Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
PocketGPS
Web
Read the current newsletter! Weekly
Newsletter
SatNav,GPS,Navigation
Get Speed Camera Warnings For SatNavs Get Speed Camera Warnings For Android Get Speed Camera Warnings For iPhone
Pocket GPS World - SatNavs | GPS | Speed Cameras: Forums

Pocket GPS World :: View topic - Camera Submissions
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in for private messagesLog in for private messages   Log inLog in 

Camera Submissions
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> PocketGPSWorld Speed Camera Database
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MikeyBow
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Jan 08, 2007
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:53 pm    Post subject: Camera Submissions Reply with quote

I submitted three new camera sightings on 19th March (detailed below) and have not heard anything back. I notice that two of them are now verified on the database, but no sign of the mobile submission. Although I note that you can't reply to every submission, as a member, it is infuriating to have submitted sightings and not know whether they are valid, being validated or whether I was beaten to it by another subscriber. If we take the time to submit new sightings in order to help the wider community, I think it would be far more courteous to let us know the outcome of our submission, rather than just sending them into effectively a black hole. Would it be possible to get a reply on the three submissions please?

Addition of: Single Direction Monitron (ID#0), Heading: 360, Lat:52.262917643441, Lon:-1.8911719322205 (United Kingdom), Speed:40, New camera installed within the last couple of days.

Addition of: Single Direction Monitron (ID#0), Heading: 180, Lat:52.264546097127, Lon:-1.8914079666138 (United Kingdom), Speed:40, New camera installed within the last couple of days.

Addition of: Reversible Mobile (ID#0), Heading: 180, Lat:52.186256932129, Lon:-1.7939633131027 (United Kingdom), Speed:30.

Many thanks,

Mike.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
john877
Lifetime Member


Joined: Mar 16, 2007
Posts: 468

PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When you submit a camera you will receive an email thanking you for your camera submission !!!

Have you checked that your email address is correct or that it has not been treated as spam???

It does work!!! I myself have received about 4 emails in the last week thanking me for submitting cameras
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scarymonkey
Lifetime Member


Joined: May 09, 2007
Posts: 454
Location: Worcestershire

PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no access to the backend stuff but looing at the submission map, the mobile in Binton is in the pMobile database now. Assuming it is reported again you may well be the first for this one but at present its in the 'limbo' state mobile submissions go into before being added to the main database.

The 2 Studley cameras were reported by the 'first' on the 19th I believe (from info supplied by MaFt in a members area post). Since the updated database has been released and all first submissions have been awarded the lifetime membership, I guess you were beaten to it this time.

Like you I would like more feedback but do understand that the sheer number of submissions would mean the team spends more time responding to submissions than updating the database. I would prefer the database to be updated ahead of any replies to submissons.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
john877
Lifetime Member


Joined: Mar 16, 2007
Posts: 468

PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When you submit a camera

1- you get an email to confirm this with the details of your submission

2- If you were the first to report it when you look at the submissions map page you will see your submission on there it will only be visible to you

3-- your submission which is shown on the map will have a cross inside the box which means it is waiting to be verified

So what this means is !! if you submit a camera and it is not shown on the map with a cross in it you were not the first to report it.
These further submissions are very important as they confirm previously made submissions

I think this is correct
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Pocket GPS Staff


Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 14089
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire

PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

every time i read these i tell myself i shouldn't reply.... but yet here we go again...


ok, monitron heading 360, id 50316, received 2008-03-19 19:55:25 matches heading / type for id 50306 (rec'd 2008-03-19 17:15:33) but 132m too far north

monitron heading 180, id 50317, received 2008-03-19 19:56:41 matches heading / type for id 50305 (rec'd 2008-03-19 17:12:17) but 128m too far north

mobile sighting id 50315 for pmobile 46149 - you are the only person to have reported this camera. for full verification we need further independent reports.



this just took me about 8 minutes - if i had to do this for every one of the (on average) 75-100 daily submissions there would never be a database release.

MaFt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Tired Old Man


Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14554
Location: Keynsham

PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Start here, then try these ...
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.
Discussion thread.

Then finish off with this.

It'll take you less time than MaFt needs - ten hours a day to spend answering this type of question. Of course it's "unacceptable" for you to drop your cameras into a black hole (which is not what happens), but what would you prefer? A database or an answering service? I sometimes think we should set up a phone line with buttons to press - "If you are annoyed because you haven't received a free membership, press 1". Then you could be passed to a recorded message.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London

PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike, sorry, if there is a slightly "exasperated" tone to the replies above, but it does get asked a lot.

