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!
Joined: Mar 18, 2004 Posts: 788 Location: Midlands UK
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:01 pm Post subject: Lifetime members spotting cameras
Of the 27 submissions that qualified for Lifetime Membership, 23 were already Lifetime Members. To qualify for a Lifetime Subscription it is a condition that you MUST hold a valid subscription at the time that your report is submitted.
And so this week we welcome 4 new members to the club.
So why not let 23 members have a free lifetime sub?
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.
Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Posts: 2145 Location: Midlands, UK
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:07 am Post subject: Re: Lifetime members spotting cameras
technik wrote:
Of the 27 submissions that qualified for Lifetime Membership, 23 were already Lifetime Members. To qualify for a Lifetime Subscription it is a condition that you MUST hold a valid subscription at the time that your report is submitted.
And so this week we welcome 4 new members to the club.
So why not let 23 members have a free lifetime sub?
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.
I can see what you mean, but those are the rules.
People buy Lotto tickets, no one wins the main prize, do they keep drawing another six numbers till some one wins that week, NO
Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 454 Location: Worcestershire
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:50 am Post subject: Re: Lifetime members spotting cameras
technik wrote:
So why not let 23 members have a free lifetime sub?
Which 23? They didn't report the camera first so didn't qualify
Quote:
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.
Everyone has the same chance to report the camera first and the purpose of this site is not to get a free subscription. The purpose is to provide the most up to date camera database around. Most of the lifetime subsciption members still report cameras they see (be they new ones or seen again mobiles). No one is denied the chance of a lifetime subscription, they just need to be the first to report the camera.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14892 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:35 am Post subject: Re: Lifetime members spotting cameras
technik wrote:
And so this week we welcome 4 new members to the club.
So why not let 23 members have a free lifetime sub?
I wonder how much longer we are going to pursue this foolishness? The rules of this award are straightforward - the free lifetime membership is a reward for speed and accuracy. Which other 23 members should we reward? The 23 who were first to submit a camera report, irrespective of whether it was accurate - e.g. this week, the first person to submit a camera is Joe, who submits a camera with coordinates about a mile to the left of Blackpool pier, which is absolutely no use to the database whatsoever. But if we change the rules to allocate free membership to the next submitting member after the 23 existing lifers, this guy gets a free membership just for turning up!
The idea is to get new cameras into the database accurately as fast as possible. For 50p a week, you get the benefit of that diligence. As an added bonus, if you join in the diligence, you have a chance to win a free lifetime membership. Simple. Now for goodness sake, let's drop it.
You drew our attention to the TomTom special offer of £14.95. If you are so dissatisfied with pgpsw, wouldn't you be better off taking advantage of that? I currently have three devices, all covered by my pgpsw membership. The TT camera database would cost me three subscriptions - I was going to say "the equivalent TT database", but of course it isn't even halfway equivalent! _________________ Dennis
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:06 am Post subject: Re: Lifetime members spotting cameras
Pocketgps wrote:
Pocketgps Corrected to 'technik' wrote:
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.[/b]
I can see what you mean, but those are the rules.
People buy Lotto tickets, no one wins the main prize, do they keep drawing another six numbers till some one wins that week, NO
And is it 'unfair' to win two prizes in a raffle? There are no rules there that insist that you 'give it back' and daw again, which your suggestion amounts to. The main difference is that our second 'prize' to an existing lifer is totally valueless, other that to give the person a sense of satisfaction .
Last edited by M8TJT on Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Calm down everybody - it's not that important that we get so worked up about it.
I tried a few times to report a camera before anyone else - eventually I succeeded. I found it fun and I certainly wasn't offended when I got beaten to the tape. Maybe others feel different but personally I had no problems paying my subs until I was offered the life membership.
If you think about it, it's just a "race" to the finish line. If the winner happens to already be a life member, then so be it. There's no favouritism in the race. This month it just happened that 23 winners were life members - other months, it's different.
Where it could be improved would be to tell the losers in a nice way that they didn't win this month - just a comfort factor to make them feel better. At the moment (as far as I know), there is no response mechanism if you don't win - and that can be disheartening.
