Difference between revisions of "Talk:Regional geohashing achievement"

From Geohashing
imported>Arvid
imported>Wmcduff
m (Reply)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
===Land Hashes?===
 
Why do they all have to be land hashes?  What's wrong with an air hash or a geohash in the territorial waters of the region? -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 03:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 
Why do they all have to be land hashes?  What's wrong with an air hash or a geohash in the territorial waters of the region? -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 03:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 
P.S. Sorry about editing while you were still working on it. I thought you were done.
 
P.S. Sorry about editing while you were still working on it. I thought you were done.
Line 16: Line 17:
 
A regional geohash was one of those awards I felt needed to be made; it's something that people will instinctively go for anyway, I think. -[[User:Wmcduff|Wmcduff]] 03:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 
A regional geohash was one of those awards I felt needed to be made; it's something that people will instinctively go for anyway, I think. -[[User:Wmcduff|Wmcduff]] 03:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
  
 +
===Enshede===
 
Let me get this straight, I live in the Province of Overijssel, which is for >95% in my [[Enschede| own graticule]], but there are tiny edges in 52 5 and in 52 7. I'd have to wait until a hash actually falls in my Province in those graticules, and visit them. (which is a PITA for 52 5, since thats around 100km away). It sounds fairly easy, but chances make it hard. ARGH. Last sunday(17-8) was a [http://irc.peeron.com/xkcd/map/map.html?date=2008-08-17&lat=52&long=7&zoom=12&abs=1 perfect chance] to get it in 52 7! I didn't go! (why do I remember this?)--[[User:Arvid|Arvid]] 05:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 
Let me get this straight, I live in the Province of Overijssel, which is for >95% in my [[Enschede| own graticule]], but there are tiny edges in 52 5 and in 52 7. I'd have to wait until a hash actually falls in my Province in those graticules, and visit them. (which is a PITA for 52 5, since thats around 100km away). It sounds fairly easy, but chances make it hard. ARGH. Last sunday(17-8) was a [http://irc.peeron.com/xkcd/map/map.html?date=2008-08-17&lat=52&long=7&zoom=12&abs=1 perfect chance] to get it in 52 7! I didn't go! (why do I remember this?)--[[User:Arvid|Arvid]] 05:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 +
 +
Yep.  It's in Extreme Geohashing for a reason. :)-[[User:Wmcduff|Wmcduff]] 11:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:31, 23 August 2008

Land Hashes?

Why do they all have to be land hashes? What's wrong with an air hash or a geohash in the territorial waters of the region? -Robyn 03:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC) P.S. Sorry about editing while you were still working on it. I thought you were done.

No worries. And good point. I suppose they should all be within the region boundaries; however, is a mile off Vancouver still 'in British Columbia'? Doesn't feel like to me, for some reason. -Wmcduff 03:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

A mile off the ooast of Vancouver is not yet calf-deep in water. I'm pretty sure that's in BC. If I wade too far south the US border guards are going to be pretty sure it's in Washington State. And what about lakes and rivers? I would think that if it's in the graticule and not in international waters or in the territory of another country, it's in the region. But I can follow your rule. Just wanted to make sure you hadn't accidentally excluded some valid hashes. Or just completely fail to need to follow it, as there is no way I'll get all of BC if I can't air hash the remote graticules. -Robyn 03:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Too true; it's an extreme category, though, and the ocean just feels like cheating to me. Granted, feel free to adjust if you disagree.

Also, I would define a graticule as a must get if part of the land borders was in a grat (for examples of hard ones, south of Eureka, California, west of Key West, Florida, Kekerengu, New Zealand, or Seacow Pond, Prince Edward Island). That's where the 'land' comes from. I suppose I should say something like a hash in each grat where that region's land extends to, but I need a more elegant way of putting it.

Yes, definitely you must get a hash in every graticule that touches any part of the region's land territory. And if the graticule crosses a region border you must get a hash on your own side of the border for it to count. Thomcat is busy trying to do that for Washington State. How long do you think it will take you to do NB? -Robyn 03:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No hope of that, alas, in the near future; I return to British Columbia on Saturday the 30th. British Columbia is nigh impossible as well. Perhaps once I finish my degree in four months I can take a shot at somewhere.

A regional geohash was one of those awards I felt needed to be made; it's something that people will instinctively go for anyway, I think. -Wmcduff 03:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Enshede

Let me get this straight, I live in the Province of Overijssel, which is for >95% in my own graticule, but there are tiny edges in 52 5 and in 52 7. I'd have to wait until a hash actually falls in my Province in those graticules, and visit them. (which is a PITA for 52 5, since thats around 100km away). It sounds fairly easy, but chances make it hard. ARGH. Last sunday(17-8) was a perfect chance to get it in 52 7! I didn't go! (why do I remember this?)--Arvid 05:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep. It's in Extreme Geohashing for a reason. :)-Wmcduff 11:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)