[talk-au] TAGGING a 'club' to a suburb rather than its actual street address ot isolate risk of theft/abuse

Gary Pope gaz at alchester.com.au
Thu Jul 13 12:22:14 UTC 2017

> 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?  
>>>> Sidney.Woodwork.Club.Secretary at gmail.com 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).

More information about the Talk-au mailing list