Talk:Bicycle geohashes

From Geo Hashing
Jump to: navigation, search

The "own cycling page" Arvid joked about in his last update isn't a bad idea. We could have totals here and say that if you have more than ten lines in the table for cycling expeditions, that you have just the total here, and link back to your own cycling grid.

- Robyn

I disagree that geohashes on this page cannot involve non-bicycle means of transport. The bicycle geohash ribbon is another matter. It definitely requires that bicycle alone be used to reach the geohash. And bicycle distances on this page must be distances actually cycled. But if, in order to get to the geohash the cyclist takes a train to reach another graticule, hitchhikes part way with a fellow geohasher who is using a car, uses a shuttle or public transit to bypass an unpleasant or illegal area to cycle, takes a ferry across a stretch of water, or disembarks from the bicycle and rents a kayak to reach a water point, I think that the effort he or she puts into cycling should not be discounted. -Robyn 22:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I quite agree that cycling at least part of the way to a hash is good. And I would definitely support the idea of a list containing all hashes for which some or all of the distance was covered by bike. I would aspire to being on it, even. However, calling the page containing such a list "Bicycle geohashes" surely creates the idea that it is a page of bicycle geohashes -- that is, expeditions that meet the requirements for the bicycle geohash achievement. At least, that's what confused me. I could be abnormally dim.  :-) -- Benjw 22:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
You don't seem abnormally dim, and it confused you, so your point is well taken. What would you rename it to? Geohashes using bicycles? Cycling distance? I recommend you suggest your favourite and run it by a couple of the heavy cyclists, like Arvid, relet or thepiguy and then move the page. Yay for wiki. -Robyn 22:41, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Cycling geohashers, perhaps. Not sure. I'll think about it and will consult the heavy cyclists tomorrow, if they haven't made their thoughts known already by then. Time for bed now. Thanks for all your constructive comments! -- Benjw 22:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I think with the now-reworded note in the beginning of the page, it doesn't have to be renamed. Also, I was thinking about adding another achievement ribbon for combined puclic transport and bicycle usage or something like that. And still keep all the bike rides at Bicycle geohashes (or maybe rename it). Koepfel talk 22:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't think there is any need for renaming, neither for a special combined public transport + bike achievement. The public transport achievement works well for that. --Ekorren 23:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

On another note, I just notice that the description of the page disagrees with common use in another detail: According to the exact description, only expeditions which reached the coordinates should be listed. By now, I listed all of my expeditions, also if I did not reach the coordinates. To be honest, if I had to remove them (and I'm not the only one), my motivation to do bike expeditions would drop a bit. I would strongly suggest to change that part so that all expeditions done for a significant part by bike may be listed (as basically done already). --Ekorren 23:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I think you have accurately represented the spirit of the page. -Robyn 23:03, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I didn't think of that! But I'd agree with that as well. -- Benjw 04:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the message Benjw! I've been using it to record any cycling done even if I didn't reach the coordinates or if I had to use another method of transportation (which I usually do, what with living on an island and all). I don't see any reason to move the page though, if we wanted to be really strict (something I also don't see the need for) we can always use the Bicycle_Geohash page itself. Thepiguy 00:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
yeah, just modifying the description should be ok, making it obvious that there are two pages, and how they differ. I admit I was also confused about it to start with though. mykaDragonBlue [- i have no sig -] 01:38, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Everyone seems to disagree with me here. But other than "it's easier to leave things as they are", I'm still not sure why people think it's a good idea to have one page called Bicycle geohash which gives the strict rules for claiming an all-bicycle, coordinates-reached expedition; and another page called Bicycle geohashes which lists a completely different set of not-all-bicycle, coordinates-maybe-not-reached expeditions. Perhaps someone could explain why this is a good thing, please? -- Benjw 06:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm seeing more apathetic agreement than disagreement. There's also a lot of "I didn't understand it originally, but now I do". Moving the page to somewhere with a decent and less confusing name would not, I think, bring much complaint in the end. mykaDragonBlue [- i have no sig -] 07:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
In response to being asked for my opinion: That only a bike-only-and-coordinates-reached expedition is valid for earning the original bike geohash achievement is okay. In my opinion it would be also possible to get it for an expedition where you cycled all the way but the hashpoint is inside a house and thus you "fail" at the door, within some metres of the hashpoint; On most expeditions you won't carry your bike the last 20 metres inside the forest/field either, but leave it for the last tiny bit. But then it would be a case of "5 metres is okay, 1 km is not, where is the limit?", so it would be better to keep it with coordinates-reached-only.
So far, I have used this Bicycle geohashES page to also list my failed expeditions, as long as I made them by bike (+feet) alone. The expeditions where I used public transport + bike I listed on a special page, User:Danatar/Distances , separated by mode(s) of transport and with the table columns that I deem sensible. I won't add those expeditions to the Bicycle geohashes page, but if this page is going to be "every expedition including a bike", I can just add the total distance here. If the name is changed, I'd prefer "Expeditions with bicycle" or Robyn's "Geohashes using bicycles". "Cycling geohashers" sounds like a category name ("add yourself here if you do expeditions by bicycle"). - Danatar 14:25, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Here's my three part answer:
  • It's a good thing to have a strict requirement for the Bicycle geohash achievement, otherwise someone can drive their bike to the city park on their car, and then take it down, ride the last 500 m and claim the achievement. That could tick off the people who actually bike to their geohashes.
  • It's a good thing to have a page documenting all the cycling people do, because it's impressive and it inspires people to mount exciting cycling expeditions and to ride their bikes.
  • It's a Meh, who cares thing to have the similar names. The names of the respective pages are a possible source of confusion, but the people who use them are used to it and don't really care. I agree with Myka (below) that you have found no serious objections to renaming the page, so move it to your favourite alternative, and everyone will still be able to find it via the automatically created redirect. -Robyn 14:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)