...BOOMERANG NOTES....

A few days ago, I suggested that a change be made to the web site.

Please read/re-read the suggestion and then post your idea/suggestions here in this forum.

Here is what I originally wrote:

I don't understand why a note can't be re-entered if it has unassistedly found its way back to someone who has previously possessed it.

I believe there are essentially two types of "returns" possible: 1) a tracker enters a note, marks it, and then "launches" it…and then somewhere/somehow along the line that particular note finds its way back to the tracker who originally launched it…and 2) a similar thing happens when a note generates a hit and then finds its way back to the tracker who entered the hit.

I suggest that the site be revised to allow recording both types of situations.

I feel that neither should affect the tracker's CMT score.

I would further suggest that the above two scenarios be named 1) a boomerang and 2) a boomerang2.

A few days later, I wrote a response to a fellow tracker who had responded to an idea I had written about.

Here is part of what I had written: I would suggest that the site be altered in such a way that the boomerang effect would get recorded in the "hit history" of the particular note but in such a way that future trackers who hit that note could quickly and easily "see" that the note had previously boomeranged.

It seems to me that the boomerang effect is, at least, as interesting as some of the scenarios that the site is already recording. (How, for example, could some of the entries for the 2004 $20 note EYG8123 or the 2002 $5 note HNN5890 be justifiably worth recording?)

I suppose there's always the chance that someone will consciously falsify his/her own records…but, I suspect, there's some degree of that, in some form or other, going on any way. (Who could create a system so fool-proof that there was absolutely no way to "get around" it?)

I don't see recording the boomerang effect much different to a note being entered multiple times in the same community. (Let's face it, that COULD [and please understand that I am not implying that I think that that is going on] simply be some buddies passing a note around among themselves; couldn't any, so-called, "hit" be created by buddies in different communities?)

If we're working on the honour system (and, it seems to me, that that's what this site operates on) I'm probably less likely to consciously create a boomerang effect than I am to consciously create some fake "hits" (since, as suggested, the boomerang effect wouldn't affect the CMT score).

I believe that the suggested changes can be made; I would guess that they are more likely to be made sooner rather than later if they have significant support. I further believe that the best way to show support for the idea is to post your support for it here in this forum. I challenge you to post any further ideas/suggestions and your support or opposition here.

Respectfully submitted,
Roger eroom29

I would like to see this suggestion come to fruition.

I like it as well.

well, just to re-iterate what has been gently suggested regarding this by long-term members.

it matters not one whit what a group or even a majority of people thing should or should not be included. this is not a democracy. it is somewhat more of a benevolent dictatorship. and while all are welcome to offer opinions to what might be included – it only matters what ONE person thinks and/or wants to include in the code. dr has taken many suggestions to heart and included many things in the past but the fact of the matter is that this site has not changed in appearance, code or administration for over 2 years and this would suggest that it may be very slow to change in the future.

while it is really great that people are still enthused and want things to evolve, the likelihood of that happening is remote at best. so, sometimes, it is best to just throw a wet blanket on that enthusiasm and speak the simple truths. you have made your suggestion – having a bunch of people also saying it's a good idea is just not very worthwhile.

If enough people support it and dr thinks it is worthwhile it may happen, but if there is no support from the members dr may not even consider it…Just my two cents…

" having a bunch of people also saying it's a good idea is just not very worthwhile."
I think enthusiasm is more worthwhile than throwing wet blankets.

Sorry to be another wet blanket guy, but the reason why DR wrote this into the program in the first place was to stop some rampant abuse that popped up early on in the history of this site. There is also some systems in place that monitor entries for other indications of abuse. These, understandably, are known only to DR (and maybe a couple of confidants). These exist to make sure everyone plays nice and doesn't get any funny ideas. Persons caught by these programs are warned freindly-like to knock it off, and if further abuses become apparent, they can be terminated, not-so-freindly like. Anyways, just a bit of history to help with perspective here- this rule exists to protect us from ourselves, er, sort of, and it's unlikely to change in the near future, I think…

CS opined:
I think enthusiasm is more worthwhile than throwing wet blankets.

your mileage may vary. :) i am, by nature, an optimist. i couldn't have taught for as long as i have if i was not. however, reality must occasionally be considered. as i said before – nice thought, but jumping on a bandwagon is pointless. said otherwise, "wishing don't make it so".