Community reorganization

[bz2012]

One form of expertise that should be covered (and does not seem to be) is 'communications'.

If you look carefully at many of the problems that WAZE has, they amount to communications problems.

There are several different channels of communications involved. Many of them interact.

Much of the time, the WRONG channel is invoked when a problem is noticed and rather than quickly solving the problem, it escalates.

Let me mention a few of the communications channels.

The MAP itself is the most important communications channel. It allows 'the end users[the drivers]' to receive timely instructions so that they can cope safely with all the problems of navigating a massive implement of death and destruction from one place to another safely. It MUST be the primary focus of everyone's efforts. Of course, the GPS reports of the vehicle's location travel over a communications channel and must be kept 'up-to-date'.

As the territory is always in a state of flux, the MAP is never the territory and the map must be adjusted constantly to reflect changes.

By editing the map, the editors are using a communications channel. They communicate with the drivers and they communicate with other editors. They communicate with the programmers that write the editing software. The importance of these communications channels can not be over stressed. The 'rules' for editing have two functions: 1) to inform the editors HOW to make necessary changes so that the drivers get the proper cues, and 2) to allow the editors to communicate with other editors the information the editors need when they are called upon to modify the map to match changes in conditions.

Then there are the forums. They remind me of a room full of people milling around and conversing in small groups. Some are very useful, others just add background noise and make communications more difficult.

There is also PM, e-mail, and other channels. Sometimes these are used effectively but often they are neglected. If I find a new editor making mistakes, my first communications effort is to PM them and bring the mistake to their attention gently, educating them as to the right way to do things and why.
When I see someone in a forum asking a question about a problem attributable to some particular editor, my first impulse is to PM the editor and alert them to the problem. Some editors have disabled PM. This cuts a very important communications channel.

The vast volume of traffic seems to have caused WAZE to shut down some important communications channels as they seek to streamline things. This Community reorganization appears to me to be an effort to bring these communications problems under control.

Perhaps looking at things in this light will help some to see the situation in a new light and may even bring some new and better solutions to mind.

When looking at our problems, as someone once said "what we have here, is failure to communicate!"

Let us all do our best to find the fastest and most effective way to communicate at each particular point.

[bigbear3764]

I see your point and agree. But I think that's what breaking the US into regions is suppose to do. Instead of 50K users trying to tell Waze of a problem, we report to a region manager who is in contact with one person from waze. A chain of command.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bz2012]

I see your point and agree. But I think that's what breaking the US into regions is suppose to do. Instead of 50K users trying to tell Waze of a problem, we report to a region manager who is in contact with one person from waze. A chain of command.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed.

I guess what I am trying to say is that for each type of information flow, a careful look at 'what needs to be communicated', 'from whom', and 'to whom', will often make it clear HOW the information can be best communicated.

Also, it is important to improve the 'signal to noise' ratio of some communications channels.
The automatic map problem reports are an example of 'poor signal to noise ratio' because many of the reports are 'noise'. The ARE some reports that ARE useful, but clearly the problem detection criteria need refinement.

Improving communications with users so that they use the hazard and map problem reporting properly is another area where looking at the communications channels available may provide an insight to where changes can be made that improve things.

[rottielover]

+10,000 I also think client map problem reporting should be a focus effort of refinement. My suggestion, combine some existing functionality of the live map and editor to make a problem report interface. You can keep the quick map reports, but put an option in there that will email the account a link to a reporting map where they can type details, maybe even highlight or draw boxes around issues etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bz2012]

Somewhat in the same line as my previous posts, I think that WAZE could make the various new forums much more useful if they were 'readable' by everyone while only the "designated experts" could write to them.

It would give those of us that were not considered to be experts in some particular field a chance to learn from the experts by observing the experts in action. In fact, some probably should be 'required reading' for new AMs and CMs.

And, as people often have 'hidden talents', if someone sees a topic being discussed and has some worthwhile information to contribute, they could PM the information to one of those involved in the discussion and perhaps save time, money and even, since directing people through traffic involves life and death decisions, perhaps even saving lives.

Keeping the groups 'closed' seems to have few benefits and the costs, though they may often be unknown, seem rather high.

If all of these factors have been carefully weighed and considered, then good communications would suggest that explaining the reasoning behind the decisions to the community would make the transition smoother.