Checking the facts and gamification

[LucioV]

Hi all,

we know that answering questions brings a lot of points, it's easy and looks like a game...

Today i had some spare time, and i played around with Fact Checkings in my area, just to help map getting better: a hard work.

Wrong names, web sites updates, etc. a lot of work searching the web to confirm the update requests, once i made a call to an hotel to ask if they were closed, as i had a fact check that reported it as closed.

There is a lot of work!

I know, we are intended to only answer on places we know... but, my friends.... you could know something about an update request if it's about your own business! Who could, by personal knowledge, answer a question like:"Could you confirm that the phone number of this shop is this?" without having to perform a web search?

And here it comes the best thing: this will not bring you a single point!

Checking the facts is a nice addition that will help (i hope speed) the update approval process, but it's an hard work for reviewers, and will not bring points.

Just want to share with you this feedback: i think that, to be more appreciated and used, Fact checking should bring some points.

Thanks for your kind attention

[MonicaJ]

I know...! This is soooooo annoying! I spent a lot of time doing the same thing and no points 😞 Hope that this "job" will get the local guides points in the future. It is a important job that needs to be done! 

[LucioV]

---

@MonicaJ wrote:

I know...! This is soooooo annoying! I spent a lot of time doing the same thing and no points 😞 Hope that this "job" will get the local guides points in the future. It is a important job that needs to be done! 

---

I want to clarify that for me it is not a problem, not receiving points for checking the facts, i'm more interested in my updates being approved, so i want that all the other local guides Check MY facts. But i think that, to do so, expecially for those that still haven't hit the LVL5, this could be more feasible if this activity could bring points. 😉

Thanks @MonicaJ

[LucioV]

Related.

This is really odd: yesterday i suggested an update.

 Tody i found it in my Fact Checkings... and i actually can confirm my update!

[MonicaJ]

So true LucioV 🙂 

[Pea]

---

@LucioV wrote:

This is really odd: yesterday i suggested an update.

 Tody i found it in my Fact Checkings... and i actually can confirm my update! 

---

I often see my own edits in my CtFs list. Verifying didn't speed up approval - either it discounts self verification, or as has been discussed elsewhere, it is just another data point with minimal influence

[LucioV]

---

@PhilipF wrote:

---

@LucioV wrote:

This is really odd: yesterday i suggested an update.

 Tody i found it in my Fact Checkings... and i actually can confirm my update! 

---

I often see my own edits in my CtFs list. Verifying didn't speed up approval - either it discounts self verification, or as has been discussed elsewhere, it is just another data point with minimal influence

---

First time for me. I'm pretty sure the weight of this approval is minimal, anyway i approved it.

[LuisRG]

Thanks for the suggestion @LucioV. You know that we are always thinking of ways to improve the program, and this is something we have in mind, of course 🙂

[LucioV]

---

@LuisR wrote:

Thanks for the suggestion @LucioV. You know that we are always thinking of ways to improve the program, and this is something we have in mind, of course 🙂

---

Thanks @LuisRG i know that feedbacks found a nice place in LGC!!! 🙂

[Csaba]

In MapMaker, edits and checking others' edits were counted on two, separate lists. The "incentive" was that the more edits you check, the higher your edits get bumped in the review list (or something like that - I cannot remember correctly - even of the real name of checking the facts there). 

Now I understand that Maps is different and many things have also been simplified so I am not suggesting a different list for checking just mentioning that in MM this was also rewarded.