Thortok2000 wrote:Will do.
Do they still get your message though? If I send a "We don't map toll booths" and then immediately hit "not identified" do they get that message or do they just get the not identified part?
I'd also like to offer my opinions for the discussion on landmarks but it seems that thread is locked. -.-
haraop wrote:I'm sorry for my ignorance, but I already read all the wiki post, and I can't understand one thing yet. If I want to block a road only to Sundays from 5 AM to 1 PM (due to closed area for jogging), I just need to mark "Sunday" and the time? I don't need to place anything else?
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:@jasonh300 I think you're being overly critical and restrictive. This is a collaborative environment and the handful of country managers can't fix everything. We've got to have newer editors looking at URs and looking to solve map issues too.
I didn't even think URs showed up outside a user's editable area, which means they could have rights to fix the issues within that area. If URs show up everywhere now, that's a WME issue which should be fixed.elle-emme wrote:jasonh300 wrote: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?
I agree. Just because there is a conversation going on, asking for an unlock is no different now than before. Hundreds of editors every month ask for unlocks because of a UR they can't resolve due to rank. This is a normal part of the editing workflow. This is not an additional complication. We've been doing this for years.jasonh300 wrote: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.
I disagree. Now I don't have to worry about trying to solve ALL URs in my area using conversations. What I didn't think about in testing is a way to quickly, visually ID URs which I have participated in. Like the Participated list for the forum in Tapatalk.elle-emme wrote: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?
But a good % of URs aren't about the road they are reported on anyway, so that's one reason it didn't come up. And I don't think it is worth the effort to pursue as a feature. The whole "issue" with multiple editors being involved in URs and the possible problems with it was partly due to not a lot of overlap between editors. But even before public release, we had issues with URs being closed improperly and having a conversation tool is not going to change it.elle-emme wrote: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?
IMO, it isn't, and therefore, it isn't.
ohad-ron wrote:Conversations - this feature lets you talk directly from the editor with people who have reported update requests. Client users are able to reply directly from the client, and you will get a notification to your client and an email when they respond.
AndyPoms wrote:You should have been marking those as "Not Identified" as you didn't solve the issue they were reporting. Only MPs should never be marked as "Not Identified", NOT URs.