Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 17 Aug 2017, 23:04
Seriously, what is your problem? Do you psychiatric issues? Threatening, no promising, to get somebody fired because you don't get your way?
tubechallenge.com
Eleven lines - one record
http://www.tubechallenge.com/forum/
Guinness world record regulations
Page 4 of 5
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 17 Aug 2017, 23:58
Well that is indeed "good night nurse" as far as any GWR ever being verified again is concerned then.. Can they really seriously expect you to find a completely random stranger at 0515 at Chesham to agree to be your timekeeper and then meet you at T5 around 2200 hrs and pass the watch to another completely random stranger !!!!!!! This is absolute insanity surelyAn independent person is a professional that is not known to any of the challenge participants prior to the challenge attempt.
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 18 Aug 2017, 11:00
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 18 Aug 2017, 18:08
this new employee has not stuck to the written rules of when we got given the rules in 1st place he has been particulary unhelpful and biased when others in his office have been very nice. and you can **** off for that comment ever met me sir or even spoke to me no so u know **** all about the situation and about me enough to have an opinion like that. !michael_churchill wrote: ↑17 Aug 2017, 23:04Seriously, what is your problem? Do you psychiatric issues? Threatening, no promising, to get somebody fired because you don't get your way?
I stated that he has a complaint he hasn't answered our many questions on the new persons record did he film it all did he have independant witness. if the answer is no then injustice has been done to myself and Steve and someone needs to be liable and if liable then Guinness need to employ better people I don't really care if this person keeps his job or not but i think Caroline of gwr would be better and more reasoned that this alleged rubbish person just like Wikipedia no liability when they make mistakes.
no apologies and no central organisation means illegal organisation I think Guinness have deliberately denied us this record not that we have kept it long anyway.
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 20 Aug 2017, 07:36
OK, let's settle it down here. You two can argue in private if you like.
On the subject of GWR employees, I'm still of the opinion that there can't be just one rogue person who insists on making it as hard as possible for record attempts to be verified without mountains of unobtainable evidence, while everyone else is going, "Yeah, that'll do. Give them a certificate". I would like to think that the management, or whoever is in charge of certain teams of people (I have no idea how GWR is organised) have started tightening these things up for various reasons. As none of us were at the meeting where this was decided, we have no idea why.
No amount of arguing with them is going to make them tell us, especially when certain people (
) send them unhelpfully rude correspondence. That's not going to make them want to help us any more than they already are. They may even just simply decide "screw you lot" and impose impossible requirements (such as a non-stop 16-hour video, or 47 independent stopwatch timers, and a witness statement every 30 seconds). I have a feeling that certain tube challengers have become somewhat infamous among the GWR team, and that may colour their attitude towards the record. After all, they're not obliged by any law to recognise the record if they don't want to.Just face it - you aren't going to be getting a certificate any time soon unless you beat the record, and gather all the evidence they want. Good luck ...
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 20 Aug 2017, 09:59
tubeguru wrote: ↑20 Aug 2017, 07:36dstock17 wrote: ↑18 Aug 2017, 18:08and you can f**k off for that comment ever met me sir or even spoke to me no so u know f**k all about the situation and about me enough to have an opinion like that. ! [/fquote]
OK, let's settle it down here. You two can argue in private if you like. I don't like people who have opinions if they haven't met the person behind them that's all I make no apologies for language and don't feel I have too if Mr Churchill has a problem with that then that's his problem he shouldn't have done comment in 1st place.
On the subject of GWR employees, I'm still of the opinion that there can't be just one rogue person who insists on making it as hard as possible for record attempts to be verified without mountains of unobtainable evidence, while everyone else is going, "Yeah, that'll do. Give them a certificate". I would like to think that the management, or whoever is in charge of certain teams of people (I have no idea how GWR is organised) have started tightening these things up for various reasons. As none of us were at the meeting where this was decided, we have no idea why.
No amount of arguing with them is going to make them tell us, especially when certain people (
Just face it - you aren't going to be getting a certificate any time soon unless you beat the record, and gather all the evidence they want. Good luck ...
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 20 Aug 2017, 12:43
Did you mean to type something with that?
