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: Aug 21, 2005 Posts: 1761 Location: Kent, England
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:39 pm Post subject:
MaFt wrote:
All this talk of suing for damages is just a bit silly, don't you think?
Who said anything about suing? As I said originally the decision has already been made that removes the risk of legal problems. _________________ Peter
HTC Sensation
Sygic GPS for Europe (No more TT "support"!)
Copilot for USA
Bury CC9060 bluetooth car kit & Brodit mount
I'm growing more to the 1 year award to be honest. I think it's a fairer way to award people.
The persistent submitters will basically still get a free lifetime sub as they will keep submitting cameras year after year. Those who submit a single camera will be rewarded for a year, after which they will no longer be 'helping' us as such so then they revert to paying.
Is it fair for us to keep rewarding someone who only submitted once and no longer 'helps out' with the database? The reward IS for helping keep the database fresh, after all...
MaFt
This is by far and away the most sensible suggestion I can see - the most difficult consideration how to administer it with regards to the current PayPal recurring payments. Would be much easier if the payments worked like a Direct Debit where it is only claimed if due rather than being sent automatically like a standing order.
I am an infrequent poster, but have secured FLM and (to my immense satisfaction) posted a second new camera recently
Perhaps a simple rule such as "If you post a new camera during your current subscription period (whether paid or free) which is validated as a new camera your next subscription period will renew for £0." This would result in regular contributors being rewarded, and those happy to simply pay for the subscription (which I should say is really good value at £19.99/year) carry on as they are.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14902 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:46 pm Post subject:
DavidIr wrote:
MaFt wrote:
I'm growing more to the 1 year award to be honest. I think it's a fairer way to award people.
The persistent submitters will basically still get a free lifetime sub as they will keep submitting cameras year after year. Those who submit a single camera will be rewarded for a year, after which they will no longer be 'helping' us as such so then they revert to paying.
Is it fair for us to keep rewarding someone who only submitted once and no longer 'helps out' with the database? The reward IS for helping keep the database fresh, after all...
MaFt
This is by far and away the most sensible suggestion I can see - the most difficult consideration how to administer it with regards to the current PayPal recurring payments. Would be much easier if the payments worked like a Direct Debit where it is only claimed if due rather than being sent automatically like a standing order.
Completely agree. And it does require that existing Lifers relinquish it - with which I completely agree too. I imagine MaFt will have a better idea than any of us as to how to go about the payment difficulties. _________________ Dennis
Joined: Jan 10, 2008 Posts: 56 Location: Telford, West Midlands
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:09 pm Post subject:
Now that I've reached 75 my general interest in things which "last a lifetime" has ebbed somewhat.
I would caution against removing your scheme entirely, because people love getting somat for nowt.
I feel that if you were to give a discount of 50% of annual membership to camera spotters they would appreciate the saving they were making and your accounts wouldn't be in dire straights any time soon.
I used to wonder at the insanity of giving so much away for so little effort and concluded that Pocket GPS must have other sources of income untouched by the generosity of its masters. Apparently not. Pity.
And it does require that existing Lifers relinquish it - with which I completely agree too.
No it doesn't...?! I think existing lifers should keep it.
MaFt
Surprisingly I think in this case MaFt and Darren have got this one wrong (sorry guys but my opinion!). I am a "lifer" and do think that if you proposed reducing the "life" to (for example) 2 years you would find that the vast majority would not even comment on it, let alone complain. You could even be generous and only reduce to 5 years.
If at the same time you introduced the new rewards of next year's renewal being free if you submit then a large number of existing lifers would continue not to pay. I guess you should be able to see that from your internal database numbers of lifers who continue to post submissions.
I really want to see PGPSW continue, and if that means I have to start paying again so be it.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:35 pm Post subject: Retain lifetime member award-- Already agreed
To Quote Darren.....To prevent this thread going downhill any further, we've had a discussion and whatever happens with the lifer award for future subscribers, those who have been awarded to date will not lose their life member award. That is agreed and will not change.
We are considering an option that would allow existing life members to make a voluntary payment as a contribution. Those life members who did so would have their donation recognised with a new rank to recognise their support.
As stated, this has already been decided by the staff - it seems sensible. So lets accept this and move on!!!
Yes, legal reasons. Surely you've considered that ?
Pray do enlighten us.
Sorry Darren, I've had a rummage in my free legal advice bag and it's empty
peterc10 wrote:
I am afraid that that is not the law of damages. Their whole point is, as far as possible, to put the parties back in the position they would have been had the repudiation or breach not happened. Prospective loss, i.e. on damages for sums of money payable in the future, is a legitimate head of claim for damages. In assessing the future loss the courts will take into account the contingencies of life and other uncertainties affecting the future. In some cases damages will be assessed based not upon what has been paid or will be paid in the future, but in the reduction in the value of the goods or services bought.
peterc10 has touched upon most of the salient points but in light of your statement below, those points are moot.
