[HOT] Validation

[john whelan]

So it sounds like by validating we are giving some positive feedback and
makes it seem that the mapping efforts aren't for naught and ideally we
should be in a position to validate within a day or two of the mapping to
keep a bit of motivation up.

I have noticed that in the stats we say xyz has done twenty three tiles but
in reality each tile has been worked on by three or four different people
in some ways xyz has only signed off on it.

Anyway I'd better go and validate a few more on the tasks I'm working on.

Thanks John

On 16 February 2015 at 00:55, Blake Girardot <bgirardot at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> It is a difficult question you ask as I feel the same way you and Nick do,
> I really don't want to invalidate squares to avoid discouraging people.
>
> I tend to almost never invalidate a square unless it is obvious that
> someone clicked "done" thinking that meant they were just "done" looking at
> it.
>
> So, depending on how much mapping there is to do I usually:
>
> Just do the mapping if it is less than 15 mins worth and make sure to let
> the person who marked it done thank you for the mapping, there was a bit
> more to do so I finished it up. I will also often just map it even if it is
> longer than 15 mins but I end up validating a lot less if that is the case
> on a lot of squares.
>
> Unlock a task square and then just directly message the person and ask
> them if they could map a bit more. I only do this if we are talking a
> square completed in the past day or two.
>
> Unlock the task square and find another one to hopefully validate quicker
> if my time is limited. I know this is a terrible solution.
>
> There are probably some programmatic things to improve the situation that
> could be done:
>
> 1. Dialog box on marking "Done" that asks "Are you sure you have mapped
> everything in the 'Entities to map' field?"
>
> 2. Maybe reverse what we have now: No mail gets sent when something is
> invalidated and mail gets sent when something is validated. I don't know
> how many people come back to map if their task square gets invalidated
> anyway, especially if it is weeks or months later so we might not be
> gaining anything by sending the invalidated notice and just discouraging
> people.
>
> I think we would gain a lot more if people got notices of the good job
> they did instead.
>
> And then we wouldn't feel bad to invalidate a task square so it can get
> the attention it needs and we can move on to validate more tasks.
>
> That might be a good simple start, just stop sending the 'invalidated'
> notices.
>
> Thank you for bringing it up, the validation process is tricky and subtle.
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/16/2015 12:55 AM, john whelan wrote:
>
>> Mapping in Africa from satellite images I find I'm adding perhaps half a
>> dozen settlements when I validate, they're quite quick and easy to do.
>> Some are huts and are not quite so easy to spot.
>>
>> Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
>> perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
>> fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added
>> in the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
>> settlements and no one else will be validating.
>>
>> I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is
>> a concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at
>> the moment we have a lot of tiles to map.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20150216/f9c2f48b/attachment.html>