Question: Do we want to setup our own approval process for new AMs?
The main objective is to let the Waze-champs/CM/senior-managers discuss, approve/disapprove and manage requests for area-management - either from an existing AM who’s asking to increase the area s/he’s currently managing or a user who would like to become an area manager for the first time.
If we decide to start using the new method - Waze can set the tools, enable the access for the relevant people and announce it to all users in the UK.
Discuss.
Yes, we do need to set up an approval process.
I’m seeing too many mistakes made by AMs, and they are critical mistakes such as disconnecting motorways, making hue botch jobs of roundabouts etc. They then lock them. :roll:
I started up Support Mozilla project. We designed a process for vetting people before they could be let on their own giving support either through chat, wiki or forums.
Now, why do I keep on being refused for AM by Waze? Newbies come along and make a request to be an AM and get it?
One of the ideas being suggested by Waze is for each new AM to have a ‘mentor’ to help them along. Is this something we want to spend time doing? Sounds like a good idea to me.
via mobile
We should get this in place asap!
via Tapatalk
Hi,
It would, perhaps, be nice to vet everyone who edits the map! Extreme I know, but when you spend your first 20 minutes fixing errors made by someone else (I know I’m not perfect) it can get you down…
And whats with people adding railways!!! Like there aren’t any roads to name, correct or add!!! FFS… :roll:
But as an aside, Waze itself could also be checked before we give it permission to import something or make a country-wide change. Petrol comes to mind but there must be other instances…
/rant off… 
Yes, checks or vetting should be in place. Including a trial period where previous and later map edits are examined/checked for consistency, accuracy and where there is ambiguity - best effort editing.
Des. . . 
Interesting. I like the idea. As a newer map editor, I still make a good deal of mistakes. Fortunately, Mapcat and Jondrush are familiar in working around and in my AM area. Had I consulted them previous, I would have had more time to edit roads in good form, rather than spend time fixing my mistakes.
~ I don’t always post in forums on my Nexus 7. When I do, I Swype with Tapatalk 2.
Some thoughts, in no particular order:
- There aren’t enough editors in the UK, anything that puts people off becoming an editor (of whatever type) is a bad thing.
- People work/learn in different ways. Some people like to be/work better when mentored, some people just don’t accept it. Doesn’t imply anything about how good an editor they will be.
- People make mistakes, that’s the way life is - but not as many as I would expect with Waze - most of the mistakes I see are actually a result of people not understanding the subtle ways in which the WME doesn’t work properly - and a lot of these are level-0 editors.
- Aren’t WazeHQ going to completely change the way AM areas work so that you can check-out/check-in an area.
In conclusion:
I think this would need to be done carefully, and gently. I would actually ask people what level of mentoring they want when they request to become an AM, rather than imposing something upon them - in fear of just scaring them off completely.
Any AM area approval system would need to be very responsive to requests. WazeHQ have been very responsive in this respect to my previous requests, and they normally get sorted out the same day.
Anyone who wants to be an AM MUST be active on the forums and at least know about the IRC Chatroom. If they don’t participate in the community why should they be an area manager?
Perhaps a minimum number of posts and edits should be required before AM approval.
I disagree Dave; as my addiction to editing is so high I have no time to spend in IRC chat rooms.
Joking aside I really have no interest in chatting on IRC and neither do I participate often in these forums.
However I do enjoy editing a lot, and I do try to keep up to date with the forums and the wiki, but often miss important changes in editing policy. I would prefer that somehow that this information on changes in editing procedure is pushed to me, maybe via email, rather than me remembering to check a forum or log into a chat room.
I think forcing people to be social in a pass time that I think will tend to be attractive to a slightly higher than average percentage of people with anti-social tendancies, will be detrimental to Waze and the development of the maps.
I’d rather have people editing the maps correctly, but never hear from them than someone who is very vocal and just point whoring for the kudos and rank.
I’m sure there are some great editors that read the forum and wiki on a regular basis, but never feel the need to post. So, I don’t think that quantity of forum posts should be a qualifying factor either.
via mobile
I’m talking about those who never use the forum, even a casual user like you Phil have amassed almost 50 posts.
These tend to be the ones who also ignore you when you PM them about poor editing work and carry on regardless.
Totally in agreement with Dave here. How can anyone learn the nuances of the editor by just reading?
