Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

The place to get information and ask questions about everything to do with properly and successfully editing the Waze Map.

Use this forum for all general editing questions, and the sub-forums for specific types of Waze Map Editor features.

Moderators: Unholy, bextein

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby Yogi_v2 » Fri Aug 01, 2014 9:49 pm

Helgramite wrote:My Master of the Obvious moment for Friday ... It would be easier to just NOT display URs to Level 1s. You cant close what you cannot see. Have the L2 upgrade require an AM check of your edits.


There ya go usin' yer noodle again.
Puttering along...
Image
Yogi_v2
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 4:37 am
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio - United States
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby Yogi_v2 » Fri Aug 01, 2014 2:39 am

DwarfLord wrote:My concern in this thread is to prevent what amounts to deletion of URs. That is, closure with no attempt to understand or remedy the issue or to allow another editor to do so.


The only solutions I can come up with to prevent that would require coding changes. As it stands now anyone can go in to any UR and just click Solved or NI and close it out without reading anything in the report - which is what they would have to do in order to even understand what's going on.

While you can't force people to read the posts in the UR, you can force them to read the wiki by changing some things around. For example, I'm sure we're all familiar with how Facebook hides their "edit post/delete post" buttons. You have to hover over a certain area of the post and the menu pops up allowing you to click what you need. So for this example, there would be a hidden check box that says "read". All boxes for all messages must be checked before you can close out any UR. Since it is not obvious how to close out a UR, put the instructions in the wiki and force them to at least read how to properly close out a UR.

This is simply an example. There are other ways this could be done, (clicking on the message turns it green, put a "read" button in the corner of the message, you name it) but the overall idea is to add a few simple - but not self explanatory - hurdles that will drive traffic to the wiki page for URs.

Another idea would be to link UR's to the road's rank. For example a UR on a highway would be locked at a 5. Anyone can comment on it and help the reporter, but only a Level 5 editor can close it out. With a Level 4 road, a 4 or 5 editor can close it out and so on and so on, etc., etc.. Since URs with higher level roads are typically more complicated to solve or remedy, this would go a long way in insuring that those corrections take place and aren't lost due to a willy nilly Level 1.

This could be visualized the same way a cluster of traffic reports are on the live map. When you have three reports of slow traffic close to each other you get the warning symbol with a small 3. Likewise, when they can't figure out why they can't close it, they'll go to the wiki and read all about the wondrous world of URs.

That's the best I've got.
Puttering along...
Image
Yogi_v2
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 4:37 am
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio - United States
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby yogi_fuggin_bear » Wed Jul 16, 2014 9:02 am

I have to disagree on completely shutting them out under the first proposal. For starters you're asking for drastic changes to be made because of a sporadic nuisance that only infuriates a few. To boot, the URs aren't gone forever, just click on "show closed" in the layers menu and you can continue to make comments on the UR.... However the others involved in the conversation need to select that button as well in order to reply.

To further play devils advocate;

1: There are some areas off the beaten path that only have level one editors monitoring anything on a regular basis, and because of the recently increased level limits, and the lower proportion of roads to edit, it will take them longer to level up to 2/3/4. Also, considering the higher proportion of rural areas versus suburban, it will make their lives more tedious always PMing higher level editors to close out the UR. This is because these areas don't have AMs and thus they'll need to take it up with their RCs, and the RCs already have a busy enough job.

2: Not all L3/4/5 editors are created equal. I've seen no less than 100 UR's that had L3/4/5 editors simply never close out the UR. They could be stated as solved, had no conversation for over 45 days, you name it. They're okay to close, but never closed. Let the L1's come in and take care of the grunt work and earn some points.

3: Your AM needs to take a more active role with this and you should be keeping tabs of names and sending those to them with a nice tidy report, they're the manager of the area, it's their call.

That aside, there are better options than just shutting them out.


Kobes1878 wrote:Yessir. I proposed a similar idea here. (I was under the impression at the time that AMs have the ability to reopen closed URs.)

For example if this is true, then expand that capability to L3/4 editors.

Add a lock button similar to the lock on a road, where you someone can lock a comment from being closed, or have it auto lock for the highest responder.

Add exclusion zones around major cities. These could be drawn by the RCs and the minimum level should correspond to the size of the metropolitan area. New York City for example could be a minimum of 3/4 and smaller cities like Memphis can be 2/3.

