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 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.
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: 720 times
Been thanked: 640 times

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

Postby DwarfLord » Sun Aug 31, 2014 3:42 pm

Like Taco909, I agree with much of XKSpeed's comments but would like to respond to some aspects.

XKSpeed wrote: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

The point is not that higher-ranking editors are always more conscientious, it's that they are usually more conscientious. We can't make Waze perfect but we can make it better. Individual examples of rogue editing by higher-ranking editors are useful as case studies but I am quite sure the rank/locking system provides useful damage control.

XKSpeed wrote: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.

In general I agree, but there are downsides to a heavy UR load. Some editors are indeed working with more limited resources (computer power, screen size, bandwidth). I was recently in a remote area with very limited bandwidth and found editing in Waze effectively impossible. Also, if a pile of URs show up at the site of a new issue, a massive background UR load will make such a cluster harder for browsing editors to detect, a sort of visual signal-to-noise issue. Finally there is a morale concern: when an editor is presented with hundreds of URs rather than ten or twenty -- not to mention when the URs seem to come in faster than the local community is clearing them -- it can be depressing and many editors might say to heck with it. So there are some good reasons to clear stale URs rather then let them languish.

XKSpeed wrote: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!

Thanks for saying this. I agree completely that Waze reporters are disproportionately likely to be "power users" with valuable input. That's why it hurts so much to see their reports dismissed as a result of poor editing. At the same time, I disagree that these busy people should be allowed more than 7 days to respond. In my experience busy people prioritize their time among constant distractions and requests, and if they don't get to something like this soon they won't get to it at all. Some editors recommend a second "ping" and I sometimes do that, especially if I am interested in the area of the report. But as Taco909 said there is the serious danger of being perceived as nagging. I think it is better to show good will, and say that they can feel welcome to submit again if the issue recurs, than to try to nail them down on one particular UR.

XKSpeed wrote:While some editors may be truly altruistic, I suspect many want that cool dinosaur mood icon when they're driving around town!

Indeed. I haven't seen a post yet in favor of the current UR rewards system. The idea of rewarding new editors for closing reports may have had value in the early days of Waze but any value it once had is gone.

XKSpeed wrote:Sometimes there's legwork that takes a few days.

I'll echo what Taco909 said, that one can add a discussion comment indicating that one is actively pursuing a UR and please leave it open. This works unless one encounters a rogue editor who disregards such things. Such an editor is disproportionately likely to be Rank 1. Hence this topic :mrgreen:

Regarding any proposals for addressing this issue, Waze seems to want to limit their interaction with and responsiveness to the editing community. As you may have noticed, much of our understanding of how routing and voice instructions work is the result of dedicated and painstaking reverse engineering by volunteers, not as a result of the Waze developers simply telling us. I don't get this business model but it is what it is. The likelihood of complex proposals being adopted seems abominably minuscule, no matter how good they are. I am hoping that the idea of URs being auto-locked at 2 and/or re-openable is simple enough it could actually happen :roll:
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2019
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 863 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

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

Postby taco909 » Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:48 am

For the most part, I agree with you, except for a few details...

The map is "mature" but there is a LOT of crap left over from the basemap imports... and these can cause problems. I've found basemap segments crossing over cinderblock walls and connecting a shopping center parking lot with an apartment driveway that is gated... and the whole thing is tagged as a street and routable, never been touched by a human editor. This is in a saturated area like Los Angeles where we have hundreds of editors. So no, the map is far from perfect even after 5 years.

New editors adding roads not normally mapped by Google or Navtech create a secondary situation, whereby Waze will route to a Google pin using the nearest road to those GPS coordinates. Is the Google pin for your house in your back yard? That's fine, until someone maps that alley behind Home Depot that's only 30ft from your pin... now Waze will route your visitors to the back of the store and not your driveway.
Being aware of this, we can sometimes take advantage of it if we for some reason WANT to force someone to a destination of the than the named address road, but it presents huge problems for airports, golf courses, etc.... These all show up as URs.

Yes, 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. Local policy will dictate how long OVER 7 days is a good minimum... but the standard is that it is a minimum, not a maximum.