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 21 Aug 2017, 11:54
michael_churchill wrote: ↑17 Aug 2017, 23:02Now I would read that to mean that they would accept the timing by independent witnesses to verify the time taken. If you don't get those witnesses, the video of the entire attempt is the only other acceptable evidence because time-stamped photos and partial videos can be faked. Then you need to provide a reasonable amount of evidence like photos and log books to prove that the challenge was completed to the rules, and that you didn't just go round to the pub for a few hours.Steeevooo wrote: ↑17 Aug 2017, 15:38 I thought that here would be as good a place as any to quote, in full, the appeal rejection email that I have just received from GWR in regards to mine and Andi's Berlin attempt:
Thank you for submitting the appeal of your records decision to Guinness World Records.
After a full Records Management Team review, we have to inform you that the rejection must stand.
The record the Fastest time to travel to all the Berlin U-Bahn metro stations is based on time and so it is absolutely imperative that we have a reliable, independent record of the time taken for the attempt.
The independence, professionalism and reliability of the timekeepers is explicit in the rules of the record are sent to all applicants for this title. The rules state that “…it is necessary to have two independent persons witness the beginning and the end of the record attempt…” and outline that the stopwatch for the timing of the attempt can only be in the possession of independent persons.
Your attempt only had one person and this person was not independent. An independent person is a professional that is not known to any of the challenge participants prior to the challenge attempt. Your sole timekeeper does not meet this criteria, thus there is no independent corroboration of the time taken for your attempt so we have no option but to reject your evidence.
We understand that it is not always easy to arrange for independent witnesses but this is a requirement across all of our records and gathering adequate proof is part of the challenge of record-breaking.
We ask for a variety of evidence to give applicants the best chance of providing sufficient proof that they attempted the record in line with the rules of the attempt.
Unfortunately, your remaining evidence is not sufficient in itself to prove the time taken. You do not have video of the entire attempt that we can reference the time taken from. The time-stamped photographs and videos themselves are not enough to prove the time taken as the data files can be edited or the camera manually set to certain times, whilst photographs and videos that contain clocks can be taken on different dates.
The absence of the independent verification of the time taken, as required by the rules of the record, means that we cannot accept your attempt as a record. We must apply the rules fairly in all cases and it would not be fair to the current holder and other applicants to approve an attempt that we cannot be confident follows our rules.
We understand how disappointing this must be for you after all of the effort you both put in and we hope you will be able to attempt a record in future. However, for the reasons above we are unable to consider this case further and this is the final decision of the Records Management Team.
I think the paragraph that annoys me the most is that beginning "Unfortunately, your remaining evidence...". They complete disregard all of the other evidence that we provided - the log books, the independent witness statements, the train numbers etc. They really do give the impression that unless they have a full video of the attempt and truly independent witnesses as timekeepers (i.e. GWR employees???) that they will not even consider anything else that you offer to them.
I'm pretty much done with records attempts anywhere now.
Anyway, who needs their names listed in a kid's annual? You know and we believe what you did.
Thanks Steeevooo. This is incredibly useful. I also subscribe to what Michael says - The video is back up to if they are questioning the number/independence of the witnesses.
I've taken stock what they have said, and other than it being utterly ridiculous that they are now concerned that the very evidence they are asking for could be manipulated (do they know how hard/time consuming video editing is, or how difficult it would be to convincing compile photos across different days?), the key thing I've taken from it is that they want proof of DATE as well as enough evidence to prove lack of cheating on interchanges, and of the time quoted being correct.
I've going to attempt to do the following:
- Time verification - I'm going to try and take time-stamped photos of the times shown on the platform indicators (not every one!!!) to verify at least part of this. Attempt at least one on each line
- Date verification - I'm going to try to take some pictures including the day's Metro, City AM and Evening Standard. I also think that I could get the independent witnesses to sign both the log book AND on one of the above day's publications, AND where possible get a picture taken of them holding the paper with me (overkill I know, but what can I do), and submitting all of the above. I'm also going to try and take some time and date stamped photos of the paper dispensers at several of the stations - to prove that I haven't just kept hold of one copy of each of the papers from that day (because they might try to claim that that is an easy way to cheat too....)
- Video - I've discovered I can take time-lapse photos on the go pro, that would allow the battery to last 24 hours. Whilst this isn't a full video, they haven't claimed what frame rate video they need!!! I will continue to fully film the transitions, but then switch back to one image every 30 or 60 seconds, to compile into a video, that at least provides a body of evidence for them to review against a lack of cheating vs the reasonable life of the batteries I can get my hands on. The alternative of TWO go-pros to capture when one camera runs out of battery, to film continuously, is utterly ridiculous and not possible with the technology, but I at least feel that this means I'm trying to comply as best as I can
And if all else fails, as Steeevooo says, my aim is to be recognised as the record holder, not the GWR record holder. The name in a book is not the point.
