IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

55 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Newbury's CCTV
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 01:15 AM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



I have heard rumours that there is or was a problem with the radio links between Newbury and Windsor.

On top of that, I was drawn to a comment on the news page.

"He added that while the shop was within range of a CCTV camera, he did not think it had been captured on tape. A West Berkshire Council spokesman, Phil Spray, said: “Obviously the cameras are moving all the time for monitoring purposes and so there is no guarantee that this incident has been captured. We will ask the police to review the tapes to see if any evidence of the damage has been recorded.”"


Are they having to 'move' to make up for a short-fall in the number we now have?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Dec 24 2010, 10:59 AM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



I don't know how you read that rather ambiguous statement, but I took it to mean the cameras stay in the same place, but are panning around.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 11:14 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (JeffG @ Dec 24 2010, 10:59 AM) *
I don't know how you read that rather ambiguous statement, but I took it to mean the cameras stay in the same place, but are panning around.

Maybe, but if there are fewer cameras, then it stands to reason that the cameras 'have to move' to cover ground; zooming in when an incident is observed. If it is not a case of fewer cameras, then it suggests that even being in Newbury town centre doesn't come with any reasonable CCTV protection, possibly suggesting they are a rather flawed idea.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 11:22 AM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



I have heard rumours that Newbury's ANPR system has been adversely affected as well. I understand that the ANPR alarm might not be being 'responded' to in such a timely manner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Dec 24 2010, 01:04 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



This needs to sorted and quickly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 24 2010, 01:15 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Dec 24 2010, 01:04 PM) *
This needs to sorted and quickly.
Yes, people need to stop posting silly rumours.

It's Christmas Eve not April Fools Day.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 01:17 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (user23 @ Dec 24 2010, 01:15 PM) *
Yes, people need to stop posting silly rumours.

It's Christmas Eve not April Fools Day.

Presumably you are in a position to refute the rumour?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 24 2010, 01:24 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 24 2010, 01:17 PM) *
Presumably you are in a position to refute the rumour?
No more than you can substantiate what you've read as rumour on another chat board and posted on here. In almost all cases the burden of proof is on the person making the accusation.

It's a prime example of why you should never take local chat forums too seriously and they should never be used for proper political debate. Rumours are taken as fact until they are refuted, that and Garvie jumping on yet another bandwagon whilst still in the USA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 01:28 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (user23 @ Dec 24 2010, 01:24 PM) *
No more than you can substantiate what you've read as rumour on another chat board and posted on here. In almost all cases the burden of proof is on the person making the accusation.

It's a prime example of why you should never take local chat forums too seriously and they should never be used for proper political debate. Rumours are taken as fact until they are refuted.

I qualified my posts with the words 'allegedly' and 'rumour', so I have no need to explain to you sir. I have heard a rumour and have reported as such. You are in no position, it seems, to refute the claims; that is good enough for me. Perhaps someone in authority might like to know these rumours are spreading whether this forum exists or not, so they might like to clarify the situation.

I can assure you these forums play a bigger role in local 'democracy' than you like to make out. BTW RG is back in West Berks, not that it makes any difference in this case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 24 2010, 01:32 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 24 2010, 01:28 PM) *
I qualified my posts with the words 'allegedly' and rumour, so I have no need to explain to you sir.
This is commonly called having ones bluff called I think.

Always best to check before copying the work of a wind up merchant on another forum. laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 01:35 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (user23 @ Dec 24 2010, 01:32 PM) *
This is commonly called having ones bluff called I think. Always best to check before copying the work of a wind up merchant on another forum. laugh.gif

What are you talking about? I reported a rumour. That is all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bartholomew
post Dec 24 2010, 01:41 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 8-August 09
Member No.: 261



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 24 2010, 01:35 PM) *
What are you talking about? I reported a rumour. That is all.

Sounds like he's trying to change the direction of this thread.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 01:42 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Bartholomew @ Dec 24 2010, 01:41 PM) *
Sounds like he's trying to change the direction of this thread.

Of course he is. That is his mission.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 24 2010, 01:43 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 24 2010, 01:35 PM) *
What are you talking about? I reported a rumour. That is all.
Then you implied it must be true if no one on this chat board can refute it.

Quick question for you. Do you think public bodies, Newbury Town Council for example, should employ someone to spend all day refuting rumours on internet chat boards?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Dec 24 2010, 01:54 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 24 2010, 11:22 AM) *
I have heard rumours that Newbury's ANPR system has been adversely affected as well. I understand that the ANPR alarm might not be being 'responded' to in such a timely manner.

Does Newbury have an ANPR system? Was there ever one?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 24 2010, 01:58 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Dec 24 2010, 01:54 PM) *
Does Newbury have an ANPR system? Was there ever one?
Who cares say some, what matters is Newbury might have one and it might not be working now. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Dec 24 2010, 02:02 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Dec 24 2010, 01:54 PM) *
Does Newbury have an ANPR system? Was there ever one?

Yes, that's a new one on me. There is one in Northbrook multi-storey that prints your registration on the ticket, however. Whether it's linked to any database of missing/stolen vehicles I don't know (I doubt it somehow).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 24 2010, 02:03 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (user23 @ Dec 24 2010, 01:43 PM) *
Then you implied it must be true if no one on this chat board can refute it.

No I didn't, that was your take. The point I make is that who are you to say that rumours shouldn't be listened to, or indeed posted.

QUOTE (user23 @ Dec 24 2010, 01:43 PM) *
Quick question for you. Do you think public bodies, Newbury Town Council for example, should employ someone to spend all day refuting rumours on internet chat boards?

I think the councils like the one you mention should ensure the best possible standards, and if they are not met, then they should act accordingly. It is incumbent on the population to take an interest in local affairs if they wish those standards to be met.

Most places have information officers of some kind; it wouldn't be a full time job to monitor what is posted here for that which is relevant to the council. Indeed, I suspect the juicier stories would be taken up by NWN and the council would be contacted in any case. So perhaps it wouldn't be necessary.

On the whole, I think public relations is one of the poorer aspects our governance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Dec 24 2010, 02:03 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Can I just say User23, that the biggest concern for me is the vastly reduced number of cameras in West Berkshire. On top of that, there has been issues with the radio system (fact), and I believe West Berks have sent somebody to Windsor for an initial period of time to help train operators there on local knowledge. This isn't "another bandwagon" as you put it, I've actually been highlighting this issue for some time.

We can deal with teething issues, but for the radio systems and other equipment to fail in this manner may be seen to have been a lack of foresight on the Councils part. Let me give you an example. When I worked in retail management, we had access to all of the CCTV cameras in store, as did the head office. Is it not possible that the operation could have been run from Newbury for a little longer, whilst Windsor were also viewing the same cameras whilst learning the area. At that time, the systems could have been tested, and if there was a technical hitch on the Windsor side, it could have been resolved whilst the Newbury control room was still in operation.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 24 2010, 02:07 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 24 2010, 02:03 PM) *
Most places have information officers of some kind; it would be a full time job to monitor what is posted here.
You're seriously advocating the Town Council paying someone no doubt a five figure sum per year to someone to refute rumours on chat boards all day?

What about Thatcham Town Council, Hungerford, Tilehurst? How much would that all cost?

Absolutely barmy at any time and even more absurd given the current climate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

55 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th June 2019 - 07:00 AM