IMO: Too wordy. I’ve seen some loooooooooong responses to issues, and I’m not reading after the first two sentences. BZ has some long winded responses and I don’t pay attention. A driver doesn’t have that much time to read, if they’re reading in the car (which I’m sure some do), but in a “I want it now” world we live in, I like to keep it short and simple:
You reported an issue, I need to know what’s up, please reply.
First paragraph!? You gotta be kidding me. As a reporter, I’d be over it and moving on halfway through the first paragraph. I actually like txemt’s approach.
I live in northern NJ where we see hundreds (if not more) URs a week, most of which end up referring to things that cannot be fixed in WME. Ain’t nobody got time for that!
Well, as I said in my posting here, I added the second bit primarily because I was having an issue where someone who replied would end up opening up a second UR because they couldn’t seem to figure out how to reply from within the app or after clicking on the link in their mail on their computer. They can cheerfully ignore the parts that don’t apply to them. I’ve adopted txemt’s approach for the first bit as a template, which is now:
(And after pasting in the text adjust the location and error being reported, obviously. :D)
Tx things that the first sentence is a bit too much. It might be, but I think it’s better to let them know that they’re not dealing with a paid staff member (and treat me as such :)) but rather someone who’s there to help them and isn’t being paid for it.
Agreed. But northern Nevada isn’t that busy so this works for me. Again, I’m not advocating that anyone use what I’m using; I’m simply listing it here in this discussion so that those in an environment where they think it can help them can copy it and adjust for their use.
The more I read this thread and the more varied opinions I see on the subject, the more convinced I am that a “one-size-fits-all” boilerplate for the US isn’t a good idea, and won’t work. Or at least not as well as some would like. Different areas, different traffic patterns, different needs.
But that’s just my opinion, too. 
What is the purpose of telling the reporter that the report is incomplete?
Besides, sometimes Waze loses the reporter’s comment, notably with the category of “Missing …”. That’s not the fault of the reporter.
It prompts the driver to actually tell us what’s wrong. I can’t fix a general error with just a GPS trace that matches the Waze provided route. Most drivers just report things by pressing the buttons. I’m not sure if they’re aware there is the chat feature, but I also figure they’re too busy driving to text us information on what’s wrong. I wish there was some way the report could stay open until they can get somewhere they can type.
But you don’t tell the reporter that the report is incomplete (You left no information on what’s wrong). That’s why my question about the statement was not directed to you.
Completing the report later was discussed here.
Because most drivers assume when they submit a report we get everything about their drive, which is why I tell them it’s incomplete and we need more info.
Why not? It’s a true statement - the information isn’t there in the report, thus it’s “not complete.”
I’d venture a guess that he replied because the text I cited as what I’m using now was directly copied from the text that txemt posted as to what he sends out (albeit mine has the “volunteer map editor” clause added).
Because without enough information, I can’t even attempt to fix it?
Ok, fair enough. I can change the wording to, “but no other information is showing in the report.”
No, but the information is still missing and the only person who can provide it is the reporter. If an editor doesn’t ask, the reporter isn’t going to provide it. Granted, an editor may get no response in which case it’ll have to be closed out as NI, but without at least asking for that information the the chances of that go up to 100%.
Yep, totally this. I’ve had numerous reporters tell me either in the UR or in email that they thought we had their whole drive along with destination details. Is that a reasonable assumption on their part? Perhaps so. It’s no more invalid than assuming that no data is shared or that some data is shared. Waze doesn’t allow users to know via helpful in-app notices the first time they post a map issue.
Ditto to Superdave, Txemt and Alan. The fact that at best we get a few hundred meters of their route, but often don’t even get that much data, means we are often missing key information that would clue us into the real problem.
For example on the Jolly Drivers thread, there was a recent question about a UR (actually a series of UR’s probably by the same driver, Where Waze was repeatedly telling the driver to take the next Michigan left and head back the way they came. Based on just one or two of the UR’s it looked like Waze was trying to train the user to drive NASCAR by having him drive endless loops. Only by zooming out did I hypothesize that maybe Waze wanted to take him to the near by freeway. But based on the tiny amount of data that Waze gives us, that is merely a guess as to why Waze kept insisting the user turn around.