A good student will ask questions, hence the post requirement.
I’d also say they need to agree to terms of being an AM, including agreeing that they have read the wiki, on editing and UK specifics at the bare minimum. Being an AM should be a privilege given for showing knowledge and working of the editor, not a right.
I would also suggest a test of sorts, maybe a simple multiple choice up to 20 questions that gives different examples, covering editing in general, Map Problems and URs.
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
Forum posts: unless someone re-reads every post from an AM applicant to see if they have any relevance to becoming an AM, or are just “me too” type posts, then using post count alone isn’t a good indication of how serious someone is. I also don’t believe that asking questions is necessarily a requirement to learning, particularly not given the sheer quantity of existing forum posts where many of the questions have already been asked and answered. Knowing where to look to get the answers that already exist is at least as important as having been seen to ask questions.
Wiki reading declaration: good idea - regardless of what other factors may or may not make someone a half-decent AM, knowing that the wiki exists is a good start, and having actually read it is pretty much essential.
Quiz/test: not sure, it could be quite offputting for some people who believe they’ve proven their editing ability by the number of decent quality edits they’ve already made within their driving areas. Also, given the number of times established AMs end up asking for advice on what the current consensus is regarding editing guidelines, would it even be possible to come up with sufficient relevant questions, the answers of which are without any shadow of doubt, to make a test worthwhile?
As TonyG said, we don’t have enough AMs as it is, and whilst we don’t want to lower the bar to entry too far, we don’t also want to make people think they’re trying to gain access to some secret society full of anal retentive types wanting to protect their own positions and just waiting to pounce on any infraction of the, largely unwritten, rules by a newcomer to the group. Note that I don’t believe for one moment that’s in any way a valid description of the group, merely that this is how we could be perceived by an outsider faced with a long list of requirements to be met before they’re granted AM status too.
In the relatively short time I’ve been an AM, I’ve been very impressed by the community spirit that exists right now, and it’d be a crying shame if, in trying to maintain the quality of the AM group, we did anything which, accidentally or not, dulled that spirit.
I feel that as long as we have visibility of new AMs, and can review and give feedback on their edits, we don’t need a strict criteria for approval. By assigning a mentor to each would really help with educating them, and resolving problems early on.
Here’s what I think we should do for each AM application (in no particular order):
- Review recent work by editor, and provide constructive feedback for any major mistakes (red roads, missing junctions, bad naming, etc)
- Send one introductory message with pointers to the Best Practice, and to the community.
- Nominate a mentor to keep an eye on that area, and to be 1st point of contact for any questions.
- Mark for approval once the above points have been acknowledged by the editor, and their edits are satisfactory.
via mobile
Isn’t that what Waze are doing now, working retrospectively?
I still think a simple test is a good idea. Nothing difficult, just simple stuff like
Which is the correct way to name this road?
High Street
High STREET
High St
It’s not like we’re pushing anyone out with simple questions. It’s really just to make sure that they’ve read the relevant parts of the wiki.
Why would a road appear red in the editor?
It was paved by someone’s device
It had no country set
It is not named
All of the above
It’s not intended to be difficult at all.
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
How are we going to be able to see recent edits? Another tool is needed by Waze that we just don’t have.
My option doesn’t need Waze to take 2 years to develop something.
Sending an introductory message is fine, but any aspiring AM needs to show that they can demonstrate the knowledge required (simple multiple choice test/quiz).
We’ve enough to do without chasing after people, let’s be honest.
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
I had gotten a tutorial on how to use excel program. Along with them going through the how to’s, they had you create a spread sheet and do the task they just talked about.
They already have the videos on editing, can they make it so the new editor can do it themselves. Once they complete they training video, then allow them to edit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We ask the applicant to show us. Simples.
This won’t take 2 years. Some countries already have this in place. We just have to agree on how we’re going to use it.
If we start a new AM out with a small area to clean up, we’ll be able to easily see what they’ve done. Giving a new AM half a state won’t work. There’s too much opportunity for them to wreak havoc with the maps. I’ve been cleaning up after a couple of them for the past few weeks. And no help from Waze about shutting anybody down.
Considering the small size of the UK, I’d say start with a maximum of 5x5 25 sq mile chunk, centred where they live roughly.
I still stand by the quiz…
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2