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!
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:37 pm Post subject: When is a pMobile not a pMobile?
G'day.
A couple of times, I've submitted a camera (North Wales Police "Talivan", sitting at Latitude: 53.097786430274546 Longitude: -3.031282424926758, in a 30mph limit) via the website. Now, I realise that all new submissions are checked and verified before being made 'live' - and that strikes me as a Good Thing, I'm all for it. But I thought that new submissions went into the database as a "pMobile" until verification - yet, the one that I submitted isn't in there.
What are the criteria for a camera making it into the list as a pMobile?
Joined: Aug 21, 2005 Posts: 617 Location: Gloucester UK
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject:
pmobile is a pending mobile, a mobile that hasn't been verified.
a gatso or whatever, is a fixed camera, which when verified is put into the database, but mobiles are difficult to verify, they are there for a few hours, then are gone. So instead of waiting for the mobile to be there again, and risk someone being caught, they are put into a pending file, so you know there could be a camera there, but it hasn't been verified. _________________ Audi A3 Sline sat nav
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:20 pm Post subject:
tanda wrote:
pmobile is a pending mobile, a mobile that hasn't been verified.
a gatso or whatever, is a fixed camera, which when verified is put into the database, but mobiles are difficult to verify, they are there for a few hours, then are gone. So instead of waiting for the mobile to be there again, and risk someone being caught, they are put into a pending file, so you know there could be a camera there, but it hasn't been verified.
As tanda has said, fixed cameras are relatively straightforward because they are 'there' all the time.
With a mobile camera, a sighting is submitted and the location is verified on the grounds of its perceived suitability as a mobile camera site.
However, because the mobile is unlikely to be in-situ at the time of verification, the camera remains listed as a pMobile until such time as further independent sightings have been reported - ie this mobile is seen and reported by other member(s) _________________ Andy
PocketGPSWorld.com supports Help for Heroes - Read here
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15145 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:04 pm Post subject:
verifiers need a good description of the actual area to confirm that correct coords were submitted.
i have now added one of them as i must have been in a particularly fussy mood that day!
Quote:
Mobile van parked on pavement at junction of Ffrwd Road and A541 Wrexham Road. Camera at side window of van, pointing north, looking at vehicles coming from the Mold direction travelling towards Wrexham.
i know it mentions the road names but then that's information on the map...! if there was a description of the actual area itself (eg just by railway line, 200m down from xxx pub) then a verifier could see that the submitted coordinates were in fact at the right place and check the area is suiable.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: Re: When is a pMobile not a pMobile?
gareth71 wrote:
I thought that new submissions went into the database as a "pMobile" until verification - yet, the one that I submitted isn't in there.
What are the criteria for a camera making it into the list as a pMobile?
I can't tell you the criteria, that's determined by the Database Administrator. But I do know that not every camera submission makes it into the database even as a pmobile.
For example, there is one criterion which you could fail quite easily - Comments - if there are no comments included with the submission, it's quite likely it won't make it.
Also, if the coordinates place the mobile in an unlikely place, they don't get in.
Yet another criterion is time - our Administrator actually gets to sleep in between doing the job and trying to have a family life. By some huge coincidence, when I checked those coordinates 10 minutes ago, there was no pmobile there. I've just re-checked for accuracy and suddenly there is one there now. I have also checked my file of cameras for verification, which I downloaded at 11am this morning and it wasn't in there then.
And whilst I'm typing this I see MaFt has popped in with the proper answer. (goes to show he has his eyes open more often than the rest of us). Don't I just hate it when all these ********** super fast typists get in before me. But I'm still posting this because it's been an effort and a labour of luuuurv! _________________ Dennis
verifiers need a good description of the actual area to confirm that correct coords were submitted.
i have now added one of them as i must have been in a particularly fussy mood that day!
Quote:
Mobile van parked on pavement at junction of Ffrwd Road and A541 Wrexham Road. Camera at side window of van, pointing north, looking at vehicles coming from the Mold direction travelling towards Wrexham.
i know it mentions the road names but then that's information on the map...! if there was a description of the actual area itself (eg just by railway line, 200m down from xxx pub) then a verifier could see that the submitted coordinates were in fact at the right place and check the area is suiable.
hope that makes sense!
MaFt
Well, yes, it makes sense - but crikey, I didn't realise you were that particular and picky about descriptions!!
OK, then, I'll flesh it out a bit - the van was parked on the wide bit of pavement on the south side of the junction. Coming from Mold (the direction you'd be coming if you were nicked by it!), you'd see it as you were coming out of Abermorddu past the entrance to Cefn-y-Bedd station car park, immediately before the railway overbridge just before you pass the Hollybush pub.
Is that specific enough?! (I'm not being facetious - I'm genuinely asking whether that's enough info!!)
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:43 pm Post subject:
Let's not labour the point, eh?
MaFt has said that having considered your post, he has revisited your submission and decided to include it. He's actually a very nice real human and the next time you or anybody else can come up with an opportunity to criticise him is a bloody long way into the future.
As an afterthought, you and many others might take comfort from the discovery that rejected submissions are not destroyed and can be retrieved and reviewed. _________________ Dennis
Dennis, don't be so sensitive. I'm not having a go at, or criticising, or in any other way maligning, anyone - you, MaFt, anyone else.
All I did was post to casually enquire whether there was a reason that a mobile camera that I subimtted to the database hadn't appeared as a pMobile several weeks after I submitted it. I wasn't agressive, abrasive, rude, petulant, obnoxious, or in any other way objectionable in what I posted or the way I wrote it - it seemed like a reasonable question to me. As it turns out, what I thought was a more than adequate description of the camera site was deemed to be insufficient - so I beefed it up a bit. Personally, I thought what I wrote originally would've been sufficient for the purposes of camera verification - but seeing as it apparently isn't, I'm more than happy to expand on the information to the point where there's as much as I can possibly give. I'm only sorry I didn't have time to stop and take a photo of the damn van as I passed it.
And all I get from you for my troubles is a load of angst and indignation. Well, I'm sorry to trouble you - I'll crawl back under my rock now, and won't bother you with any more submissions.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 11:53 pm Post subject:
Sensitive? Was my first post angst and indignation? I thought it was an effort at informing you and reading it again, I can't see a single indication of angst and indignation.
My subsequent post about not labouring the point was because your response to MaFt was uncalled for. Firstly, there was no need to quote his entire post, secondly, "particular and picky about descriptions", thirdly no need to go on about the location description and fourthly supposedly "I'm, not being facetious" when it sounded like it to me. I see a number of posts like that, with digs concealed by smilies and/or soft words. If you think about it, you wouldn't have needed to claim not to be facetious if you had been confident what you had written could not be interpreted thus.
Neither I nor anybody else has any problem with you raising your query. Just remember we are rather often on the sharp end of them, so occasionally feel the prickles. Especially if we get grief when we try to offer reasonable explanations. _________________ Dennis
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15145 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 10:24 am Post subject:
cheers gareth, have updated the submission with those extra details.
sometimes i can be VERY picky! depends what mood i'm in but then i get shouted at by submitters (not personal, just a humerous post) so then i relax a bit and then get shouted at by the verifiers saying 'theres no information!! how can i verify THAT!!!' - and around that time i get picky again
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
but then i get shouted at by submitters (not personal, just a humerous post) so then i relax a bit and then get shouted at by the verifiers saying 'theres no information!! how can i verify THAT!!!' - and around that time i get picky again 