When a UR gets a comment, we users get that comment back in both email and in the client. I have no problem at all with being a little verbose (well I don’t have that problem anywhere). Details get problems solved. Telling a user that the report was short on details is only going to make our volunteer jobs easier. And telling the users that we are only volunteers will cut back on snarky or rude replies when we do ask for more information to solve a problem. If an area does get soooo many UR’s a week, then increasing the detail will help editors identify problems that can be fixed and those that cannot but will just keep repeating. Allowing for quicker closure of the unfixable repeat reports. And better focus on the real problem areas, getting them fixed and cleared quicker as well. That and hard time frames. No reply in seven days? Close it to focus on newer reports.
So, highlights of recent discussion:
Many users start out assuming we are omniscient paid droids who probably don’t much care, or worse, that we are automated altogether. If we want to engage them we need to humanize our response. If we don’t, then on average they may be less interested in partnering with us to solve the problem.
A great way to do that would be if the Waze standard wrapper told users we were a volunteer mapping community that has been provided with a subset of drive data around the time and location of the report. Sadly, the wrapper doesn’t say that. So, if we want to humanize our response and increase the chances of engagement, we need to convey that, but as briefly as possible. Ways to do that:
Also I suddenly twigged that since the wrapper does at least refer to the “Waze mapping community” it makes perfect sense to say “we”.
Here’s an example that tries to incorporate these guidelines in a “human” response:
I open almost all reports with a standard:
I find that the amount of times people hit the wrong button is pretty high so even assuming the issue falls under the category the user selected (like missing road or wrong turn) isn’t really necessary. If it’s actually about that issue when they reply, then I use a more specific followup (if necessary.)
For instance:
This is my standard message before closing as ‘not identified’:
And then here’s the monster. If I get a ‘it didn’t route me the way I expected it to’ I post this (and then close the UR):
I’m going to sleep now but I’ll read the rest of this thread when I have time this weekend, before I do any more Wazing. =D
Okay I stayed up and read the thread. Some opinions:
1 - I’m pretty sure the app provides the location of the report for you, so putting it in your response is repeating information. Granted I don’t think it does a very good job, so perhaps this information is best repeated until Waze improves it.
2 - Saying you’re missing information is kind of pointless. Instead, ask for what you need. Then, the fact that you’re missing it is implied (and again mentioned by the app as a wrapper for your comment). If it’s a blank UR, then a simple ‘what is this UR about’ question is fine. Something along the lines of “What seems to be the problem?” or something.
3 - If your response is TOO short, throwing in a polite introduction is fine. “Hi! Volunteer map editor here. I saw your report about X, what seems to be the problem?” This would be a little better than a flat-out “What seems to be the problem?” opener.
4 - I’ve tried the whole “will close in X days” (and that’s assuming you’re going to be Wazing that exact day to close it). I’ve even tried the ‘2nd warning’ as well. Too much work. If they don’t reply in 7 days, just close it. (I do send a ‘reason this is being closed’ message right before closing it, though, so they know for next time.)
5 - I don’t care how old the report is, I mark the 7 days from the first non-reporter comment after the last reporter comment. As soon as it hits day 8, it’s eligible to be closed, imo, unless there is specific phrasing of a request of “please do not close this UR.”
6 - I do think wordy is bad. The only reason I have that ‘monster’ response is because I close the ticket right after. They can read it at their leisure. It’s not meant to be read and then replied to. I might add a first line of “Thanks for your report, but I’ll be closing this as not identified. Please read on to understand why.”
Not 100% all the time
Why? A blank UR is missing information. We’re not mind readers.
Eh
Why do we give warnings for 7 days? I know an editor that does that and it drives me up the wall. I typically close it out in 7 days from the report if no response is given from the first time someone asks about the issue
See above
I close out URs that are older than 7 days with a
comment to let the original poster, as well as the editor know that this report has been closed. Tough if no one responded, or if the driver didn’t respond in quick enough time.
There are too many URs left open throughout the country to be sitting there begging for a driver to respond.
