Phyto,

I am wondering how we would all find out about boxes if they weren't listed
online. WOM only? I can't imagine I would be able to get enough WOM clues
to keep me busy. Published catalogs?

So how do people find YOUR boxes now?

Is the point of letterboxing to be a secret society? Complete with secret
handshakes?

What is the reason you took your's offline? Vandals?

Just curious.

RIFamily

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Phyto
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 10:04 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of delete?]


Hi folks
It is no secret (now) that my boxes used to be listed online. They are
no longer online. I went to great lengths nearly a year ago to delete
them all and remove them from both AQ listings and teh massive LBNA
datababble. So, with that said, I had thought by saving my membership
and deleting the boxes one by one (painful for someone with 100+boxes)
that they would be removed once and for all.

Apparently I (and some others) was wrong because if you do a quick
little search for "Unclaimed boxes" you'll find a nice little
compendium a la history of phyto boxes in Maine on the following list:
http://www.letterboxing.org/BoxFind.php and if that doesn't work, you
can surely figure out how to search by unclaimed boxes under "Placer".

Not that it really matters now since the moxie boxes are defunct and
there is no clue associated with them, but it brings up a slight issue
I have with the way in which clues are currently numbered, catalogued
and listed online. This is a fantastic example of what happens when
you give up ownership of your clues and list them online.

Does anyone else see the problem with this?
Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
online is a poor way to go.

Phyto




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.0.405 / Virus Database: 268.14.7/538 - Release Date: 11/18/2006


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

> Does anyone else see the problem with this?
> Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
> online is a poor way to go.
>
> Phyto
>


How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching for
your boxes?

Just curious as to what the problems are.

MaryE. aka MOMMO

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "tworstaggering"
wrote:
> How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

> What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching
> for your boxes?


Good questions Mary.
Many new boxers in Maine or anywhere else for that matter have
absolutely no clue that there may be a[n old] box in the same area
five feet from a new one (PRESCOTT PARK CASE IN POINT) because the
clue is not listed online. I can see the issue with that, but at the
same time it seems to me as though there is a history to letterboxing
that pre-dates all the clues online.

This is a very important concept that I think some people forget, the
fact that the folks that went before them established clues, boxes,
etc. For instance, Tom Cooch's original boxes in Maine - they were the
first listed boxes in Maine and still remain inspiration to myself and
many others. The folks that have inspired us to carve and plant are
few and far between, I can count them on one hand and I'm sure I don't
need to mention that Legerdemaine is one of them. I count myself very
lucky to have had those who went before me set a high standard for boxing.

Are Cooch boxes (in Maine) listed online anylonger? Yes and no. Just
because a clue isn't listed anywhere online does not mean it isn't a
clue, or that it isn't available, or that you can't find it without a
bit of searching. Isn't this letterboxing after all? This poses the
real question - if a clue is written but nobody actually finds it - is
it still a clue? Or what about the box last weekend that we found, if
it isn't posted online and wasn't a box, but we found the stamp, is it
still a box? Is a letterbox without a clue still a letterbox?

That aside, if the clue is posted online without a real clue to link
it to then there is a problem. This is what has happened in my case,
the old clue listing was there, but the webpage where the clue was
listed - was defunct and therefore the clues were either 1) teaser
placeholders or 2) annoyances to folks looking and seeing the listing
with nothing there.

And to answer your question about what my problem is with people
finding clues online and searching for my boxes?

Well, that's more complex. I'd prefer to keep this post objective and
helpful to those who may have encountered this problem with my boxes
and say that the clues are no longer distributed online and that is my
preferred method. If you're interested in those sorts of boxes, then
I'm happy to hear it - if you're not, there are plenty of boxes listed
online for you to choose from.

Thanks for asking.
phyto

--- Phyto wrote:
> Does anyone else see the problem with this?
> Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
> online is a poor way to go.
>
> Phyto

Perhaps others don't want to pick up their toys and run home to play
with themselves.

(*snerk* I said "play with themselves"... ;-)

Seriously, tho - if you want this game to be just between you and your
friends, have at it - WOM only is fine for you. It's kind of a shame
you feel that "old boxers" are leaving the game, saddened by the
terrible state it is now in, instead of maybe trying to improve it for
everyone.

There really isn't a lot of older boxes in my area - I guess I don't
get to play if I don't live in New England, right? And if I don't
happen to be friends with someone planting, well, too bad - I don't get
the clues, right?

I've gotten to the point where I'm planning my vacations to go to
places that have boxes planted, but I guess if everyone pulls their
on-line clues, I don't get to do that anymore, huh?

I get as irritated as the next person when I find that one of my boxes
has been mistreated / not replaced properly / gone missing, but you
know what? That's not going to prompt me to pull them. It IS going to
make me try to find better hiding places, write better clues (still
working on this - clue writing is my weak point!), and always emphasize
within the clues the importance of being stealthy and unobserved while
hunting and proper rehide-ation.

Everyone was a newbie at some point, even you. Did you enjoy those
first boxes you found? Did you ever hunt boxes using clues you got
on-line? Judging from your AQ log, I think you may have...

Apparently, one can't walk two steps off-trail in New England without
tripping on letterboxes. I doubt greatly anyone will miss your boxes.
I hope you enjoy them, all by yourself.

"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain





____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com

i will be perfectly honest and tell you that i had intentions of finding your boxes in maine. i need to do some boxing there and while my mother lives in that stae, i plan on going. how am i supposed to do that? if i can't find your clues, then i will look forward to finding someone elses clues. you suggest it yourself.

it won't make your box any safer from muggles!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com


Phyto wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "tworstaggering"
wrote:
> How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

> What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching
> for your boxes?

Good questions Mary.
Many new boxers in Maine or anywhere else for that matter have
absolutely no clue that there may be a[n old] box in the same area
five feet from a new one (PRESCOTT PARK CASE IN POINT) because the
clue is not listed online. I can see the issue with that, but at the
same time it seems to me as though there is a history to letterboxing
that pre-dates all the clues online.

This is a very important concept that I think some people forget, the
fact that the folks that went before them established clues, boxes,
etc. For instance, Tom Cooch's original boxes in Maine - they were the
first listed boxes in Maine and still remain inspiration to myself and
many others. The folks that have inspired us to carve and plant are
few and far between, I can count them on one hand and I'm sure I don't
need to mention that Legerdemaine is one of them. I count myself very
lucky to have had those who went before me set a high standard for boxing.

Are Cooch boxes (in Maine) listed online anylonger? Yes and no. Just
because a clue isn't listed anywhere online does not mean it isn't a
clue, or that it isn't available, or that you can't find it without a
bit of searching. Isn't this letterboxing after all? This poses the
real question - if a clue is written but nobody actually finds it - is
it still a clue? Or what about the box last weekend that we found, if
it isn't posted online and wasn't a box, but we found the stamp, is it
still a box? Is a letterbox without a clue still a letterbox?

That aside, if the clue is posted online without a real clue to link
it to then there is a problem. This is what has happened in my case,
the old clue listing was there, but the webpage where the clue was
listed - was defunct and therefore the clues were either 1) teaser
placeholders or 2) annoyances to folks looking and seeing the listing
with nothing there.