The important question to ask you is: did you not get the automated reply thanking you for your submission?

If you had, (or had seen it, if it's got lost in your junk mail filters) would that have been OK for you?

As MaFt says (considering he may get several dozen reports of a new camera IN THE FIRST DAY), it simply isn't possible to cross-reference every group of submissions for a particular camera and then tell every person involved who it was that beat them to it this time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeyBow
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Jan 08, 2007
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Andy et all,

I'm sorry if I have upset anybody, that wasn't my intention. It is difficult sitting outside of the circle of those of you 'in the know' about how the system works. I followed the instructions given on the site, to use the forum for any questions, rather than emailing and I am grateful for all of you that have taken the time to reply.

My initial wording was ambiguous - yes, I did receive the automated responses to each of the three submissions, but this only confirms receipt. When I checked on the camera database before my posting yesterday, there was no symbol on the map for the Binton camera, but it is there now. MaFt's response indicates that my submissions were the first received, but I was too far out with the location. Please don't take this the wrong way, but unless I was carrying a GPS or had a surveyors tape measure with me, how was I supposed to get the location down to within a couple of metres?

Yes, it would be nice to get a free lifetime subscription, but that is not what motivated me to submit the cameras. I submitted a speed change modification to TRUVELO:956@60 last year and my mobile camera submission this year, neither of which qualify for any reward. I had already reported the Binton camera on 9th February, but it took a repeat submission and my posting to appear to get it into the database. (I stand to be corrected if that is incorrect). The text that I included within both submissions for the Binton mobile camera, should be sufficient to justify its' inclusion without further verification.

I accept that it is unreasonable to expect, given the quantity of communications you have to deal with. Maybe it would be worth including the Username & date/time of the submission against the camera details, then if there is any dispute, we users have the information to base queries on prior to contacting yourselves.

Now I have a better understanding of the way you work, I can appreciate why you can't respond to every submission. Sorry again to have caused offence to any of you.

All the best,

Mike.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
john877
Lifetime Member


Joined: Mar 16, 2007
Posts: 468

PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeyBow wrote:
Andy et all,

I'm sorry if I have upset anybody, that wasn't my intention. It is difficult sitting outside of the circle of those of you 'in the know' about how the system works. I followed the instructions given on the site, to use the forum for any questions, rather than emailing and I am grateful for all of you that have taken the time to reply.

My initial wording was ambiguous - yes, I did receive the automated responses to each of the three submissions, but this only confirms receipt. When I checked on the camera database before my posting yesterday, there was no symbol on the map for the Binton camera, but it is there now. MaFt's response indicates that my submissions were the first received, but I was too far out with the location. Please don't take this the wrong way, but unless I was carrying a GPS or had a surveyors tape measure with me, how was I supposed to get the location down to within a couple of metres?

Yes, it would be nice to get a free lifetime subscription, but that is not what motivated me to submit the cameras. I submitted a speed change modification to TRUVELO:956@60 last year and my mobile camera submission this year, neither of which qualify for any reward. I had already reported the Binton camera on 9th February, but it took a repeat submission and my posting to appear to get it into the database. (I stand to be corrected if that is incorrect). The text that I included within both submissions for the Binton mobile camera, should be sufficient to justify its' inclusion without further verification.

I accept that it is unreasonable to expect, given the quantity of communications you have to deal with. Maybe it would be worth including the Username & date/time of the submission against the camera details, then if there is any dispute, we users have the information to base queries on prior to contacting yourselves.

Now I have a better understanding of the way you work, I can appreciate why you can't respond to every submission. Sorry again to have caused offence to any of you.

All the best,

Mike.


I myself do understand what you are saying especially in an area which is strange to you or there is no prominent landmarks .
I find the hybrid Google map makes it a lot easier to find the location more accurately
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Tired Old Man


Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14554
Location: Keynsham

PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeyBow wrote:
The text that I included within both submissions for the Binton mobile camera, should be sufficient to justify its' inclusion without further verification.


Why? Inside information? Effectively, you said "I am trustworthy and I know there's a camera in Binton". We get submissions from camera installation teams which are not considered sufficient to justify their inclusion without further verification. They sometimes get the coordinates wrong! We have members who are police officers and their submissions are not sufficient for inclusion without further verification.