On the reminder messages to the reporter, that bites both ways. We want responses, but we also don't want to be seen as nagging. When the editor posts a comment, the reporter gets an email and a note in the app. If they don't respond, it's because they don't want to, not because they didn't get the note.
A reminder to the editors is not a bad idea, but we have discussed the idea of "locking" a UR to the first editor to work the report and it goes against Waze's ideas of keeping things "open"
Map lock levels are there to protect the map (that they paid for), but beyond that, they want things to be as open and welcoming as possible.

Of course, if an editor can see that much research or field work is going to be needed, he can always post "Please hold open for Editor769" in the comments and most other editors will respect that.
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: 720 times
Been thanked: 640 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: 131
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:35 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Has thanked: 52 times
Been thanked: 50 times

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

Postby coontex » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:14 pm

Taco909 wrote:
mdavidsonjr wrote:
Taco909 wrote:Of course, we all did... but when called on it, we stopped or figured it out on our own. We responded to PMs without being snarky, we stopped closing URs without comments, we stopped creating red roads, we stopped fully populating parking lots, etc...

One of the most creative excuses for leaving red roads I've seen was from an L1 who put 2 and 2 together on the red roads and came up with "5"... The road is a different color on the map + The error in the top corner says "Unconfirmed" = "That is a flag for a higher level editor to review and approve the edit" :lol:
Okay, yes, it does tend to draw our attention, but not for the reason you think ;)


I am wondering if enabling pms and an email address was not a choose if this might help with getting in touch with some of the new editors that are doing this. If you had to supply a way to contact them in order to edit then then this might get there attention when they start getting repeated emails.

This should not be to hard for waze to implement but I am no programer so I do not know. Something needs to be done though. I appreciate the help from the ones that do it right or even just ask a question. I do not want to own the UR's but it gets to point sometimes that some of them close the UR out in just a few days from the last comment when there is a problem in the area that is being worked on. It's not right .

They can't log into the editor without creating an ID on the forum.
That requires an email for verification.

The PMs that I have sent that have been ignored have not been rejected due to the user having the option set that users can't PM them... they are simply sitting in my out box where they remain until they are opened, or they have been "picked up" (opened) and not replied to.
And a number of these messages have had a line at the end that failure to respond or correct the issue will result in suspension of editing ability, and they have been referred to the CM as my L5 AM has only been able to make contact with one of the 4 or 5 problem editors.


Ok maybe I had a misunderstanding on this as it may have changed since I first started. I had to go in a enable pms about a week or so after I starts editing so that another editor could contact me about something I had done. Maybe it is not like that anymore but if it is then this should be automatic for the pms. Maybe they can have a popup come up every time you login or open a new page so they people would see that they have a message and get curious about it and look .

I have talked to some of the editors in my area that I tried to pm and they said they did not have any from me on the issue so I had to resend the pm to them. Just another issue I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 200 times
Been thanked: 272 times

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

Postby taco909 » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:13 pm

Poncewattle wrote:Don't laugh. That was my impression of what it was on my first day editing. The second day I went over the wiki again and saw the relevant page and went back and fixed my red PLR (where I work). But hey, I at least did THAT right after reading not to draw ever parking lot road in!

(Unfortunately, it took me a few more days to learn I had to submit an unlock request to get that PLR tied into a rank 3 road.... Sigh....)

My first editing experience was fun.
I began editing because I wanted to be able to assist Tonestrtm with the closures around the I-5 construction in Burbank (where I work).
This was just after I got home from a trip to visit my parents, so I had huge areas of New Mexico oil field with a bunch of dirt roads with which to experiment.
When I saw that roads that I modified did not change color, but new roads did, I started comparing the two and found the "Name" fields.
Still didn't know about scripts or the keyboard shortcuts, so I was manually enabling all turns on all approaches, and I probably created a couple of dead end loops as I did not have Validator.
But it gave me a place to learn where I couldn't do any damage to the routing of the map.

I should go back to that field and see if I left any mistakes that haven't been caught by the local editor.
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: 720 times
Been thanked: 640 times

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

Postby taco909 » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:04 pm

mdavidsonjr wrote:
Taco909 wrote:
mdavidsonjr wrote:I'll admit that I did a few in the first couple of days of editing then I found the wiki after looking at some of the other hundreds of UR's in the houston area at the time. Now a days we can't keep up with them .