And to answer your question about what my problem is with people
finding clues online and searching for my boxes?

Well, that's more complex. I'd prefer to keep this post objective and
helpful to those who may have encountered this problem with my boxes
and say that the clues are no longer distributed online and that is my
preferred method. If you're interested in those sorts of boxes, then
I'm happy to hear it - if you're not, there are plenty of boxes listed
online for you to choose from.

Thanks for asking.
phyto






---------------------------------
Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

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

But sometimes "safer from muggles" isn't the problem. I've got a sneaky
hunch that muggles might not be as big a problem as a lot of folks think
they are. It hasn't turned out that way for me at least.

Since I've taken my boxes off LbNA and atlasquest and put them on my own
website, where, yes, they're out there on the internet but folks have to put
a little more work into finding them, I haven't had a single box go missing
in 2005. So, as far as *my* missing boxes go, I can't attribute them to
muggles. Because muggles would find my boxes whether they were on the
internet or not, since muggles find boxes accidentally. Thus neither my
hiding techniques nor my clues were the problem. Letterboxers were the
problem.

Something tells me Phyto isn't going to miss having your stamp in their
logbook anymore than I would. :-)


~~ Mosey ~~



-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 9:13 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]


i will be perfectly honest and tell you that i had intentions of finding
your boxes in maine. i need to do some boxing there and while my mother
lives in that stae, i plan on going. how am i supposed to do that? if i
can't find your clues, then i will look forward to finding someone elses
clues. you suggest it yourself.

it won't make your box any safer from muggles!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com


Phyto wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "tworstaggering"
wrote:
> How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

> What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching
> for your boxes?

Good questions Mary.
Many new boxers in Maine or anywhere else for that matter have
absolutely no clue that there may be a[n old] box in the same area
five feet from a new one (PRESCOTT PARK CASE IN POINT) because the
clue is not listed online. I can see the issue with that, but at the
same time it seems to me as though there is a history to letterboxing
that pre-dates all the clues online.

This is a very important concept that I think some people forget, the
fact that the folks that went before them established clues, boxes,
etc. For instance, Tom Cooch's original boxes in Maine - they were the
first listed boxes in Maine and still remain inspiration to myself and
many others. The folks that have inspired us to carve and plant are
few and far between, I can count them on one hand and I'm sure I don't
need to mention that Legerdemaine is one of them. I count myself very
lucky to have had those who went before me set a high standard for boxing.

Are Cooch boxes (in Maine) listed online anylonger? Yes and no. Just
because a clue isn't listed anywhere online does not mean it isn't a
clue, or that it isn't available, or that you can't find it without a
bit of searching. Isn't this letterboxing after all? This poses the
real question - if a clue is written but nobody actually finds it - is
it still a clue? Or what about the box last weekend that we found, if
it isn't posted online and wasn't a box, but we found the stamp, is it
still a box? Is a letterbox without a clue still a letterbox?

That aside, if the clue is posted online without a real clue to link
it to then there is a problem. This is what has happened in my case,
the old clue listing was there, but the webpage where the clue was
listed - was defunct and therefore the clues were either 1) teaser
placeholders or 2) annoyances to folks looking and seeing the listing
with nothing there.

And to answer your question about what my problem is with people
finding clues online and searching for my boxes?

Well, that's more complex. I'd prefer to keep this post objective and
helpful to those who may have encountered this problem with my boxes
and say that the clues are no longer distributed online and that is my
preferred method. If you're interested in those sorts of boxes, then
I'm happy to hear it - if you're not, there are plenty of boxes listed
online for you to choose from.

Thanks for asking.
phyto






---------------------------------
Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

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




Yahoo! Groups Links

sounds like you think i am part of the problem!
do yourself a favor, before you go blaming letterboxers for you problems, GET SOME FACTS! out of 68 boxes, i have lost 3. 1 to animals and 2 have been pulled due to vandalism. WOW! i don't blame letterboxers for these problems.

so you go to feed your cat and it doesn't eat the food. a squirrel comes along and eats all the food. do you blame the cat?

the internet is a big place, and you can get lost easily. have fun doing so.
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com



xxxxxxxx wrote:
But sometimes "safer from muggles" isn't the problem. I've got a sneaky
hunch that muggles might not be as big a problem as a lot of folks think
they are. It hasn't turned out that way for me at least.

Since I've taken my boxes off LbNA and atlasquest and put them on my own
website, where, yes, they're out there on the internet but folks have to put
a little more work into finding them, I haven't had a single box go missing
in 2005. So, as far as *my* missing boxes go, I can't attribute them to
muggles. Because muggles would find my boxes whether they were on the
internet or not, since muggles find boxes accidentally. Thus neither my
hiding techniques nor my clues were the problem. Letterboxers were the
problem.

Something tells me Phyto isn't going to miss having your stamp in their
logbook anymore than I would. :-)

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 9:13 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]

i will be perfectly honest and tell you that i had intentions of finding
your boxes in maine. i need to do some boxing there and while my mother
lives in that stae, i plan on going. how am i supposed to do that? if i
can't find your clues, then i will look forward to finding someone elses
clues. you suggest it yourself.

it won't make your box any safer from muggles!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com

Phyto wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "tworstaggering"
wrote:
> How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

> What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching
> for your boxes?

Good questions Mary.
Many new boxers in Maine or anywhere else for that matter have
absolutely no clue that there may be a[n old] box in the same area
five feet from a new one (PRESCOTT PARK CASE IN POINT) because the
clue is not listed online. I can see the issue with that, but at the
same time it seems to me as though there is a history to letterboxing
that pre-dates all the clues online.

This is a very important concept that I think some people forget, the
fact that the folks that went before them established clues, boxes,
etc. For instance, Tom Cooch's original boxes in Maine - they were the
first listed boxes in Maine and still remain inspiration to myself and
many others. The folks that have inspired us to carve and plant are
few and far between, I can count them on one hand and I'm sure I don't
need to mention that Legerdemaine is one of them. I count myself very
lucky to have had those who went before me set a high standard for boxing.

Are Cooch boxes (in Maine) listed online anylonger? Yes and no. Just
because a clue isn't listed anywhere online does not mean it isn't a
clue, or that it isn't available, or that you can't find it without a
bit of searching. Isn't this letterboxing after all? This poses the
real question - if a clue is written but nobody actually finds it - is
it still a clue? Or what about the box last weekend that we found, if
it isn't posted online and wasn't a box, but we found the stamp, is it
still a box? Is a letterbox without a clue still a letterbox?

That aside, if the clue is posted online without a real clue to link
it to then there is a problem. This is what has happened in my case,
the old clue listing was there, but the webpage where the clue was
listed - was defunct and therefore the clues were either 1) teaser
placeholders or 2) annoyances to folks looking and seeing the listing
with nothing there.

And to answer your question about what my problem is with people
finding clues online and searching for my boxes?

Well, that's more complex. I'd prefer to keep this post objective and
helpful to those who may have encountered this problem with my boxes
and say that the clues are no longer distributed online and that is my
preferred method. If you're interested in those sorts of boxes, then
I'm happy to hear it - if you're not, there are plenty of boxes listed
online for you to choose from.