Your submission comments only say "in the village of Binton" and your coordinates for 50315 (52.18626, -1.79396) placed the camera site in the back garden of a house at the far end of Orchard Rise - well off Main Road.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GPS_fan
Pocket GPS Moderator
Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jan 04, 2007
Posts: 2789
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DennisN wrote:
Your submission comments only say "in the village of Binton" and your coordinates for 50315 (52.18626, -1.79396) placed the camera site in the back garden of a house at the far end of Orchard Rise - well off Main Road.

Maybe somebody has a yellow speed camera as a garden ornament - like red phone boxes etc Rolling Eyes

On a more serious not, the PGPSW system is fair and transparent because the SAME rules are applied equally to EVERYBODY.

I'm a reliable, honest kind of bloke, but I wouldn't expect PGPSW to bend the rules for me and just stick a camera in the database because I reported it - I'd expect the submission to be scrutinised and verified, just like everybody else's.

At the end of the day, the verification is part of the process that makes this database what it is - the best Thumbs Up
_________________
Andy
PocketGPSWorld.com supports Help for Heroes - Read here
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmuskett
Lifetime Member


Joined: May 12, 2006
Posts: 702
Location: Stockport, Cheshire

PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeyBow wrote:
MaFt's response indicates that my submissions were the first received, but I was too far out with the location. Please don't take this the wrong way, but unless I was carrying a GPS or had a surveyors tape measure with me, how was I supposed to get the location down to within a couple of metres?


Read it again. My reading of MaFt's post is that your submissions were over 2 hours after the first submissions for those fixed cameras. I think if you had been the first, just being a few yards out wouldn't have mattered - the verifiers would correct the position anyway.

MikeyBow wrote:
Yes, it would be nice to get a free lifetime subscription, but that is not what motivated me to submit the cameras.

Quote:
Maybe it would be worth including the Username & date/time of the submission against the camera details, then if there is any dispute, we users have the information to base queries on prior to contacting yourselves..


If the free lifetime subscription is not what motivated you, why are you worried about knowing who submitted a camera? Don't worry, if you're first you'll get the lifetime sub. Haven't all the threads Dennis gave you to read reassured you of that? Just keep submitting and it will happen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Pocket GPS Staff


Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 14089
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire

PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 10:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

no offence taken MikeyBow!

also, as bmuskett points out, the dates / times in my initial response show you were 2 hours after the first submission

however, even if they had been first they were too far away from further submissions so there was no 'grouping' of submissions near yours to verify it.

the image below is a map of some of the submissions (there were about 5 more around the active camera (blue circle) but these were not 'added' as there were enough already)



there is a clear 'grouping' that shows the likely location of the camera and 50317 being where it was was evidence of a camera in the vicinity but could not be used as an actual location. seeing this map (along with the knowledge that there were a further 5 submissions near the active camera) where would you have placed the active camera had you been me?

MaFt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London

PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A good example of how hard it is to get "spot-on" accurate submissions.

I'm sure it would really help MaFt if everyone could double check their intended location against surrounding streets etc. on the submission map, rather than just sending in a marked "favourite" or whatever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeyBow
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Jan 08, 2007
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks again for all those that replied, even the one from GPS_fan!!

I now have a much better understanding of the work that goes into the submission and validation of a camera addition and will try to ensure that any further ones that I submit are more accurate and know that each one is being investigated.

Maybe it is time to close this post and move on, but thanks again (honestly Smile ) for everybody's input. I'll leave you all to get on with some higher priority work, hey.

All the best,

MikeyBow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message







Posted: Today    Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> PocketGPSWorld Speed Camera Database All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
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

Powered by phpBB 2.0.11 © 2001 phpBB Group
phpBB port v2.1 based on Tom Nitzschner's phpbb2.0.6 upgraded to phpBB 2.0.4 standalone was developed and tested by:
ArtificialIntel, ChatServ, mikem,
sixonetonoffun and Paul Laudanski (aka Zhen-Xjell).

Version 2.1 by Nuke Cops 2003 http://www.nukecops.com

Make a Donation



CamerAlert Database

Click here for the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database

Download Speed Camera Database
17.061 (05 Jun 19)



WORLDWIDE SPEED CAMERA SPOTTERS WANTED!

Click here to submit camera positions to the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database


12mth Subscriber memberships awarded every week for verified new camera reports!

Submit Speed Camera Locations Now


CamerAlert Apps



iOS QR Code






Android QR Code







Terms & Privacy


GPS Shopping