Official feedback thread - v1.3 - Schedules & Conversation

[AlanOfTheBerg]

Perhaps it wasn't your intention, but what I got from that statement is "what good are these useless low-ranked editors? All they can do is ask questions and then not be able to fix anything!"

Which, as a low-ranked editor, is rather offensive

Asking questions, such as in the forums, is one thing, but I think Jason's saying that if the UR is on a freeway or other roadway and it's a complaint about the ramp naming, which is locked at 5, a rank 1 editor doesn't need to be asking for clarification in the UR necessarily, because they have no way to fix it. Given the experience with a lot (not all) new editors, they will close the UR as NI without making the change and then this update opportunity may be lost.

A very small percentage of new editors may come to the forum to post the permalink asking for an update because of the UR. That's great, but it is rare.

[jasonh300]

How do we handle users with driven area permissions that allow them to start conversations in URs but have no ability to edit anything on major roads in the area because their level is too low, and therefore no hope of being able to solve anything?

Perhaps it wasn't your intention, but what I got from that statement is "what good are these useless low-ranked editors? All they can do is ask questions and then not be able to fix anything!"

Which, as a low-ranked editor, is rather offensive

That was exactly my intention. If you ask a question, you're misrepresenting yourself as being able to potentially fix the problem. The low ranked editors are forbidden to edit certain areas and should also be forbidden to be involved in conversations that they can't hope to solve.

In the case here, the lower ranked editors have their own assigned areas where they have full permissions, and have ignored warnings to leave the URs alone that they can't solve that are outside of their area.

[russblau]

How do we handle users with driven area permissions that allow them to start conversations in URs but have no ability to edit anything on major roads in the area because their level is too low, and therefore no hope of being able to solve anything?

Perhaps it wasn't your intention, but what I got from that statement is "what good are these useless low-ranked editors? All they can do is ask questions and then not be able to fix anything!"

Which, as a low-ranked editor, is rather offensive

That was exactly my intention. If you ask a question, you're misrepresenting yourself as being able to potentially fix the problem. The low ranked editors are forbidden to edit certain areas and should also be forbidden to be involved in conversations that they can't hope to solve.

In the case here, the lower ranked editors have their own assigned areas where they have full permissions, and have ignored warnings to leave the URs alone that they can't solve that are outside of their area.

Wow! Elle-emme, rest assured that not everyone feels that way. To me, if an editor's questions or comments are helping to clarify or resolve an issue, then their rank doesn't matter. For that matter, anyone whose comments aren't constructive shouldn't be editing, and in that case their rank shouldn't matter either.

[jasonh300]

Wow! Elle-emme, rest assured that not everyone feels that way. To me, if an editor's questions or comments are helping to clarify or resolve an issue, then their rank doesn't matter. For that matter, anyone whose comments aren't constructive shouldn't be editing, and in that case their rank shouldn't matter either.

This isn't about comments. It's about misrepresenting yourself as a person who can solve a problem when you can't. That will drive users away just as quickly as lying to them about having solved a UR when you haven't done anything.

When you make the initial comment on a UR, you become responsible for that UR. Nobody else is going to get a notification that the reporter has replied. So now, the lower level user has to ask for an unlock, or ask for someone else to fix the problem, creating additional complication.

We've worked on and tested this feature for 6 months now to make it a DIRECT communication between the editor and the reporter. Obviously this isn't how it's going to work now that everyone has access to it. This is quickly going to turn into an unmanageable mess.

[elle-emme]

When you make the initial comment on a UR, you become responsible for that UR. Nobody else is going to get a notification that the reporter has replied.

Unless you follow the conversation as well.

So now, the lower level user has to ask for an unlock, or ask for someone else to fix the problem, creating additional complication.

As long as the lower-ranked editor does that, is it really such an issue? How is it any different than a low-ranked editor running across the same problem during their normal editing of the map and posting an unlock request in the forum?

We've worked on and tested this feature for 6 months now to make it a DIRECT communication between the editor and the reporter. Obviously this isn't how it's going to work now that everyone has access to it. This is quickly going to turn into an unmanageable mess.

If you worked on and tested it for six months, then how did this issue never come up? Did no one ever bring up the possibility of rank-locking conversations according to the rank lock of the road the UR was reported on?

edit: also, if it's such a big deal that plebeian editors are forbidden from initiating conversations on roads that are rank-locked and only patrician editors should do so, why isn't it addressed in the Wiki article about URs and conversations?

[jasonh300]

Unless you follow the conversation as well.

Creating more work in having to pick out which URs have been commented on by unqualified users.

As long as the lower-ranked editor does that, is it really such an issue? How is it any different than a low-ranked editor running across the same problem during their normal editing of the map and posting an unlock request in the forum?

Once again, creating more unnecessary work.

If you worked on and tested it for six months, then how did this issue never come up? Did no one ever bring up the possibility of rank-locking conversations according to the rank lock of the road the UR was reported on?