Thanks for asking.
phyto

---------------------------------
Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links






---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

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

Quote: "Did you ever hunt boxes using clues you got on-line?"


Good point and I would add, do you currently hunt boxes using clues you
get on-line? If so, how fair is that?



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Roze wrote:
>
> --- Phyto phyto_me@... wrote:
> > Does anyone else see the problem with this?
> > Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
> > online is a poor way to go.
> >
> > Phyto
>
> Perhaps others don't want to pick up their toys and run home to play
> with themselves.
>
> (*snerk* I said "play with themselves"... ;-)
>
> Seriously, tho - if you want this game to be just between you and your
> friends, have at it - WOM only is fine for you. It's kind of a shame
> you feel that "old boxers" are leaving the game, saddened by the
> terrible state it is now in, instead of maybe trying to improve it for
> everyone.
>
> There really isn't a lot of older boxes in my area - I guess I don't
> get to play if I don't live in New England, right? And if I don't
> happen to be friends with someone planting, well, too bad - I don't
get
> the clues, right?
>
> I've gotten to the point where I'm planning my vacations to go to
> places that have boxes planted, but I guess if everyone pulls their
> on-line clues, I don't get to do that anymore, huh?
>
> I get as irritated as the next person when I find that one of my boxes
> has been mistreated / not replaced properly / gone missing, but you
> know what? That's not going to prompt me to pull them. It IS going
to
> make me try to find better hiding places, write better clues (still
> working on this - clue writing is my weak point!), and always
emphasize
> within the clues the importance of being stealthy and unobserved while
> hunting and proper rehide-ation.
>
> Everyone was a newbie at some point, even you. Did you enjoy those
> first boxes you found? Did you ever hunt boxes using clues you got
> on-line? Judging from your AQ log, I think you may have...
>
> Apparently, one can't walk two steps off-trail in New England without
> tripping on letterboxes. I doubt greatly anyone will miss your boxes.
> I hope you enjoy them, all by yourself.
>
> "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress.
But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________\
____________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>



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

Bad analogy David because you're not taking it far enough. I can't say
whether you're part of the problem or not. I've never letterboxed with you,
so how would I know? I've come directly behind some pretty "seasoned"
letterboxers in this area, and have found some of the more seasoned folks to
be no more respectful than some of the new boxers.

You might have felt I was talking about you specifically being a bad boxer
because I mentioned that Phyto might not miss having your stamp in their box
logbooks and that, by that, I was saying you were a boxer who was
disrespectful of boxes when out in the field. Nope. But first let's take
your analogy.

A more complete analogy might be:

Say I were to put out some well-hidden cat food. But there were also other
cats (other letterboxers) in the neighborhood and also some squirrels
(muggles). And my cat lets his fellow cats know where the food was but
nobody tells the squirrels. Every so often the food bowl is turned upside
down and the food ruined. Who did it? Squirrel or cat? Who knows? It
could have been either. The food may have been hidden in MY mind but I have
have inadvertently placed it right along a path that squirrels take
everyday. I didn't plant at camcorder at the site, so I have no way of
knowing.

Here's where ya have to go a little farther -- Say instead of allowing my
cat to tell his catbuddies, I instead took a bowl of cat food and tell my
cat that, for the time being at least, he's not to tell anyone, not even his
catbuddies, that the food is there. I tell my cat that this is going to be
a little experiment. I hide the food in exactly the same place so that takes
the placement of the food out of the equation as far as variables go. And
lo and behold, a year goes by and there are absolutely NO overturned food
dishes. Now, to me, this rather suggests that the food bowl was NOT hidden
along a common squirrel path and was not being found accidentally by
squirrels. Since if the squirrels were the ones finding it in the first
place, then they'd still be finding it, no?

What I meant by my statement was that you're just another person attempting
to "play" what I call the "Dismay Card." In other words, when Boxer A
decides to play the game a bit differently from how Boxer B would like them
to play it, Boxer B seems to think that by suddenly proclaiming that this
will then cause a problem for them, Boxer B, that Boxer A will immediately
become dismayed by that fact, fall into a deep depression over it, and
immediately seek to rectify the situation to Boxer B's satisfaction. But
there are a lot of Boxer As out there who don't care if Boxer B becomes
upset or not. What it tells me is that some of the Boxer Bs have a rather
inflated opinion of themselves by expecting the Boxer As to be dismayed,
overwrought, severely depressed. :-)

There are no facts to "get" unfortunately. There is no huge U.S. lost
letterbox database that will tell us exactly why all the letterboxes have
gone missing or been damaged that have gone missing or been damaged. So I
can't "GET SOME FACTS!" as you say, and neither can you.

I was speaking for my letterboxes, based on what I've personally found this
year, and was thinking that just possibly letterboxers are more to blame
than other letterboxers commonly want to blame them. That's all. Like I
said, "I have a sneaky hunch."

When I had my boxes on LbNA and atlasquest and when Pippi and Keith had
theirs on LbNA and atlasquest, there was a fair amount of either damaged or
missing boxes. Other placers in this area have had very similar problems.
And there was no way of knowing why. But I DID know that neither squirrels
nor muggles read LbNA or atlasquest. And when the boxes were replaced back
into the same places and the clues were kept a little more quiet, there's
been no missing or damaged boxes. For 3/4 of a year now. So muggles were
not finding the boxes accidentally because they'd still be finding them
accidentally no matter where I placed the clues, since muggles weren't using
the clues anyway.

On our regional letterboxing discussion group, generally when I post I put
my website under my signature. If someone gets curious and checks it out,
they'll find my letterbox clues. Or sometimes a letterboxer will email me,
asking where they might find my clues. Or sometimes a letterboxer will come
across my blog on blogger.com and my blog gives the url for my website.
Silent Doug's site also has a link to my little website. My clues are out
there. It's just not quite as easy to find them. Do I miss not having tons
and tons of stamps in the logbooks? It'd be the same as saying do I miss
not having to recarve stamps and replace boxes? Nope. I don't miss it at
all.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 1:50 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]


sounds like you think i am part of the problem!
do yourself a favor, before you go blaming letterboxers for you problems,
GET SOME FACTS! out of 68 boxes, i have lost 3. 1 to animals and 2 have been
pulled due to vandalism. WOW! i don't blame letterboxers for these problems.

so you go to feed your cat and it doesn't eat the food. a squirrel comes
along and eats all the food. do you blame the cat?

the internet is a big place, and you can get lost easily. have fun doing
so.
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com



xxxxxxxx wrote:
But sometimes "safer from muggles" isn't the problem. I've got a
sneaky
hunch that muggles might not be as big a problem as a lot of folks think
they are. It hasn't turned out that way for me at least.

Since I've taken my boxes off LbNA and atlasquest and put them on my own
website, where, yes, they're out there on the internet but folks have to put
a little more work into finding them, I haven't had a single box go missing
in 2005. So, as far as *my* missing boxes go, I can't attribute them to
muggles. Because muggles would find my boxes whether they were on the
internet or not, since muggles find boxes accidentally. Thus neither my
hiding techniques nor my clues were the problem. Letterboxers were the
problem.

