Like Taco909, I agree with much of XKSpeed's comments but would like to respond to some aspects.
XKSpeed wrote:First off, I want to respond to the heading of this thread. I've seen a L3 close a huge swath of other editor's UR's for no reason except they were a few days old. In the same area were dozens of unworked URs and that L3 didn't engage the reporters on ANY of them
The point is not that higher-ranking editors are always
more conscientious, it's that they are usually
more conscientious. We can't make Waze perfect but we can make it better. Individual examples of rogue editing by higher-ranking editors are useful as case studies but I am quite sure the rank/locking system provides useful damage control.
XKSpeed wrote:Second, I see no reason URs need to be closed swiftly when there's no response from a reporter. I'm sure there's some exceptions, but if I increase my zoom I have no problems seeing all the URs in a major metro area. Unless you're still working on a 640 x 480 desktop, I don't buy the "clutter" argument.
In general I agree, but there are downsides to a heavy UR load. Some editors are indeed working with more limited resources (computer power, screen size, bandwidth). I was recently in a remote area with very limited bandwidth and found editing in Waze effectively impossible. Also, if a pile of URs show up at the site of a new issue, a massive background UR load will make such a cluster harder for browsing editors to detect, a sort of visual signal-to-noise issue. Finally there is a morale concern: when an editor is presented with hundreds of URs rather than ten or twenty -- not to mention when the URs seem to come in faster than the local community is clearing them -- it can be depressing and many editors might say to heck with it. So there are some good reasons to clear stale URs rather then let them languish.
XKSpeed wrote:The kind of people that report minor issues are usually smart, busy people, and are very rare personality types. It's quite possible they are not going to have time to respond until several days later and are the type to take time to compose a detailed response. If you close their UR in a few days with no warning, you disenfranchise your most important sector of users!
Thanks for saying this. I agree completely that Waze reporters are disproportionately likely to be "power users" with valuable input. That's why it hurts so much to see their reports dismissed as a result of poor editing. At the same time, I disagree that these busy people should be allowed more than 7 days to respond. In my experience busy people prioritize their time among constant distractions and requests, and if they don't get to something like this soon they won't get to it at all. Some editors recommend a second "ping" and I sometimes do that, especially if I am interested in the area of the report. But as Taco909 said there is the serious danger of being perceived as nagging. I think it is better to show good will, and say that they can feel welcome to submit again if the issue recurs, than to try to nail them down on one particular UR.
XKSpeed wrote:While some editors may be truly altruistic, I suspect many want that cool dinosaur mood icon when they're driving around town!
Indeed. I haven't seen a post yet in favor of the current UR rewards system. The idea of rewarding new editors for closing reports may have had value in the early days of Waze but any value it once had is gone.
XKSpeed wrote:Sometimes there's legwork that takes a few days.
I'll echo what Taco909 said, that one can add a discussion comment indicating that one is actively pursuing a UR and please leave it open. This works unless one encounters a rogue editor who disregards such things. Such an editor is disproportionately likely to be Rank 1. Hence this topic
Regarding any proposals for addressing this issue, Waze seems to want to limit their interaction with and responsiveness to the editing community. As you may have noticed, much of our understanding of how routing and voice instructions work is the result of dedicated and painstaking reverse engineering by volunteers, not as a result of the Waze developers simply telling us. I don't get this business model but it is what it is. The likelihood of complex proposals being adopted seems abominably minuscule, no matter how good they are. I am hoping that the idea of URs being auto-locked at 2 and/or re-openable is simple enough it could actually happen