Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

The place to get information and ask questions about everything to do with properly and successfully editing the Waze Map.

Use this forum for all general editing questions, and the sub-forums for specific types of Waze Map Editor features.

Moderator: Unholy

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby coontex » Fri Aug 01, 2014 8:28 pm

I personally think that maybe they can come up with a way for the AM of the area to maybe get an email if one gets closed without a comment at least. This way level one editors can work on them also. This may be a good way to do this i think . Should not be closed without 2 comments.
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 183 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby coontex » Mon Aug 04, 2014 3:47 pm

Helgramite wrote:
orbitc wrote:
Taco909 wrote:They need the exposure and ability to work them, limited as their abilities may be.
They also need the exposure to how higher level editors are handling them WRT canned messages, back and forth, ultimate resolution, etc...

In addition to that, we have formal mentoring program where we help editors editing, solving URs and other map and community topic. Not to mention the accelerated promotions.


I have certainly benefited from both informal and formal mentoring, and I understand your points, but do not feel that they come into play ... yet.

Unless I have a talented friend that I personally introduce to map editing, are we really looking at anyone below the old L3 threshold (aka ~10K edits) for either formal mentoring or accelerated promotion?

My very brief exposure as an AM has my daily routine consumed with tracking down an ever changing list of L1 bad actors peppering the map with speed cameras, places/landmarks, PLR confabulations, and either snarky UR comments or outright closing URs with no investigation or comms.

My challenge this week is an editor was improperly closing URs two weeks ago as an L1, before he discovered Chrome Extensions and is now an L3 with more access but no greater self-control.

Every minute spent trying to coral a new L1 on a points expedition directly reduces any engagement with those actually doing their homework, engaging with the local community, and editing in moderation.

So ... agree that we need to continually generate new editors, and that I need to improve my "social" engagement with those who haven't read or understand the wiki, etc.

Good thing that I am code-limited, or in a fit of frustration could create a tool to "select all ... set lock to 4" and eliminate that problem.

With Waze inundating folks with "Edit the Map" suggestions (links in the client, LiveMap, and every UR email) the need for an updated privileges list might be ripe.

Eliminate vanity points for Closing URs ... Require successful completion of Practice Mode before receiving live access ... Restrict L1 and L2 editing privileges ... Require AM mentoring and approval before upgrade to L2 and L3 ...

So, apologies for the Monday morning expurgation.

I appreciate what the Champs and Experts do on a daily basis to improve Waze, and especially to guide and mentor ME.

JP


I am a level 3 am myself and try to do more on UR's in my area then edit. I have been editing since January and have 38000 edits but have a lot of UR's with conversations. In the houston area it is hard to keep up and it does not help when outer people close UR's that you are trying to work on. I also try to work with new editors also to help them to the best of my ability. I feel your pain also.
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 183 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby coontex » Fri Aug 29, 2014 7:33 pm

Undearius wrote:We should somehow get all the L1s that are doing it for the candy to close the General Error URs opened by the people doing it for the candy.


Not a good way to do that but it is a good idea. Wish we could tell but even level 1s need to learn. I do agree that there needs to be a way that a level 1 editor had to have the UR's approved before closing them.

I'll admit that I did a few in the first couple of days of editing then I found the wiki after looking at some of the other hundreds of UR's in the houston area at the time. Now a days we can't keep up with them .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 183 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby coontex » Sat Aug 30, 2014 4:52 pm

Taco909 wrote:
mdavidsonjr wrote:I'll admit that I did a few in the first couple of days of editing then I found the wiki after looking at some of the other hundreds of UR's in the houston area at the time. Now a days we can't keep up with them .

Of course, we all did... but when called on it, we stopped or figured it out on our own. We responded to PMs without being snarky, we stopped closing URs without comments, we stopped creating red roads, we stopped fully populating parking lots, etc...

One of the most creative excuses for leaving red roads I've seen was from an L1 who put 2 and 2 together on the red roads and came up with "5"... The road is a different color on the map + The error in the top corner says "Unconfirmed" = "That is a flag for a higher level editor to review and approve the edit" :lol:
Okay, yes, it does tend to draw our attention, but not for the reason you think ;)


I am wondering if enabling pms and an email address was not a choose if this might help with getting in touch with some of the new editors that are doing this. If you had to supply a way to contact them in order to edit then then this might get there attention when they start getting repeated emails.

This should not be to hard for waze to implement but I am no programer so I do not know. Something needs to be done though. I appreciate the help from the ones that do it right or even just ask a question. I do not want to own the UR's but it gets to point sometimes that some of them close the UR out in just a few days from the last comment when there is a problem in the area that is being worked on. It's not right .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 183 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby coontex » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:14 pm

Taco909 wrote:
mdavidsonjr wrote:
Taco909 wrote:Of course, we all did... but when called on it, we stopped or figured it out on our own. We responded to PMs without being snarky, we stopped closing URs without comments, we stopped creating red roads, we stopped fully populating parking lots, etc...

One of the most creative excuses for leaving red roads I've seen was from an L1 who put 2 and 2 together on the red roads and came up with "5"... The road is a different color on the map + The error in the top corner says "Unconfirmed" = "That is a flag for a higher level editor to review and approve the edit" :lol:
Okay, yes, it does tend to draw our attention, but not for the reason you think ;)


I am wondering if enabling pms and an email address was not a choose if this might help with getting in touch with some of the new editors that are doing this. If you had to supply a way to contact them in order to edit then then this might get there attention when they start getting repeated emails.

This should not be to hard for waze to implement but I am no programer so I do not know. Something needs to be done though. I appreciate the help from the ones that do it right or even just ask a question. I do not want to own the UR's but it gets to point sometimes that some of them close the UR out in just a few days from the last comment when there is a problem in the area that is being worked on. It's not right .

