5 ms·
Well you just ban them. You might catch some innocents but that's their right. If someone has a habit of turning in a whole bunch of scooters that didn't have G
by ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
Well you just ban them. You might catch some innocents but that's their right. If someone has a habit of turning in a whole bunch of scooters that didn't have GPS available for X days before, ban them. A legitimate charger should have a certain percentage of scooters where the GPS was available up until charging (1-2 day turn around I'm guessing, or there's some fundamental flaw with the charging system), so I'm sure there's an algorithm that can remove a majority of the abusers with minimal casualties.
You can never solve gaming the system entirely, the goal is just to make it harder than it's worth, and hopefully the abusers move to some other scheme.
- michaelt 8y agoIf someone has a habit of turning in a whole bunch of scooters that didn't have GPS available for X days before, ban them. You've just banned your best guy, Wader Wayne, the only guy in the city who was retrieving scooters that vandals had chucked in the river. Now he's complaining on your employees' subreddit everyone said he was doing a great job and his numbers were really good, that no-one else should invest in equipment to do the same work, and that you've ruined Christmas for his family by cutting off their only source of income. The Guardian is going to interview him for their article on job insecurity in the gig economy.
- solatic 8y agoAll of these parameters are tunable. You don't have to get rid of 90% of the dishonest catchers, if even 50-70% will make a big difference. Your argument would have more merit if the majority of unrecoverable scooters were due to vandalism, but the facts bear out that the vast majority are due to hoarding.