Of course, we all did... but when called on it, we stopped or figured it out on our own. We responded to PMs without being snarky, we stopped closing URs without comments, we stopped creating red roads, we stopped fully populating parking lots, etc...

One of the most creative excuses for leaving red roads I've seen was from an L1 who put 2 and 2 together on the red roads and came up with "5"... The road is a different color on the map + The error in the top corner says "Unconfirmed" = "That is a flag for a higher level editor to review and approve the edit" :lol:
Okay, yes, it does tend to draw our attention, but not for the reason you think ;)


I am wondering if enabling pms and an email address was not a choose if this might help with getting in touch with some of the new editors that are doing this. If you had to supply a way to contact them in order to edit then then this might get there attention when they start getting repeated emails.

This should not be to hard for waze to implement but I am no programer so I do not know. Something needs to be done though. I appreciate the help from the ones that do it right or even just ask a question. I do not want to own the UR's but it gets to point sometimes that some of them close the UR out in just a few days from the last comment when there is a problem in the area that is being worked on. It's not right .

They can't log into the editor without creating an ID on the forum.
That requires an email for verification.

The PMs that I have sent that have been ignored have not been rejected due to the user having the option set that users can't PM them... they are simply sitting in my out box where they remain until they are opened, or they have been "picked up" (opened) and not replied to.
And a number of these messages have had a line at the end that failure to respond or correct the issue will result in suspension of editing ability, and they have been referred to the CM as my L5 AM has only been able to make contact with one of the 4 or 5 problem editors.
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: 720 times
Been thanked: 640 times

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

Postby Poncewattle » Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:48 pm

Taco909 wrote:One of the most creative excuses for leaving red roads I've seen was from an L1 who put 2 and 2 together on the red roads and came up with "5"... The road is a different color on the map + The error in the top corner says "Unconfirmed" = "That is a flag for a higher level editor to review and approve the edit" :lol:


Don't laugh. That was my impression of what it was on my first day editing. The second day I went over the wiki again and saw the relevant page and went back and fixed my red PLR (where I work). But hey, I at least did THAT right after reading not to draw ever parking lot road in!

(Unfortunately, it took me a few more days to learn I had to submit an unlock request to get that PLR tied into a rank 3 road.... Sigh....)
Poncewattle
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:00 am
Location: Virginia/Delaware, USA
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 181 times

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

Postby coontex » Sat Aug 30, 2014 4:52 pm

Taco909 wrote:
mdavidsonjr wrote:I'll admit that I did a few in the first couple of days of editing then I found the wiki after looking at some of the other hundreds of UR's in the houston area at the time. Now a days we can't keep up with them .

Of course, we all did... but when called on it, we stopped or figured it out on our own. We responded to PMs without being snarky, we stopped closing URs without comments, we stopped creating red roads, we stopped fully populating parking lots, etc...

One of the most creative excuses for leaving red roads I've seen was from an L1 who put 2 and 2 together on the red roads and came up with "5"... The road is a different color on the map + The error in the top corner says "Unconfirmed" = "That is a flag for a higher level editor to review and approve the edit" :lol:
Okay, yes, it does tend to draw our attention, but not for the reason you think ;)


I am wondering if enabling pms and an email address was not a choose if this might help with getting in touch with some of the new editors that are doing this. If you had to supply a way to contact them in order to edit then then this might get there attention when they start getting repeated emails.

This should not be to hard for waze to implement but I am no programer so I do not know. Something needs to be done though. I appreciate the help from the ones that do it right or even just ask a question. I do not want to own the UR's but it gets to point sometimes that some of them close the UR out in just a few days from the last comment when there is a problem in the area that is being worked on. It's not right .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 200 times
Been thanked: 272 times

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

Postby DwarfLord » Sat Aug 30, 2014 6:13 am

URs are, I believe, the only situation where Waze prevents experienced editors from limiting or undoing damage caused by new editors.

It baffles me. One can see from the responses to this thread that it impacts volunteer morale. We can guess that it impacts driver morale as well when their concerns are summarily dismissed or marked as solved when nothing has been done.

I have no way of conveying to Waze how horribly discouraging this can be, so I'm running with the assumption that Waze places a low priority on the integrity of the UR system. Fair enough.
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2019
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 863 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

PreviousNext

Return to Waze Map Editor

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], totyy