To say I am disappointed is an understatement. Not since I have geocached with a local competitive group have I felt compelled to kick myself over being angry and having to chant, "It's Just a Game" as a calming mantra. Letterboxing is filled with wonderfully creative people and their ideas. When a competitive edge of having to find every box they know exists or being hell bent on being first finders is introduced, I start to become disillusioned and dismayed.
Over the past couple of years it has been an extremely rare occurrence to have someone push what I felt was a letterboxing limit. The game is played differently by each player and surprisingly it does not lead to anarchy. It makes a wonderful mix of ideas and choices. It is when I feel someone's creation has been violated that I perceive a line has been crossed. Not everyone is going to agree on when that line is crossed nor what a personal violation is so I am going to try to make it clear what I, personally, feel is crossing the line. I think it might help to check out the link to By any means necessary.
One of the first times I can remember feeling the line was crossed was when a letterboxing couple at an event took my table box from me as I was trying to clean the stamp. I had turned away to walk a few steps from a remote corner of the pavilion to wash off the inks and looked back and find the rest of the box was gone. I spent 5 minutes looking around the 70 or so people to reunite the stamp with the box and log. I tried to keep it light and said, "You are going to need this," as I returned the stamp to the box. Was it necessary to take the opened box from behind my back? I was 10 feet away, visibly washing the stamp. In my opinion, a quick, "Are you done with this one?" would have been a much more ethical way of logging this box.
Different event, same couple. One distracted me with chit chat as the other started physically rummaging through my bag. I had printed off a specific number of clues to a "day of" box I had hidden which included the price of admission attached each set of clues. The letterboxer I was speaking to had already received a copy and the rummager was absconding with copies I had set aside for others who had singed up. I caught them walking away with them and said, "No no! you folks already have these!" I was shocked, felt violated and i retrospect, they were stealing admission tickets from me. Was that necessary? The same couple later took clues we had to a limited time box off of our picnic table at our campsite. I saw them walking away with them as we returned from sharing breakfast with other letterboxers. I just shook my head and thought maybe this couple was the one bad apple in letterboxing.
Sadly, I learned that others could sometimes have the attitude of using "any means". I am all a fan of Reverse engineering in almost any way, I learn how to plant betterboxes® with the knowledge. Threatening to call in favors from other letterboxers to gain WOM clues is pushing a limit. Rules I had set up to gain the WOM clues to some unique letterboxes were being bypassed. Why? For the "find"? To show they could do it? Sure you can, but why? I had access to the clues set up a certain way for a reason. What is wrong with playing the game the way the placer intends it? I found I was disappointed by a few more letterboxers who felt it was necessary to use means of threats to accessing these clues by calling in favors.
This paragraph of my blog has been removed and amended 6/26/07 thanks to to a sincere amendment of setting things right. Do as ye will, harm ye no one.
Rooting through bags, logging WOM boxes that are limited for specific reasons, digging up clues by plugging in box titles to the end of URLs are probably a means that 90% of letterboxers never use. Of the 10% of those who do it have, 9% have the decorum to know you don't seek those boxes or at least you don't log them.
I am not sure where I am going with this. I think I just wanted it to be clear as to when I feel lines have been crossed so it is clear in the future. If my way of playing the game is too rigid in your opinions, please don't seek my letterboxes. I think there are plenty of others who can understand this point of view so I will continue enjoying letterboxing and chant my calming mantra...
"itsjustagame,itsjustagame,itsjustagame,itsjustagame,itsjustagame,itsjustagame..."
As another letterboxer who has felt violated several times lately, I applaud your expressing my feelings so eloquently.
ReplyDeleteThanks,
Jan
You said this very diplomatically I think considering the rudeness you have encountered. I am not one of those "first finder" types either, don't see this as a competition. Resourcefullness is positive, but these tactics you mention are not needed in letterboxing. I like going to gatherings were "every stamp must have a clue".
ReplyDeleteWe definitely understand this one. Two of our favorite carves have very rigid rules for clue access. Red Cap and Seven Lucky Gods. Go to AQ, look at the list of finders, and at least half of them found the boxes when they shouldn't have even had access to the clues at all. It can be frustrating, and it takes away from the people who make it a point to "earn" the clues.
ReplyDeleteIt is not just a matter of finding the clues, but a matter of enjoying the box. A good planter often plants a box and writes clues a certain way because they want the finder to enjoy not just the find, not just the carve, but also the experience and the journey.
ReplyDeleteTo bypass this often defeats the purpose of the box.
I think I know which couple you speak of, and they truly will do anything they can to get a stamp, including cheating and stealing. I have felt violated but these people in my own boxes, and they are the few people that I feel are not welcome at my events, and that is a shame.