In the current scheme of UR types, either because of fat-fingering or general unfamiliarity with the process I have learned to somewhat "ignore" the type.
However, with the addition of conversations and the expansion of topics with Places-area/point potential, I think there is a need to be able to possibly "re-classify" URs.
Regardless of whether the user reported something under "General", "Missing overpass" or anything else, if the issue is related to directions - we should be able to change it to such. But this could also mean having the ability to indicate things like:
"Client error" when the reporter indicates their screen "froze"
"Feature Request" when the user says "let me indicate slow moving snow plow". Marking it solved, or even logically mark as "not identified" doesn't seem terribly satisfying.
The other reason for re-classifying is when users begin to use URs for missing/incorrect commercial Places-points when their favorite coffee shop/store/restaurant is missing and/or went out of business.
I don't mind fixing bad house numbers when the UR is for "Burger Palace" not at the correct location, but having to maintain whether a commercial business location is in-or-out of business has a different priority than the integrity of streets, directions, and address numbers. This does not mean I wouldn't perform the indicated edits - but being able to distinguish the issues confronting general driving/routing is what I am most concerned about and would have an urgency to fix if I am pressed for time.
AM Chicago, NW Indiana, SW Lower MI