NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Moderators: orbitc, RussPA, PhantomSoul

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby PhantomSoul » Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:47 pm

jdelosa wrote:So after a quick read back it seems like our community is largely in agreement with a 7 plus 7 policy.... How do we get this past the powers that be and into our state wiki....

By the way..... With the exception of the newbie editor not much has been closed in under 14 days anyway, but it still would be best that we get the wiki to match our protocol....

Thanks JD


How about you draft the changes to your own wiki space - you can save all kinds of things under your own user page in the wikis, right? - and then post a link to the NY forum for review? Then when we get consensus on the language and all those goodies, we can apply the change to the wiki.
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ]
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Cricket (AT&T) iPhone XR / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
PhantomSoul
Local Champ Mentor
Local Champ Mentor
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:00 am
Location: Union, NJ USA
Has thanked: 329 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby qwaletee » Tue Mar 15, 2016 3:24 am

I would advise everyone here to read the existing pinned topic about handling URs in NY. That policy, while vague in some areas, has never been superseded. I'm not saying it is set in stone, this discussion is good and can contribute toward changing it. But it behooves us to know what the baseline is before we propose changes. Yes, it should have carried into the wiki long ago, but that's the way it is, and nobody ever fixed that until now.

I agree that it is vital to bring initial editor response up. That said, I'm sorry, russ, but 4+4 doesn't cut it here. I don't know if it is the mentality of our driers or something else, but many editors have found responses to work on long-dormant URs, even where there was an initial editor response that was ignored. Perhaps we have a lot of drivers who only use Waze infrequently. In rural areas where you may have an actual problem but not enough driver density to get multiple reports for it, we need to give them a chance.

OTOH, we know that we can't leave every UR open long-term. I saw suggestions of a potential NYC versus rest of state standard, but it is deeper than that.

KTCAOP, I understand what you are trying to propose with 4+4 vs 4+4+4. Bu I don't really see any need for 3 follow-ups just to bring the reminder down to 4 days, with one particular exception (see below). Honestly, I just see the 4 day versus 7 day debate as one of "how fast can we close this" versus "how long is safe to assume the user should have opened the app and seen a notification since initial response." Also, as far as "butting in," there's something to be said for allowing the initial responder a chance to retain ownership, especially for newer editors who are still in the honeymoon stage.

Here's how I deal with it personally (and not always in compliance with standards). I look at UR density. If I have very few URs in a large area, then there's no harm in leaving them open long-term. If there are a great many URs in a small area, then getting them closed out is very important for several reasons: 1) It may indicate a problem, we need to attack the URs aggresively. 2) WME will slow down if there are too many URs. 3) WME will not display all URs if there are too many in a certain area. 4) It is hard to manage overlapping URs. 5) It is hard to read the map overall when there are so many URs.

So we really need three rules, nothing to do with NYC. Low density, normal density, and high density (which will naturally cover much but not all of NYC and other high-traffic areas). We'll have to define what Low/normal/high mean, and we'll have to develop a policy for each.

A strawman for discussion:
* low density: less than 5 URs at zoom 2. Response+7 reminder+6 months to close. Must have one final reminder within 7 days of closing unless there have been >3 reminders already and at least one in the last 30 days. Stretch goal of response in 2 days, but in rural areas, we know that response within 2 weeks is more likely, and many will not even meet that due to coverage issues.

* high density: more than 5 URs at zoom 6 or more than 10 at zoom 5. Response+4 to remind+4 to close. Goal is first response within 1 day, and to try to hit the 4+4 as consistently as possible (i.e., close within 9 days of report).

* normal density: anything else. Response+7 to remind+minimum 7 to close, but no need to be overly strict about getting it closed. Stretch goal of response within 1 day, but 2 days is fine, and 3 within reason.

Some secondary policies within this strawman to modify the above: 1) If there is a tight cluster of URs sent over a period of 3 days or more, then there is a potential unaddressed problem. Aggressively visit the site (daily) and respond to every UR as quickly as possible. Until the problem is clarified: Reminders every 4 days even in normal/low density areas, and allow up to 30 days before closing even in high/normal density areas. 2) If a UR is due for a reminder or closure but was initially responded to by someone else then 2a) if the action is less than 4 days overdue, PM the initial responder, 2b) if the reminder is 5-7 days overdue then post a friendly reminder that acknowledges the original responder (even if it was due for closure), 2c) if action >7 days past due, don't worry about the initial responder. 3) If you see a UR responded to by someone else that you think you have an approach to solving that the original responder does not seem to recognize, then 3a) if there was already a reminder sent, and there is a risk that the initial responder may close the UR before you can work on it, respond nicely that you may have a solution that you will work with {original responder} on to fix the problem, then PM the original responder with your suggestion and/or with a request to take over; if no response to PM within 4 days, you may take over at will. 3b) If there is no initial reminder, same applies, but initially only send the PM, without posting a response in the UR.

