Existing problems reported with 14
- I think this review is also on the wrong route. It mentions going on Bowen Drive and past Kingswood House and they are both on WesCry 2 but not here. It's a bit confusing, especially as the writer then discusses a whole load of other roads/places, some of which might actually be on WesCry 1. I saw there is a flag on one of the reviews, so perhaps someone already noticed and adding the flag was the workaround to stop it counting. Reported 16 Sep 2023
- 04.07.21 I was uploading my review of Pathar1 on which I had submitted the allowed total of 15 pictures that I had referenced in the written review. It appears to have deleted all but the 1st 3 pictures "Oops! An Error Occurred The server returned a "413 Payload Too Large". Something is broken. Please let us know what you were doing when this error occurred. We will fix it as soon as possible. Sorry for any inconvenience caused." Reported 04 Jul 2021
- I believe there is no safe crossing on the A1(M) between Stotfold and Caldecote although there are old rights of way on each side of the motorway here. I would recommend routing via Radwell and along Norton Mill Lane which goes below the A1(M), then a bridleway to Ashwell Road, then a byway from Ashwell Road to Ashwell (I have plotted this route, length 14.3 miles, but have not yet been able to upload it). Reported 23 Apr 2021
- This is a follow-up to your previous request #846 "Problem with a General: Site" Hi Christie I have tried to report two bugs/errors for a few days but keep getting Error 500, so I am trying emailing them. First A few of days ago, I accidentally clicked a second time to submit my review of Prebam Two, which I had created, when the first submission didn't show up quickly. My review is now duplicated, so please could you remove one of them. Second My Waylist map is showing Barrhead to Thorniebank (Bartho) which I didn’t add, and have never even viewed. When I click that route, and View Route Details, it takes me to Preley Two. Beneath my review is Other Routes for Barrhead—Thornliebank. Thanks Mary Oz (Austin) Reported 19 Feb 2022
- This is a follow-up to your previous request #1107 "Problem with a General: Site" Hi Cristie! Happy New Year! I asked Tony about what he remembered of Borpot One, and he definitely remembers there was a review too. I think for this specific instance it's maybe not that important, but it does suggest something else may have been going on behind the scenes when the route was accidently removed. Borpot Two is waiting for some better weather! Anyway, thanks for helping to get the 'Two' route back up and running. Jane ________________________________ From: Cristie Moore <[email protected]> Sent: 14 December 2022 12:23 To: Jane Taylor <[email protected]> Subject: [Slow Ways] Re: Problem with a General: Site Reported 03 Jan 2023
- This route runs through the Broad Ride of Cirencester Park from Cecily Hill to Sapperton. This is not a public right of way (according to the online Gloucestershire PROW map). Only the east part of the Broad Ride are open to the public and the gates are locked at 18:00 every evening. To get from Sapperton to Cirencester follow the Thames Severn Way to the Tunnel House and cut across to Coates and then through the Royal Agricultural University farm fields to the Foss Way just west of Cirencester Reported 16 Apr 2021
- There’s a 3km section which is on private land where there’s no Right of Way. This is between Park Lane at Weel Carr and Meaux Bridge. Also, crossing the A165 is dangerous, especially since just nearby there’s an underpass. Reported 13 May 2021
- 😝😤Hi Cristie Apologies for the mess that is the reviews on NEWTEI2. I've had problems in getting hold of Tony and Julie - they can be hard to tie down! Tods is Tony. Chronologically, the first review ("We walked this . . . . . ") is the genuine Tods review entered for him by Julie. Julie then encountered problems in logging on herself and ended up entering her review with Tony's credentials! This appeared not to have worked and so she sent it again (you'll notice the slight differences). Both should have been attributed to Julie Squire (as in the Julie Squire reviews to CHUDAW2 and DAWTOP3). I compounded the problem by adding a comment to the first, plugging the tide issue, and addressing it to "Tods". Don't despair of us! It seems to me that Tods' original review ("We walked this route on Thursday . . . ") should stand. Julie's first review should be attributed to Julie Squire not Tods and the comment(s) deleted (you will see I also made a hash of that! So both comments!). I suspect this may not be possible probably because of the way the algorithms are written or because it amounts to tampering which could be deemed inappropriate. In this case perhaps both Julie's reviews could be deleted and I will work with Julie to restore her access and upload a new review. Annoyed with myself because I should have recognised the different styles, albeit both entered by Julie, but was of the mind that all 3 had been entered by Tony whom I suspect is a bit of a Jamie Oliver - a very clever, successful and delightful character who chooses, rightly, to delegate the written word to others. I am very anxious to resolve things with the utmost sensitively. Sorry, last thing you want on a Monday morning! Just let me know how you want to resolve it. Incidentally, they are both keen to do another and I'm inviting them to do Kingsteignton to Teignmouth which requires attention because it relies on a path that has never existed! Also requires hopping on a double decker bus to start which was a bit of a bonus getting to Newton Abbot 😊. Tony Reported 04 Sep 2023