Something tells me Phyto isn't going to miss having your stamp in their
logbook anymore than I would. :-)

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 9:13 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]

i will be perfectly honest and tell you that i had intentions of finding
your boxes in maine. i need to do some boxing there and while my mother
lives in that stae, i plan on going. how am i supposed to do that? if i
can't find your clues, then i will look forward to finding someone elses
clues. you suggest it yourself.

it won't make your box any safer from muggles!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com

Phyto wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "tworstaggering"
wrote:
> How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

> What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching
> for your boxes?

Good questions Mary.
Many new boxers in Maine or anywhere else for that matter have
absolutely no clue that there may be a[n old] box in the same area
five feet from a new one (PRESCOTT PARK CASE IN POINT) because the
clue is not listed online. I can see the issue with that, but at the
same time it seems to me as though there is a history to letterboxing
that pre-dates all the clues online.

This is a very important concept that I think some people forget, the
fact that the folks that went before them established clues, boxes,
etc. For instance, Tom Cooch's original boxes in Maine - they were the
first listed boxes in Maine and still remain inspiration to myself and
many others. The folks that have inspired us to carve and plant are
few and far between, I can count them on one hand and I'm sure I don't
need to mention that Legerdemaine is one of them. I count myself very
lucky to have had those who went before me set a high standard for boxing.

Are Cooch boxes (in Maine) listed online anylonger? Yes and no. Just
because a clue isn't listed anywhere online does not mean it isn't a
clue, or that it isn't available, or that you can't find it without a
bit of searching. Isn't this letterboxing after all? This poses the
real question - if a clue is written but nobody actually finds it - is
it still a clue? Or what about the box last weekend that we found, if
it isn't posted online and wasn't a box, but we found the stamp, is it
still a box? Is a letterbox without a clue still a letterbox?

That aside, if the clue is posted online without a real clue to link
it to then there is a problem. This is what has happened in my case,
the old clue listing was there, but the webpage where the clue was
listed - was defunct and therefore the clues were either 1) teaser
placeholders or 2) annoyances to folks looking and seeing the listing
with nothing there.

And to answer your question about what my problem is with people
finding clues online and searching for my boxes?

Well, that's more complex. I'd prefer to keep this post objective and
helpful to those who may have encountered this problem with my boxes
and say that the clues are no longer distributed online and that is my
preferred method. If you're interested in those sorts of boxes, then
I'm happy to hear it - if you're not, there are plenty of boxes listed
online for you to choose from.

Thanks for asking.
phyto

---------------------------------
Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links






---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

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




Yahoo! Groups Links

It's totally fair because it's how each placer has chosen to handle their
boxes. If a placer lists boxes on LbNA or atlasquest, they've *chosen* to
put those boxes out there for the entire world.

If we're going to play tit for tat, then why don't we include other things
as well? For example, if a person has found a box, they should have to
immediately place a box so that it could be found by the placer of the box
they just found. If a person finds 8000 boxes, they should have placed 8000
boxes.

Otherwise, it's not "fair", right?

Why should somebody, say, get to find 2000 boxes if they've only put the
work into placing 10? There are a ton of folks who find boxes but who plant
NO boxes. Should a finder have to be a card carrying member of Letterbox
Planters of America in order to be able to find boxes? Or should we say,
OK, you can find maybe 5 or 6 boxes, but after that you're banned from
finding any more boxes unless you start plant boxes?

Another tit for tat: If somebody finds drive-by boxes, are they then
obligated to place drive-by boxes? Their preference might be to take people
on long hikes to beautiful scenery, but, by your definition, for any
drive-by boxes they found, they'd also have to plant drive-by boxes
themselves.

Or the reverse. If someone chooses to plant drive-by boxes because they're
easy for them to get to and maintain, then if they take a nice long camping
and hiking vacation, they can't plan their trip around finding any boxes out
on that trip that might require long hikes because they didn't plant any
such boxes themselves. So what right do they have to go finding any boxes
that may require a 3 mile hike?

Oooooooooh, and how about pens or inkpads? If a person finds a box with a
pen or inkpad, but doesn't place pens or inkpads in the boxes they've
placed, then it's no fair that they use the pen or inkpad that's in that box
they just found, right? In the immortal words of Andy Taylor, that would be
"bad bad baaaaaaaaaaaaad", right?

And what about First Finder certificates and prizes? Some folks put them in
their boxes, some don't. But if a person chooses not to use those with
their boxes, then they'd better not take them from any boxes they might be
the First Finder of, right? If they're the First Finder, they should just
pack that box back on up and come back another day to refind it since they
have to wait until a First Finder finds it who DOES give out First Finder
certificates and prizes in their boxes.

The tit for tat game could get kind of ridiculous dontcha think?

~~ Mosey ~~





-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of ontario_cacher
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 7:59 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]


Quote: "Did you ever hunt boxes using clues you got on-line?"


Good point and I would add, do you currently hunt boxes using clues you
get on-line? If so, how fair is that?



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Roze wrote:
>
> --- Phyto phyto_me@... wrote:
> > Does anyone else see the problem with this?
> > Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
> > online is a poor way to go.
> >
> > Phyto
>
> Perhaps others don't want to pick up their toys and run home to play
> with themselves.
>
> (*snerk* I said "play with themselves"... ;-)
>
> Seriously, tho - if you want this game to be just between you and your
> friends, have at it - WOM only is fine for you. It's kind of a shame
> you feel that "old boxers" are leaving the game, saddened by the
> terrible state it is now in, instead of maybe trying to improve it for
> everyone.
>
> There really isn't a lot of older boxes in my area - I guess I don't
> get to play if I don't live in New England, right? And if I don't
> happen to be friends with someone planting, well, too bad - I don't
get
> the clues, right?
>
> I've gotten to the point where I'm planning my vacations to go to
> places that have boxes planted, but I guess if everyone pulls their
> on-line clues, I don't get to do that anymore, huh?
>
> I get as irritated as the next person when I find that one of my boxes
> has been mistreated / not replaced properly / gone missing, but you
> know what? That's not going to prompt me to pull them. It IS going
to
> make me try to find better hiding places, write better clues (still
> working on this - clue writing is my weak point!), and always
emphasize
> within the clues the importance of being stealthy and unobserved while
> hunting and proper rehide-ation.
>
> Everyone was a newbie at some point, even you. Did you enjoy those
> first boxes you found? Did you ever hunt boxes using clues you got
> on-line? Judging from your AQ log, I think you may have...
>
> Apparently, one can't walk two steps off-trail in New England without
> tripping on letterboxes. I doubt greatly anyone will miss your boxes.
> I hope you enjoy them, all by yourself.
>
> "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress.
But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________\
____________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>



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




Yahoo! Groups Links

no your right, my cat does tell his cat buddies about the food and they raid the bowl!
or is it the squirrels? oh man i don't know. with no facts, your attempt to make your boxes safer is unjustified. but that is just my opinion and i am fully aware of that. it just sounds like you have some pretty high standards for those who look for your boxes. what if those direspectful letterboxers you are afriad of, go to your website? look for your boxes! and then, oh man, your box goes missing. you wouldn't have fixed your problem!

maybe wal-mart should put lock on thier doors and put the combination to the locks on thier website. that would solve the shoplifting problems there!

you don't know many other letterboxers either! don't be a playa hater!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com



xxxxxxxx wrote:
Bad analogy David because you're not taking it far enough. I can't say
whether you're part of the problem or not. I've never letterboxed with you,
so how would I know? I've come directly behind some pretty "seasoned"
letterboxers in this area, and have found some of the more seasoned folks to
be no more respectful than some of the new boxers.

