May database does not use any of my updates

Andy_P

I'm so annoyed I make no apology for starting a new thread that is basically identical to last month's one started by 'strumble'

I have just installed the May database and NOT ONE of the nine changes/errors I reported have been included.
What is the point? I used to feel I was doing some good by contributing, now I just feel I'm wasting my time and petrol!

missing_user · Joined: Aug 30, 2008 Posts: -7

Two members submitting 22 changes and then the database does not reflect their time and effort!

Is the 'submission procedure' at fault or are they waiting to appoint 'verifiers'?

We have been waiting some time on the suggestion of verifiers.

MikeB · Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 11:47 pm Post subject:

Andy, how did you submit your data? I will look in to why these have not been applied yet. As you know verification is not instant and may take some time to achieve.

We are currently in the process of trying to implement a system whereby frequent well known contributors effectively "self verify" submissions. In fact Oldie and I were reviewing some entries on Monday. We identified a few problems with the way we process some of the submissions, and also some improvements that we can implement. We also individually reviewed all of Strumble's entries which will be in the next release of the database. However we do get many tens of thousands of camera submissions a month, most of which are duplicates of the current database, often with only some minor changes. All these have to be checked and entered onto the main database.

We are trying really hard here to do our best and maintain the best database possible. Sometimes we will get it wrong, sometimes things may take a little time to appear in the released database. But I can assure you it is not due to the lack of effort or commitment but more to do with our efforts to ensure the quality of the data we release.
_________________
Mike Barrett

CS · Lifetime Member Joined: Feb 29, 2004 Posts: 113

I also made about 6 changes to the database about 3 weeks ago using the PocketGPS submission page but I don't think mine have been adopted either.

Andy_P · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:59 pm Post subject:

missing_user · Joined: Aug 30, 2008 Posts: -7

Mine come from:-

PocketGPSWorld.com Camera Submissions [cameras@pocketgpsworld.com]

Andy_P · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 3:22 pm Post subject:

Think I'll revert to that method. At least I can see when I sent stuff then.

MikeB · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:15 pm Post subject:

JockTamsonsBairn · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 9:30 pm Post subject:

Andy_P · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 10:54 pm Post subject:

Thank you for your detailed reply, Mike; here's one from me!

As for my submissions, all I can say is that is how I always used to submit changes in the old days, as an ov2 file with the details or corrections in the name.

Surely this is the most obvious way to note down changes or inacuracies (rather than just adding a "new" camera) while you are out and about? To be honest, I'm not sure how else can additional information could be given with an ov2 unless you want a long "comments" list that attempts to match up with the entries.
I'm glad to hear that it will be made OK to submit like this again very soon.

As for the example you chose....
Your map picture does make it easier to understand the difficulties you face! However, I'm worried by this "averaging" process you are using. As you are encouraging everyone to re-submit all the cameras, doesn't that mean that a lot of accurately placed spots are going to end up worse than they were before?

Now, as for that junction....
I could go on at length about which cameras were wrong, changed moved in the various monthly databases, and I even started re-installing earlier versions in order to check my facts, but soon realised it would be much quicker to just visit the bl**dy junction on my way home!!!
So here is the definitive version:

The confusion stems from the fact that:
There ARE two new Monitrons, one in each direction.
There is ALSO an existing Gatso Redlight camera on the eastbound carriageway

The old redlight camera MAY be due to be removed, but the new Monitron on that carriageway is set further back along the road, and the white stripes end well before the traffic lights, so I don't think it will cover the traffic lights.
The Monitron on the westbound carriageway is much closer to the junction and the stripes extend onto the pedestrian crossing, so that one is probably a combined redlight and speed version.

Here is your picture corrected:

And if you need more proof here is the eastbound pair (i.e. to the left of the junction on the map):

and the westbound one:

Now THAT is the sort of aroraky attention to detail you can expect from some of us!
8)

MikeB · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 11:22 pm Post subject:

OK I have now amended the whole of that area to accurately reflect your changes. Look out for this in the next release of the database.

Mike 8)
_________________
Mike Barrett

JockTamsonsBairn · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 11:31 pm Post subject:

Skippy · Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 11:31 pm Post subject:

I also submitted a new Monitron location at N51.44597 W0.04261 (Intersection of Brockley Rise and Watman Road) but that hasn't appeared either.

The camera isn't there yet but the post, road markings and sensors are in place.

I'd be interested to know why that one isn't there if you can spare the time to check for me! - these new digital cameras are nasty, we don't want to miss any.
_________________
Gone fishing!

missing_user · Joined: Aug 30, 2008 Posts: -7

This has developed into an interesting topic!

I dislike the possibility of 'averaging out' the location. The only location of interest, is the correct one!

I feel that many submissions may be made from details taken at speed!

Surely, this topic indicates the need for 'local verifiers' rather than using this 'hit and miss' method [10 submissions for one camera, one is correct and nine incorrect - using your listed method, it would result in an incorrect location]

What a great topic with all these diagrams!
Will you make it possible for the ordinary person to include jpegs as we do in other forums. It is much easier to make a point!

jimmymac · Occasional Visitor Joined: Sep 19, 2005 Posts: 9

I have just submitted about 8 brand spanking new Truvello cameras I PIO-Capture'd tonight on the 1079 East Yorkshire which have all just been erected.
When I got home i reviewed them and found a couple hadnt recorded in exactly the right position (I have been driving past all week). So I deleted these and readded them in the correct position using manage POI feature within tomtom which I discovered still puts coordinates in to the pgpswcams ov2 file.

Will your system reject these also?
I noted with my submision they where all Truvello's as obviously using the tomtom pio manage features you cant specify camera type.

cheers

	PocketGPS
	Web