- Hi Yesterday I surveyed the route Adel to Pool in Wharfedale (Pooade). In the evening I completed a survey questionnaire and spent ages uploading 14 photos, but then at the end got an error message. When I have more time I will try again but I don't want to go to all the effort of typing all my comments and uploading the photos again, if the same thing is going to happen again. I thought it maybe would take time for my report to appear but I've checked again tonight and it isn't there. Is there a problem at the moment with surveys do you know? Thanks Lynne Strutt Sent from Samsung tablet. Reported 13 May 2021
- Hi Cristie, For some time DawTop1 has not worked - it returns an ERROR 500. The Rail Resilience Project has caused closure of sections to which I referred in an earlier review (long lost I suspect) and which also led Dan to create DawTop 2. Should it still exist my original review is no longer valid and neither is Dan's as the major part of his diversion is now no longer necessary. I had posted a July date when the final short stretch was to be opened but unexpected foundation problems have forced this to be delayed and the latest permission states the closure is valid "until 07 September 2022 or when completed whichever is the earlier" (my italics). (The sensitivities of local Parish Councillors have been offended!) I felt some update was called for and have submitted a DawTop3 to which I have added a review and survey to repeat/update data conveyed in my original review/survey. I leave you to decide what further tidying-up is required but it might be worth renaming DawTop3 to DawTop1 and removing the malfunctioning DawTop1 and Dan's alternative (DawTop 2) while retaining his review, photos and validation and Pilea's review and validation in the new DawTop1 (aka Dawtop3) if they are agreeable? All 3 are exactly the same track which is indubitably the most appropriate from 07 September 2022. There are some other issues. I have submitted it with the original DawTop .gpx although I am a little uncomfortable with it. At times it drifts up to 25m from the true track although this is not usually an issue - just means someone following the screen track zoomed in would be aware of apparently criss-crossing the mainline railway on occasions and paddling below the low-water tide line on others! However, it starts from inside Geronimo's coffee bar, ploughs straight through the station booking office walls and exits into the station car park dead-end on the wrong side of the tracks! I have allowed for this in the review. However, if required I can re-walk the route after 7 September (or when possible) and submit a new .gpx track. In the description and review I have also drawn attention to the irregularity of the ferry timetable and the complications of arriving to learn the next ferry is due at 1000 on the first Friday of next month given that a further walk of up to 3km is the only way out to civilisation! Seemed important. While in contact . . . . A couple of other observations. ChuDaw1 includes a seriously dangerous stretch of blind bends on a very busy road without footpaths, bordered by impregnable Devon banks and a reputation as one of the most dangerous roads in the County! I condemned the Way and note another contributor to ChuTei1, which uses the same stretch, has done likewise. It is lethal and frankly the thought that it remains a possible Slow Way worries me. It is inappropriate for anyone (I tried it and felt exceedingly irresponsible and inconsiderate [and a bl---- fool]). I shudder to think of a family, young children or someone with a dog attempting it. I've always thought the star system should allow for zero stars to be awarded as on a dark night even one star is a vote of confidence! My suggested alternative (ChuDaw2) is a really great, off-road alternative - and is actually slightly shorter - even the version I uploaded which in fairness could be shortened still further by using road stretches for the purity of "directness" BUT at the expense of some outstanding bridle ways and paths even by Devon standards. I expect all 4 Daw ways to be snailed this year. This target is closer than appears from just looking at current validations but ChuDaw is proving a bit more of an issue because of its length and climbs. However, we have a tradition of 19th century naval press-ganging in South Devon , , , , , , . . . I also plan to re-visit each of my descriptions and reviews following the full restoration of the seawall which I shall upload using the new edit feature. Thank you, Cristie, for your earlier correspondence and encouragement and I hope you can see your way to perhaps resolving the DawTop problem. Please pass my thanks to Dan also - I was delighted he walked and clearly enjoyed my TeiDaw2 alternative. With very best wishes Tony (Leigh) PS. What a way to start your Friday morning. If you park this email until Monday I shall not be offended :-) Reported 09 Jun 2022
- I have downloaded and printed the survey forms and completed them by hand. How to I send these to you. There are supplementary documents on an error in the route. I was hoping to scan these and send them as a pdf, but cannot find such a facility on the slow ways website. Ken Perrett Reported 30 Apr 2021
- Hi. My husband and I attempted to walk this route today, and a middle section of the published route did not correlate at all with the walking routes available. At one point the route crosses a stream and there is no way of crossing it at that place. It appears that a volunteer walked this route on 7 April but their review is not shown on the website- do you have any more details, and is this type of issue commonplace? We had to deviate from the route with difficulty to complete it. Kind Regards, Karen Reported 10 May 2021
- I surveyed & uploaded a route (strgla one) at the weekend. It appeared this morning without the pictures. I noticed someone else has experienced this on the forum.. is there a problem? Reported 05 May 2021