I understand the annoyance of lower level editors and fix their mistakes all the time, but there are better ways to approach this than just putting them at the kids table.
Puttering along....
Image
yogi_fuggin_bear
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:05 am
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby XKSpeed » Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:45 pm

tlcarpenter69 wrote:The biggest problem I am having is related to Google Map pins. Unlike others, I'm only batting about .500 with getting changes approved over there.


I approach Google Map issues like a software bug report: steps to replicate, steps to solve, and verification of the solution. Since you're in the business, hopefully that makes sense to you.

My Google Map reports include all these:
1) Why the existing marker is wrong. For example, "causing navigation to street behind the house".
2) Why my suggested change is right. For example, "closer to street the driveway connects to".
3) A way to verify the change. For example, naming the county tax assessor GIS and/or "business can be seen in Street View".

I'm batting .980. If you're doing it this way and getting .500 I don't know what to tell ya. :?
XKSpeed
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:35 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby XKSpeed » Thu Oct 02, 2014 4:11 pm

Forgive this, it's slightly off topic, but how does one go about reporting a "rogue" editor?
XKSpeed
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:35 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby XKSpeed » Sun Aug 31, 2014 11:36 pm

Thanks for your thoughts.

I would like to emphasize my intent was not to keep URs open for six months or indefinitely for that matter. The root problem is Waze overlooked some basic safeguards for its own policies. As an example, most web sites will prohibit you from saving alpha characters when you're filling out a phone number field. That is to prevent malicious issues and dumb mistakes. Unfortunately, at the higher level such as URs, Waze doesn't have any policy protections. One policy needing protection is that once an editor asks for more info on a UR, it should close a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 30 days later if there's no response from the reporter. And the editor(s) who did the actual work on the UR should get rewarded. Not some random map editor trolling for points.

Taco909 wrote:The specific issue with L1 editors is those doing it for their 50-UR "candy" points

I got into map editing for two reasons: the candy points and because an editor closed some of my URs without doing any work (and they were above level 1). Once in, I found it fun. So the candy is a good lure for new editors, but it's not executed effectively.

Taco909 wrote:as discussed in other threads, all rank of editors sometimes forget that the word "MINIMUM" is in front of "7 Days" on the flowchart and in the Wiki.

Amen. My concern is also the zeal to close, as Taco909 said, 7 days and 1 minute later. If you're going to do that, fine, but let that be automated. Computers are good at things like automation and it saves valuable editing time.

DwarfLord wrote:But as Taco909 said there is the serious danger of being perceived as nagging.

How many times have you e-mailed / texted a friend and asked "hey wanna go to the game this weekend?" and the next day had to send another one asking again? You then find out they meant to reply, but just forgot. Hence the auto-reminders to the reports. As I detailed, reporters typically really want their issue addressed. A couple of polite nudges wouldn't be a bother. Reminders are especially important because Waze is a driving app. If they get that UR notice while they're driving, they're going to wait to respond until they get to their destination. But by then they may have forgotten.

I would add that, as has been previously mentioned in the forums, there could be improvements in the emails the reporters get. That would address the perception of nagging as well. Quick reply buttons/links would be sweet:
"Sorry, I made a mistake, close the UR"
"I forgot, close the UR"
"Please wait, I can't respond right now"

And there should be a direct way for Reporters to respond to a UR via email.
XKSpeed
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:35 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby XKSpeed » Sun Aug 31, 2014 6:23 am

I am but a lowly level 2 editor, but I'm providing my .02 anyway. I am a software developer with years of process improvement experience so please weigh or flame my comments accordingly. :ugeek:


BACKGROUND

First off, I want to respond to the heading of this thread. I've seen a L3 close a huge swath of other editor's UR's for no reason except they were a few days old. In the same area were dozens of unworked URs and that L3 didn't engage the reporters on ANY of them - just closed tickets that had a comment (by another editor). Was this L3 contributing? Not at all! So higher level editors do the same stuff that level 1's do. Some people have 5 years of experience. Some have 1 year of experience 5 times over.

Second, I see no reason URs need to be closed swiftly when there's no response from a reporter. I'm sure there's some exceptions, but if I increase my zoom I have no problems seeing all the URs in a major metro area. Unless you're still working on a 640 x 480 desktop, I don't buy the "clutter" argument.


GOAL: Engage reporters

As a technology professional I know that only about 20% of minor issues (aka "annoyances") get reported. And most of the URs I've seen fall into the minor issue category (turn not allowed here, destination is 1000 feet farther down the road, etc). The kind of people that report minor issues are usually smart, busy people, and are very rare personality types. It's quite possible they are not going to have time to respond until several days later and are the type to take time to compose a detailed response. If you close their UR in a few days with no warning, you disenfranchise your most important sector of users!