You might have felt I was talking about you specifically being a bad boxer
because I mentioned that Phyto might not miss having your stamp in their box
logbooks and that, by that, I was saying you were a boxer who was
disrespectful of boxes when out in the field. Nope. But first let's take
your analogy.

A more complete analogy might be:

Say I were to put out some well-hidden cat food. But there were also other
cats (other letterboxers) in the neighborhood and also some squirrels
(muggles). And my cat lets his fellow cats know where the food was but
nobody tells the squirrels. Every so often the food bowl is turned upside
down and the food ruined. Who did it? Squirrel or cat? Who knows? It
could have been either. The food may have been hidden in MY mind but I have
have inadvertently placed it right along a path that squirrels take
everyday. I didn't plant at camcorder at the site, so I have no way of
knowing.

Here's where ya have to go a little farther -- Say instead of allowing my
cat to tell his catbuddies, I instead took a bowl of cat food and tell my
cat that, for the time being at least, he's not to tell anyone, not even his
catbuddies, that the food is there. I tell my cat that this is going to be
a little experiment. I hide the food in exactly the same place so that takes
the placement of the food out of the equation as far as variables go. And
lo and behold, a year goes by and there are absolutely NO overturned food
dishes. Now, to me, this rather suggests that the food bowl was NOT hidden
along a common squirrel path and was not being found accidentally by
squirrels. Since if the squirrels were the ones finding it in the first
place, then they'd still be finding it, no?

What I meant by my statement was that you're just another person attempting
to "play" what I call the "Dismay Card." In other words, when Boxer A
decides to play the game a bit differently from how Boxer B would like them
to play it, Boxer B seems to think that by suddenly proclaiming that this
will then cause a problem for them, Boxer B, that Boxer A will immediately
become dismayed by that fact, fall into a deep depression over it, and
immediately seek to rectify the situation to Boxer B's satisfaction. But
there are a lot of Boxer As out there who don't care if Boxer B becomes
upset or not. What it tells me is that some of the Boxer Bs have a rather
inflated opinion of themselves by expecting the Boxer As to be dismayed,
overwrought, severely depressed. :-)

There are no facts to "get" unfortunately. There is no huge U.S. lost
letterbox database that will tell us exactly why all the letterboxes have
gone missing or been damaged that have gone missing or been damaged. So I
can't "GET SOME FACTS!" as you say, and neither can you.

I was speaking for my letterboxes, based on what I've personally found this
year, and was thinking that just possibly letterboxers are more to blame
than other letterboxers commonly want to blame them. That's all. Like I
said, "I have a sneaky hunch."

When I had my boxes on LbNA and atlasquest and when Pippi and Keith had
theirs on LbNA and atlasquest, there was a fair amount of either damaged or
missing boxes. Other placers in this area have had very similar problems.
And there was no way of knowing why. But I DID know that neither squirrels
nor muggles read LbNA or atlasquest. And when the boxes were replaced back
into the same places and the clues were kept a little more quiet, there's
been no missing or damaged boxes. For 3/4 of a year now. So muggles were
not finding the boxes accidentally because they'd still be finding them
accidentally no matter where I placed the clues, since muggles weren't using
the clues anyway.

On our regional letterboxing discussion group, generally when I post I put
my website under my signature. If someone gets curious and checks it out,
they'll find my letterbox clues. Or sometimes a letterboxer will email me,
asking where they might find my clues. Or sometimes a letterboxer will come
across my blog on blogger.com and my blog gives the url for my website.
Silent Doug's site also has a link to my little website. My clues are out
there. It's just not quite as easy to find them. Do I miss not having tons
and tons of stamps in the logbooks? It'd be the same as saying do I miss
not having to recarve stamps and replace boxes? Nope. I don't miss it at
all.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 1:50 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]

sounds like you think i am part of the problem!
do yourself a favor, before you go blaming letterboxers for you problems,
GET SOME FACTS! out of 68 boxes, i have lost 3. 1 to animals and 2 have been
pulled due to vandalism. WOW! i don't blame letterboxers for these problems.

so you go to feed your cat and it doesn't eat the food. a squirrel comes
along and eats all the food. do you blame the cat?

the internet is a big place, and you can get lost easily. have fun doing
so.
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com

xxxxxxxx wrote:
But sometimes "safer from muggles" isn't the problem. I've got a
sneaky
hunch that muggles might not be as big a problem as a lot of folks think
they are. It hasn't turned out that way for me at least.

Since I've taken my boxes off LbNA and atlasquest and put them on my own
website, where, yes, they're out there on the internet but folks have to put
a little more work into finding them, I haven't had a single box go missing
in 2005. So, as far as *my* missing boxes go, I can't attribute them to
muggles. Because muggles would find my boxes whether they were on the
internet or not, since muggles find boxes accidentally. Thus neither my
hiding techniques nor my clues were the problem. Letterboxers were the
problem.

Something tells me Phyto isn't going to miss having your stamp in their
logbook anymore than I would. :-)

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 9:13 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]

i will be perfectly honest and tell you that i had intentions of finding
your boxes in maine. i need to do some boxing there and while my mother
lives in that stae, i plan on going. how am i supposed to do that? if i
can't find your clues, then i will look forward to finding someone elses
clues. you suggest it yourself.

it won't make your box any safer from muggles!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com

Phyto wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "tworstaggering"
wrote:
> How, exactly, do new folk find any boxes if no one lists them on-line?

> What was the problem with people knowing your clues and searching
> for your boxes?

Good questions Mary.
Many new boxers in Maine or anywhere else for that matter have
absolutely no clue that there may be a[n old] box in the same area
five feet from a new one (PRESCOTT PARK CASE IN POINT) because the
clue is not listed online. I can see the issue with that, but at the
same time it seems to me as though there is a history to letterboxing
that pre-dates all the clues online.

This is a very important concept that I think some people forget, the
fact that the folks that went before them established clues, boxes,
etc. For instance, Tom Cooch's original boxes in Maine - they were the
first listed boxes in Maine and still remain inspiration to myself and
many others. The folks that have inspired us to carve and plant are
few and far between, I can count them on one hand and I'm sure I don't
need to mention that Legerdemaine is one of them. I count myself very
lucky to have had those who went before me set a high standard for boxing.

Are Cooch boxes (in Maine) listed online anylonger? Yes and no. Just
because a clue isn't listed anywhere online does not mean it isn't a
clue, or that it isn't available, or that you can't find it without a
bit of searching. Isn't this letterboxing after all? This poses the
real question - if a clue is written but nobody actually finds it - is
it still a clue? Or what about the box last weekend that we found, if
it isn't posted online and wasn't a box, but we found the stamp, is it
still a box? Is a letterbox without a clue still a letterbox?

That aside, if the clue is posted online without a real clue to link
it to then there is a problem. This is what has happened in my case,
the old clue listing was there, but the webpage where the clue was
listed - was defunct and therefore the clues were either 1) teaser
placeholders or 2) annoyances to folks looking and seeing the listing
with nothing there.

And to answer your question about what my problem is with people
finding clues online and searching for my boxes?

Well, that's more complex. I'd prefer to keep this post objective and
helpful to those who may have encountered this problem with my boxes
and say that the clues are no longer distributed online and that is my
preferred method. If you're interested in those sorts of boxes, then
I'm happy to hear it - if you're not, there are plenty of boxes listed
online for you to choose from.

Thanks for asking.
phyto

---------------------------------
Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links






---------------------------------
Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.

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

Just thought I'd add some wise words from Rick Simpson.....

"... we all put a lot of time and energy into our boxes, and we
should realize that once you plant a box, you loose control. It's
no longer a personal keepsake. It's not on a shelf in your house.
Your box takes on a life of it's own. It's constantly interacting with
the elements, animals and other boxers. Things can and will go
wrong, but things also go wonderfully right most of the time.

The whole LB community is based on a gift of sharing with strangers,
which inherently has risk. There is no reward without the risk."



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

The same as I told rozebud, it's a question of priorities. I don't have the
time to recarve stamps and replace boxes. Or, I should say, I don't
*choose* to have the time. The same as Roze doesn't have the time to hit
the internet in search of boxes other than on the two major sites. Roze has
the time. It's just not how Roze *chooses* to use Roze's time. I have
other things I prefer to do with the time I can give to letterboxing. Just
because my priorities aren't the same as yours or aren't the same as Roze's
doesn't make my priorities any less valid.

If people do find the website and do harm the boxes, then they find the
website and harm the boxes. But so far, so good. The people who *have*
taken the time to find my clues have been great about the handling of the
boxes. I have no complaints to date. 2005 has been a much better year than
2004 or 2003. As long as it's working, why should I change it?

And I wouldn't say I have "high standards" at all. I'd say I have very
normal "standards."

Is it a high standard to expect folks to seal the baggies after they're
finished and they're packing everything up?

Is it a high standard to expect folks to put tops tightly back on boxes, and
make sure those tops are rightside up?

Is it a high standard to expect folks to rehide the box so that it can't
been seen by someone passing by?

Is it a high standard to expect folks to double-bag the logbook if I state
in the clues that I'd really appreciate it if they did so and I
double-bagged the logbook in the first place, so it's not like the baggies
aren't there to use to do it?

Is it a high standard to expect folks not to scream and shout "I FOUND IT! I
FOUND IT!" if they find a letterbox while muggles are in the near vicinity
and will wonder just what the heck is going on and might want to go check it
out after the letterboxers have left?

I think those are pretty normal standards. I don't think I'm setting the
bar very high at all. If those are "high standards" to you, then you seem
to be saying the letterboxers in general in this country are a pretty
mediocre lot. If those are "high standards" then I guess I'm happy having
high standards.

No, David, frankly I'm not out to "know many other letterboxers." I began
letterboxing because I love stamps, I love art, I love to carve even tho I'm
not too good at it, and the walks and hikes are an absolutely fantastic
stress reducer (which is why I rarely do drive-by boxes -- nothing wrong
with drive-bys but for health reasons I prefer the longer hikes). I do
probably 95 percent of my boxing alone, if not 99 percent. That's how I
want it. If I find a great spot, I can stop and do some meditation, stop
and do some yoga, stop and do some birdwatching, stop and take a swim in the
quarry, etc. In other words, I can "mosey" (hence my trail name).

For the most part, letterboxing is not a social activity for me. I'm a
union official and a good part of my job these last two years or so has been
putting together cases for either arbitration hearings or court dates.
Every so often I actually get to go back and deliver some mail, but that's
becoming pretty rare these days. A lot of what I do is high stress and I
love the letterboxing to reduce that stress. I recently had a bout of
tests and stuff run to see what shape my cardiovascular system is in because
my internist was concerned because of the stress I'm usually under.
Cardiologist told me when we were finally all finished that the heart in
this 55 year old body is as good as or better than the hearts in most 20
year old bodies. I owe a huge thanks to letterboxing for that. I certainly
don't owe it to the M&Ms that are my major food group. :-)

I also kind of *like* not being able to put many names with faces. For some
folks, they love to put names to faces. And that's great. That's what they
like to do. I like the mystery of *not* necessarily knowing who someone is.
We had a finder around here by the trailname of "Midnight Visitor" who, for
the better part of a couple of years, was the first finder on practically
every box planted in this area. I don't know if anybody knows who this
person was. They planted one box, were the first finder or close to it for
all the boxes planted for a couple of years, and now he/she seems to have
completely disappeared. (Unless they've moved and are now active in another
part of the country.) I try to keep an eye on the one box they planted
because it's a great box and I don't know if they're still active or not. I
certainly wouldn't change anything about the box, that's definitely not my
place to do that, but if the baggies get worn out or the box doesn't get
replaced in the right spot, I check out the box every so often and fix it.
And I like the mystery of having absolutely no idea who this person is/was.
If I passed 'em on the street, I wouldn't know them and they wouldn't know
me. I'm fine with that.

I don't "hate" anybody. "Hate" is an awfully strong word. But then in
another post of yours you mention your ex-wife in a way that tells me that
"hate" might possibly be a well-used member of your vocabulary. I hope not.
But it's not in mine. Much as I seriously dislike the guy, I don't even
"hate" George Bush. And I can't think of anybody I dislike more than Bush
right now. :-)

As far as your Walmart comment, like I said, the way I'm doing it has worked
for me this year. So I'm fine with it. I'm sure that Walmart uses the
techniques and practices that work for *them*. I can't imagine Walmart
doing much of anything that didn't work for them. :-) And if you truly
*aren't* upset or throwing any sort of temper tantrum, if you truly are
totally 100 percent happy with all the boxes you're finding that are listed
on LbNA and atlasquest, I can't see what your problem is with how either
phyto or me, or anyone else for that matter, lists their boxes. If you're
happy as a "bug in a rug" as you say in another post, then why the sniping?
I would think you'd be totally willing to live and let live, make the
choices that work for you, and allow other folks to make the choices that
work for *them*.

~~ Mosey ~~




-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 11:16 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]


no your right, my cat does tell his cat buddies about the food and they raid
the bowl!
or is it the squirrels? oh man i don't know. with no facts, your attempt
to make your boxes safer is unjustified. but that is just my opinion and i
am fully aware of that. it just sounds like you have some pretty high
standards for those who look for your boxes. what if those direspectful
letterboxers you are afriad of, go to your website? look for your boxes! and
then, oh man, your box goes missing. you wouldn't have fixed your problem!

maybe wal-mart should put lock on thier doors and put the combination to
the locks on thier website. that would solve the shoplifting problems there!

you don't know many other letterboxers either! don't be a playa hater!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com

thank you!

i say no more because it was said best by someone else
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com


ontario_cacher wrote:
Just thought I'd add some wise words from Rick Simpson.....

"... we all put a lot of time and energy into our boxes, and we
should realize that once you plant a box, you loose control. It's
no longer a personal keepsake. It's not on a shelf in your house.
Your box takes on a life of it's own. It's constantly interacting with
the elements, animals and other boxers. Things can and will go
wrong, but things also go wonderfully right most of the time.

