Location secrecy

Aydun · 06 Mar 2013, 1:08 am

Bangers wrote:
aydun wrote:
dougo wrote:Do UEGA have a policy about giving out locations?

I know a lot of (most) urbex forums do.

Just asking.
These aren't really secretive/concealed though. A quick Google search reveals a Wikipedia page of the locations of all these naval towers.
I'v known about this place for years and kept it very quiet, with 1 or 2 trusted exceptions. Never been there since it shut down and envy anyone who has since i'm on the opposite side of the country, But, what happens when someone falls off this thing after seeing someone climbed it on the net? Probably demolition, then everyone loses...

I can't say that i'm not guilty of sometimes giving too much information on occasions in the public domain, but some things are just too good (or dangerous or sensitive) to let the cat out of the bag...

A policy should be in place to protect the identity of places like this on UEGA, no discredit to the person who started the thread though either, i'd want to show off my efforts too, and a great effort this is, but with a little less info maybe, at least location and purpose wise....

Google search or whatever, if someone doesn't know what they're looking for then they're a hell of a lot less likely to find it, and often for the better, we're not a closed community here, posts become public info once published, to inexperienced thrill seekers, vandals, and various groups of people who wear uniforms...

In general, everyone's been pretty good at leaving detaied location details out of their posts on UEGA, let's do our best to keep it that way.......

Enough from me.

New thread in case anyone wants to continue discussion..

I agree for most locations they should be kept hush hush to prevent vandals, injuries etc, but in regards to some, it seems a bit over the top. The tower in discussion can simply be found by searching 'tall tower Victoria' in Google. First result at that. As nick said, it's remote and difficult to climb. If someone's really that keen to climb such a difficult and dangerous tower, I'm sure they can type three generic words into Google to find it/one like it.

Panic! · 06 Mar 2013, 7:02 pm

Variable Omni Range.
I have a fear of heights. Well I have a fear of heights when I am in buildings. But not one when I am in planes.
So I have climbed only a few towers and even then I was not too happy.
So you sir, are far braver than I will be in that situation.
Even with the ladder on the inside the view would scare me.
It would be like climbing down the outisde of the Eiffel Tower (Tour Eiffel).
Please take photos for us, and a safety clip.

Nick · 06 Mar 2013, 8:57 pm

I'd do anything to climb Le Tour Eiffel,

Why not this for a policy "It is up to the poster how much information they wish to post, if they don't post details such as location address, other members must respect this and not post additional location info even if they know such."

I don't think it's fair to expect members to hide details to prevent the retarded from injuring themselves,

ThatLb · 06 Mar 2013, 11:20 pm

I don't think it's fair to discuss something that many have known about for years and kept quiet about, not only "to prevent the retarded from injuring themselves" (as you so eloquently put it) but to KEEP THE LOCATION EXPLORABLE FOR OTHERS (like many other locations that aren't talked about on open forums such as this)

I am aware that a simple Google search with the right words would bring this up (how could it not) but YOU HAVE SINGLE-HANDEDLY RUINED THIS LOCATION, it is now out there on the web as "explorable" (not only because of your thread on this forum, but also because of your Wikipedia photos and wherever else you have posted this information) for ANYONE AND EVERYONE to see.

This is all because you have a lack of respect, both for the location, and for other explorers to be free to explore it (which because of you, more than likely WILL NOT be possible now.)

If you had been around for more than a year (that is a guess, I can't actually remember when I first saw a post from "you" but it wasn't too long ago) you would realise that giving locations such as this publicity, is NOT a good idea. This WILL end in the location being made inaccessible for others in one way or another.

Aydun · 07 Mar 2013, 12:02 am

ThatLb wrote:I don't think it's fair to discuss something that many have known about for years and kept quiet about, not only "to prevent the retarded from injuring themselves" (as you so eloquently put it) but to KEEP THE LOCATION EXPLORABLE FOR OTHERS (like many other locations that aren't talked about on open forums such as this)

I am aware that a simple Google search with the right words would bring this up (how could it not) but YOU HAVE SINGLE-HANDEDLY RUINED THIS LOCATION, it is now out there on the web as "explorable" (not only because of your thread on this forum, but also because of your Wikipedia photos and wherever else you have posted this information) for ANYONE AND EVERYONE to see.