Which is why it doesn’t do a very good job and is “best repeated.” =P
“I need information.” “We’re missing information.” “Would you please tell me X?” Same thing, said three different ways. It’s a tone thing. Politely asking for information, versus “You didn’t do the report right” tone of voice.
The fact that you’re asking for it implies you don’t have it. You can skip stuff like “Would you please tell me X because it’s not included in your report” because you’re basically repeating yourself. If they ask something like “why do you need to know?” then you can educate the user about it not being included in the report, but most of the time that’s a waste of time and doesn’t get the issue resolved any faster.
I agree that from our point of view it’s six of one, half a dozen of the other. So no reason not to choose the most ‘pleasant’ form. That’s all I’m saying. Stuff like this was common in the customer service job I used to have.
Meh
See, this is a case of you agreeing with me, but somehow giving off the tone that you don’t agree with me. Maybe I wasn’t clear?
See above.
If the report is 30 days old but an editor finally commented on it, I will wait the 7 days for a response from the time the editor commented and not from the original date of the report. That was the key distinction I was making. I don’t care if the report’s half a day old, 7 days old, or 500 days old, giving 7 days to reply to an editor is common courtesy and is the standard from what I understand.
Similarly, if there’s been a few replies from the reporter but the last comment is from an editor, then I still count 7 days from the first comment from an editor after the last comment from the reporter.
And I always throw in the “Just make another report if you need” in my “I’m closing this because it’s inactive” message as a way of indicating that if the information does ever get provided we’re still willing to fix whatever the issue was.
If we were Waze customer service, I’d be in complete agreement with you!
But we are not Waze employees, we are Waze customers who have volunteered to help other customers. Thing is, the other customers don’t know that and many if not most of them are starting from a place of disengagement. They submit the report with the attitude “this is your problem” not “this is our problem”.
So not only do we have to ask for the information we need, we also have to persuade the reporter to take more time and energy to give it to us. Our response to the UR has to accomplish both to be successful.
If we say “Your report did not include this info” I agree that’s redundant and unhelpful.
But if we say “Waze did not provide us this info” there are two pieces of information there. First, that we don’t have the info; and second, that we are not Waze. If that tiny bit of wakeup embedded in our response persuades the reporter to engage with us it is worth a few extra words.
In my experience, I have found some reporters do respond after a “nudge” message. In my case, I send this message 7 days after my initial response. To me it is worth the effort since I believe that for every valid report we receive, there are many other users who experience the issue, but decide to just work through it. So if we can coax information from one reporter, we may be able to improve the Waze experience for many others.
Additionally, I may begin to include an email address in my “nudge” message. CBenson includes one in his initial message and I recall him stating somewhere that he has received valid responses in his inbox after closing the reports.
Passing on the message that we’re not Waze, meh, I don’t see a problem with it, but I don’t see it as necessary either.
When I get a UR, all I really care about, is resolving the UR. Fixing the map. Moving on. I’m not trying to recruit another map editor.
The only reason I spend so much time educating about the ‘routed wrong way’ issue is so they don’t make more unnecessary UR’s.
If you want a response from a reporter, it helps to understand the reporter’s perspective.
The best way to do that is to submit a UR once in awhile. As most of us know, this is easy to do in Live Map from the comfort of your home by clicking on a location at an adequate zoom level and selecting “Report a problem” in the resulting dialog window.
I tried this recently, outside my normal editing territory, leaving a to-die-for report with a careful and detailed description of what went wrong. Eventually an editor responded, told me “That’s how Waze works” (translation: sigh, another idiot I have to educate), and immediately closed the report with no action. Problem was, that’s not how Waze works and there really was a map issue which was later verified in the forums after I pursued it as an editor rather than a reporter.
Maybe it’s not all that surprising how seldom reporters bother to respond to followup?
Submitting your own URs occasionally can be quite an eye-opener. Highly recommended.
I do that. I leave notes for me all over the place when I drive. I used to submit URs in San Antonio to see who else is editing the map. I’ve left a trail of URs from Austin to Dallas when I rode up there yesterday, so now I get to go back and fix the construction zone. Yippe!!!