I was thinking would be great to see the date completed the city. Not only for myself when I post my yearly stats to friends. But also when you see a city with multiple finishers and all tied for 1st. Would be nice to see who really was first not just alphabetically done.
This has been somewhat discussed in First, second, third, etc. city completion badge. There are issues around something like this like if a a runner has 100% today but then new streets are added. The runner would no longer be at 100%. Would you want to keep the earlier completion date? Remove it until they complete the new streets? Keep the first date and add a second date when they complete new streets? In most cities, there are street changes, construction, etc that happen semi-regularly. In that sense we are all on a Sisyphus-esque challenge to “complete” a city.
I see what your saying. I would be cool to see the first completed then the latest completed. Or just the latest. I do live in an area that is always adding new neighborhoods (that rural expansion for you).
My biggest thing for myself I would like to be able to see the year I completed a city. Just like with my running ahead data I want to be able to pull a report and compare stats…since we are probably all state driven on the site if we are doing this lol
That would be my vote. After all, you were the first, etc., person to 100% the city on that day. There could also be an note explaining that on the page, so people understand it.
I still think that when someone runs a city to completion, it is the absolute truth that it is a 100% at that moment in time in space. I would like to see some recognition for that. And later one could always go for the new streets that can occur to show up, and you would get a ‘latest completion date’. behind of below your first completion.
That would do right to the people who are first to complete
That’s not entirely accurate. It’s 100% of the streets that meet the specific criteria to be ingested into CS. There could be a lot of streets that haven’t been created in OSM because there aren’t any local OSMers to add them. I’ve found streets on my runs that according to Google Street View have been there for ~7 years and they weren’t drawn in OSM at all or were missing street names. Or there could be streets that are in OSM but have a mislabeled type so they aren’t ingested into CS when some runners go by the street (ie they may skip it).
What about the instances James’ described in the other thread? Who should be labeled as “first to complete”?
But nevertheless, that is all CS “knows”, so I think it would be accurate for CS’s “moment in space and time.”
As to @Marty’s second example, well technically that person with the virtual “time machine” was first, so I would say the order gets shuffled, and maybe asterisks get placed next to the numbers (if that happens).
Personally, if I lost a “first to complete” accolade for the above examples, I would not have a problem accepting it (as long as there was an asterisk ).
But why should the new person get an asterisk placed next to their name at all? Seems like a punishment just because they happened to sign up for Citystrides later than others. In addition, asterisks in sports usually denote some sort of shenanigans has gone on (ie. cheating). That’d be an unfair label to place next to a person’s name.
In a more CS focused example, should individual streets then also get a “first to complete by X person” or “first completed date”? Streets get updated all the time. So currently if I have a street that was completed by a past run, an OSM update changes it and now it’s incomplete, I have to go complete the new section/nodes. But using your argument for the city-level date listings for the street-level, there should be asterisks next to a whole bunch of runners names and/or potentially multiple completion dates listed for each runner.
I just meant it so that if anyone wondered how someone “new” came along, and “all of a sudden” had completed a city (that they had been working on for quite some time).
The text for the asterisk would read something like this, “This Strider’s account is based on historical data from activities completed prior to joining CityStrides.”
I think the likelihood of this happening is pretty low, but as the saying goes, “Never say never.”
@Marty, your street completed example is a good one, and I think highlights on how this could get awfully complicated. I think most of us are doing CS for our own personal satisfaction. While I like some of the accolade ideas, it certainly does not add, or take away, from my own satisfaction of knowing I completed a city.
That being said, if an OSM update dropped me from a 100% status on a city, I would do my best to get back there and get those new nodes.
My 100% for that moment in time, is of course within the context of what is added to OSM and imported into CS. For ‘my’ cities i am sure that 99,999% is accurate and complete
Bumping this idea because I was thinking about it again. I still think it would be cool and pretty simple to both list the date of the most recent activity that completed a street in a 100% city, as well as rank folks that have 100%ed a city by oldest activity completion date.
If you’re worried a runnable unnamed road will become a bona fide CityStrides street in the future due to some change in city planning, development, etc…then go run it now, get in early!
I had this happen to me recently where only some of the streets were on CS in a new development. I ran all the streets in that neighborhood anyway on 2/21/22 while I was in Nashville and the streets just got added to my total today.