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

[Warin]

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.@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'Who would ant to knock off some 15 year old, outdated machinery 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.secret...@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 

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

[Gary Pope]

  
  
Warin 

All good input - agreed.    The generic use of
'president.@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.secret...@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 

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

[Gary Pope]

  
  
Thanks Simon

The 'phone' is not a problem any more, since we thought it best to
just lave that out, to avoid the issue.  WE felt that having the
existence of the club in the 'area' as being sufficient to allow
people to pursue further investigation about where the club
ultimately is, and where to find it.  The thing is,  'clubs' often
have obscure names that relate to something other than the town, and
this is why they are hard to find..  The OSM map was behind the
thinking, as to how to address that one issue.  But then upon
reflection we started to discover all the privacy and risk factors
associated with mapping them.

Thanks for your input tonight.   We decided NOT to include phone
numbers at all, to avoid phone spamming by allegeed
telecommunication, power and insurance companies and the like,  to
avoid frustration by clubs who just want to craft wood.

I'm left with Andrew's fine comment s so far.




Gaz

On 06/07/17 19:34, Simon Slater wrote:


  On Thursday, 6 July 2017 4:48:50 PM AEST Gary Pope wrote:

  
In fact our first draft attempt was to include the phone and email, but we
soon realised that would just be a cause for spam to the email addresses,
and unsolicited phone calls to the owners. PLus, committees change every
year (or so), so there cannot be a 'contact' per se.

  
  
Clubs often have a Public Officer.  This title could be the contact "person", 
irrespective of the appointed person, with official PO box for mail and 
clubhouse phone for calling.

If the OP is in personal contact with clubs about this and privacy is a 
concern, then a suggestion of  answer-phone on at the clubhouse or cheap 
mobile gives a phone contact. Then the frequency of answering and other 
details on the message leave contactability  totally to the club.




  
  
  -- 


  -- 


Gary A. Pope
B.Bus(ACC)
DIRECTOR


Alchester Business Systems
m: 0408-994799 anytime.
p: 03-97626293
e: g...@alchester.com.au
w: www.alchester.com.au
Remote: Communications powered by ABSoutback3!
“We take care of everything!"

  

  

  

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

[Warin]

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.secret...@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/ , or Mapbox 
https://www.mapbox.com (full disclosure, I work with Mapbox).





___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

[Simon Slater]

On Thursday, 6 July 2017 4:48:50 PM AEST Gary Pope wrote:
> In fact our first draft attempt was to include the phone and email, but we
> soon realised that would just be a cause for spam to the email addresses,
> and unsolicited phone calls to the owners. PLus, committees change every
> year (or so), so there cannot be a 'contact' per se.

Clubs often have a Public Officer.  This title could be the contact "person", 
irrespective of the appointed person, with official PO box for mail and 
clubhouse phone for calling.

If the OP is in personal contact with clubs about this and privacy is a 
concern, then a suggestion of  answer-phone on at the clubhouse or cheap 
mobile gives a phone contact. Then the frequency of answering and other 
details on the message leave contactability  totally to the club.
-- 
Regards
Simon Slater

Registered Linux User #463789 @ http://linuxcounter.net

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au