There is a reason there is a button to report a traffic jam and a separate button to report a hazard. A hazard does not necessarily cause a traffic jam. If I am driving in a middle of a night in a middle of nowhere and there is a car on shoulder, I will report it so that the next person driving 20 minutes behind me is alert and cautious. My action to report the hazard is to prevent accidents.
The reason I used terms "completely baseless and wrong" is because that post hints that reporting a hazard somehow alerts Waze of a traffic slowdown, which is not true. You anonymous data and usage statistics transmitted to the Waze servers do.
If Waze send me down a particular route because it is faster than another, it's because it knows how fast Wazers are travelling on these routes. It doesn't case how many times you hit that "Hazard" button, it means nothing in respect to travel time.
I think people should report legit hazards to caution other drivers, and report jams when they are stuck in traffic, or both if that is the case.
By the way, no disrespect was meant to gordonski.
Well, I did not feel offended (not much ) so I guess we're fine...
But I still see things a little different. You are right, that hazards do not relate to a delay in routing, Waze will still calculate the same ETA. But you mentioned yourself that you want other wazers to be "alert and cautious". Maybe I'm a bit old-school, but when I drive espacially cautiously because I'm alert of something (such as playing children on the roadside) I tend to drive slower than usual, being prepared to do a full stop if necessary. So even though the traffic can flow at regular speed, the risk of a slowdown in areas with hazardous situations is higher. Waze won't compute that but I do. When I see a hazard ahead on the map and there is an alternative route around that hazard (of which I know that it causes only minor delay), I will prefer that second route.
That's why I don't report things that have nothing to do with the line of cars rushing alongside. Over here shoulders on freeways are relatively wide (minimum: 2.5m (>8ft) Yes, we have prescriptions for everything). When a car has stopped there, is properly secured, and the driver is wearing the prescribed flashy, orange vest and is standing far away from the vehicle and the freeway, I don't see why I (or others) shouldn't pass that place at 200km/h without being more cautious than any other time I drive that fast. The probability that a second car has to stop in exactly the same location is neglectably low, so it doesn't tell me reasons for warning other wazers of that harmless situation. The risk when looking at my phone at 120mph to read a hazard report is higher than just flying by.
I often see people who stop on the side on the road just to answer their phones. (In my opinion hardly better than phoning while driving...) They pose a risk by parking way too close to the road or even halfway on the road, but I know that they will probably be driving again by the time I'm finished with submitting the hazard report, so there's no use in reporting the hazard.
Remember the story of the boy who cried wolf? Reporting every flat-run hedgehog as hazard will make people become ignorant to real hazard reports. That why I try to report only stuff that requires special actions like driving slower or maintaining a certain lateral distance to the hazardous things.