Contents
Trespassing
I live in a rural area full of no trespassing signs that no one obeys. I think they're really there for liability reasons, or to keep out those want to use the land rather than just pass through (harvesters, hunters, bush parties, four-wheelers, dirt bikes). I've been trespassing in areas like these since I was kid, and I've never once had a problem. I'd like to hear from other geohashers about this.
Also, I see there are other geohashers who trespass and document it, and sometimes claim this achievement. Is that in the spirit of the achievement, or is it for those who turned away because of it? Juventas 04:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- The No Trespassing award is definitely for those who respect area where it is forbidden to trespass, and turn back. I acknowledge cultural differences from place to place such that a "No Trespassing" sign may or may not actually forbid hikers, and trust geohashers to respect their own lccal customs, and obey the signs in areas where they are unfamiliar with local customs. A geohash taking place where the landowner forbids trespass should not count as a success. -Robyn 02:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion: Master Trespass Geohasher
There should be a "Master Trespass Geohasher" or similar award for someone who is able to approach the owner of private property and gain permission to enter for the purpose of Geohashing. It's all well and good that we respect private property, but I think we can be a tiny bit evangelical and spread the joy that is Geohashing by letting people know to up what we have been getting. Bah, not logged in -- User:Ted 64.74.213.98 03:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- Ted: there already is one. Its called the ambassador achievement. --Shady 03:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- Perfect. I'll be going for that this weekend; thanks! Ted 22:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Dead Zone/Love Canal/Etc?
Do areas like the Chernobol Dead Zone count for No Tresspassing? (And, conversely, we probably should have a catch all "OMGWTFBBQ!?" ribbon for those insane things that will never happen again. Like leaving the road in the center of the Zone.) --Kyevan 07:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
If the area is signposted with the local equivalent of DANGER HAZARDOUS AREA - KEEP OUT then it's a no trespassing geohash, and the adventurers should take some nice pictures of the signs and turn back. If the area is simply an abandoned nuclear wasteland with no official prohibition on entry then well yes, OMFG what are you doing there? See the disclaimer on the front page about hazardous areas. Also consider whether you want to risk your future heath and yet-to-be conceived mutant children for the sake of a geohash. -Robyn 02:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
No Trespassing Collection Award
One of the purposes of the No Trespassing Award is to discourage people from trespassing. The idea is that people reach the sign, and even though they could reach the point, they turn back, because there's an award for that. But after they've got the award, its incentive goes away. I think we should make an award like the Centurion for a collection of No Trespassing signs. Should it be a hundred? -Robyn 15:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- And a matching achievement for a hundred trespasses called You Can Speak To My Lawyer. So Robyn, I'm guessing you've been having one too many expeditions thwarted by no public access? I can relate. After the last one, I'm starting to lean away from the ones that look easy, and go for ones that require serious bushwhacking. Usually no roads or fields means no fences or signs. Juventas 02:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- No actually, my thwarts lately have all been "not within walking distance of the place I'm stuck with no bicycle." I'm frustrated with the number of geohashers who are trespassing. And make sure you're there at 4 pm when you bushwhack, because one day I'll be sitting on the geohash with a picnic basket. I get around, and the Salmon Arm area is not out of my reach! -Robyn 02:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- The area that I live in is full of No Trespassing and private/government land. In fact I have yet to reach a point due to signs. I like the idea of collecting No Trespassing because there are likely many more in my future. 25 should be a good number to start with. Mr. Bow Tie 01:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Beforehand Knowledge
Anyone want to weigh in on elegibility for this if the actual location's No Trespassing status was identified using technology (in my case, the point is in an established, [NOAA-charted] military restricted zone in a waterway) *and* an alternate location was proposed for the meetup? In this case, geohashers would already know that the point is not accessible, and that fact can be proven using the Internet. Do geohashers need to provide photographs of the signage? Are geohashers eligible if they reach the proposed alternate location and do not attempt to reach the original hash point? - Cordelya 20:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- You definitely need to go as far as you can without trespassing. There are no points ever for staying home saying it can't be done. A photo of the sign is not essential, but an expedition report detailing your approach to the forbidden area should be provided. If the alternate was established for example, at a beach near the restricted area in a waterway, I'd be okay with someone calling that a no trespassing hash, but personally unless I paddled up towards the limits of the area, I'd probably class it as "Did not attempt." An alternate at a fine location unrelated to the algoritm would also be did not attempt, and there is no shame at all in that. -Robyn 21:11, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Error with multiple images
On my user page I have multiple instances of this template, all with different images. This is because I add one for each expedition that earned me the ribbon, so I use different photos. However, I am seeing an error when I edit my page: Warning: User:Macronencer is calling Template:No trespassing with more than one value for the "image" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.. Is this something that can be fixed? The ribbons actually look fine, so perhaps it's an erroneous validation somewhere? --Macronencer (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- The image parameter was called twice. Fixed. --Fippe (talk) 16:02, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Brilliant. Thanks! --Macronencer (talk)
