Randy, I agree with your statements about the clues.

I feel that if I write clues and people find the box without extra
hints/help, that proves the clues are understandable. The fact that
SOME people can't find the box does not make MY clues suspect.
If the case was that ALL people could not find my boxes using the
clues, then I would suspect my clue writing ability.

I voluntarily decided to participate in letterboxing, and take all
the risks and rewards that come with it.
If I should run across a clue or set of clues that I can not solve,
then maybe I am not in the right frame of mind to be looking for that
box today, I'll try again another time, or not, it's my choice. I
certainly don't blame the clue writer!

Let's all try to remember that this activity is for each individual's
enjoyment, however that individual interprets enjoyment.

Isn't there and old saying something about "let he who is without
guilt cast the first stone".

Who on this list qualifies??



> Now, regarding pulling my clues -- this is about two things, the
> implicit belief that if the hunter gets lost or has some other
> misfortune, or causes damage to the park, the clue is somehow to
> blame, or that the writer owes the hunter some sort of fun.
>
> This is not the case, but I sensed belief in this sentiment
> in the NJ incident when Todd briefly pulled some of his clues,
> and sense this sentiment now. I guess I feel my clues are like
> GNU software, take them for what they are worth, and use them if
> you want, but they don't owe anyone anything. I spend alot of
> time on them and they are a labor of love, if you like them great,
> if you ignore them fine, but there is simply no place for repeatedly
> criticizing clues after the criticism has been acknowledged, or
> expecting the clues to provide some level of enjoyment or be written
> in such a way that the probability of misinterpretation is below
some
> percentage or that they will be immune to changes in the landscape
> is below some percentage, or that they be checked on some number
> of times per year.
>
> Todd chose to revise his clues. I do not feel my clues would take
> to the recommended revisions and retain their appeal to those
> who enjoy them, including myself, nor do I feel revision would
> eliminate this problem in principle -- if the clue is 'walk outside
> and look in your mailbox, and make sure you take the cobblestone
> walkway from your door to the mailbox, and make sure it is the
> red mailbox adjacent to the Japanese maple', the problem remains,
> in principle.
>
> Rather than debate this, as there is a real frustrating sense that
> the community is not interested in dealing with heavy issues
> (from me, anyway), and rather than continue to risk that the
hunters
> expectations are different than my assumptions of them (despite
> mountains of verbiage about this issue on my web site and numerous
> explanations on-list), I chose the only rational response available.
>
> I will be exploring alternatives to allow the clues to remain on-
line
> for all to view, as sample/historical work, but those alternatives
> will cost money, so I'm not sure this will happen.
>
> Cheers