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!
I actually don't submit cameras as I believe that there is a disproportionate number of first reports from (already) lifetime members. This could be because they do a lot of miles but I personally suspect (rightly or wrongly), that this because they have inside information about new sites. As this is something a non-lifetime member has little chance of beating it lays the process open to abuse.... installers can sell the information. Please note that I have NO evidence of this what-so-ever but it is something that could easily happen and yet be extremely difficult to prove.
That's great - but I got my lifetime sub due to seeing and reporting a mobile camera I saw when out walking
Hopefully I get to keep my sub despite my unorthodox method of travel
All of the 4 cameras I've seen, and reported, were when walking. As I walk a lot, and drive very infrequently (1 local journey a week) - I guess it makes sense ...
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14892 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 12:14 am Post subject:
Multi wrote:
I personally suspect (rightly or wrongly), that this because they have inside information about new sites. As this is something a non-lifetime member has little chance of beating it lays the process open to abuse.... installers can sell the information.
Please note that I have NO evidence of this what-so-ever but it is something that could easily happen and yet be extremely difficult to prove.
Actually I have a gripe about Insider Information. Not existing lifers, though, but about submitters. As one of the earlier Verifiers to be appointed, I've been out there checking for quite some time now - two and a half years to be precise. So I've seen a certain amount of what I call insider information - that's new cameras reported before they are installed. Verifiers get a regular list of all new submissions which require verification and I find it extremely annoying to go look at a roadworks site to check new temporary cameras and find nothing there, but some evidence of impending roadworks - advance warning signs, cones along the edge of the road etc. That happened a lot with sets of Specs temporary cameras on the M4 near Membury Services. When the cameras were eventually installed, they didn't match up with the coordinates submitted, so in my opinion they had been submitted by somebody with more than just a little knowledge of the forthcoming intentions, who used that information to steal a march on everybody else. BUT obviously, the submitter didn't have the correct locations for the cameras, just a vague idea. I rejected every single one of them (and grumpily too!) and subsequently was happy to accept correctly submitted locations where there were actual cameras.
That grumble of mine can't carry much weight though unless the installers work on a national basis, which I don't think is true. Nor does inside information carry much credibility elsewhere - too much conspiracy theory I think.
I know the free lifetime membership thing works, because it happened to me as a submitter before they started charging and when matt_e first posted earlier in this thread he didn't have the lifer tag to his name and has now, so it has obviously worked for him! We Verifiers don't ever know who submits reports, but on one occasion with the M4 cameras mentioned above somebody identified himself as a submitter and when I subsequently verified them, he got his lifetime membership.
I think the main evidence against malpractice in awarding free membership is to be seen in the weekly newsletter where it shows trhe numbers and IDs of new awardees. I would suggest that anybody who doubts the genuine nature of this has an answer readily available, the PM system - all you need do is send a PM to any and all members with Lifetime Member under their name and ask for details. I'd suggest there are far too many for the very small number of PGPSW Staff (fingers of one hand) to have cosy matey relationships. And you'll occasionally find odd posts by lifers which are far from pally towards the Staff. _________________ Dennis
I'll reply the same as I replied to your friends email recently...:
Have you written to the Olympic committee to suggest that only athletes/teams who have not already won a gold medal can then win further gold medals? It seems unfair that some athletes can come back with 5 or 6 gold medals just because they were faster...
MaFt
I take your point MaFt but an athlete is rewarded for a single specific event. Once it is finished they are not rewarded again. If they want another medal they have to compete (and win) again.
Where as by it's very nature, a member can only ever win ONE lifetime membership.
Maybe I didn't explain my idea very well....
My idea of giving lifetime membership to the first PAYING member to report a camera (except if it had already been reported by a non-paying person) would reward them yet at the same time in no way penalise an existing lifer or a non-subscriber.
If a non-subscriber is the FIRST person to report a camera then they get free LTM.
If a PAYING member is the FIRST person to report a camera then they get free LTM.
If a PAYING member submits a new camera but is ONLY beaten by members with LTM then they still get free LTM.
This way, there is an additional incentive to being a paid member. The reward for being the first to submit a camera is exactly as it is now.
Darren wrote:
I can't see the justification for an incentive over and above the Lifetime Offer.
If anything we are too generous already given the numbers who qualify
I agree with you Darren, it is a generous offer. However, by making the qualifying criteria slightly wider does that not also make membership more attractive? Only your good selves (Der Management) would know if giving away more free membership would be out weighed by an increase in new paying subscribers.