All the above may seem complex, but I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all approach that works well. And this is just a strawman to get the discussion going. You may all hate the whole thing. Or you may like it but come to a consensus that it needs tweaking. In case you haven't guessed it, the aboe is close to my own practices, but that doesn't mean it is necessarily the best overall solution.
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby qwaletee » Wed Mar 16, 2016 12:19 am

John,

There is one problem with wide discretion for editors. It will inevitably cause conflicts between editors with different viewpoints who work the same area. (Or perhaps worse: one editor who is AM, and a differing editor just passing through.)

We have seen this over the last few years using existing national guidance and, prior to that, lack of guidance. "This editor just zapped a bunch of URs I was working on, and wasn't a newbie or points farmer."
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby qwaletee » Fri Mar 18, 2016 3:01 am

YOu can turn a regular UR into a [NOTE] - just include [NOTE] somewhere in one of your replies.
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby qwaletee » Mon Apr 04, 2016 9:26 pm

7+7 previously meant to be min 7 days from 1st comment to reminder, then 7 min days from reminder to closure. That will sometimes be 14 days total (if things are super efficient), but could be longer if the reminder came late. Otherwise, it could lead to absrudity such as:

1st comment - April 1
Reminder possible on April 8, and theoretical earliest non-responsive closure is April 15
No reminder sent
On April 15, 1st reminder sent
Another editor, also April 15, sees that 14 days have passed, and closes UR same day as first reminder sent
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby qwaletee » Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:57 pm

This is going well. Russblau's proposal mostly matches the other posts in teh thread, except 1) for filling in the number of days, 2) possible disagreement with his last paragraph that gives priority to the original responder, and 3) perhaps some ambiguity for the start of the final countdown before NOT IDENTIFIED, i.e., start from the original report date, the first comment date, or the last comment date.
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby Rfrsw101 » Tue May 31, 2016 1:04 am

PhantomSoul wrote:BTW, I always thought that UR stood for User Report. Is that wrong?

I always through it was User Request...
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ] [ img ]

MSM NOR; MTE Marshall; NYC Closure Team
Rfrsw101
PartnerCoordinator
PartnerCoordinator
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 1:05 am
Location: Staten Island, New York
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 83 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby russblau » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:28 pm

PhantomSoul wrote:4+3=7 is too short IMO. Unless we have a mapraid or statewide issues with the volume of URs impacting the performance of WME (like in NYC), we really need to strive for at least 7+7.


In other states (Delaware and Virginia come to mind), a 4 + 4 policy has been used for some time without controversy or problems. Specifically, we try to respond to all new URs within 1 day, send a reminder 4 days after initial contact, and close the UR 4 days after the reminder if there has been no response. Waiting longer does not seem to improve the response rate; if the reporter is going to respond at all, most of the time they do so fairly promptly, but 70-75% of the time you get no response.

Incidentally, working towards making the initial contact within one day would do much more to improve the response rate than waiting longer for responses to old, old URs.
[ img ] [ img ] [ img ]
MAR MSM; State Manager: District of Columbia
russblau
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:36 pm
Has thanked: 320 times
Been thanked: 655 times

Re: NY Protocol for Handling UR's

Postby russblau » Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:25 pm

Here's an unsolicited attempt at rewriting the proposal for simplicity and clarity (wiki mark-up included). Note that I have not touched the question of how many days to allow for responses, etc.; and the proposal only addresses the timing guidelines, not the substance of how to resolve URs.

{{Details|Update Requests in Waze Map Editor}}
An Update Request (UR) is what the Waze client app calls a "Map Issue." When a Wazer submits a map issue for wrong driving instructions, or a disallowed turn, etc., the icon with the small Waze icon is added to the editing map in the Update Requests layer.

Update Requests are our only direct line of communication with the end user. As such, it is important that we not only make every attempt respond to reports as they pop up in a timely fashion, but also provide them with enough time to respond (since many users are what are affectionately referred to "weekend warriors").

Ideally, we should send an initial response to every UR within 24 hours of the report. If you find an unanswered UR that is older than that, of course, please respond to it as soon as possible. The sooner the user receives the initial response, the better the chances we will get useful information back from them, since memories of specific issues will fade with time.

After you respond to a UR, try to check back on it reasonably often, so that you can answer if the user does provide more information. If has been no answer to the initial response within [X] days, send a reminder message. If there is no response to a reminder message within [X] days, and you cannot identify the issue from the UR itself, then the UR may be closed as “Not identified.” If at any time the user stops responding for [X] days, the editor should send out a reminder to the user, and the report may be closed out if there has been no response to this reminder within [X] days.

Generally, if the UR itself contains no useful information and the user has not yet responded to an inquiry, any editor may send a reminder message and/or close the UR if the standards above are met. If the user has provided information, either in the original report or in response to an inquiry, then priority should be given to the initial responding editor to continue the conversation with the user. If more than [X] days have gone by since the last response by the initial editor, then it may be handled by any editor, either by acting on the user's last response or by requesting further information if needed.


Editorial suggestions welcome.
[ img ] [ img ] [ img ]
MAR MSM; State Manager: District of Columbia
russblau
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:36 pm
Has thanked: 320 times
Been thanked: 655 times

Previous

Return to New York

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users