Thinking of subscribing: but Cumbria mobile data is lacking

Andy_P · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:23 am Post subject:

Sorry, I can understand what you've done, and the time you spent doing it; but I'm still struggling to see any proof that these are sites that are still in use, and hence your assertion that the current database is inaccurate.

Can I ask a basic question? Have you actually seen speed cameras being operated from all of these locations yourself?
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-)

peterjhill · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:33 am Post subject:

Of course.

Process (with TomTom GO920):
Set up personal ov2 file for mobile camera vans.
Spot van, add to favourites/current location
Park up, rename and save as POI in personal ov2 file (sent to yourselves)

Done it like this since I downloaded your sites as free years ago.

Every one is one I've seen, and in one case 60 quid cost Sad

_________________
Cheers
Peter

Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 running old version of Sygic GPS Navigation
Replaced TomTom GO920

Andy_P · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:37 am Post subject:

Thank you. That makes it a lot clearer.
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-)

peterjhill · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:57 am Post subject:

<----- licking wounds ftom a Mod bashing

DennisN · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:24 am Post subject:

And you don't consider we might be licking our wounds from your bashing?

You last got the pgpsw database when it was free, 7 years ago and now come on here telling us it's all wrong and what's more, your own database is all right. And you spent TWO WHOLE HOURS checking it over! Wow, gosh, gobsmacked! As in you BASHing us!! As in you taking the p*ss out of all the other contributing members and verifyers.

We have been supporting and reporting the database for seven years, unpaid, unrewarded and you come along to say what a load of rubbish our work is. We should sit back and offer our humble gratitude to you for your kindness in granting us the favour of donating your database.

I'm curious that you have now changed emphasis to say not that the pgpsw database was missing a load of mobiles, but merely that they didn't have speed or direction. And I'm not surprised that one of them cost you £60 during your reliance on an out of date database coupled with your own incomplete one. If your only findings were that some didn't have speed or direction (neither of which omissions would have jeopardised the warnings issued by your GO920) and you have offered corrections from memory, your own database seems to have a very flimsy basis.

However, thank you for your submissions. If they meet our criteria for consideration, I am sure our Admin will circulate them to verifyers for the normal checking process.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

peterjhill · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:51 am Post subject:

I guess me and you will never agree, and you will always be aggressive, and surprisingly personal in your responses, which surprised me from forum mods. You appear to have made a number of assumptions throughout, but mainly that I couldn't possibly be right, and that I was not using first hand experience.

I haven't said, at any time, that any of the sites were wrong, but just some were missing. I spotted the purging policy last night, which maybe explains some, which I also questioned, just to be shot down again. Personally, I'd rather have a few extra warnings, than another ticket. That's just me I guess.

Regarding the 60.00, you again assume that your database had the said site. The background here was that the local Partnership had just obtained planning permission to place their vans anywhere they wanted (instead of the previous 44 fixed sites they were allowed). The van was parked quite dangerously on the grass on a corner of the A66. I got this ticket in August 2008. I would have been surprised if the site had been reported, and wouldn't have expected it to be. The site isn't on the database now.
_________________
Cheers
Peter

Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 running old version of Sygic GPS Navigation
Replaced TomTom GO920

DennisN · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 9:55 am Post subject:

My post above is only my third in this thread. From three posts you conclude that I'm personal, aggressive and make false assumptions. Please demonstrate which of the three posts are personal, aggressive and make false assumptions.

OK - YOUR thread title "Thinking of subscribing: but Cumbria mobile data is lacking", YOUR comment "your database is poor", YOUR comment "currently can't justify 20.00 from what Ive seen". What am I to assume from this? I would suggest you are stating quite unequivocally that the pgpsw database is useless, not worth £20 a year. Somebody beat me to the first comment, that he thinks £20 is justifiable from his driving experience. Your signature previously included the information that you drive 30,000 miles a year and I therefore commented that your driving pattern ought to justify £20.

Where did I say you couldn't possibly be right? What I said, in essence, was that you made your criticism of the pgpsw database without proper experience of it. Remember, you made your comment and entitled the thread BEFORE subscribing, so I considered your opinion entirely unjustified. AFTER you subscribed, you committed two hours to checking against your own records and your own memory. We on the site have, voluntarily and unpaid, committed uncounted hours to physical checking over the last seven years. With a few ill-considered throw-away comments, you have rubbished our efforts, so I for one do not take kindly to unsubstantiated criticism like yours.

I didn't assume the pgpsw database had the site which cost you £60, I assumed you got fined through speeding whilst using an inaccurate database - even in 2008, your copy pgpsw database was over two years out of date and your own was only two years into its progress in becoming your trusted Cumbria version. How do you know the £60 site didn't appear in the database during the last seven years? Someone else has already commented that you have not been contributing to the pgpsw database for the last 7 years - at the very least, your fine should have suggested to you that joining in with several thousand pgpsw members might have been a wiser course than going it alone.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

PaulB2005 · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:38 am Post subject:

MaFt · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:28 pm Post subject:

CHILL OUT FOR ODIN'S SAKE!!

I have the file from Peter along with details of the location and the speeds etc.

These will be added s pMobiles (the same as all mobile submissions) hopefully for this week's release.

Thor.

peterjhill · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:21 pm Post subject:

MaFt · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:36 pm Post subject:

for info there were only about 5 new sites. the others were reactivating old sites we previously had in the database.

MaFt

M8TJT · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:25 pm Post subject:

@peterjhill.
Did you manage to get CVA to fire up sygic automatically, or indeed, to get it to run OK in the background.

@MaFt. The 'free lifetime' is still in the FAQ as indicated by Peter in an earlier post. Perhaps a year without seen again is a bit previous to 'retire' a mobile site?

Zeus. (There you go, trumped your minor Norse god with a Greek geezer)

peterjhill · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:26 pm Post subject:

I can understand that. Thanks.
_________________
Cheers
Peter

Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 running old version of Sygic GPS Navigation
Replaced TomTom GO920

Andy_P · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 9:57 pm Post subject:

DennisN · Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:40 pm Post subject:

Huh? Are you saying that you edited his title? So that when I commented on HIS title, it was YOUR title? Have you edited any more of what he wrote? Have I responded to what he didn't write?

Gosh!
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

	PocketGPS
	Web