Difference between revisions of "Talk:Posted achievement"
From Geohashing
imported>Thomcat (My count - 7 so far.) |
imported>Robyn (If you missed it, it must mean it isn't clear.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Sounds like a good achievement to me. Would private property with a fence but no sign count? I presume so. What about no fence either? Or did I miss the already existing clarifications in my late-night reading... --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] 05:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | Sounds like a good achievement to me. Would private property with a fence but no sign count? I presume so. What about no fence either? Or did I miss the already existing clarifications in my late-night reading... --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] 05:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yes, I intended it to apply to any geohash where you stopped because of a barrier, sign or even a bad feeling about accessing an area where you were not welcome. I thought I covered it with "Each "no trespassing" geohash you claim should link to an expedition report showing or describing the sign, fence or checkpoint that turned you back," but please edit the proposal to make the wording clearer. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 05:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 05:06, 20 April 2009
Sounds like a good achievement to me. Would private property with a fence but no sign count? I presume so. What about no fence either? Or did I miss the already existing clarifications in my late-night reading... --Thomcat 05:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I intended it to apply to any geohash where you stopped because of a barrier, sign or even a bad feeling about accessing an area where you were not welcome. I thought I covered it with "Each "no trespassing" geohash you claim should link to an expedition report showing or describing the sign, fence or checkpoint that turned you back," but please edit the proposal to make the wording clearer. -Robyn 05:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
