Talk:2010-08-29 51 4

Expedition category

There appears to be a disagreement. Category:Not reached - Mother Nature or Category:Not reached - Did not attempt? I favour the latter because it was always known, even at the planning stage, that the hashpoint was in the middle of the water. The participants were never aiming to actually reach it, just get as close as possible. Jiml appears to favour the former, I think because some sort of expedition was made at all, so "did not attempt" is not appropriate. But I'll let him explain further if he wishes to.

Thoughts from other geohashers, please? Thanks. — Benjw  _[talk] 09:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

For alternate locations, the convention is to use "Did not attempt (to reach the correct coordinates)". IMHO this applies here too. -- relet 12:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I think that the "Not attempted" pretty much applies only when the expedition is only going to an alternate location. If you actually try to visit the hashpoint, I think it counts as, say, "Not reached - Mother Nature", even if you knew it was out in the middle of the ocean and you stopped on the shore looking out at it. I think it reflects level of effort Jiml 02:22, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

This was an alternative location. The hashpoint was in the sea and they knew that, so they did not attempt to reach the actual hashpoint, but instead went to an alternative location which was set as "the point as close to the hashpoint as possible, while remaining on dry (well, rainy) land". — Benjw  _[talk] 13:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Isn't there some achievement I can claim for bringing confusion to the geohashing community? ;) --Mr. Pi

We are not confused. We just like to discuss in depth. :P -- relet 13:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it depends on intent. If you know the point is near-ish land and you make a vague plan to try and reach it (swim, earn a maker ribbon, &c.) then it would be a mother nature reason to abandon the point. If it's way out in the ocean and you didn't even bring your lifejacket, I'd say it was a did not attempt. So, if you knew it was in the water, and you didn't even get in the water, then it would be a did not attempt. Alternatively, if satellite images say the point is on shore and when you get to the shoreline your GPS says it's 30m into the drink, that would also be a mother nature. This can happen due to satellite images taken during low tide, when a flooding lagoon is dry, before erosion, or before a man-made access like a jetty or wharf is demolished, &c. Splitdipless 12:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I've got a slight side case for this that I thought of when I ran into this page again. A few years ago I set out for Geohashing Day without any hope: Google Maps clearly showed the hashpoint in the middle of a nearby river, and I had no watercraft. But the Geohashing gods decided to grant me a boon: When I arrived at the shore, one of the local watersports stores was having a "demo day" to show off their wares, and I got a ride on one of their boats out to the hashpoint! For me, the spirit of geohashing is getting out into the world and seeing what happens and can happen: Sometimes one stands on the shore waving at the hashpoint and sometimes one gets an unexpected boat ride. Jiml (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Awesome

I love the pictures you took. I was there a lot as a kid while visiting my great-grandpa in Rotterdam. Yay Hoek van Holland! A geohash in the middle of the Maastunnel (the one for bikes and pedestrians) would be most awesome. --Zb 20:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Zb! If I ever go for the Bill Gates award, the Maastunnel would be perfect. --Mr. Pi