this* close to
> implementing it on AQ just to prove the fears
> unfounded--especially when people start making
> unjustified comparisons to geocaching or fear
> of spoilers--neither of which hold any substance
> so far as I can see.

I certainly can't speak for anyone else, but as for me, it has
nothing to do with fear, concerns about comparison, geocaching or
opposition to change. I don't even necessarily think it is a bad
concept in and of itself. But while I'm sure the feature has merit
and would even no-doubt serve to enhance the overall letterboxing
experience for *some* people, I simply do not see that there is
anything about such a logging feature that would support or enhance
the basic philosophy of letterboxing.

My opposition to implementing such a feature on the LbNA site is
based on the belief that the LbNA site is first and foremost a clue
distribution site and should focus on remaining true to that
mission.

I am not opposed to technical gizmos, bells and whistles or anything
else that an individual letterboxer wants to do to make the game
more to their liking and enjoyment. I am, however, opposed to
implementing these features at the joint LbNA web site. As the
primary letterboxing web site, new features that are implemented at
letterboxing.org have the effect of setting and/or changing the
principles of the game to include whatever has been added. There
are many people who wish to play this game more bare bones than
others. Implementing new features to accommodate the *others*
inadvertently changes the game and imposes on those who wish to
stick to the basics.

SpringChick
(who has been known to letterbox with a GPS and a PDA, but is proud
to be considered a troglodyte nonetheless)




> The only reason I haven't implemented it is because I'm not
convinced
> it's really a compelling feature and I'd rather work on the
compelling
> ones, but I so want to prove all those nay-sayers wrong.
>
> Like I said before, it's not as good as supporters say it is, but
it's
> not as bad as the opponents would lead you believe. The lemur dies
> when people stop arguing with me. ;o)
>
> -- Ryan
>

How hard is it to use the delete button? See, you're reaching for it now. I knew you could! =)

rscarpen wrote: > And so they email this list and ask if anyone has seen the placer.

Which works great when there's a hundred thousand boxes in the wild and I have to weed through a bunch of posts about a box I know nothing about and can't do anything about.



---------------------------------
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]

Bad lemur, bad, bad, bad lemur! Die already!!


--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rscarpen"
wrote:
> The lemur dies when people stop arguing with me. ;o)
> -- Ryan
>