GOAL: Reward editors for real work

While some editors may be truly altruistic, I suspect many want that cool dinosaur mood icon when they're driving around town! They're willing to do it right, but need a reward. I assume most editors are like me in that when they view a UR, they spend a few minutes looking at the surrounding area before posting a query for further info on the UR. There may be nothing conspicuous, and hence no edits to earn points with. Their only possible reward for the few minutes of work? Closing the ticket. Yet like hungry wolves, other editors creep in after a few days and close the ticket, denying the original editor any reward.

GOAL: Acknowledge that not all map editing is in the WME

Sometimes there's legwork that takes a few days.

An editor may go to the tax assessor's office to gather some info.
An editor may want to drive to the location.
An editor may e-mail the local DOT for details.

In these cases it may take a few days to get the answer. Well that's too bad because in the meantime another editor swooped in and closed the UR. Reward denied.

I shall call this the "No Soup For You" effect (shameless Seinfeld reference).


SUMMARY - PROPOSAL
Waze has been around for years.

One would expect most everything in developed areas to be about perfect by now. Yet there's still many older roadways with incorrect names, major parks and attractions missing, etc. One likely cause is the kind of users that would report these issues have become disenfranchised.

One would expect scores of level 6 editors in each state. There's not. One likely cause is the morale-busting reward system.


Solution / Suggested New Feature: User Request Countdown Timer

A Countdown timer on URs set by the first editor. The first responder on a UR becomes the "owner" of the UR and has a countdown timer to set. Suggest it default to 10 days, but can be set from 7 to 30 days. All but the highest level editors/managers are prevented from closing the ticket before the countdown completes. A comment from any editor starts the countdown all over again. As the UR approaches the end of the countdown, the reporter and all the editors that have commented on the UR get a reminder by PM or e-mail that the UR is about to expire. Recommend two reminders: 3 days out and 1 day out. Once the countdown completes the UR closes all by itself if the last comment was by an editor. But the owner of the UR may close it at any time. But if the last comment was by a reporter and the countdown is complete, anyone may close it. If the owner closes it or it autocloses, the owner gets the points.

Result:
1) Reporter has time to respond and is repeatedly and automatically asked to respond.
2) Editor cannot be denied their reward.


I've gone beyond the scope of the original thread, but I hope I have explained my reasoning and provided at least one solution that keeps reporters and editors happy. This is by no means the complete solution, but is a viable and easy to program one that will likely reduce work for editors with autoclosing and automated reminders and ensure editors are properly rewarded.
XKSpeed
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:35 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby undearius » Fri Aug 29, 2014 7:27 pm

We should somehow get all the L1s that are doing it for the candy to close the General Error URs opened by the people doing it for the candy.
undearius
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:05 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby tonestertm » Fri Aug 01, 2014 8:49 pm

First time a new user tries to close a UR, they get automatically redirected to the wiki, or get a popup containing a short warning about proper UR handling, a link to the wiki and a checkbox saying they've read it. Not perfect, but at least lets them know it exists. I just had another very small run here from a first-week editor.

Locking things wholesale would create an enormous workload for upper level editors, and emails for uncommented closures would create a tsunami of email for each AM of a given area, not to speak of areas which are AM-less. If you're going to do something like that, just make it so URs can't be closed without a comment.

Sent from my NookColor using Tapatalk
Image
ARC for SW Region, USA
US Local Champ, US Country Manager
The best editors Read the Wiki and read it often. Learn the proper way to handle URs. Don't draw another Place until you read this!
tonestertm
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:02 pm
Location: City of...um, Angels, CA, USA
Has thanked: 500 times
Been thanked: 827 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby tonestertm » Thu Jul 31, 2014 2:17 pm

mdavidsonjr wrote:I think that I may have to create another email address and do this. Just need to make sure if I change my email address in the editor that it will not affect my rank. I don't think it will but need to make sure.
It shouldn't affect your rank at all; at least it didn't when I, and several other editors I know, did so.

But there's no need to change your email in the app just to receive replies from reporters with a new address. Granted, it does make things tidier to receive all Waze-related mail to one address. :)
Image
ARC for SW Region, USA
US Local Champ, US Country Manager
The best editors Read the Wiki and read it often. Learn the proper way to handle URs. Don't draw another Place until you read this!
tonestertm
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:02 pm
Location: City of...um, Angels, CA, USA
Has thanked: 500 times
Been thanked: 827 times

Next

Return to Waze Map Editor

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], MajkiiTelini

cron