They can't log into the editor without creating an ID on the forum.
That requires an email for verification.

The PMs that I have sent that have been ignored have not been rejected due to the user having the option set that users can't PM them... they are simply sitting in my out box where they remain until they are opened, or they have been "picked up" (opened) and not replied to.
And a number of these messages have had a line at the end that failure to respond or correct the issue will result in suspension of editing ability, and they have been referred to the CM as my L5 AM has only been able to make contact with one of the 4 or 5 problem editors.


Ok maybe I had a misunderstanding on this as it may have changed since I first started. I had to go in a enable pms about a week or so after I starts editing so that another editor could contact me about something I had done. Maybe it is not like that anymore but if it is then this should be automatic for the pms. Maybe they can have a popup come up every time you login or open a new page so they people would see that they have a message and get curious about it and look .

I have talked to some of the editors in my area that I tried to pm and they said they did not have any from me on the issue so I had to resend the pm to them. Just another issue I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 183 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby coontex » Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:41 pm

If you have URO+ installed you can click on it and scroll to the bottom and see the AM for that area. You have to have the am layer activated also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
coontex
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:01 am
Location: Katy TX
Has thanked: 199 times
Been thanked: 183 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby ctpoole » Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:04 pm

mdavidsonjr wrote:It would be a lot better if they could reply to an email. We might get a lot more responses if this were an easier process then doing this through the app or the editor. Most people want things simple.


The requirement that you use the app to respond is probably the biggest reason for lack of response to information requests. Casual users of Waze are unfamiliar with using the app for more than routing and are lost by the complexity of how to respond.
Area Manager: Metropolitan Austin, TX
ImageImage
ctpoole
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:27 am
Location: Austin, TX
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 130 times

Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby DwarfLord » Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:13 pm

For the second time in a few months, a novice editor has closed on order 100-200 URs in my area without customary etiquette. Different novice each time, and both responded contritely and thoughtfully to PMs.

But the URs are gone forever and there is no way to get them back. One could make a mad dash to work them in the few days left before they disappear. One could also say there shouldn't have been that many lying around to begin with. Both true, but besides the point that this kind of event can and does happen. Repeatedly.

I'd like to propose that closing URs be limited to Rank 2 and above. Rank 1 editors would be more than welcome to converse with the reporter and try to solve the problem, but they would not be able to close the report. This would not prevent a Rank 1 editor from working the UR! It would only prevent him or her from, effectively, deleting it.

Opinions please!

[EDIT: Alternate solutions include (a) allowing Rank 1 editors to close URs pending Rank 2+ approval or (b) allowing closed URs to be re-opened during the time window when they still appear on the map.]
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 651 times
Been thanked: 624 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby DwarfLord » Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:51 pm

yogi_fuggin_bear wrote:I have to disagree on completely shutting them out under the first proposal. For starters you're asking for drastic changes to be made because of a sporadic nuisance that only infuriates a few. To boot, the URs aren't gone forever, just click on "show closed" in the layers menu and you can continue to make comments on the UR.

yogi, my observation is that closed URs disappear from the map after a week or so. Once a UR is no longer displayed, if nobody has the UR identifier (e.g. as obtained through an email) there is no way to access it and it really is, effectively, gone forever. If closed URs really were available for display til the end of time I would agree with you that locking them is unnecessary, but then we'd have a different problem :)

Closing a UR with no particular effort to solve it is not "closing" it. It is deleting it. I just don't want Rank 1s to be able to delete URs. We lock all sorts of things above Rank 1, why not URs?

To reiterate, the idea is emphatically not to "completely shut them out". I am very sorry if I gave that impression. I very much want Rank 1s to be able to view URs, converse with reporters, and attempt to solve issues. I just don't want Rank 1s to delete URs. That does not shut them out at all really! It just means (a) they don't get points for deleting URs (well, yeah!) and (b) the URs won't be closed until somebody else comes along, which as you point out already happens no matter who works the URs.

The most important thing about a UR is the window it can open into a problem in the map. While nobody wants open URs lying around forever, it is even worse for them to be deleted without being worked. If that's the tradeoff, then yes, in cases where a Rank 1 successfully works a UR let's leave it lying around until a Rank 2+ can review and close it. What harm does that do really? In fact it gives Rank 1s one more incentive to reach Rank 2, which is a good thing.

[EDIT: WIth regard to other proposals, all of which have great merit, my only concern is that the more complex the proposal the less likely it is to be implemented. Beyond a certain point of complexity -- for example, having different UR locking behavior in different regions to be drawn and maintained by the RC -- the likelihood of implementation is so low we are engaging in what Einstein happily referred to as "brainschmaltz".]
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 651 times
Been thanked: 624 times

Re: Should closing URs be limited to Rank 2+?

Postby DwarfLord » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:00 pm

bart99gt wrote:As long as Waze has the bonus points out there for resolving 50 URs, you're going to have this problem.

I used to suspect that was the problem too, but in the two most egregious cases the editor didn't stop at 50. In the more recent case, I've heard the editor was active outside my editing area as well (where I can't see the URs) and the deletion toll may have been more like 300-500 URs in one day. And, like I said, this editor responded quickly and very contritely to a PM. I really don't think it was a point hound, at least not in this case, just someone unclear on the concept.

Limiting the closing of URs to Rank 2+ would have given this editor time to understand by example while preserving the integrity of the UR system.
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 651 times
Been thanked: 624 times

PreviousNext

Return to Waze Map Editor

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baysidelass, Google Feedfetcher, StarCityFusion