Waze forum

jasonh300 wrote:Due to the long period between the map updates and the thousands of Wazers in L.A., the URs pile up really fast.

Exactly why there needs to be more than a couple of active map editors / area managers in LA. More Wazer should equate to more editors. They probably need 10's or 100's of active editors / area managers in LA to cover it well.

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:I'm going to admit right now that sometimes (currently) I will falsely mark a UR as solved simply to get my username into the email to the user in the slim-to-none hope that they might PM me on the forums some day. ...

Yep done that, and resorted to other methods, as I described in the "Unhappy Users" thread!

And I should have also used "slim-to-none" for my expectations of getting a response from the users in my post there too!

bigbear3764 wrote:Sometimes I think it is the same person posting everyday till it works. Wish I could send a brief note with reply like in old edit version.

I had one of these, posting the same UR every day for a week. Found out via Facebook last night that it was an old friend who I haven't seen in years who figured out who I was by my username and kept sending the same UR over and over.

During the attempted L.A. cleanup, I closed hundreds of URs that had been posted after bgodette had fixed the problems. Due to the long period between the map updates and the thousands of Wazers in L.A., the URs pile up really fast.

AlanOfTheBerg wrote: If I can't figure out what the problem is, I will mark some "not a problem" and others "solved" just hoping they get the idea that maybe not everything is right and they should try and contact me. It feels so ridiculous to have to resort to this kind of action because of the lack of communication in the UR system. Between my username from the "solved" and a URL to the location in the "not a problem" emails, I hope they can get started with editing and have a name to PM just in case...

I actually experienced the reverse - I dropped 2 URs very close to each other but for different problems and then promptly forgot about them. A few days ago, I received a "Poof" and a "Help" email, so it was brilliant to be able to see the name of the editor (in the Poof) and the permalink of the location (in the Help). I looked at the area, noted that actually neither of the problems had been fixed (and apparently new ones introduced!) and sent a PM to the editor with my observations, suggestions on how to fix (i didn't make any changes myself, hoping that he/she would learn new edit skills), my contact info, links to the forum and the wiki, etc.

I didn't hear back from the editor, however, the suggested changes were made. That said, if I were not a waze-addicted editor, I might not have had any idea/desire to do all this.

Why, oh why can we not get both username and permalink in BOTH emails? Of course, I would gladly let that one slide if only they would change the emails to tell the users to "be patient, map updates will take time"

I didn't get a response from most of my UR's on the old editor, but I did get quite a few significant ones, so until we have some form of useful communication with the user, I'll just keep glancing around, see nothing wrong, mark as solved. Problem isn't really solved, and the user will get annoyed, and they'll probably stop using Waze. If that's how the Waze folks want it to work, whatever.

dknight212 wrote:And of course all this relies on the emails going out to the users, which I think isn't happening at the moment.

David, using Tapatalk

They're definitely working. I report stuff on the road and fix it the editor. I have a horrible memory. I can't even remember a sign I passed two seconds prior. Those reports help me remember that I need to fix it.

Anyway, the emails take some time, but they are being sent, to say the least.

I usually use not a problem in these cases. Maybe that will get them started editing.

I often have to click 'Solved' for issues that are obviously client related or due to 'Prefer goodie munching'. The 'Not identified' option is the least appropriate response in this case, as it suggests that the problem is still there but the editor can't find it.