Tue Jan 27, 2015 9:48 pm
SkiDooGuy wrote:I am a fan of the following after this thread:
Ramp-5 (or Highest. MUTI always 5)
With no complaints I would like to start implementing these in Michigan.
Fri Nov 28, 2014 7:30 pm
Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:11 pm
Fri Dec 12, 2014 1:58 am
SkiDooGuy wrote:That was a lot of math...
As far as highways. I don't see that being something that we can really negotiate.
4 is probably the lowest that we can put them. I had them lowered to 4 in San Diego for a while. But I was on every day and the only active 4 in the area.
If an AM in MI has a need for freeways to be lowered for work, I have no issue lowering areas and leaving them as such.
Fri Dec 26, 2014 4:17 pm
Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:00 am
Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:16 pm
Wed Nov 26, 2014 3:05 am
Fri Nov 28, 2014 9:47 pm
trukkurt wrote:I get the feeling I may have started this recent push to enforce lock level standards when I sought help in Chat from a rank 6 editor (because I saw that as the fastest way to fix and "be done with it"). I suspected that prompted that rank 6 editor to apply pressure to our Michigan "family" to "get busy and enforce the standards that have been already set". I'm now inclined to seek help only in the MI forum or via PM/HO.
Wed Dec 03, 2014 6:32 pm
TerryPurdue wrote:The other angle to this discussion is a perception issue in my opinion: when you're talking about R3 editors, you are (at least a large percentage of the time) talking about Area Managers.
If we can't trust Area Managers to fully understand and appreciate the importance of MH roads in the areas they're managing, I feel like the whole belief system we're working off of is broken.
Personally, I would encourage a system that allows all Area Managers to edit all segments in their areas save for freeways and freeway ramps.