Returning Editor and Reasoning

Moderator: delilush

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby theclem54 » Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:30 am

Wow, I check in to see how the community is going and this is what it has become...

I've missed a bit the past 12 months due to decreased editing activity, but I had assumed that we were still mapping per what are legally permissible turns.

I find it quite surprising, especially early on, that the only legislation referenced was SA, yet we are discussing QLD.

https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view ... -2009-0194
Section 97 of the aforementioned road rules deals with Road access signs. This is quite grey and would be interesting to see it tested in court (I suspect that it is referring to the signs regarding vehicle types and weights, not whether it's destination is the next state over or not). Like many of the standards and legislative requirements in my industry, it's not likely to ever get tested and will remain forever grey.

So if we are to 'gate' off all of the local access only areas, assuming we get it done right and don't break half the city, does that mean that the chap living just on the other side of the 'gated area' is forced to travel the long way around? Is he not a local, living right beside the 'gated area'? This is the same concern that TG has and it's a valid one.

Without a clear definition of the intent of local access areas from the appropriate regulator (council or state) defining the intended boundaries, limitations and implementation, then I am not prepared to support the 'gating' of local access areas with the use of private roads or any other means.
[ img ][ img ]
Over 125,000 km driven with Waze!
theclem54
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1047
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:42 am
Location: Brisbane
Has thanked: 228 times
Been thanked: 323 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby GarvinGray » Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:02 am

So, decided to return to this thread now that this thread has a fair chance to wash itself out and more editors have commented.

In summary, all Qld editors believe that the 'gate' system is difficult to implement and may not work as intended. So far this issue has only been discussed in regards to Qld and so I believe it only applies to Qld under our policies and laws.

Since we have not received support or feedback from Waze HQ as offers to elevate this issue higher up were not done, it has been left to us to 'sort out'.

One Qld State manager, two Qld area managers and various other Qld editors do not support the gating system, all basically for the same reason.

As we asked for a higher opinion and the highest opinion we have received is our State manager, I believe we should proceed with that opinion. That is why we have State Managers after all, isn't it?

I am aware of the acknowledged legal issues, but I believe that theclem54 has addressed these and I defer to his judgement as Qld State Manager and this is a Qld issue.

Deadonthefloor, you offered to reverse the 'gate' system? Does this still stand?
As waze editors, our role is to map based on what is legal. It is the job of councils and governments to determine whether or not a turn or other similar 'risky' situations should be permitted based on risk assessments performed by people much more qualified than us to do so.

This point is not up for discussion, never has been and never will be.
GarvinGray
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1250
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 8:00 am
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby PMG801 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:32 am

I don't support gating, but we shouldn't be using local streets for rat runs.
PMG801
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:04 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby ituajr » Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:51 pm

Well, I think it is now apparent that most of the people commenting here think that this is a Queensland issue, despite several of them previously pointing out that this would become a precedent for Australia. And GG has summarised the objections as "the 'gate' system is difficult to implement and may not work as intended". Apparently implementing it where it can be done properly is not good enough. The Nirvana Fallacy wins again.
I continue to believe that the underlying reason for the dissent is that some people want to use the rat runs, are happy to encourage others to do so, and don't accept that it is both irresponsible and can have consequences. This whole discussion leaves me disappointed with the behaviour of those editors, and discourages me from taking part in the community any more.
[ img ] [ img ]
Country Manager for Australia.
70000 km driven with Waze, 2027 km paved, 7200 Update Requests resolved.
ituajr
Coordinators
Coordinators
 
Posts: 3113
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:23 pm
Location: South Australia
Has thanked: 332 times
Been thanked: 1675 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby PMG801 » Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:02 am

ituajr wrote:Well, I think it is now apparent that most of the people commenting here think that this is a Queensland issue, despite several of them previously pointing out that this would become a precedent for Australia. And GG has summarised the objections as "the 'gate' system is difficult to implement and may not work as intended". Apparently implementing it where it can be done properly is not good enough. The Nirvana Fallacy wins again.
I continue to believe that the underlying reason for the dissent is that some people want to use the rat runs, are happy to encourage others to do so, and don't accept that it is both irresponsible and can have consequences. This whole discussion leaves me disappointed with the behaviour of those editors, and discourages me from taking part in the community any more.


Can I buy your account from you then so I can have level 5 editor access?
PMG801
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:04 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby GarvinGray » Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:57 am

I have moved your comments around in order because I think there is an order of priority for other readers. Personal opinion of course-

This whole discussion leaves me disappointed with the behaviour of those editors, and discourages me from taking part in the community any more.

You are not the first editor to express a dissatisfaction with how this discussion has taken place. It would not surprise me if it was the overriding opinion of everyone who has taken part.

Different editors have different reasons for being upset at the events that have transpired, but when editors of different levels of experience and differing opinions are left to their own devices to work out a solution, not everyone is going to be happy with the final outcome and it is rare that there is a final decision made. Quite often it is a compromise that leaves everyone sour.

