Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 19991 Location: West and Southwest London
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:45 pm Post subject:
OK we're all getting confused.
Normal subscribers see their OWN submissions as a square with crosshairs.
Other normal subscribers do not see anyone else's.
HOWEVER, because there is an additional ACTUAL download of un-verified mobile sites (the "pMobiles"), THEY become real icons that everyone sees, once they have been processed.
Joined: May 31, 2007 Posts: 17 Location: Ayrshire, Scotland
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:27 pm Post subject:
The purpose of my original post was two fold :
1. To raise awareness of the change in speed limit on he section of the A77 covered by SPECS cameras
2. To ask the question about how this change and the effect it has on the SPECS cameras is best reported to PGPS World so that the camera sites can be updated.
The post was to make sure the camera sites were updated for the benefit of all. What a pity the post has been hijacked over what can and cannot be seen by those who submit new camera sites, and even those who dont allegedly see the sites but submit anyway to try and get a life membership!
The database is only as accurate as it is because people take two minutes to report a camera site or update a current one. If your the first with a new site that is verified then you get a life membership. Even if your not the first, we all 'benefit' from the work of others so that the database is accurate. It seems that people only notify of new cameras to get a life membership rather than trying to keep the database accurate.
The cost of membership for such an accurate database that is updated monthly is, in my opinion, very fair. I dont want to start (another) big debate about this issue as it has been well covered elsewhere in the forums.
This post and associated threads are, in my view, complete. The question has been answered and I have e-mailed with the details of the cameras involved on the A77 so that the database is updated in due course.
The purpose of my original post was two fold :
1. To raise awareness of the change in speed limit on he section of the A77 covered by SPECS cameras
2. To ask the question about how this change and the effect it has on the SPECS cameras is best reported to PGPS World so that the camera sites can be updated.
The post was to make sure the camera sites were updated for the benefit of all. What a pity the post has been hijacked over what can and cannot be seen by those who submit new camera sites, and even those who dont allegedly see the sites but submit anyway to try and get a life membership!
The database is only as accurate as it is because people take two minutes to report a camera site or update a current one. If your the first with a new site that is verified then you get a life membership. Even if your not the first, we all 'benefit' from the work of others so that the database is accurate. It seems that people only notify of new cameras to get a life membership rather than trying to keep the database accurate.
The cost of membership for such an accurate database that is updated monthly is, in my opinion, very fair. I dont want to start (another) big debate about this issue as it has been well covered elsewhere in the forums.
This post and associated threads are, in my view, complete. The question has been answered and I have e-mailed with the details of the cameras involved on the A77 so that the database is updated in due course.
BJA416,
I'm gutted... absolutely gutted with your post.
You see, your Original post, was probably one of the best worded, succinct, informative, and helpful posts on this site that I have seen since I joined.
Indeed, I now wish I had said so, as I was minded to, when I read it last night (ney, the night before that should be, as it is now in the wee small hours of Monday).
How sad, so very sad therefore, that you choose to ruin all the great respect I held for you, by bandying about words like "thread hijacked" and so on, and making out that we are mercenary, only interested in getting a freebie etc.
At ZERO, ZILCH, NOUGHT, point did this thread EVER get HIJACKED...
It meandered, wandered, and drifted slightly, absolutely!
But never even really went fully OT if the truth be told.
So I am furious you accuse people of having HIJACKED it.
The thread took a fairly loose turn, off in a slightly different, but still somewhat related direction.
And indeed it wasn't even ME that had it do so, it was the other poster that started asking about the icons on the submission map (the common theme here being talking about submissions, and first inclusions, as that is EXACTLY what your post was about).
After that two VERIFIERS replied, before I even came in, and I then only did so mainly to explain what the person who had it take a slight meander, actually meant.
The sad thing about all of this however...?
Was that even then, after all of that, none of it did ANYTHING to detract from the GREAT post you first put up. It never watered it down, diluted, or confused it in ANY way, as as you say, the later posts became a slightly separate subject, albeit, with a common underlying theme.
So there was ZERO need for you to even say half of what you did, as not only was it totally untrue - no one HIJACKED your thread - certainly not Any_p or M8TJT, or Gerry_C who are all experienced and well respected on here, but moreover, none of it took anything away from your GREAT post.
So I am saddened that such a GREAT post was spoilt, NOT by anyone hijacking your excellent thread, but in fact, by YOU yourself, posting the reply you did.
Again though, that's not to fan flames. It's just simple reality, as I say again, your ORIGINAL post, is STILL one of, if not THE, very best post I have seen on here since joining.
Your follow up was not, er, quite as good mind you.
Joined: May 31, 2007 Posts: 17 Location: Ayrshire, Scotland
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:32 am Post subject:
And indeed it wasn't even ME that had it do so, it was the other poster that started asking about the icons on the submission map (the common theme here being talking about submissions, and first inclusions, as that is EXACTLY what your post was about).
The purpose of my original post was two fold :
1. To raise awareness of the change in speed limit on he section of the A77 covered by SPECS cameras
2. To ask the question about how this change and the effect it has on the SPECS cameras is best reported to PGPS World so that the camera sites can be updated.
My submission was for the purpose as detailed above. The two cameras that only I can see were submitted by me a number of weeks ago to ensure that the database is as accurate as possible.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and mine is, that the post went off on a different direction that what I intended.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14902 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:30 am Post subject:
BJA416 wrote:
This post and associated threads are, in my view, complete. The question has been answered and I have e-mailed with the details of the cameras involved on the A77 so that the database is updated in due course.
I quite agree and without reading the subsequent pages which I have to Page Down several times on a 19" screen - Click - Locked!! _________________ Dennis
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