And thanks to M8TJT and Privateer for saying welcome .... the asbestos underpants were getting a bit warm
However, this post has renewed my faith in the system and as a result I will (try) and make a real effort to remember to report a camera when I see one.
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 6:42 am Post subject:
Multi wrote:
MaFt wrote:
....[Snip]It seems unfair that some athletes can come back with 5 or 6 gold medals just because they were faster...MaFt
I take your point MaFt but an athlete is rewarded for a single specific event. Once it is finished they are not rewarded again. If they want another medal they have to compete (and win) again.
But the person who comes second in that event only wins a Silver. In the pgpsw case, there ain't no Silver. Same for cameras. New camera, new race, only one gold medal. Although I do see your point. Win the next cam race and no further gold. But this aparantly does not dissuade the current lifers from entering the race again for no 'reward'.
Multi wrote:
My idea of giving lifetime membership to the first PAYING member to report a camera (except if it had already been reported by a non-paying person) would reward them yet at the same time in no way penalise an existing lifer or a non-subscriber.
If a non-subscriber is the FIRST person to report a camera then they get free LTM.
If a PAYING member is the FIRST person to report a camera then they get free LTM.
If a PAYING member submits a new camera but is ONLY beaten by members with LTM then they still get free LTM.
This way, there is an additional incentive to being a paid member. The reward for being the first to submit a camera is exactly as it is now.
:
Given that we are calling the award of a 'lifetime' an incentive, how will your first point increase the incentive to subscribe? It will increase the incentive NOT to subscribe Why would they subscribe if they could get free membership, other than to have the best cam database around? Surely this is enough incentive to subscribe. Apart from that, if they have not subscribed, they do not have the database (other than under the 'household' rules, then the subscriber would get gold if they won the race) so how do they know that the cam is not in the database already?
Your second point: That's the way it works (Overseas cams excepted)
Your third point could have some merit but---
Multi wrote:
Only your good selves (Der Management) would know if giving away more free membership would be out weighed by an increase in new paying subscribers.
Presumably that has already been taken into consideration. PGPSW IS a commercial outfit, and no doubt depends on subscriptions for at least part of its income stream and your first point would possibly decrease the number of new subscribers.
Multi wrote:
And thanks to M8TJT and Privateer for saying welcome.
Multi wrote:
However, this post has renewed my faith in the system and as a result I will (try) and make a real effort to remember to report a camera when I see one.
Good on yer bro Keep on spotting. You never know
DennisN wrote:
And you'll occasionally find odd posts by lifers which are far from pally towards the Staff.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14892 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 8:08 am Post subject:
I think the basics are...
You want the best camera database available, so you buy the PGPSW one. It so happens that it's as cheap as the nearest competitor (TomTom). Have a read of GPS_fan's article Why choose PGPSW for a better explanation than I can offer.
On top of being the best, it has the advantage that it stays best because members voluntarily contribute information, knowing that their submissions will be looked at - other DBs are less open about it.
As a bonus, it is possible to win a free lifetime membership for being the first to submit. I don't know of any other DB which has the same offer. Not being the first simply puts you on the same footing (paying) as any other DB. Many members are not interested in submitting, happily subscribing and using the DB. Others (like me) submit because we feel that if we do, so will somebody else and that means when we drive in unfamiliar territory, we have cameras which somebody has reported just like we do. I do about 60,000 miles a year, so I've already benefited a zillion times from other people's submissions - free or paying, I really owe them something in return. _________________ Dennis
Joined: Jun 20, 2005 Posts: 1096 Location: Solihull, UK
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 10:20 am Post subject:
Multi wrote:
My idea of giving lifetime membership to the first PAYING member to report a camera (except if it had already been reported by a non-paying person) would reward them yet at the same time in no way penalise an existing lifer or a non-subscriber.
If a non-subscriber is the FIRST person to report a camera then they get free LTM.
...
If he was a non-subscriber, how did he know that the camera he has just reported wasn't on the database? I can only think of 3 reasons:
An ex-subscriber using an old copy of the database.
Insider knowledge
Piracy.
None of which really warrant a reward! _________________ Garmin DriveSmart 50 LMT-D
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 11:14 am Post subject:
Multi wrote:
Isn't the point of giving away free membership to increase the number of camera's known and at the same time to reward new successful submissions?
Indeed it is and it works well as it is. We can capture a new location within hours of it being installed.
