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 tonestertm » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:43 am

CBenson wrote:I really haven't encountered any such mass deletions. But my experience is that URs that are closed as solved without any edit to the map that actually solves the problem does not correlate with the rank of the editor that closes the UR.
Lucky you! :) Around here it happens, on average, about 2-4 times a month. Most times it's limited to only about 10-25 closures, perhaps because we typically get messages sent right away (responding in closed conversations might help) but occasionally a huge swath of the metropolis is swept clean, including URs with active conversations.
Not sure if you were implying this, but I never claimed that the "Solve" problem was limited to any particular rank, though I would say that there seems to be less of it from "trail-hardened" 3's and above. I was simply stating that, when this happens, that is most often the course of events.
tonestertm
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:02 pm
Location: City of...um, Angels, CA, USA
Has thanked: 499 times
Been thanked: 823 times

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

Postby tonestertm » Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:26 pm

I have to say I've wished for the same Rank 2 restriction many times. The amount of potential information lost by not having those URs (not to mention the reporter receiving a message that their problem was "fixed", only to find later that it wasn't) should not only be "infuriating to a few" but frustrating to all who care about improving the map. I like the original proposal of allowing R1s to work the URs, but not close them out, at least without an approval of some sort from a higher ranked editor to look in on things.

It has been my experience that the vast majority of these types of mass deletions have been editors quite literally in their first day or three of touching the map, and this is accomplished by clicking the Solved button without so much as a whisper of a comment nor a fix on the map. Not many absolute beginners truly know how to edit the map properly, let alone distinguish between actual problem URs and noise, and how to properly solve some of those actual problems. I'm not so sure that points are even a motivation to some of these folks--they might think they're actually helping. IMHO, if there were even a simple delay of perhaps a week or two between the first edit and UR privilege, it might go a long way toward eliminating this problem.

Another option would be to have a sort of UR "oversight" where a new editor would be able to work URs , but have a certain number of them approved by a higher rank (doesn't necessarily have to be AM or CM), before they were allowed to Solve/Not Identify on their own. This would add a small additional load on some upper editors but not as much as having to OK every single edit by an R1, and provides an opportunity for interaction between the n00b and someone with a bit more experience who might then be able to guide the beginners in an informal mentorage.

Of course all of this would be moot if there were a simple basics-test and a pointer to the wiki before editing could begin, but that's another thread.... ;)
tonestertm
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:02 pm
Location: City of...um, Angels, CA, USA
Has thanked: 499 times
Been thanked: 823 times

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

Postby tlcarpenter69 » Wed Nov 12, 2014 2:10 pm

Doomedtx: This is the approach I'm currently taking in the same area. Closed a large number yesterday, a few today, and I see tomorrow has a large number on the chopping block. Once the large number of useless reports are down, then it will be easier to see the new problems, and address them in a timely manner.

BTW...there were a number in the batch I closed yesterday that were submitted in JUNE, and had no comments!
ImageImage
tlcarpenter69
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:05 pm
Location: Lawrenceville, GA
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 15 times

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

Postby tlcarpenter69 » Tue Nov 11, 2014 7:44 pm

Actually, I've entered entire subdivisions without needing a review. One time, however, I entered the address, which was published immediately. I then decided to realign the marker with the other houses. Wouldn't you know it, that slight move required a review. And even better, the move was rejected by an editor in India because...you guessed it: "has wrong information". My guess is that he looked at the satellite which didn't have a subdivision, and rejected it.
ImageImage
tlcarpenter69
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:05 pm
Location: Lawrenceville, GA
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 15 times

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

Postby tlcarpenter69 » Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:22 am

I'm also late to this party. XKSpeed is also an editor in my area, and the AM, spankdog, has been very helpful. My professional background is as a software engineer, similar to XKSpeed, if you recall his original post.

Even though I have only been doing this a short time, I've already found that I spend the majority of my editing time with URs and not general map edits. However, when working URs I might peruse the area surrounding for any chance items to edit that may not have been reported by anyone.

As XKSpeed and other will verify, there are a large number of unaddressed URs in our area. I've found some approaching 5 months without ANY comments on them, let alone a boilerplate introduction. So my goal right now is to get as many of the URs off the map, following the flowchart and established etiquette.

First off, and maybe this is because I'm relatively new to this, I've only had a handful of URs that I could easily solve without asking any questions based on the error type, problem description, and/or the provided traces. Almost all have required communication with the reporter.

The first URs I look for are General Errors without any problem description. These may or may not have traces, and if after looking I can't figure out what the report would even be about, a boilerplate request goes like this: "Thanks for your report. Can you elaborate on the general error you are reporting?" Lately, the response usually comes back quickly that the report was a mistake. I follow that with a thanks, and tell them I will be closing the report.

