Talk:2010-03-02 49 12
From Geohashing
If the reason for not reaching the coords is that you don't want to walk on a field where things grow, couldn't you claim it a success? You could easily have walked there, you weren't blocked by a fence or a no trespassing sign, it's just respect for the farmer. Someone once told me on the wiki that it was o.k. to claim it a success in case the only reason why you didn't get to the exact coords was respect for whichever grows on the field. But maybe that's one of the things not clearly defined in geohashing and everyone may do as (s)he wants? --Zb 21:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- There isn't any fixed rule of that kind, but an unspoken agreement that you may a success if you could easily have proceeded but restrained out of respect (as opposed to some "I clearly know the hash is in the house, but I got as close as x metres, and I can't fail"). However, you are surely not obliged to call it a success. If there isn't any other achievement in for you which depends on "reached" it doesn't make much of a difference, does it? Geohashing is not about numbers, it's about experience. And the experience outside is just the same whether you categorize it as reached or not reached. --Ekorren 21:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- I go by the "Did I earn this?" rule. In my books the minimum distance needed to claim success is proportional to the amount of effort or skill that was required to get there. If I climbed a mountain, crossed a river and then had to battle an evil dragon and his minions, an extra few meters of leniency seems fair, but if it took a 30 minute drive, I had better nail it. Same for achievements as long as it makes for a good or funny story, why not take that extra achievement! Thepiguy 02:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I enjoy to see how everyone agrees and just like y'all, I also think that the adventure is more about getting there than being there anyway. Happy weekend to everyone! --Zb 10:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- And I also think that if the spot was in a house, you would definitely have to convince whoever lives there that you may be their guest, even if it was just for a minute. On the other hand, on a field, you can't ask the potatoes (or whatever grows there) for a permission, so you are basically "there" even if you don't trample on them. Something else that seems very important to me is the following: If you go to a location, and somebody else also attempts going there at the same time, would you have a chance to meet? That is: Did you get close enough so you would find each other searching the spot? If you can be reasonably sure you would, or if you put up an XKCD marker made from wood or written into the snow, would somebody else have a chance to find it? --Zb 10:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I go by the "Did I earn this?" rule. In my books the minimum distance needed to claim success is proportional to the amount of effort or skill that was required to get there. If I climbed a mountain, crossed a river and then had to battle an evil dragon and his minions, an extra few meters of leniency seems fair, but if it took a 30 minute drive, I had better nail it. Same for achievements as long as it makes for a good or funny story, why not take that extra achievement! Thepiguy 02:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've learned in past expeditions that I'd rather not claim a success in doubtful circumstances than argue with someone about whether it counts or not. My success/failure ratio is very good anyway (thanks to good planning and a generally rather easy graticule) - I can afford to admit I didn't reach the exact coordinates once in a while, especially when I'm not after an achievement that requires success. My frowny face was only for the camera, really I felt more like "eee, nice quiet place here" than "aw, crop!" ;-) --dawidi 22:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