Because during the testing phase, no unqualified users had access to it, so it wasn't evident how huge of a problem this would be come. But yes, all sorts of locking schemes were discussed...none were implemented.

edit: also, if it's such a big deal that plebeian editors are forbidden from initiating conversations on roads that are rank-locked and only patrician editors should do so, why isn't it addressed in the Wiki article about URs and conversations?

The wiki can be addressed, but it's not really relevant because anyone who tries this should be able to see that they can't do anything to help and move on to other things that will actually improve the map.

[Thortok2000]

@jasonh - If I saw a report that needed additional information and I knew what information I needed to ask for, I would go ahead and ask for that information. Only when I knew what needed to be done to fix it would I even look to see what the locks are in that area. If I then didn't have a high enough rank to do the fix myself, I'd go to the unlock forum and request the correct fix. If I didn't know how to do the fix, I'd go to the proper forum and ask for help on how to do the fix.

This is how I learn and grow as an editor. This is the way it's done.

There's a difference between a NEW editor and a BAD editor. A bad editor can potentially be any rank, although you do tend to see more of them at lower rank, it's true. They usually get weeded out before rising in rank.

It's one thing to request to be able to prevent bad editors from messing things up, but it's another to block all new editors completely.

If anything, you should be able to lock a region so that if a report shows up in that region, someone below the lock level cannot 'solve' or 'not identified' the reports in that area. But I don't think you should block comments. The rank of the commenter shows up in the comment anyway, and anyone else can easily follow and/or join the conversation. And if someone says the wrong thing, you can report the editor for that and/or PM them about what they did wrong.

~

What I'd like to see is an option to automatically follow all UR's in my editable area since I'm going to do that anyway even if I'm not the first to reply (although I usually am since I check the Waze map several times a day.) Perhaps even getting an e-mail notification that a UR (or automatic report) has appeared, and then I won't have to obsessively check the map anymore. That would rock.

[SuperDave1426]

So now, the lower level user has to ask for an unlock, or ask for someone else to fix the problem, creating additional complication.

As long as the lower-ranked editor does that, is it really such an issue? How is it any different than a low-ranked editor running across the same problem during their normal editing of the map and posting an unlock request in the forum?

Absolutely +1.

When I'm editing whatever and need to have someone else apply the change because there's a junction node, etc., that's attached to something locked at a rank higher than me, I post the usual unlock/update request and it gets handled by someone. Nobody seems to complain about all that extra complication because I couldn't just handle it myself.

I completely fail to see how this is any different. If I'm browsing and come across something as incredibly "informative" as a UR containing "General error (user reported)" with no describing text and nothing showing up in the drive or waze-provided routing that gives me a clue as to the problem, I would have simply closed it as NI in the days before we had this feature - regardless of what rank the road was locked at because there's nothing to go on. NOBODY would be able to solve that, regardless of rank. Now we DO have the feature, so I see absolutely nothing wrong with making the comment to ask the reporter for more information. Then, simply follow the procedure as outlined in the Wiki: Give it a few days and if there's no reply from the reporter, close the UR. If there is a reply, then I've now got the same information that I would be giving in an unlock/update request I make for myself. Treat it at that point like any other unlock/update, make the request and when it's taken care of, close the UR in addition to the usual thank/solved in that thread.

Using the above example (General error), I've already run into three of those on roads I could edit where the reply was, essentially, "Oops." They hit it by accident or didn't realize they had done it. Problem solve, UR solved, done. In the case of a rank locked road, I wouldn't even have to post the unlock/update request since the UR itself can be closed.

[Bigbear3764]

I think it has been working well in my area. I get to see who the editors are in my area asking for info, watch what they saying back to them, and they get to see how I'm handling them. Been a good learning experience for all. Some have asked for help when they can't fix the problem. Some have been closed and I don't know what they did to fix it. But it's a learning experience for all.

You really don't know till you ask what the problem was and what rank is needed to fix it. Most of mine are complaints about being directed down alleys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[russblau]

This isn't about comments. It's about misrepresenting yourself as a person who can solve a problem when you can't. That will drive users away just as quickly as lying to them about having solved a UR when you haven't done anything.

I guess that is possible, depending on what the comment says, but just asking for additional information or directing the user to information in the Wiki (for example) would not be "misrepresentation" in any way.

When you make the initial comment on a UR, you become responsible for that UR. Nobody else is going to get a notification that the reporter has replied. So now, the lower level user has to ask for an unlock, or ask for someone else to fix the problem, creating additional complication.

We've worked on and tested this feature for 6 months now to make it a DIRECT communication between the editor and the reporter. Obviously this isn't how it's going to work now that everyone has access to it. This is quickly going to turn into an unmanageable mess.

It sounds like you want Waze to design and implement a feature different from the one they actually implemented. You want a PRIVATE communication between one editor and one reporting user, but Waze has designed a communication tool that allows collaboration among multiple map editors. Perhaps you don't like collaboration. In my opinion, it's a good thing, but I understand that everyone has their own opinion.