> > Thanks Warin > > "take-home' has a whole new set of logistics issues. Trust me, the > gear is best left at the club. > But you are right when you declare that advertising the club's > presence is important for gaining new blood. > > And so, we're left with marketing versus paranoia f loss..... as to > whether a club more openly advertises its existence on the internet. > That seems to be the main issue at task here. > > > Gary > > On 06/07/17 21:06, Warin wrote: >> Arr .. the old equipment is actual very nice once you get rid of the >> dirt, rust and replace the worn out rubber drives, electrical cables >> etc. >> I have a few local woodworkers around me and they favour the older >> gear. As in older .. say 25+ years. >> The fact that is cast iron means it is very heavy and so moving it is >> going to be a problem for theft. >> They will take the modern portable powered stuff .. easily sold on .. >> and that is easy to replace. >> The reason why they would target the club is that they see it as not >> as well protected as some other target. >> >> So - how to reduce the risk? Take the 'attractive' portable power >> tools home after each meeting? >> People may want to use them at home anyway, so loaning them out ... >> provided they come back or can be easily collected if required might >> be good. >> >> Could look at using OSM as a base map and then applying an overlay of >> the clubs area on top of that. >> But you will need your own website to display it and have a displayed >> means of contacting the individual clubs .. >> Once that is displayed then anyone can contact the club - find out >> where it is and when meetings are not taking place and target them. >> The anti theft thing gains little.. and the loss is that it is not >> displayed/advertised on the OSM map which has a wide audience - most >> cell phone users have an OSM source map on their phone. >> Unless the club wants to hide away and not have any new blood then I >> see little advantage in not advertising the clubs presence .. >> particularly to people local in the area. >> >> On 06-Jul-17 08:21 PM, Gary Pope wrote: >>> Warin >>> >>> All good input - agreed. The generic use of >>> 'president.<woodclubname>@gmail.com is already well adhered to. >>> And the matter of searching in the end or the Club as a second step >>> I agree with. It is in fact, from a security/risk point of view, >>> all about mitigating the risks. The outright purpose was to simply >>> ascertain, where , in this fine country, are the 180 clubs. Once >>> people know that one is nearby, then they can resort to other search >>> methodologies t finally find it. >>> >>> Interesting tonight after getting a few terrific replies like >>> yours, to ascertain the real issues legally, technically amd >>> emotionally, and we start asking questions like: >>> >>> 'Who would ant to knock off some 15 year old, outdated machinery >>> anyway?" versus the fact that jewellery companies and cash based >>> firms are already all over the OSM maps - so why would a robber >>> suddenly think woodworking clubs are a target ? >>> >>> >>> You and I are on the same page, Warin. They point still remains, >>> that there are committees on these clubs who remain paranoid, or in >>> fact, sensibly smart, in ensuring that ANY risk of an impact on >>> their not-for-profit club is worth safeguarding. So, if a MAP were >>> to make it 1% easier to FIND such clubs, then such a MAP should be >>> avoided. That's the impression I'm coming too, as I read and >>> evaluate everyone's answers. But the sad conclusion is, that we're >>> running scared of a 1% chance of impact, versus the terrific help >>> and awareness of how to join and enjoy such clubs, could attain. >>> And it is that LAST point that motivates me to find a solution. >>> >>> Thanks, Warin! >>> >>> Appreciate you, like other too, to find time to reply to my >>> passionate query, >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> >>> On 06/07/17 19:43, Warin wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> Andrew has it correct ... the map shows the actual location. Many >>>> things on the map could be targets for theft - car mechanics >>>> garages for instance. >>>> Sorry but I don't see anyway that an area can be mapped for a club >>>> workshop, >>>> the address will be found to anyone who really wants it, all that >>>> putting it in OSM does is makes it a little easier. >>>> A google search on woodworking clubs gets a few hits - most of them >>>> with addresses. >>>> >>>> As for spam emails and emails to past office holders .. too easy? >>>> >>>> Email for club secretary? >>>> [email protected] as an example - >>>> The gmail account can be past from one office holder to the next. >>>> Gmail does filter spam somewhat too. >>>> This may go against gmails rules .. contact them and see if they >>>> can understand the requirement and if they would accept it. >>>> >>>> Phone numbers are some what harder unless you have a landline at >>>> the club premises - there you can forward a call to another number >>>> .. and that number can be kept up to date for the present contact >>>> person. >>>> You will probably need to pay for 2 landlines - incoming and >>>> outgoing - and some equipment to do the job. >>>> If that is too much - a simple landline going to a message recorder >>>> would be very easy. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 06-Jul-17 05:50 PM, Gary Pope wrote: >>>>> Andrew >>>>> >>>>> I think you've explained well, the approach here. The purpose of >>>>> OSM and my desire for a map showing general directory of clubs is >>>>> indeed a mismatch. But nonetheless, worthy of trying, I hope >>>>> you'd agree. >>>>> >>>>> Until a solution for overcoming the risk or the fear of exposing >>>>> the location of the actual clubs is found, then pure OSM appears >>>>> not to be the way forward. But for those (like the six example >>>>> cases) that do want to promote their location, then the way we >>>>> already have it (minimal info to ensure no spam to emails or >>>>> unsolicited calls to phone numbers, or tagging out of date names >>>>> of committee members for instance) - then that aspect was already >>>>> a goer. >>>>> >>>>> I'll standby for some more terrific feedback from this question >>>>> posed today. Thanks for your insight, Andrew. >>>>> >>>>> Gary >>>>> >>>>> On 06/07/17 17:34, Andrew Harvey wrote: >>>>>> Hi Gary, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think that the options are either tag the exact location as >>>>>> club=woodwork or leave it out of OSM. So I don't agree with >>>>>> adding it on the suburb or locality. OSM is a geographic database >>>>>> not a business directory, so we don't have any way to add >>>>>> business without an exact location on the ground. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you'd like to only have a map at the suburb/locality level I >>>>>> think it's a perfect use case of having your own data on top of >>>>>> OSM using something like umap https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/, >>>>>> geojson.io http://geojson.io/ >>>>>> <http://geojson.io/#map=2/20.0/0.0>, or >>>>>> Mapbox https://www.mapbox.com (full disclosure, I work with Mapbox). >>>>>> >>>>>>
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
