dmcconachie wrote:

llayden wrote:

dmcconachie wrote: Earlier in the thread you were complaining how sparse the user base was in your area! Encourage them to edit and your workload will be less!

So every time I see an unedited road, I'm to PM them and deliver a lecture - I'd much rather continue lecturing you, Darren!

I've PMd loads of folk to encourage them to edit, some do, many don't, a couple have become serious editors!

Badger me all you want, I'm a big lad, I can take it - but it's far less productive!

I'm not badgering you. I'm trying to keep the discussion on the idea that making the life of an editor easier will bear rapid results. If you have a 90% complete map, it doesn't really matter. If you're starting from nowhere, extra clicks count! Evaluate the changes I and others have suggested to see what effect it would have on the timeline to produce maps and then weigh up whether the improvement, if any, is worth the effort. That's how project change processes work!

dmcconachie wrote:For the most part I'm not disagreeing with you and have said similar things over the course of my near 2 years using waze. But an affinity for brick walls my head doth not possess!

So you're saying that Waze will not change. OK. That's their right. But they've asked for feedback. The OP made a criticism. I supported him. We may be wasting our time . . . but you telling us that we're wasting our time must be an even bigger waste of time? Let them answer if they feel so moved.

bgodette wrote:

llayden wrote:Or disable paving - but give us a way to create a road from GPS points.

As we keep telling you, it's already in there, and has been ever since the archive was added to Cartouche, and has been added to WME. Now if you want to have a way to create a road from an average of everyone's GPS traces, without having to draw it by hand, that's entirely different.

I thought that's what I said. There was no 'my' before GPS points.

foxitrot wrote:llayden, despite the lot of criticism seen here yesterday, I love your awesome post and agree with at least 95% of its contents.

As you mentioned later - the point of view possibly has a lot to do with whether there was some initial basemap in a particular country.

Thanks foxitrot, I was beginning to lose hope. That's 2.5 votes in favour! (dmcconachie seems to be 50-50). Can you round up a crowd to pour in in support?

Hi llayden,

What a brilliant text! I will print it about and hang it over my bed.

Regards
Mynios

dmcconachie wrote: Feel free to name them!

Moving the URs to Papyrus without a communication-system like excisting in Cartouche.

Edit:
Sorry dmcconachie that I didn't read the quote in your reply really carefull. And sorry again that I tried to edit my post in panic because I thought I can correct my fault before anybody read my post. But now I'm at home and I can now read and answer carefully.

dmcconachie wrote:I meant name the fanboys!

I'm not long enough here to link names with the word fanboy. But I already read something like "Why do you criticize Waze it's free". This argumentation makes me mad. But I haven't read this often so I can't name anyone.

bgodette wrote:Or how about, why criticize Waze's maps, which everyone has the ability to improve, that have at best two years of work by very few volunteer editors....

Perhaps my english is too bad but it sounds a little bit like "hey just work harder or leave it entirely". Please don't misunderstand me! A few volunteers have shown a tremendous commitment and did a great job. My respect for it. But waze and the developers aren't perfect. And if I remember this correctly they are high interested in feedback.

The final problem is that we can not compare the requirements of all countries because the countries has different problems. And thus it is difficult to simultaneously meet all claims from different countries. But "work harder" isn't a solution anyway.

Some areas have been blessed (and sometimes a curse ) with base maps. This is only done when either a free source, or a commercial partnership is made with a source. This is done to allow waze to use the map data without any restrictions, and also to keep costs down and leave the product free to us users.

That being said. Base maps or no Base maps, the maps are only as good as the community or yourself (you have looked at the waze map editor right?) make them. It's amazing actually how little time it takes to get major backbone roads into place. This is normally handled by a few dedicated individuals. Then if you as the local user, add in the little roads around the places you visit, you have helped the community out, and things get better.

<applaud WeeeZer14>

Yes, as being part of most of the beta teams I can attest to the passion that all the high contributors have towards the project, and the criticality we place on the Waze staff. We want the project/business to succeed.

I think Waze can do a better job of making it clear to the user base the differences in the model, which would go a long ways towards bridging the misunderstanding between using a paid for (mature maps) gps product and waze.

I suggested a while ago, that routing gives a confidence level based on the quality of the maps... which would help when things just don't look right.