Page 2 of 2

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:09 pm
by Colonel Vilhelm
Call me old fashioned, but if it's on the map, count it as accurate.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:30 pm
by pawelabrams
Umm... I wasn't around here when the dimensions were settled, so I can't judge, but let's trust someone who was there, and preferably voted on the size of Micras...

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:31 pm
by dr-spangle
I was there and corrected a few of the errors in that measurement key back in august '07, it's how i got the job of technical administrator of MCS, I am the one who decides technical values like the scales.

The wiki was based on the old models, it was changed by bill and I, people who knew the values, everything was built on the value of the wiki
More things agree with the value on the wiki than the one on the map, so the wiki one is correct.

1+1=3 because i said so despite the huge evidence against it and masses of applications that say it's 2 is effectively your argument here.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:56 pm
by chrimigules
Why not just fix the scale on the map, then?

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:11 pm
by Colonel Vilhelm
Indeed, what Chris said. All hail the legacy of the Techie- no one doubts your supremacy in these matters- but if it was amended on the map, that would make a lot more sense to everyone.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:22 pm
by Rook
No, my argument here is 1+1=3 because that's what the textbook says. You're argument here is 1+1=2 because your published journal says so and it is the basis for most of your work.

Again, I've never read the wiki. I've never needed to. I have the map. The official map, on the official website. No where on the website, or the map, does it say 'here's our very frequently updated map, but don't pay too much attention to it because it's wrong.' You can't expect the lay-person to be up to date on everything you've done unless it's made evident on the most commonly viewed resource: the map.

Again, I'd like to hear from another cartographer as to the validity of this. I don't doubt that, like now, some change was made, or talked about being made, and people started going the way they thought it should be. I understand why you would be opposed to some of your work being fouled, but I believe that for the common convenience of the user base, not just for us using it now but for everyone who will use this map, for the Bill and Spangles of the future who want to design applications like the ones you've made, this should be made more sensible.

The wiki will not convince me, a change to the next map update will. Until it makes the map, it's unofficial.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:14 pm
by dr-spangle
Well, yes, the map needs fixing, that's obvious by the fact it's wrong. Wrong things need fixing.

Ari, on the bottom right corner of the map is a correct box, it says who the cartographers are, you will find a "Joshua Coales" in there, "Joshua Coales" == "dr-spangle".

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:33 pm
by Rook
You really must think I'm an idiot. How about you read everything I wrote? I use specific words, like 'another,' for a damned reason.
King Ailin of Uantir wrote:Again, I'd like to hear from another cartographer as to the validity of this.
I'm talking about fixing the map, and to be honest even if the map had the values you believe to be the correct ones, this conversation would be happening anyway because your values still include a decimal.

You like to say metric is superior to Imperial. Right now, your way or the map's way, the numbers are Imperial. They don't fit nicely, multiply evenly or convert sensibly. It's time to change that.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:16 pm
by Craitman
King Ailin of Uantir wrote:Again, I'd like to hear from another cartographer as to the validity of this.
As current Cartographer, I have no idea how or why it is like it is because it all happened before I was involved in micronations. I just make sure the map's up-to-date and that there are no æsthetic flaws, not whether its dimensions are correct (because, admittedly, I'm not mathematically or scientifically knowledgeable enough to know what's right and what's wrong with that sorta thing).

To put it in the most basic sense; I didn't make it, I just colour it in...

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:49 pm
by Rook
Thank you. My plan to check with everyone and submit a final proposal will continue. Be it 6.917mi to 7mi or 12km and change to 12km. Spangle's conflict has been noted and will in no doubt be taken into account in any final decision made.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:32 pm
by SaiKar
Nelaga considers opposing on sheer virtue of any proposal that can't spell our name right probably has other, more glaring issues. :wink:

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:27 am
by Rook
Fixed that. I was transcribing all the names off the key of the map. As I was updating a couple of them I noticed syntax errors, such as Alexandrians with two r's.

Re: Proposal: Miles per Pixel

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:55 pm
by Rook
I apologize for the double post, but I'm leaving for basic training in a few days.

There are 36 nations that have land on Micras, not including Uantir. 18 have not responded to forum posts, e-mails or forum registration applications. 17 have responded that they have no conflict with the change. 1 is still in discussion, but since I'm having to run everything through Google Translate into Italian, it's moving slowly simply because we're trying to understand what each other is saying. 1 independent user has conflict with the change.

I leave on March 1st, and am steadily having less time to spend online with my preparations. I have done all the foot work, registered and posted on every forum of every country on the map. Those who noticed, didn't care. The rest are not active enough to respond to a post on their own forums.

So where do we go from here? It's either make the change to 7 miles or 11 kilometers, since no nation has opposition, or do not because of Dr. Spangle's conflict.

If we make the change, what more needs to be done? Calling a vote? Again, I'd really like to know one way or another before I go.