We could give every reportee a lifetime subscription but lets be realistic here! We have to balance the offer with the income. As it stands we think it is pitched right. _________________ Darren Griffin
Joined: Mar 09, 2008 Posts: 463 Location: Rainhill, Lancashire Not Merseyside!
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 12:24 pm Post subject:
To add my 2p worth - I would dearly love to be able to submit a new camera, but I travel less than 10,000 miles a year these days and those are mainly local to the area I live in. There are not that many camera's around here and those that are have been in the database for almost as long as the cameras have existed.
I did submit two new mobiles, but they were only in the location for one or two days and the second was manned by PCSOs, not Police officers, so it doesn't count.
I still keep my eyes open wherever I go and will submit if I see anything, but here's the thing from my point of view, I'll do that regardless of the fact that a Lifer membership could be mine - I will renew anyway. I paid early to get the discounted price a month or so ago, but £20 per year is an absolute bargain and you don't get points on your License when you buy.
So come on all members - submit, submit, submit. You never know, but let's get the database so good that no one lines the revenue seekers' pockets. _________________ Ric - TomTom 520 DEAD - Passed to the great traffic jam in the sky. Now using Maps & Waze on Samsung Galaxy S4 + CamerAlert of course!
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15137 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 12:34 pm Post subject:
(belated welcome by the way )
Multi wrote:
But that's the key... they don't know it's not on database. They only find out after submitting.
and when it IS on the database it really bugs me cos i have to reject all the ones that we already have and have had for years in some cases!
as it stands i personally think the offer is too generous, the criteria being too 'wide' so to speak. however, darren, mike and rob agreed on the current criteria so that is what is used! for info we 'recently' (july 07?) changed the criteria to also include new mobile sightings in the free lifetime subscription offer which, again, gives even more poeple the opportunity of a free sub!
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 5:13 pm Post subject:
Multi wrote:
But that's the key... they don't know it's not on database. They only find out after submitting..
As a verifier, I get a different view of the map than Non-subscribed members. Can you not see the cams on the map? If you can and if there is one in the location that you want to report, it's already in the database and you're not the first.
Multi wrote:
The same is true for ALL new submissions. No-one knows if they are the first or not (to submit a camera) until later on.
How could they. They are not automatically put on the database, MaFt filters them and puts them there 'manually' then informs the qualifying submitter that he/she was first, and here's your gold medal. Given the manual nature of database management, how would you suggest that it was done otherwise. Remember that there is the word ACCURATELY in the qualifying rules. How can MaFt know that the first was ACCURATE until either the cam is verified or he has had a load of reports for a cam in about the same position.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14892 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 11:08 pm Post subject:
Multi wrote:
The same is true for ALL new submissions. No-one knows if they are the first or not (to submit a camera) until later on.
It used to be the case that first submitter could see his submission pending verification on the map as a crosshair icon - if you can see the crosshairs, it's your submission, because only the actual submitter (and the Verifiers) can see them. If you don't see crosshairs, you haven't managed to get yours in there. The submission map page used to have a red paragraph about this feature, but since the re-design it seems to no longer be there? Maybe the feature is no longer there except for Verifiers? MaFt?
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15137 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 11:30 pm Post subject:
in the majority of cases (99.5%) the cross-hairs mean a submitter was first. there are rare occasions where that may not be the case (either 1st submitter's sub doesn't show on map or the cross-hairs do not mean they are first)
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14892 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Fri May 29, 2009 12:15 am Post subject:
So that's still the answer to "Was my submission the first?" for 99.5% of submitters - if you can see crosshairs on the map, you're in with a pretty good chance of a free lifetime membership when a Verifier gets there. It's also 99.5% certain that if you can't see crosshairs, you don't have a chance.
But I should warn you all that MaFt tends not to put crosshairs in the middle of the Irish and/or North Sea - didn't you recently have a very angry Irish Sea submitter MaFt? _________________ Dennis
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!
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5
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
.... the asbestos underpants were getting a bit warm 
Same for cameras. New camera, new race, only one gold medal. Although I do see your point. Win the next cam race and no further gold. But this aparantly does not dissuade the current lifers from entering the race again for no 'reward'.
Why would they subscribe if they could get free membership, other than to have the best cam database around? Surely this is enough incentive to subscribe. Apart from that, if they have not subscribed, they do not have the database 
(other than under the 'household' rules, then the subscriber would get gold if they won the race) so how do they know that the cam is not in the database already?
