And just to go off at a tangent has anyone thought about tapping into old people's homes? Some residents are mentally alert and it might help keep them amused. Not a full scale mapathon and you might even have to explain what a mouse is. Many will not have wifi, but JOSM can work off line and I understand even hold the images for a tile or two off line as well but if you can pull it off you might find five or so residents per home putting an hour a day into it and before anyone asks, my home contacts are 3,000 miles away so I'm not best placed to do this, and I suspect you'd need to talk it through with a home and someone who knows this sort of resident first on how best to approach it.
Cheerio John On 25 March 2015 at 14:12, Pete Masters <pedrito1...@googlemail.com> wrote: > It's an interesting discussion and one that we have fairly frequently. > > At the mapathons we run in London, whoever is doing the training is > careful to make clear that volunteers should mark squares as done once they > think they are done. They are reassured that when a validator goes over > their mapping, they will either validate or they will help the mapper to > develop by providing pointers. They are encouraged, at that point, to go > over their work. > > In the same vein, we have tables at mapathons where people who have been > to a few Missing Maps events start to validate the other attendees' work, > under the supervision of an experienced HOTty. These guys are encouraged > from the outset to leave positive and instructive feedback at the point of > invalidation. > > We are trying to find ways to teach diligence whilst inspiring confidence > in the new mappers. Anecdotally, we think these measures are working, but > it would great to know. I love Blake's idea to data mine the effectiveness > of this! > > Cheers, > > Pete > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:36 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> "Needs another look?" maybe, both incomplete and invalid are slightly >> negative. I like the idea of sending someone a more positive message when >> their tiles have been validated, could it include the comment by the >> validator? >> >> Cheerio John >> >> On 25 March 2015 at 11:27, James Conkling <james.lane.conkl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 'incomplete' instead of 'invalid'? >>> >>> I'll be honest, I've never validated a task b/c I thought you needed a >>> certain level of 'certification' (even informally). >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Blake Girardot <bgirar...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before: >>>> >>>> I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more >>>> work and are not really "done". >>>> >>>> That leaves me with these choices: >>>> >>>> 1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time >>>> for validating tiles. >>>> >>>> 2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get >>>> an email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless >>>> it was clearly marked done as a mistake. >>>> >>>> 3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I >>>> do this more often than I care to admit. >>>> >>>> I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit >>>> better: >>>> >>>> 1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in >>>> English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, but >>>> we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping" >>>> >>>> 2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send >>>> notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more >>>> motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback. >>>> >>>> We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers >>>> who marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) >>>> and get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping. >>>> >>>> I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do >>>> more validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping >>>> if I didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating" >>>> tasks. >>>> >>>> On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at >>>> missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is >>>> totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping". >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Blake >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated slowly. This could >>>>> be because >>>>> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement >>>>> (B) people don't like to pass judgement >>>>> (C) doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's >>>>> work. >>>>> >>>>> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation. >>>>> >>>>> 1. Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab. >>>>> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers >>>>> may think that validation is for someone else to do. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Include validation statistics on the stats tab. >>>>> Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed, >>>>> mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these >>>>> statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological >>>>> reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be >>>>> doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing >>>>> the >>>>> number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I >>>>> have to admit that I miss it.. >>>>> -- >>>>> Dan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> HOT mailing list >>>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org >>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> HOT mailing list >>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> HOT mailing list >>> HOT@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> HOT mailing list >> HOT@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >> > > > -- > *Pete Masters* > Missing Maps Project Coordinator > +44 7921 781 518 > > missingmaps.org <http://www.missingmaps.org/> > > *@pedrito1414* <https://twitter.com/TheMissingMaps> > *@theMissingMaps* <https://twitter.com/TheMissingMaps> > *facebook.com/MissingMapsProject* > <https://www.facebook.com/MissingMapsProject> >
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list HOT@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot