On 6/1/07, BullDawg wrote:

Can anybody support the agruement via hard facts, that newpaper articles
lead to bad boxers, and more lost boxes?...

***************Just out of curiosity, what would you consider to be "hard
fact"? I've never been to do maintenance on a box, only to find it missing
and in its place a note saying "I never woulda known about letterboxing and
had the opportunity to badly rehide your box if it hadn't been for that
article in the ..."

Have I ever noticed an upsurge in activity after an article that promises an
afternoon of fun and adventure without mention or regard to the fact that
another person, another individual is on the planting end of that box that's
guaranteed to be there and in exactly the spot it says in the clues, and
which is supposed to be marked with neon lights so that even a blind person
can find it? The same article that lists the names of the boxes in a given
area and the clue sites where they can be found, so that even a moron can
look them up? And then, have I ever gone out, after answering endless inane
questions by email to make certain a box is there, only to find that a very
stable box, one that has remained quietly in its proper place for two years
of regular, if not plentiful, finders has suddenly sprouted legs and moved,
and not only that, but it wasn't buttoned up properly AND it wasn't
recovered well, but thankfully so or I never would've found it in its NEW
place? Why yes, I have. Do I attribute my discovery to the news article?
Yes, I do. Could it have been the result of other things? Possibly, but
the timing is suspicious, and when it recurs in the same timeframe? Come on
now. It's the article.

Okay, sarcasm aside, I can't think of anything that would constitute hard
evidence, but I think most of us can make a correlation between publicity
and resulting poor activity. And most of us really aren't so selfish as to
hoard our boxes and only hope certain people find them, people who
discovered letterboxing in a way acceptable to ourselves. And I suspect
you'll give that much...

Interestingly, I share your feelings about bad Girl Scout leadership that
leads to bad Girl Scout boxing (and it IS a leader issue, not a girl
issue). And I think the source of that problem is the same problem that is
at the root of poor journalism with respect to letterboxing. Bear in mind
- I consider a few GS leaders to be my personal friends and they are both
great letterboxers and great leaders, but THEY also teach their girls LB'ing
properly. HOWEVER, since the advent of the Hi Tech Hide and Seek activity
badge, many GS leaders take it upon themselves to teach something they know
nothing of (and this bugs me in Cub Scouting too, which is where I donate my
time - I get a little peeved by computer techs trying to teaching forestry
instead of calling in a forester). They teach letterboxing and geocaching
as an activity to while away an afternoon, much like going to the movie or
going skating. They don't take into account that it is an interactive
interest that thrives on give and take, that changes a bit every time a box
is found or planted, and that calls for respect of property as well as other
people. They don't realize that someone had to make an investment in that
little bit of tupperware before it could provide entertainment for their
girls. And THAT is also why I think so much journalism is also bad for
letterboxing - journalists who don't take the time to understand the people
side of letterboxing, who just want to write about a cool and little
known game their reader can take down and play with and put back on the
shelf if it happens to break or if it doesn't suit them.
--
Barefoot Lucy
"It's not about footwear, it's about philosophy"


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

"And THAT is also why I think so much journalism is also bad for
letterboxing - journalists who don't take the time to understand the people
side of letterboxing, who just want to write about a cool and little
known game their reader can take down and play with and put back on the
shelf if it happens to break or if it doesn't suit them."

Hence why I have asked for input from people who do the activity outside
myself. I've been letterboxing for a few years and have had a wonderful time
doing so. I figured reaching out to others for insight would lend itself to
a better article and though I do not have someone to interview yet, I have
gotten excellent feedback from the resulting conversation. Your comments
will help shape this into what I believe to be a good article and I will do
my best ti emphasize the etiquette behind letterboxing as well as the
activity itself.



On 6/1/07, Barefoot Lucy wrote:
>
> On 6/1/07, BullDawg >
> wrote:
>
> Can anybody support the agruement via hard facts, that newpaper articles
> lead to bad boxers, and more lost boxes?...
>
> ***************Just out of curiosity, what would you consider to be "hard
> fact"? I've never been to do maintenance on a box, only to find it missing
> and in its place a note saying "I never woulda known about letterboxing
> and
> had the opportunity to badly rehide your box if it hadn't been for that
> article in the ..."
>
> Have I ever noticed an upsurge in activity after an article that promises
> an
> afternoon of fun and adventure without mention or regard to the fact that
> another person, another individual is on the planting end of that box
> that's
> guaranteed to be there and in exactly the spot it says in the clues, and
> which is supposed to be marked with neon lights so that even a blind
> person
> can find it? The same article that lists the names of the boxes in a given
> area and the clue sites where they can be found, so that even a moron can
> look them up? And then, have I ever gone out, after answering endless
> inane
> questions by email to make certain a box is there, only to find that a
> very
> stable box, one that has remained quietly in its proper place for two
> years
> of regular, if not plentiful, finders has suddenly sprouted legs and
> moved,
> and not only that, but it wasn't buttoned up properly AND it wasn't
> recovered well, but thankfully so or I never would've found it in its NEW
> place? Why yes, I have. Do I attribute my discovery to the news article?
> Yes, I do. Could it have been the result of other things? Possibly, but
> the timing is suspicious, and when it recurs in the same timeframe? Come
> on
> now. It's the article.
>
> Okay, sarcasm aside, I can't think of anything that would constitute hard
> evidence, but I think most of us can make a correlation between publicity
> and resulting poor activity. And most of us really aren't so selfish as to
> hoard our boxes and only hope certain people find them, people who
> discovered letterboxing in a way acceptable to ourselves. And I suspect
> you'll give that much...
>
> Interestingly, I share your feelings about bad Girl Scout leadership that
> leads to bad Girl Scout boxing (and it IS a leader issue, not a girl
> issue). And I think the source of that problem is the same problem that is
> at the root of poor journalism with respect to letterboxing. Bear in mind
> - I consider a few GS leaders to be my personal friends and they are both
> great letterboxers and great leaders, but THEY also teach their girls
> LB'ing
> properly. HOWEVER, since the advent of the Hi Tech Hide and Seek activity
> badge, many GS leaders take it upon themselves to teach something they
> know
> nothing of (and this bugs me in Cub Scouting too, which is where I donate
> my
> time - I get a little peeved by computer techs trying to teaching forestry
> instead of calling in a forester). They teach letterboxing and geocaching
> as an activity to while away an afternoon, much like going to the movie or
> going skating. They don't take into account that it is an interactive
> interest that thrives on give and take, that changes a bit every time a
> box
> is found or planted, and that calls for respect of property as well as
> other
> people. They don't realize that someone had to make an investment in that
> little bit of tupperware before it could provide entertainment for their
> girls. And THAT is also why I think so much journalism is also bad for
> letterboxing - journalists who don't take the time to understand the
> people
> side of letterboxing, who just want to write about a cool and little
> known game their reader can take down and play with and put back on the
> shelf if it happens to break or if it doesn't suit them.
> --
> Barefoot Lucy
> "It's not about footwear, it's about philosophy"
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


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

nice reply..the debate goes on...

is there an article that we can read that you might be refering to?..or was that complete sarcasm?

Great side, and if that has happened to you via a post-newpaper article, you are justified to feel so....I just dont understand those that dont want others to know of this hobby, for no reason than they want it to be a secret or "ours"...after all we were all led to it somehow.

Another reason I did the interview with the newspaper, was they had contacted 4-5 boxers in the area, and I thought I might be able to protect it best.....If someone says, "no"..another newer boxer will say "YES" to the interviewer.

Barefoot Lucy wrote:
On 6/1/07, BullDawg wrote:

Can anybody support the agruement via hard facts, that newpaper articles
lead to bad boxers, and more lost boxes?...

***************Just out of curiosity, what would you consider to be "hard
fact"? I've never been to do maintenance on a box, only to find it missing
and in its place a note saying "I never woulda known about letterboxing and
had the opportunity to badly rehide your box if it hadn't been for that
article in the ..."

Have I ever noticed an upsurge in activity after an article that promises an
afternoon of fun and adventure without mention or regard to the fact that
another person, another individual is on the planting end of that box that's
guaranteed to be there and in exactly the spot it says in the clues, and
which is supposed to be marked with neon lights so that even a blind person
can find it? The same article that lists the names of the boxes in a given
area and the clue sites where they can be found, so that even a moron can
look them up? And then, have I ever gone out, after answering endless inane
questions by email to make certain a box is there, only to find that a very
stable box, one that has remained quietly in its proper place for two years
of regular, if not plentiful, finders has suddenly sprouted legs and moved,
and not only that, but it wasn't buttoned up properly AND it wasn't
recovered well, but thankfully so or I never would've found it in its NEW
place? Why yes, I have. Do I attribute my discovery to the news article?
Yes, I do. Could it have been the result of other things? Possibly, but
the timing is suspicious, and when it recurs in the same timeframe? Come on
now. It's the article.

Okay, sarcasm aside, I can't think of anything that would constitute hard
evidence, but I think most of us can make a correlation between publicity
and resulting poor activity. And most of us really aren't so selfish as to
hoard our boxes and only hope certain people find them, people who
discovered letterboxing in a way acceptable to ourselves. And I suspect
you'll give that much...

Interestingly, I share your feelings about bad Girl Scout leadership that
leads to bad Girl Scout boxing (and it IS a leader issue, not a girl
issue). And I think the source of that problem is the same problem that is
at the root of poor journalism with respect to letterboxing. Bear in mind
- I consider a few GS leaders to be my personal friends and they are both
great letterboxers and great leaders, but THEY also teach their girls LB'ing
properly. HOWEVER, since the advent of the Hi Tech Hide and Seek activity
badge, many GS leaders take it upon themselves to teach something they know
nothing of (and this bugs me in Cub Scouting too, which is where I donate my
time - I get a little peeved by computer techs trying to teaching forestry
instead of calling in a forester). They teach letterboxing and geocaching
as an activity to while away an afternoon, much like going to the movie or
going skating. They don't take into account that it is an interactive
interest that thrives on give and take, that changes a bit every time a box
is found or planted, and that calls for respect of property as well as other
people. They don't realize that someone had to make an investment in that
little bit of tupperware before it could provide entertainment for their
girls. And THAT is also why I think so much journalism is also bad for
letterboxing - journalists who don't take the time to understand the people
side of letterboxing, who just want to write about a cool and little
known game their reader can take down and play with and put back on the
shelf if it happens to break or if it doesn't suit them.
--
Barefoot Lucy
"It's not about footwear, it's about philosophy"

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









---------------------------------
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.

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

On 6/1/07, Barefoot Lucy wrote:

...and which is supposed to be marked with neon lights so that even a blind
person can find it? The same article that lists the names of the boxes in a
given area and the clue sites where they can be found, so that even a moron
can look them up?


********************Let me just clarify, I have nothing against blind people
boxing (and in fact, I know a dear blind lady that letterboxes with her
daughter-BUT she doesn't expect neon lights). However, I AM most definitely
opposed to morons finding their way into the game! :^)
--
Barefoot Lucy
"It's not about footwear, it's about philosophy"


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

The question that I would have, since you're a journalist who's already a
letterboxer.......

Is your editor going to give you editorial control of the article?

Or can the article get hacked to death once you submit it? What you want to
stress in the article and how your editor/publisher sees it might be two
different things.

~~ Mosey ~~

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Forgotten Frequency
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 6:07 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Looking for Letterboxers in CT (Meriden,
Cheshire, Southington, Wallingford)


"And THAT is also why I think so much journalism is also bad for
letterboxing - journalists who don't take the time to understand the people
side of letterboxing, who just want to write about a cool and little
known game their reader can take down and play with and put back on the
shelf if it happens to break or if it doesn't suit them."

Hence why I have asked for input from people who do the activity outside
myself. I've been letterboxing for a few years and have had a wonderful time
doing so. I figured reaching out to others for insight would lend itself to
a better article and though I do not have someone to interview yet, I have
gotten excellent feedback from the resulting conversation. Your comments
will help shape this into what I believe to be a good article and I will do
my best ti emphasize the etiquette behind letterboxing as well as the
activity itself.

While I was being somewhat sarcastic, the sarcasm was, unfortunately, based
in experience.

Let me give you a little background. When I started boxing nearly 4 years
ago, there were 7 boxes within about an hour and a half of me, and most of
those were within 30 minutes of each other. It didn't take me long to find
them all. There wasn't another boxer that I knew of then or that I've heard
of since who was active at that time within 100 miles in any direction of me
and my family. We sat around and WAITED, and started planting, and attended
a gathering, and that was how we got our boxing fix.

Shortly before the second annual Texas gathering, a reporter emailed me and
the other two placers of boxes in my county, Silver Eagle and Baby Bear (who
both live quite a distance away), and asked to do an article. Desperate for
some company around here, I wanted to do the article. SE and BB and I were
in touch with each other and we agreed what would be best said to the
reporter and what we should emphasize. The reporter did a pretty decent job
really, and she managed to emphasize the stealth factor, the people side of
it, and did her article without giving away the farm. All in all, decent
publicity. The net result was about four bites - and all but one of those
gave up almost immediately when they couldn't find a box or two (which were
there, by the way, because I made a sweep of the whole county right before
the article to verify that everything was in good order). The one that
stuck for a few months wound up planting several boxes, then jumping out and
leaving them all orphaned and in the wild and those boxes are STILL a
problem around here.

In the meantime, the Texas talk list kicked off and Silver Eagle and I
co-moderate it together. We began to notice large influxes of joiners every
time there was an article somewhere. And it wasn't long after each article
that established boxers started seeing signs of degradation in their boxes.
Still though, we were getting some quality boxers and boxes coming in. And
more articles would come along, and more problems, and yes, more quality
boxers too. A cycle.

Now Texas has always been very welcoming to new boxers - we have a great
list and a wonderful group of folks and we've greeted newbies with great
enthusiasm and worked really hard to get them up and running quickly.
However, it's gotten to where every time a new article comes along (and
realize, I'm talking about any print article, not just local paper), we all
cringe and hold on tight, wondering which boxes will disappear with this
round. What I find interesting is that with each one, we get more traffic
and more problems, but we still only glean about the same number of good
boxers state-wide. We still love our newbies, but it gets a little wearing
paying the price for getting them.

I am not saying that all letterboxing publicity is bad. I think all of it
has a downside, even the percentage of publicity that is good. I AM saying
that as letterboxers, if we choose to participate in publicity, we have a
responsibility to the entire community to demand a certain level of quality
from the journalists that cover us and we need to be prepared to take the
weight of the consequences squarely on our shoulders.

Would I personally choose to participate in a news article again? Possibly,
but highly unlikely. First of all, it didn't glean anything for us in the
long run, and secondly, had I realized then the two-edged sword that
publicity can be, I wouldn't have thought it to be worth the price. And I
think we did things right with our reporter - we agreed together what to say
and what information to give and what direction we wanted the article to go,
and we insisted she agree to our terms before we talked to her. AND she had
done her homework and hunted us down indvidually, so she had demonstrated a
little umph in getting the story and she proved herself to be a responsible
journalist. But if I did it again, it would be with a critical eye on the
bigger picture, even beyond my little corner of letterboxingland.
--
Barefoot Lucy
"It's not about footwear, it's about philosophy"


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

Evidence?

In the first week after the Time Magazine article we lost 10% of our
letterboxes. That was a total of 15 letterboxes. We lost 3 boxes in the
6 months prior to the article. Coincidence maybe?

Don

I also entered the addiction via a family fun magazine article. Our family took it to heart, our carvings have improved and we have left a trail of pretty decent boxes to be found. We in turn introduced our parents who are now on about 100 finds. We find, plant and pick up litter all according to rules and regulations. If not for the article we would have never found this amazing hobby. While it may lead to random boxers who find 1 or 2 and then quit, the articles also lead to many who improve and add to this amazing hobby. Can you ever control all the bad or even all the good that comes out of articles. No. You can make it only WOM but then, how do you regenerate and revitalize and get new boxes if no one new comes in. I understand both sides having planted and found but I am grateful for the article as this has given my family a whole new way to come together. The B Hunters

BullDawg wrote: my comment about girl scouts was not meant to make you mad..not the point. It was not a jab at Girl Scouts at all..they do great stuff. It was more a fact that my experiences on trails, I saw that as a bigger issue for me personally than articles in newspaper. It was evidence for me to get my conclusion.

Can anybody support the agruement via hard facts, that newpaper articles lead to bad boxers, and more lost boxes?...I have had plenty of lost boxes, before any articles were out in my area...and most likely a result of bad rehides, animals, or nature. I have had well reped boxers report to me they they accidently took the stamp home, or accidently ripped the stamp in 2 via their kids...Neither were newbies. Are there facts to support this?...or is the uproar about newspaper articles, just not wanting so share a hobby?..if so, i dont understand that mentality.

I apologize if you took my post on the Girl Scouts thw wrong way...They were just not good leaders.

Tammy wrote:
I rarely get involved in these debates but I resent the remark about girl
scouts. If a troop does something wrong I would blame the leader. The
girls do what they are led to believe is ok and if that is not ok then they
were not taught properly. I am a leader. My girls are going into third
grade next year. I have not taken them boxing yet because I decided to wait
until they are older. When I decide to take them I will first do a workshop
to teach them what is expected of letterboxers. If I didn't do that and
they did something you feel is wrong it would be my fault not the troop and
not girl scouts in general.

I'll get off my soap box now.......

Tammy
RHM

-----Original Message-----
From: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of BullDawg
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 3:10 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Re: Looking for Letterboxers in CT (Meriden, Cheshire,
Southington, Wallingford)

interesting debate......It's odd that most boxers on this list basically
oppose letterboxing being spread in print, but only to their friends. Even
more odd, is the fact that an article in Smithsonian Magazine brought it
here to the USA, and others I know that love the hobby and are great for it
read about it in Family Fun magazine, or other publications. So that kinda
baffles me. Seems selfish to wanna keep something all to yourself...but I
understand that folks worry about their boxes.

I was interviewed for and article here in VA last year, and was sure to
mention to the interviewer, concerns that we may have and was given editing
rights. I included a clue to a box in it for the newbies to find. In it
was take home info about the hobby, and our concern. It was a tempoary box
and was pulled after 6 weeks. It only has 2 visitors and it was by boxers
that had been boxing for over 3 years and I knew. This was for me to guage
this kinda debate that newbies via articles in print are bad....My
conclusion: not true.

Personally i think that Girl Scout Troops (not all...!) are worse for the
sport. I have found 2 boxes from girl scouts. One was a rusty tin can,
basically litter...with no stamp in it, and the other was a black trash
bag.....

I have an open mind and always keep in mind that we are adults, acting
like kids, looking for stamps...nothing more....have fun.

Hikers and Hounds wrote:
Cyclonic,

I know Sue and she is anything but. She drove all the way down to CT to
attend the first gather I ever hosted and was just lovely to meet. She even
stayed and hung out with us at the campground afterwards and you were there.
And even though I have participated in a very limited amount of publicity, I
happen to agree with her here. If that makes me a hypocrite so be it. I can
handle it,

H&H

Nathan Brown wrote:
Sue wrote:
> <<< > is an opportunity to spread the hobby even more. >>>>
>
> Jesse, frankly many of us DON'T want Letterboxing spread around in
> this way, so please don't add another article that attracts
> "infatuation" to the hobby. The majority of these folks who read the
> articles don't bother to *really* learn about Letterboxing before
> jumping in to go on this exciting-sounding "treasure hunt", often
> jeopardizing our 'boxes. It is a game of stealth, and they usually
> just don't get that...
> Please reconsider, and if you like the hobby so much, just introduce
> it to a few of your friends who you know will also enjoy and respect
> it. Word of mouth is the only way Letterboxing should be "spread" in
> my opinion!
> sojourner
>
>

What a conceded, stuck up snob you are.

Basically your whole post comes down to you not wanting "those kinds of
people." At least that is how I read it. But of course what am I to expect
from someone who sends poster boards to gatherings telling people how they
should play the game?

On the one hand you folks complain that articles are written without ever
getting information from letterboxers themselves, but on the other hand,
when asked, you berate the reporter and tell them they should not write the
article, that it will attract the wrong type of people. Well, you are going
to have some give and take in anything, and I think these articles have
attracted lots of the right kinds of people too.

--
Nathan Brown

AKA Cyclonic
Penncoasters.com

The Insensitivity rolls on...

Real men don't do virtual letterboxes.

---------------------------------
Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.

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

"Its not about finding the box, but finding the location the box has taken
you too."

---------------------------------
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

"Its not about finding the box, but finding the location the box has taken you too."

---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.

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






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