[edit] Actually, I can think of another way to make it better. If the map where you do the reporting shows the unverified cameras, then you know not to bother - someone else has got there first. But I don't know how easy that is to implement.
Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 19991 Location: West and Southwest London
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:16 am Post subject:
I can (sort of) understand the frustration, if your main concern is to get a life subscription for yourself; but look at it this way....
Do you really want a life member who lives in a remote part of the country to IGNORE a new camera he sees, just so someone else MIGHT come along in a week or two and report it???
That is the simple reason for "lifers" continuing to report cameras, i.e. for the improved accuracy of the data..
I have to say, speaking as a verifier, I find getting our names "up in lights" again is a small reward for all the wasted journeys we make to check out reports of new cameras that don't actually exist! (Probably 80-90% of the ones I check out ).
Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 454 Location: Worcestershire
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:42 am Post subject:
alan_sh wrote:
Actually, I can think of another way to make it better. If the map where you do the reporting shows the unverified cameras, then you know not to bother - someone else has got there first. But I don't know how easy that is to implement.
Slight problem with this because this could stop some reports being made that are either slightly more accurate or reporting a mobile that is seen again. I also seem to remember reading somewhere that if multiple people report a camera (or a change to an existing one) in the same location then it could be added sooner.
Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Posts: 2145 Location: Midlands, UK
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:27 pm Post subject: Re: Lifetime members spotting cameras
M8TJT wrote:
Pocketgps wrote:
Pocketgps wrote:
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.[/b]
I can see what you mean, but those are the rules.
People buy Lotto tickets, no one wins the main prize, do they keep drawing another six numbers till some one wins that week, NO
And is it 'unfair' to win two prizes in a raffle? There are no rules there that insist that you 'give it back' and daw again, which your suggestion amounts to. The main difference is that our second 'prize' to an existing lifer is totally valueless, other that to give the person a sense of satisfaction .
Why have you put my name in the quote box. 'technik' wrote that and quote:
Quote:
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.
Joined: Jan 14, 2005 Posts: 19638 Location: Blackpool , Lancs
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:02 pm Post subject:
As I recall that camera to the left of the pier in Blackpool was further than a mile out to sea - It was closer to Iceland than the UK, I am sure all the verifiers will at some point have driven to check a location using their own fuel only to find nothing at the location or sometimes a CCTV looking at a shop entrance etc.
The free life membership scheme works and acts as an incentive for members to submit locations, if lifetime members continue to submit data then they should be applauded for doing so as it enhances the accuracy of the data for everyone. Mike
I am one of the new lifetime members, which came as a pleasant surprise when I saw my name on the home page. (Thanks guys )
My aim was and still is to contribute to and have use of the most accurate database of 'VERIFIED' safety camera locations.
I think the system as it stands is fair. And credit should be given to any subscribed member who spots a new camera that is verified.
The reward of lifetime membership was not a goal I aimed for, but it is something I do appreciate, and no doubt previous submissions I have made have just confirmed an earlier camera submission by somebody has benefited from lifetime membership after verification.
Why not give lifetime members a level that reflects their contribution and number of succesful submission to camera database.
e.g. lowest being Lifetime member, followed by Bronze Lifetime Member then silver, gold and Platinum Lifetime Member , (number of cameras verified to be set by staff)
well its only an idea! _________________ Mick
Go 1005 in need of resuscitation
GO 950 Dead,
GO 920 Dead
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15138 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:14 pm Post subject: Re: Lifetime members spotting cameras
Rick-uk wrote:
technik wrote:
It seems unfair that if a lifetime member spots a camera, other members are denied the chance of a lifetime membership.[/b]
Similarily do you think Sir Steve Redgrave should hand back 4 of his olympic gold medals and let those that came 2nd have them?
too right he should! greedy thing....
on a more serious note, it is NOT a competition with 'winners' and 'losers'. it is an offer that we make for those who help us with the database. we don't have to do it, tomtom don't do it and they even ask you to submit corrections that you then have to buy from them! there is not a 'right' to a lifetime membership, it is something we felt would be a good way to thank people for helping. maybe we should just drop the whole thing to avoid such hatred?
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 1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 1 of 4
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
.
).
. I will now correct this on my original. 