The whole LB community is based on a gift of sharing with strangers,
which inherently has risk. There is no reward without the risk."

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






---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

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

i just dont understand why you would change something when you had no proof that letterboxers were the cause of your boxes going missing.

your gonna do it your way anyway. the reason i care about what your doing, is the way in which you did it. you need proof before blaming other letterboxers. you should have just kept it to your self.

i already said to much after saying i am done. new topic please.
maybe you should have just contacted john or ryan about it.

you have fun your way and i'll have fun mine!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com


xxxxxxxx wrote:
The same as I told rozebud, it's a question of priorities. I don't have the
time to recarve stamps and replace boxes. Or, I should say, I don't
*choose* to have the time. The same as Roze doesn't have the time to hit
the internet in search of boxes other than on the two major sites. Roze has
the time. It's just not how Roze *chooses* to use Roze's time. I have
other things I prefer to do with the time I can give to letterboxing. Just
because my priorities aren't the same as yours or aren't the same as Roze's
doesn't make my priorities any less valid.

If people do find the website and do harm the boxes, then they find the
website and harm the boxes. But so far, so good. The people who *have*
taken the time to find my clues have been great about the handling of the
boxes. I have no complaints to date. 2005 has been a much better year than
2004 or 2003. As long as it's working, why should I change it?

And I wouldn't say I have "high standards" at all. I'd say I have very
normal "standards."

Is it a high standard to expect folks to seal the baggies after they're
finished and they're packing everything up?

Is it a high standard to expect folks to put tops tightly back on boxes, and
make sure those tops are rightside up?

Is it a high standard to expect folks to rehide the box so that it can't
been seen by someone passing by?

Is it a high standard to expect folks to double-bag the logbook if I state
in the clues that I'd really appreciate it if they did so and I
double-bagged the logbook in the first place, so it's not like the baggies
aren't there to use to do it?

Is it a high standard to expect folks not to scream and shout "I FOUND IT! I
FOUND IT!" if they find a letterbox while muggles are in the near vicinity
and will wonder just what the heck is going on and might want to go check it
out after the letterboxers have left?

I think those are pretty normal standards. I don't think I'm setting the
bar very high at all. If those are "high standards" to you, then you seem
to be saying the letterboxers in general in this country are a pretty
mediocre lot. If those are "high standards" then I guess I'm happy having
high standards.

No, David, frankly I'm not out to "know many other letterboxers." I began
letterboxing because I love stamps, I love art, I love to carve even tho I'm
not too good at it, and the walks and hikes are an absolutely fantastic
stress reducer (which is why I rarely do drive-by boxes -- nothing wrong
with drive-bys but for health reasons I prefer the longer hikes). I do
probably 95 percent of my boxing alone, if not 99 percent. That's how I
want it. If I find a great spot, I can stop and do some meditation, stop
and do some yoga, stop and do some birdwatching, stop and take a swim in the
quarry, etc. In other words, I can "mosey" (hence my trail name).

For the most part, letterboxing is not a social activity for me. I'm a
union official and a good part of my job these last two years or so has been
putting together cases for either arbitration hearings or court dates.
Every so often I actually get to go back and deliver some mail, but that's
becoming pretty rare these days. A lot of what I do is high stress and I
love the letterboxing to reduce that stress. I recently had a bout of
tests and stuff run to see what shape my cardiovascular system is in because
my internist was concerned because of the stress I'm usually under.
Cardiologist told me when we were finally all finished that the heart in
this 55 year old body is as good as or better than the hearts in most 20
year old bodies. I owe a huge thanks to letterboxing for that. I certainly
don't owe it to the M&Ms that are my major food group. :-)

I also kind of *like* not being able to put many names with faces. For some
folks, they love to put names to faces. And that's great. That's what they
like to do. I like the mystery of *not* necessarily knowing who someone is.
We had a finder around here by the trailname of "Midnight Visitor" who, for
the better part of a couple of years, was the first finder on practically
every box planted in this area. I don't know if anybody knows who this
person was. They planted one box, were the first finder or close to it for
all the boxes planted for a couple of years, and now he/she seems to have
completely disappeared. (Unless they've moved and are now active in another
part of the country.) I try to keep an eye on the one box they planted
because it's a great box and I don't know if they're still active or not. I
certainly wouldn't change anything about the box, that's definitely not my
place to do that, but if the baggies get worn out or the box doesn't get
replaced in the right spot, I check out the box every so often and fix it.
And I like the mystery of having absolutely no idea who this person is/was.
If I passed 'em on the street, I wouldn't know them and they wouldn't know
me. I'm fine with that.

I don't "hate" anybody. "Hate" is an awfully strong word. But then in
another post of yours you mention your ex-wife in a way that tells me that
"hate" might possibly be a well-used member of your vocabulary. I hope not.
But it's not in mine. Much as I seriously dislike the guy, I don't even
"hate" George Bush. And I can't think of anybody I dislike more than Bush
right now. :-)

As far as your Walmart comment, like I said, the way I'm doing it has worked
for me this year. So I'm fine with it. I'm sure that Walmart uses the
techniques and practices that work for *them*. I can't imagine Walmart
doing much of anything that didn't work for them. :-) And if you truly
*aren't* upset or throwing any sort of temper tantrum, if you truly are
totally 100 percent happy with all the boxes you're finding that are listed
on LbNA and atlasquest, I can't see what your problem is with how either
phyto or me, or anyone else for that matter, lists their boxes. If you're
happy as a "bug in a rug" as you say in another post, then why the sniping?
I would think you'd be totally willing to live and let live, make the
choices that work for you, and allow other folks to make the choices that
work for *them*.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 11:16 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]

no your right, my cat does tell his cat buddies about the food and they raid
the bowl!
or is it the squirrels? oh man i don't know. with no facts, your attempt
to make your boxes safer is unjustified. but that is just my opinion and i
am fully aware of that. it just sounds like you have some pretty high
standards for those who look for your boxes. what if those direspectful
letterboxers you are afriad of, go to your website? look for your boxes! and
then, oh man, your box goes missing. you wouldn't have fixed your problem!

maybe wal-mart should put lock on thier doors and put the combination to
the locks on thier website. that would solve the shoplifting problems there!

you don't know many other letterboxers either! don't be a playa hater!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com






---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

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

David, how many times do I have to tell ya? None of my boxes have gone
missing or have been damaged since I changed where I post the clues. How
much more evidence do you need to tell you that it was very very likely
neither muggles nor animals that were damaging the boxes or causing the
boxes to go missing.

If it was animals or if it was muggles, it would still be happening because
it wouldn't matter WHERE I posted the clues for animals or muggles to cause
a problem. It has not happened ONCE this year since I changed my system.
Nine months I've gone so far with no boxes missing or damaged. Yet the only
thing that's changed is where I post the clues. The location of the boxes
hasn't changed. The clues themselves haven't changed. Nothing has changed
except where I post the clues. I don't know how much simpler I can put it.

I should have just kept it to myself? I see. Now you're not only
attempting to make rules on where a placer should post their clues but also
what a person can or can't say in a post to the list?

