bgodette wrote:

SuperDave1426 wrote:I value my privacy (what little of it there is, these days), but half a residential block isn't something that would make me too terribly nervous for someone to figure out (I realize that others might not feel that way).

So no concerns about someone sitting around to see who gets into a car with a phone mount?

Heck, someone can do that now, completely unrelated to Waze.

bgodette wrote:

SuperDave1426 wrote:

bgodette wrote:So no concerns about someone sitting around to see who gets into a car with a phone mount?

Heck, someone can do that now, completely unrelated to Waze.

Well yeah, but that's looking for just anyone, not a specific someone.

My point was that if someone was really going to be that determined to find a specific someone, there are ways other than Waze to get you close enough to do that. Maybe even closer.

The unfortunate fact of the matter is that any kind of real privacy, in this day and age, is pretty much reduced to myth status.

Why restrict "search for editor" to CMs? Edits to the road are a matter of public record - all you have to do is click on a road segment to see who edited it. I believe I saw a tweet a while back from @Waze or @WazeMapping that even said something to that effect (that edits were public record and there's no expectation that what you edit will be private).

Given that most people here area using some kind of pseudonym and not their real name, I see even less of a "privacy" issue, but that's another topic, I suppose....

Area Managers (and I'm not saying this because I am one) could benefit a lot from this, especially when they're working with a new editor and want to make sure that good edits (which should be the priority here) are being made....

Edit: I found the tweet I was thinking of here. Public activity = no expectations of privacy. Just for the record.

Yea, I use that feature in Highlights upon occasion. Thank you for being reasonable about the restriction level.

berestovskyy wrote:The "Updated by" feature was implemented months ago and we agreed that it's for country managers only.

Who's "we?" Country Managers?

I still think I have a valid point that should be considered. But you're the writer of the extension, so if you don't want to implement or even consider it, there's really nothing anyone can do to compel you to make such a change or revisit the decision.

@sketch: An activity done in public (aka Public Activity) is a world of difference from a rap sheet by the FBI. If you do want to make a comparison, however, there have been a number of court cases, both in the USA and other countries, where it's been deemed that when performing a public activity, an individual has no reasonable expectation to privacy. Since editing the Waze map is likewise a public activity, there is no reasonable expectation to an editor that those edits should be considered private.

Heck, if I screw something up and someone notices it, I want the person who found it to know who I am so they can contact me and let me know about it. I can't fix something, including an errant editing behavior, if I'm not informed about it.

And as I've already pointed out, given that the vast majority of editors here are going by a pseudonym of some kind or another, they've already got all the "privacy" that they should ever need WRT Waze. Sincerely, I really do fail to see what "privacy" implications there are in someone being able to search for, to see, all your edits on the map. I just don't see how much "power" that gives someone.

I know you said you weren't taking sides, but I wanted to be sure that what I'm trying to bring up is clear.

bummerdude69 wrote:- Should there be a check for elevation? I'm thinking everything 'should' be Ground (0), unless it's actually going over/ under something (except railroads, etc).

- I'm using custom Template ${elevation} and RegExp D!/0/ Is there a better way to check for elevation?

Personally, I'm a big fan of the new highlighting for non-ground level roads. It's already helped me spot and correct surface roads that somehow had been set to elevation -2 or +3...

--Dave

sketch wrote:

SuperDave1426 wrote: Personally, I'm a big fan of the new highlighting for non-ground level roads. It's already helped me spot and correct surface roads that somehow had been set to elevation -2 or +3...

That's Toolbox

Oh. Well, I knew it was something doing it.

As to your other points, I understand what you're saying, but I still consider the concern to be a straw man. While I'm sure there may be exceptions, anyone who's using any forum who's concerned about their privacy isn't going to be using their real name in it. That's just common sense if you're worried about that sort of thing.

As to my other point - someone who's an Area Manager already has been given a level of trust, and has been made responsible for a section of the map (just like Country Managers are responsible for their respective countries). It's not unreasonable in the least to give AMs the ability to fully monitor their area(s), any more than it would be unreasonable to give CMs tools to fully monitor their areas. This is, after all, a MAP application first and foremost. IMO, that trumps "privacy" concerns (especially given the public activity nature of the map editor). If it can be restricted to someone with a CM flag set in their profile, I would think that it could be restricted to AMs just as easily.

I understand the points that you're making. I just disagree with the premise behind them.

However, the point is moot so long as berestovskyy is unwilling to give it any consideration. So I'll discontinue the probable topic clutter. For now, anyway.

Thanks for the reply and the various points. You've always been very well reasoned and even-handed in your replies that I've seen here in this forum.

It would appear that Waze has decided that U-Turns and dead-end U-Turns are not going to be editable any more. Personally, I think that's a bad idea at intersections, since how can you indicate where a U-Turn is actually legal to perform for the routing engine? But that's another topic.

Since that seems to now be the case, is there any chance that Validator can be updated to no longer highlight roads with "Unconfirmed turn at node {A|B}" when node {A|B} is a dead end?

Huh. Well, I just tried doing the "q" thing when clicking on the end node, and I do have JNF installed - and it didn't do anything....

I did finally get q-w combo to work, so there's that, at least.

Of course, if Waze truly doesn't want us changing those anymore, I still think it would be a good idea for Validator to no longer flag those dead-ends with "unconfirmed turns." But that's just my opinion,