The PA editors hangout currently has 143 people in it and we are at the point where we need to make a new channel. The dilemma we have is at least half (or more) of the people in the channel arent active and we have no way to remove them , so do we start a new channel and link the 2 together or do we start a new channel and leave the stragglers behind with many messages (or even change the channel name to point them in the right direction) on how to get over to the new channel if they were to become active again.
so what does everyone think and what do our SM’s and RC’s think the best path would be here?
Update do we follow NY’s model and have a channel for new editors as well this way if they fall off it doesnt impact the overall count?
Update 2 New GHO was created and the old one has been abandoned and renamed with SM’s and others watching for stragglers who are looking to stay active. thanks for the input everyone
New channel, make a closing statement and leave some contact names then turn history off. The people who want to continue will be in the new room and the people who want to be pick things back up know who to contact. If there were 125+ active editors it would make sense to link, but that sadly is not the case.
I think we should create a new channel. It has been mentioned repeatedly there are numerous inactive editors in the current channel. Unless there is a better way to refresh based on who has posted in say the last 90 days, it’s not serving its purpose.
I am in favor of creating a new channel, but leaving the old one open for some time and it can be monitored by the SMs for any activity. I would also like to add a PA Unlock channel only for locks and unlocks. So my suggestion…
New active Main Channel for discussions and learning
Old inactive channel monitored by SMs and people directed to new channel who are active
Move ALL closure requests to the Closure channel
Move ALL unlock requests to the new unlock channel
This will help keep down chatter and also organize this a bit more.
I like the good doctor’s suggestions. The closure HO seems to be working, so an unlock HO should also help keep chatter down in the main HO.
If everyone except SMs “Leave” the current PA HO, it should be easy for them to monitor for any stragglers.
I agree that there are numerous editors that are inactive. Some of these editors may OCCASIONALLY visit the GHO for guidance or unlocks - probably when they have a issue in their own driving area. For this reason, I would favor leaving the current one there and any active editors will obviously be able to leave it and migrate to the new one.
I like the idea of a lock/unlock only GHO, since I am on the other sided of the state from the majority of editor’s Editable Area, I require an SM most times to DL or UL any segments and frequently got lost in the mix, especially when RTC’s and Eastern DL’s were requested.
so to summarize it looks like we are leaning towards the following
abandon the old channel but monitor it for stragglers. Maybe rename it Old (or inactive) pa editors ask for invite to new channel
Create a new Pa editors channel
Create a PA bootcamp channel (more feedback and discussion is needed on this one there are advantages and disavantages)
Create a PA unlocks channel
Create a PA Closure channel
all in favor hit the thumbs up and all opposed please let us know below. we are currently at 147 users so the clock is ticking
slack has the limit of 10,000 comments whereas GHO doesnt so the history isnt lost if you want to scroll through 3 years of conversations in GHO. i would assume with raids we arent as concerned with history.
I would like editors to use the Waze forums for unlock. They can drop a link of their request in the forum. This will help you get involve the official Waze forum and we’d have a history as well.
Not all states use GHO. Some use Slack. Some don’t. There may even be something else that’s used out there.
There are 2 big problems with Slack–limited archiving on a free Slack and another service to register for and monitor. GHO isn’t perfect either…size limitations and limited notification ability.
I’m not in favor of regional PA GHOs. The SMs and higher already have too many.
I’m not sure unlocks need to be separated into their own GHO. I like the forum but it’s more clicks and more work to do the same task that usually can be done much more efficiently in a GHO. I would say if an lock request gets buried, or no one gets to it in a reasonable time frame, a request should be made in the forum to avoid it getting lost and frustrating requesters.
I agree on not being in favor of regional HOs. It gets to be too many to monitor. 5 maybe 6 tops. I do like an unlock forum, keeps the closure clutter in its own place and easier to search.
I am part of the Columbus OH GHO and I know the state has several (regional). I’d imagine it would be a lot to keep up with, and for those who don’t belong to all of them there could be some dialogue falling through the cracks.
Update: it is now possible to remove users from gHOs. So if we run into this problem again, we have a third option. I just tested removing and re-inviting another editor from the old PA HO. Great feature as long as we don’t abuse it
That said, I would also be fine with a move to slack. I don’t want to read through 3 years of chat anyway. If the info needs to stand the test of time, it needs to be on this forum or on the wiki.