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 29 Aug 2017, 03:03
I wonder if Guinness simply don't realise the difference between a 16-hour record (FNC) and a 16-second record (fastest time to do speed stacks or something) any more in the rules. The new rules on videoing the whole thing seem like it's been slapped on from other records. I think even a professional OB unit might struggle with 16 hours' continual recording. That said, the only records Guinness seem to accept these days, purely from the outside, are either the stupid ones (largest birth mark in the shape of an inverted artichoke or something equally ludicrous) or much-publicised attempts, with hours upon hours of build-up beforehand (the Richie Firth attempt could well have been nodded through within days had he done it).
How much would a record attempt now cost if you're starting from nothing?
The point made earlier in this thread (which I can't find and thus can't quote) that a GWR employee would not be impartial as they would accompany you throughout the whole attempt and thus hold the record themselves is a fantastic legal point. Anyone know any solicitors?
I think Guinness may end up with egg on their face when they get zero official submissions when Croxley/Battersea are opened...
How much would a record attempt now cost if you're starting from nothing?
The point made earlier in this thread (which I can't find and thus can't quote) that a GWR employee would not be impartial as they would accompany you throughout the whole attempt and thus hold the record themselves is a fantastic legal point. Anyone know any solicitors?
I think Guinness may end up with egg on their face when they get zero official submissions when Croxley/Battersea are opened...
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 29 Aug 2017, 09:12
What I actually said was that if a GWR employee was with you for the whole run (as someone else suggested we might eventually be faced with), then yes, they would by definition have completed the record in the same time as the challenger.hopeful traveller wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 03:03
The point made earlier in this thread (which I can't find and thus can't quote) that a GWR employee would not be impartial as they would accompany you throughout the whole attempt and thus hold the record themselves is a fantastic legal point. Anyone know any solicitors?
However that's not the current situation. As things stand, if a GWR employee is used, they only have to be present at the start and finish (as per any other 'impartial' witness).
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 29 Aug 2017, 15:41
To be honest, I'm not sure that Guinness will be losing any sleep if there were to be no further "Fastest time to visit....underground stations" forevermore.hopeful traveller wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 03:03
I think Guinness may end up with egg on their face when they get zero official submissions when Croxley/Battersea are opened...
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 29 Aug 2017, 17:38
I was going to put it less eloquently - "They wouldn't give a flying ****".Steeevooo wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 15:41To be honest, I'm not sure that Guinness will be losing any sleep if there were to be no further "Fastest time to visit....underground stations" forevermore.hopeful traveller wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 03:03
I think Guinness may end up with egg on their face when they get zero official submissions when Croxley/Battersea are opened...
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 02 Sep 2017, 00:47
I think they will. Remember, it is their livelihood...tubeguru wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 17:38I was going to put it less eloquently - "They wouldn't give a flying f**k".Steeevooo wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 15:41To be honest, I'm not sure that Guinness will be losing any sleep if there were to be no further "Fastest time to visit....underground stations" forevermore.hopeful traveller wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 03:03
I think Guinness may end up with egg on their face when they get zero official submissions when Croxley/Battersea are opened...
Should also be noted that I'm very tempted to tear up my Croxley extension route now.
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 02 Sep 2017, 09:35
0.001% of their livelihood maybe. As they don't bother to put the record in the book anymore it clearly isn't high on their list of prioritieshopeful traveller wrote: ↑02 Sep 2017, 00:47 I think they will. Remember, it is their livelihood...
Should also be noted that I'm very tempted to tear up my Croxley extension route now.
Re: Guinness world record regulations
Posted: 02 Sep 2017, 14:35
I'm sure they have plenty of record verifications keeping them busy without having to worry about a FNC ...hopeful traveller wrote: ↑02 Sep 2017, 00:47I think they will. Remember, it is their livelihood...tubeguru wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 17:38I was going to put it less eloquently - "They wouldn't give a flying f**k".Steeevooo wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 15:41To be honest, I'm not sure that Guinness will be losing any sleep if there were to be no further "Fastest time to visit....underground stations" forevermore.hopeful traveller wrote: ↑29 Aug 2017, 03:03
I think Guinness may end up with egg on their face when they get zero official submissions when Croxley/Battersea are opened...