This is all because you have a lack of respect, both for the location, and for other explorers to be free to explore it (which because of you, more than likely WILL NOT be possible now.)

If you had been around for more than a year (that is a guess, I can't actually remember when I first saw a post from "you" but it wasn't too long ago) you would realise that giving locations such as this publicity, is NOT a good idea. This WILL end in the location being made inaccessible for others in one way or another.

"Photos and information/journals of abandoned structures/places in Australia. Use this place for showcasing and documenting only."
Is 'AUS Urban Exploration' not about showcasing our 'expeditions'?

But seriously, it's not like you've been appointed guardian of this place. It's the tallest tower in Australia, and if people want to find a tower to climb, I'm sure they'll manage without the assistance of posts from here.
And as for being marked 'explorable', last time I checked there wasn't a clear cut distinction between explorable and not. I know of people who have climbed the commercial TV towers at Mt Coot-Tha, up here in QLD. I personally wouldn't have thought that would be possible, but apparently it is. Barbed wire and electric fences are less of an issue for some apparently.

I'm sure many of these would be explorable http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ta ... _Australia. Guess I just ruined all of those..

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for keeping things quiet, but only to a realistic extent. If something has its own Wikipedia page, there's really not much point trying to be super secretive. And the fact is, only the most motivated would bother going to these places. They're remote, require fitness, equipment, etc.. I've never been to any (having known about them a priori) simply because they're so far away. The remoteness itself can help in preventing spontaneous stupidity.

Point being, if people wanna climb, they'll find places. There's no point trying to mask what's already in the public domain.

Bangers · 07 Mar 2013, 1:15 am

Referring back to the thread that started all this, to assist to preserve the specific site's condition, and it's future accessibility, it could be suggested that references to the site's purpose and location be removed from the post, as well as a few photo's containing the name of the place (or simply blur certain sections and or a certain word). A bit of mystery is a good thing sometimes.

I could blurt out all kinds of stuff here, but for what, to try and be the best but at the same time risk losing something forever? Not worth it...

The significance and uniqueness of some places far outweighs the need or desire to show them off, even though it may or may not be public information, it's best to just let sleeping dogs lie sometimes... Our moderators should also take this into account, free speech is one thing, but a lack of censorship and self discipline from forum users (regarding disclosure of information) can and will stuff things up for others, not just us here on UEGA, but for the wider urbex community as well...

Loose lips sink ships remember - all forum users, for everyone's sake, please think about the potential consequences of what you write and display to the world, you might not care, but guaranteed a lot of other people do. The majority on here do a great job of this, keep up the good work and lead by example.....

Nick · 07 Mar 2013, 11:24 am

I'll just post my ethical code in regards to this, because I do have one...

If I found it, I share it. Obviously there are exceptions, but that's pretty much how I see it,
I've been to many places, and I've been with many people, take for example certain large underground cavities, beloved by many CC members, and a site that was found by them, I've been, I don't post info on it though as it's clearly not a site I've found on my lonesome.

I've discussed this with many people over the years, and I've had some great adventures because of people finding one of my sites, meeting up and them sharing their sites, it'd be great if UEGA could become the same, if you don't want a site to be shared elsewhere, or if you just don't want to share the details, that's cool, no one is making you.

Urbex is fleeting, that's what makes it awesome, things won't be there forever, they won't always be accessible, things are falling into a state of decay, withering away, so let fellow explorers share in the joy that is climbing through dirty disgusting things society left by the wayside.

Titan · 09 Mar 2013, 10:54 pm

Just a quick note. If this thread gets a little hot it will be closed immediately.

UEGA does have rules about revealing locations. They can be easily found above sections of forums.

To sum it up: Even if location is easy to find please try and not make it too obvious. As your next trim may include an encounter with: some crazy weirdo, police, council, drug addict etc etc... you simply don;t know.

A place preserved with minimal graffiti (Or none) is way cooler to explore than a thrashed pos junk yard type place.