Existing problems reported with 33
- I can't get into the swarm stats page, getting Error 500 Sorry, something has gone wrong whether I try from home or from the swarm page, both of which go to https://beta.slowways.org/swarm-stats (I was logged in on Chrome on a Windows laptop but get the same result not logged in on Safari on an iPad mini). I am trying to write an article for the Walkers are Welcome internal newsletter, I have this currently (from Facebook) At the time of writing some reports are yet to be received but, nationally, Slow Ways report that, during the swarm :195 routes had been reviewed; 2,008.0 km (1,247.7 miles) of reviews had been shared; 33 routes had been fully verified. I hope this is reasonably accurate. Reported 06 Apr 2022
- 😝😤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
- This request was created from a contribution made by Guy Brindle on 23 April 2021 21:33 UTC. Wadcam (one?) may need to become a ghost route. Link: https://slowways.zendesk.com/hc/en-gb/community/posts/360015251857-WadCam -- There are some issues with this route. It looks fine on paper, and this is my local area for walks. The start of this walk off the Camel Trail to Sladesbridge is possible but it is under review to upgrade the route. The route from Sladesbridge along the bridlepath to to the road just past Rocksea Mill cottage is fine. However, you have a problem from Allenbrook to Littlewood Mill it is a path but it is private property. The public footpath starts there but turns off uphill after some 100 meters. Again if you continue along the proposed track you are going onto private property once more till you reach the gate on the road which states it is not a public right of way, and permission is needed to walk through There is no other issues otherwise with this route. However in this stated form this route is not walkable Reported 24 Apr 2021