"To prevent this thread going downhill any further, we've had a discussion and whatever happens with the lifer award for future subscribers, those who have been awarded to date will not lose their life member award. That is agreed and will not change"
MaFt wrote:
All this talk of suing for damages is just a bit silly, don't you think?
All it takes is for a few - one or two - members to disagree with that sentiment and the costs of attempting to overturn legal precedent would kill the site or - in reality - in the face of strong legal advice to fold and liquidate the company, would kill the reputation of the site owner.
Serious business, being in business. Edited to encompass the bigger picture.
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:56 pm Post subject:
DavidIr wrote:
Surprisingly I think in this case MaFt and Darren have got this one wrong (sorry guys but my opinion!). I am a "lifer" and do think that if you proposed reducing the "life" to (for example) 2 years you would find that the vast majority would not even comment on it, let alone complain. You could even be generous and only reduce to 5 years.
And as witnessed by the the past page or so, there are plenty who think that such a move would be sufficient justification to 'go legal' and fight it _________________ Darren Griffin
as you can see from the past page or so, there are plenty who would think that such a move was sufficient justification to 'go legal' and fight it, or make threats to do so.
What surprises me the most is , it would appear from your Elizabethan "Pray do enlighten us" comment, that you hadn't considered the statutory reality, let alone the possibility of consumers exercising their rights.
Consumers exercising their rights is quite different to posters 'going legal'
Advising you, pro bono, of pitfalls, isn't threatening, it's helping.
I'm sorry and I know we are getting way off from the point of the original question, but the main thing that I would hate most is if people who once achieved lifetime membership for reporting their first camera and then never bothered reporting any others.
The crux of the case is that I don't think the genuine spotter will be the ones complaining but the one of spotter merchants who would have lost their membership "IF" PGPSW had gone down the rout of revoking it and starting afresh.
That annoys me far more than staff travelling around the world working their hind quarters off to bring us the latest news.
Now, what was the original question, maybe a trip back to the first post is called for!!
So if a member spots a camera he's be better of not reporting it then, that way he/she doesn't get tagged as a one time spotter, get real, we don't all wander around the country looking for cameras, some of us actually watch the road, try to not speed and just obey the traffic laws.
I spotted one mobile camera, it took ages for it to be verified, was grateful to receive the FLM, but maybe I should go find a tree and hang myself for not getting out and finding more, what a load.
Darren has stated that we will keep our existing FLM, and is looking for a way to move forward and reward spotters in a less costly way, any other comment is off topic and best and argumentative at worst.
Thinking about it, to reward new spotters with a free years membership is not really a change as it will still cost the site the subs for a year per spotter, so no better off, and as the subs for a year isn't a fortune for most giving a different reward which has any real meaning is not going to be easy, I'm glad I'm not the one saddled with coming up with a solution.
There appears to be too many holier than thou members on this thread, get real please as slagging off people who were given (not demanded) a reward for doing what they thought was required is self defeating and the sort of behavior no site needs.
1) Give all lifers 1 yrs notice of free life membership withdrawal except verifiers.
2) 1 yr free membership to all subscribers submitting valid camera.
3) publicise a donation facility
4) 3) Wind up the company and start up new company named "POCKET GPS WORLD TOO" This would stop any legal action.
It would be a sad shame for the database to fold or be took over by any other company because the present format is ideal way to keep uptodate, and the cost is not that excessive.
Lets face it the promise was broke to keep it free when charging was introduced and lots complained but we got over it, life goes on. _________________ Moto G5s Plus, Sygic 17.4.8
Joined: May 08, 2006 Posts: 252 Location: West Midlands. UK
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:43 pm Post subject:
I'm sorry but I think this "Legal reasons" is a cop-out and PGPSW are frightened of upsetting a "few" members.
You gave something as a reward for helping, now in hind-sight you should admit that what you gave was too much and you now need to rescind that offer, or I feel lose more members.
Yes sometimes in life you have to go against what you said earlier, bite the bullet and go for it.
No doubt somewhere in the sites T&Cs there is a paragraph that states you reserve the right to amend or alter the T&Cs as and when you feel you need to.
This thread has opened a hornets nest and is now turning around and stinging yourselves with the replies and attitudes from some members who I feel are saying they reported one camera and that's it and don't want to go out of their way to report any others, or at least that is the way I read some of the posts and what would happen if everyone decided to adopt that attitude?
As for the European database, well the way things are looking there might not be a need for one soon with the amount of countries that are making them illegal to use. _________________ (If it ain't broke, I can soon fix it)
Joined: Jan 10, 2008 Posts: 56 Location: Telford, West Midlands
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:51 pm Post subject:
K13ehr wrote:
Thinking about it, to reward new spotters with a free years membership is not really a change as it will still cost the site the subs for a year per spotter, so no better off, and as the subs for a year isn't a fortune for most giving a different reward which has any real meaning is not going to be easy, I'm glad I'm not the one saddled with coming up with a solution.
Subs not coming in for a new spotter for one year compared to subs not coming in from that same spotter for the remainder of his lifetime does not equate to "no better off".
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