And why would I have contacted John or Ryan? It's certainly not their
problem. I didn't even originate the thread. I was simply responding to
replies you made to the original poster. Replies that I felt were off-base.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 6:39 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]


i just dont understand why you would change something when you had no proof
that letterboxers were the cause of your boxes going missing.

your gonna do it your way anyway. the reason i care about what your doing,
is the way in which you did it. you need proof before blaming other
letterboxers. you should have just kept it to your self.

i already said to much after saying i am done. new topic please.
maybe you should have just contacted john or ryan about it.

you have fun your way and i'll have fun mine!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com

your right and i'm wrong!
may everyone remember that.

never claimed to be a rule maker!
everyone remember that too!

i plan on waking up in the morning and moving on.
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com


xxxxxxxx wrote:
David, how many times do I have to tell ya? None of my boxes have gone
missing or have been damaged since I changed where I post the clues. How
much more evidence do you need to tell you that it was very very likely
neither muggles nor animals that were damaging the boxes or causing the
boxes to go missing.

If it was animals or if it was muggles, it would still be happening because
it wouldn't matter WHERE I posted the clues for animals or muggles to cause
a problem. It has not happened ONCE this year since I changed my system.
Nine months I've gone so far with no boxes missing or damaged. Yet the only
thing that's changed is where I post the clues. The location of the boxes
hasn't changed. The clues themselves haven't changed. Nothing has changed
except where I post the clues. I don't know how much simpler I can put it.

I should have just kept it to myself? I see. Now you're not only
attempting to make rules on where a placer should post their clues but also
what a person can or can't say in a post to the list?

And why would I have contacted John or Ryan? It's certainly not their
problem. I didn't even originate the thread. I was simply responding to
replies you made to the original poster. Replies that I felt were off-base.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of david baril
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 6:39 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]

i just dont understand why you would change something when you had no proof
that letterboxers were the cause of your boxes going missing.

your gonna do it your way anyway. the reason i care about what your doing,
is the way in which you did it. you need proof before blaming other
letterboxers. you should have just kept it to your self.

i already said to much after saying i am done. new topic please.
maybe you should have just contacted john or ryan about it.

you have fun your way and i'll have fun mine!
david (team new hampshire)
http://teamnewhampshire.blogspot.com






---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

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

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
Some people started it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "RIFamily" wrote:
>
> Phyto,
>
> I am wondering how we would all find out about boxes if they weren't
listed
> online. WOM only? I can't imagine I would be able to get enough
WOM clues
> to keep me busy. Published catalogs?
>
> So how do people find YOUR boxes now?
>
> Is the point of letterboxing to be a secret society? Complete with
secret
> handshakes?
>
> What is the reason you took your's offline? Vandals?
>
> Just curious.
>
> RIFamily
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Phyto
> Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 10:04 AM
> To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [LbNA] Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]
>
>
> Hi folks
> It is no secret (now) that my boxes used to be listed online. They are
> no longer online. I went to great lengths nearly a year ago to delete
> them all and remove them from both AQ listings and teh massive LBNA
> datababble. So, with that said, I had thought by saving my membership
> and deleting the boxes one by one (painful for someone with 100+boxes)
> that they would be removed once and for all.
>
> Apparently I (and some others) was wrong because if you do a quick
> little search for "Unclaimed boxes" you'll find a nice little
> compendium a la history of phyto boxes in Maine on the following list:
> http://www.letterboxing.org/BoxFind.php and if that doesn't work, you
> can surely figure out how to search by unclaimed boxes under "Placer".
>
> Not that it really matters now since the moxie boxes are defunct and
> there is no clue associated with them, but it brings up a slight issue
> I have with the way in which clues are currently numbered, catalogued
> and listed online. This is a fantastic example of what happens when
> you give up ownership of your clues and list them online.
>
> Does anyone else see the problem with this?
> Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
> online is a poor way to go.
>
> Phyto
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.0.405 / Virus Database: 268.14.7/538 - Release Date:
11/18/2006
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "gerania93"
wrote:
>
> This is the song that doesn't end,
> Yes, it goes on and on, my friend
> Some people started it not knowing what it was,
> And they'll continue singing it forever just because

Hee-hee - cute! I'm glad you can't post the actual tune, or I know it
would be stuck in my head forever...

Still doesn't explain the reasoning behind this statement:

> > Really, it's too bad that others can't realize that listing clues
> > online is a poor way to go.

All those poor, unknowning others.

Sheesh, get over it already.

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "rozedud.rm" wrote:
> Still doesn't explain the reasoning behind this statement:

NOT cute. I....know the tune....aaarrgggghh....make it go awaaaay.....

"rozebud.rm" wrote: --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "gerania93"
wrote:
>
> This is the song that doesn't end,




Hee-hee - cute! I'm glad you can't post the actual tune, or I know it
would be stuck in my head forever...




---------------------------------
Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.

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

This should take care of the problem for you, 865......

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Suzanne Coe wrote:
>
> NOT cute. I....know the tune....aaarrgggghh....make it go awaaaay.....
>
> "rozebud.rm" wrote: --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com,
"gerania93"
> wrote:
> >
> > This is the song that doesn't end,
>
>
>
>
> Hee-hee - cute! I'm glad you can't post the actual tune, or I know it
> would be stuck in my head forever...
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things
done faster.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

No, i'ts 867-5...D'oh! Now I've got THAT damn song stcuk in my head!

mizscarlet731 wrote: This should take care of the problem for you, 865......

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Suzanne Coe wrote:
>
> NOT cute. I....know the tune....aaarrgggghh....make it go awaaaay.....
>
> "rozebud.rm" wrote: --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com,
"gerania93"
> wrote:
> >
> > This is the song that doesn't end,
>
>
>
>
> Hee-hee - cute! I'm glad you can't post the actual tune, or I know it
> would be stuck in my head forever...
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things
done faster.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>






---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

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

Nope, 867-5309. A song played at the wife's HS reunion this past
weekend.

Enjoy,

LB

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "mizscarlet731"
wrote:
>
> This should take care of the problem for you, 865......
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Suzanne Coe wrote:
> >
> > NOT cute. I....know the tune....aaarrgggghh....make it go
awaaaay.....
> >
> > "rozebud.rm" wrote: --- In letterbox-
usa@yahoogroups.com,
> "gerania93"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the song that doesn't end,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hee-hee - cute! I'm glad you can't post the actual tune, or I
know it
> > would be stuck in my head forever...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful
email and get things
> done faster.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

How about the mah na ma nah song instead?



_____

From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Lightnin Bug
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 1:21 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Attn: Webmasters [Unclaimed boxes as a result of
delete?]



Nope, 867-5309. A song played at the wife's HS reunion this past
weekend.

Enjoy,

LB

--- In letterbox-usa@
yahoogroups.com, "mizscarlet731"
wrote:
>
> This should take care of the problem for you, 865......
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@
yahoogroups.com, Suzanne Coe wrote:
> >
> > NOT cute. I....know the tune....aaarrgggghh....make it go
awaaaay.....
> >
> > "rozebud.rm" wrote: --- In letterbox-
usa@yahoogroups. com,
> "gerania93"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the song that doesn't end,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hee-hee - cute! I'm glad you can't post the actual tune, or I
know it
> > would be stuck in my head forever...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful
email and get things
> done faster.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>





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