For wrong directions, turn not allowed and others of that type, it usually involves some variation of asking for the destination, where they ended up, and where things went wrong. If the trace is somewhat useful, I may also ask about the intersections where the suggested and actual diverge. Before I know the destination, I may also ask them to verify whether the destination is in the correct place using Google Maps. If the destination was a business, I usually ask if they were searching based on a business name or the address.

URO+ helps filter out some of those while I am waiting for a response. Tomorrow I have a large batch of boilerplate GEs and older URs that will pass the 7 day minimum that I will likely be closing. I feel somewhat bad about that, because most of them filed the report for a reason, but I can't fix anything if they don't respond.

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. The most common denial reason I get is "Has wrong information", without any explanation as to what was missing (but that's the subject of another thread).

In the end I think if most of the editors in an area have a team-minded mentality where they work together to solve issues and not worry about the points, it benefits the area and users in the area as a whole.
ImageImage
tlcarpenter69
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:05 pm
Location: Lawrenceville, GA
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 15 times

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

Postby taco909 » Fri Dec 19, 2014 10:33 pm

And sometimes it does take a protest.
Like Waze has ign, GMM has editors who are like insurance companies... always deny the claim (except ign always approves.)

I had one where the place point had the full business name AND address.... problem was the address was five blocks south, and 5 miles north.
The request to delete the business (there already was one at the correct location) was denied.
I protested the denial, indicating that the information already contained in Google Maps showed that it was at the wrong location.
A different editor quickly approved it.
-- Rich
ImageImageImage
taco909
Map Editor - Level 4
Map Editor - Level 4
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:05 am
Location: Los Angeles Area
Has thanked: 716 times
Been thanked: 643 times

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

Postby taco909 » Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:42 am

I've found that I've had better luck getting Google pins moved by including in the comments "Poorly placed location pin causing Waze users to be directed to <rear of property><residential area behind destination><etc...>"

Especially if you don't have a lot of approved Google MM edits, you don't carry a lot of weight with their editors/approvers... seems that letting them know that you are a Waze editor (without actually saying it) is helpful in establishing credibility.
I've had two denials that were quickly reversed as well, so don't hesitate to respond when denied.

And hey, batting .500 will win the World Series!
-- Rich
ImageImageImage
taco909
Map Editor - Level 4
Map Editor - Level 4
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:05 am
Location: Los Angeles Area
Has thanked: 716 times
Been thanked: 643 times

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

Postby taco909 » Sat Nov 08, 2014 5:43 am

How about just eliminate the worthless "points" for closing a UR?
Then allow anyone to reopen.
-- Rich
ImageImageImage
taco909
Map Editor - Level 4
Map Editor - Level 4
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:05 am
Location: Los Angeles Area
Has thanked: 716 times
Been thanked: 643 times

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

Postby taco909 » Mon Sep 01, 2014 1:50 am

I really like the idea of a quick response from the app if a reporter is too busy to type in a response.
As for direct email, that would be wonderful, but unfortunately, the only way to do it is "manually"... Waze is big on privacy (and it is a requirement in some countries) so it will never reveal identifying information from any Waze user to any other member except for opt-in options like PM and email from within the forum.

But... there is nothing to stop you from creating your own Gmail account dedicated specifically to Waze. Mine is Taco909waze@gmail.com
If I ever want to go into more detail than would be appropriate for the comments field, I can always invite the reporter to contact me at that address.
I'm putting it out there first, and it is their choice whether to take me up on it and reveal their email address to me.
-- Rich
ImageImageImage
taco909
Map Editor - Level 4
Map Editor - Level 4
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:05 am
Location: Los Angeles Area
Has thanked: 716 times
Been thanked: 643 times

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

Postby taco909 » Sun Aug 31, 2014 9:00 pm

And to add, L3-L6 editors are not perfect, but they "know better" and typically will be following SOME kind of guideline when closing URs.

The specific issue with L1 editors is those doing it for their 50-UR "candy" points, where they are closing fresh URs that have not been worked, and in some cases, may even have information that COULD be used for fixing the problem, but the new L1, only looking to close 50 reports, and looking at a map of thousands, figures that "they won't miss 50"

The issue with L3-5 editors dropping in a comment and then at 7 days and 1 minute slamming them closed is another issue for the local managers and champs to hash out their specific policies.
The Wiki and standard policy says "Close after 7 days minimum"... not "Close if over 7 days." There is a subtle difference in the meaning of those two sentences. The first allows for holding it open for a longer period. Many editors are assuming the second meaning in an effort to "clean" the map.

But these are (for the most part) closed with comment, and rarely when being actively worked by another editor.
I've had many URs that were less than a week old, where I asked for more information, and an L1 comes by the next day and closed it.
-- Rich
ImageImageImage
taco909
Map Editor - Level 4
Map Editor - Level 4
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 4:05 am
Location: Los Angeles Area
Has thanked: 716 times
Been thanked: 643 times

PreviousNext

Return to Waze Map Editor

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users