Workers on Road Hazard

[gordonski]

Ugh...
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.

Regards,
Gordonski

[daknife]

I agree with most of your points but as to cars on the shoulder, the problem with not reporting them is that they could decide to start moving again at any point in time. I've seen people attempt to pull back into traffic without attempting to accelerate back to speed before trying to merge or without even looking back to make sure they can get in. They just assume (very wrongly) that the traffic has to make way for them.

For the most part a broken down or otherwise stopped car is a very minor hazard to traffic flow if sufficiently off the travel lanes. But they can be a significant hazard by their very presence. Thus they should be reported. If not broken down they could become an instant hazard as they try to return to the road, if broken down, they could become a real hazard when a tow truck arrives to pick them up, or if someone is trying to fix them. I've heard of people losing control of spare tires as they attempted to lift them out of the trunk, the tire slips from their grasp and suddenly there is a moving hazard bouncing and rolling across the lanes.

Also the warning should be popping up on the phone early enough for the driver to glance at the screen, see the warning and look back up with several hundred meters before getting to the hazard, thus gaining time to be prepared for a possible issue. This is far better than just cruising along and maybe subconsciously noting the object on the side of the road but being greatly surprised when it or some part of it lunges into your lane of travel.

So I intend to keep on reporting them, and appreciate when others do as well.

[CBenson]

I suspect the difference in opinion has to do with the number of wazers in your area. When I get a route home from work and the bar comes up showing where the hazards on my route are it is occasionally completely covered with alerts so that I can only see the symbol on the last one. The others are stacked under the last so tightly you can't see what they are. There might be a hundred on my commute home. It is simply not at all useful to me to receive reports for everything that could become a hazard as here that results in a steady stream of alerts. It would be much more useful to me if people only reported things that actually are hazards.

[mpawlicki]

So, I think what makes a great driver is his ability to judge and anticipate not just his actions, but also of those around him. I like knowing ahead of time of hazards. It prepares me to anticipate things that could otherwise catch me off guard. I definitely leave extra distance between myself and the car in front of me when I know there is a hazard ahead. You never know when the driver in front of you will slam on brakes. Besides, my wife knows someone who lost his legs because he was hit by a car when he was assisting someone else on the shoulder.
That pothole in a road 2000 feet from now may not be deep enough to cause any damage and 1000 cars will drive right over it without a problem, but I'd rather know about it in case someone else is cut off guard and decides to drive around it right into my lane.
Those geese eating in the grass next to the road, I'd rather know about it because I'd feel rather bad killing one if it decides to cross a road.
Etc, etc, blah, blah, blah I write too much.

[daknife]

I suspect the difference in opinion has to do with the number of wazers in your area. When I get a route home from work and the bar comes up showing where the hazards on my route are it is occasionally completely covered with alerts so that I can only see the symbol on the last one. The others are stacked under the last so tightly you can't see what they are. There might be a hundred on my commute home. It is simply not at all useful to me to receive reports for everything that could become a hazard as here that results in a steady stream of alerts. It would be much more useful to me if people only reported things that actually are hazards.

Sounds like it's time to complain to your DOT about the condition of the roads that are causing that many breakdowns.

[kentsmith9]

Etc, etc, blah, blah, blah I write too much.

My wife thinks I have the same disease.