Difference between revisions of "Talk:Migration Geohash"
imported>CJ (Is this what you mean?) |
imported>Robyn (What CJ said.) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
Yeah I like that idea. So it could be an upgradeable ribbon that you have one of on your userpage to show the largest hash group you have been a part of, and how many people were in it... --[[User:CJ|CJ]] 14:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC) | Yeah I like that idea. So it could be an upgradeable ribbon that you have one of on your userpage to show the largest hash group you have been a part of, and how many people were in it... --[[User:CJ|CJ]] 14:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Exactly, CJ. We can even use the same image and a different colour from the ribbon for most geohashers at a meetup. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 14:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:12, 30 October 2008
Okay, this achievement has been listed on the main page for a long time and no one has wanted it or made a page for it. That's because no one thinks they'll ever see 50 people at a geohash.
So should we delete it, or change it to meeting 50 geohashers, cumulatively, one at a time if necessary? -Robyn 03:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, that wouldn't be migration. I figure this could only happen if the hash occurred at a major event, and the count included non-hashers. I like the idea of a meeting hashers award, but see it as something quite different to this.
Hashers in my grat:3
Hashers I've met:1 (It was me)
-- UnwiseOwl 04:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
That's what I mean, it's an achievement that no one is going to get unless they live in San Francisco or Boston. No one has wanted to even make a page for it. It's not inspiring anyone. Every time I look at the red link and try to make a page for it I just think "meh." It would be migration if you met the fifty people in different graticules. -Robyn 04:35, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Unless you counted non-hashers. Then it would merely be unlikely. I have no particular attachment to it... -- UnwiseOwl 04:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
I think it's worth leaving, but perhaps consider reducing the number from 50 down to say 15? (ie still a sizeable group, but much more likely). The largest hash we have had here in Sydney had 9 people attend (I met 6 people I didn't already know), and I very nearly got together group of around 20 for one of the hashes, but plans fell through... --CJ 13:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
It could have ranks, or perhaps just be for meeting lots of people, and the individual can decide what's lots and the ribbon can show the number. So for each page it would show the most people a particular geohasher has ever met at a geohash. One is impressive in, say, Slave Lake, and 50 remains impressive in San Francisco.-Robyn 14:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I like that idea. So it could be an upgradeable ribbon that you have one of on your userpage to show the largest hash group you have been a part of, and how many people were in it... --CJ 14:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Exactly, CJ. We can even use the same image and a different colour from the ribbon for most geohashers at a meetup. -Robyn 14:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