Now maybe this reflects how I see how the waze community levels work- but I could see this outcome occurring when the offer to elevate this discussion was offered and then the person who made the offer when silent. And then especially after that same editor was being criticised in this discussion and did not respond.

If you make an offer to do something, one or more people take you up on that offer and then you fail to do what you say you are going to do, then it is going to leave a sour taste in editors mouths.

Yes, it was said that the odds of hearing from Waze HQ on this was next to zero, but an answer from the head honchos from Australia in their place would have been better than what we got, which was zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

And so we battled on and ended up with a fragmented community, appeals for harmony and to work together, more kumbuya garbage, but still having to forge a new direction on our own.

And here we are.

I continue to believe that the underlying reason for the dissent is that some people want to use the rat runs

I have chopped your sentence in half as for me this part draws an incorrect conclusion.

I have always maintained that waze is meant to achieve the following objectives:

1) Route what is legal and the driver is then responsible for making all decisions over safety, whether they like the route etc
2) Provide the best route possible

I have never mentioned anything about setting waze up for 'rat runs'. Examples were given that showed how the 'local traffic only' gate system was difficult to implement, or cut across other policies, such as Barclay St Deagon, which is a Primary St and so waze is meant to route down that Street.

ituajr wrote:Well, I think it is now apparent that most of the people commenting here think that this is a Queensland issue, despite several of them previously pointing out that this would become a precedent for Australia.

Yes, we did start this discussion with the premise that this might be a precedent for how to apply it to the whole of Australia, but as the discussion evolved and more contributions were added, the collective feeling from the Qld signs was that this was a Qld issue.

It is possible that another State or Territory might have more clearly labelled signs, rather than the ambiguous 'local traffic only' signs we have for this purpose.

If that is the case, then another State can have their discussion. It is quite common for different states to have different road rules, or different wiki interpretations. Qld has them for how to apply minor highways in rural and outback areas. There are other examples as well for other States.
As waze editors, our role is to map based on what is legal. It is the job of councils and governments to determine whether or not a turn or other similar 'risky' situations should be permitted based on risk assessments performed by people much more qualified than us to do so.

This point is not up for discussion, never has been and never will be.
GarvinGray
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1250
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 8:00 am
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby PMG801 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:07 am

I've ungated kangaroo point boys/girls.

You're all acting like a bunch of Children. Google Maps, Apple Maps, HERE etc. don't gate it, so why should Waze?

QLD Globe doesn't gate the streets either.
PMG801
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:04 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby theclem54 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:25 pm

The discussion was not elevated to Waze HQ as those with the e-mail address of our community rep are well aware that HQ does not partake in these discussions. They have no opinion on local mapping guidelines and they do not intend to start having an opinion on local mapping guidelines. This is what the community discuss and settle upon in the forum.
[ img ][ img ]
Over 125,000 km driven with Waze!
theclem54
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1047
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:42 am
Location: Brisbane
Has thanked: 228 times
Been thanked: 323 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby PMG801 » Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:55 am

theclem54 wrote:The discussion was not elevated to Waze HQ as those with the e-mail address of our community rep are well aware that HQ does not partake in these discussions. They have no opinion on local mapping guidelines and they do not intend to start having an opinion on local mapping guidelines. This is what the community discuss and settle upon in the forum.


I've already settled on a conclusion - no gating.
PMG801
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:04 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Returning Editor and Reasoning

Postby ps_au » Sat Dec 23, 2017 9:46 pm

I'm going to put my 2 cents worth in as some people claim that editors of higher levels (including those who have volunteer to look after individual states and the country) are not monitoring this topic (rest assured, they are monitoring this, but we are all big boys & girls to hopefully play nicely in the same sandpit)

What we all have to be aware of here is that both sides of the discussion have for and against points, and both sides are valid (depending on where you stand - is the shoe pink and white or grey - )

We are ALL volunteers here and we all have different opinions about roading networks and different levels of experience. Let us not forget the core concept behind Waze was local community people editing their local roads to provide a higher level of driving experience to those using the App. It's a simple, yet very effective idea.

We will never stop idiots trying to take side roads to beat the rat race and to an extent Waze will sometimes route down those roads too. Putting in gated roads may or may not minimise the issue, but as it has been said, that would be a near nightmare to implement and maintain. Looking at the roads in other countries, they do not have gated roads, yet they somehow manage to survive.

I personally don't think we need to put them in (yes they are a great idea), but use the KISS principle (Keep It Simple & Succeed). This is my thoughts and mine alone contributing to the topic and not of a Lvl6 editor or whatever I am these days.
ps_au
Australia Waze Champs
Australia Waze Champs
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:13 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 583 times
Been thanked: 462 times

PreviousNext

Return to Queensland

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users