location (the human label) and location_coords (the map pin) are written independently, each last-write-wins, so they drift apart as calls are added. In the 2026-08-19 dump they disagreed in 5 of 6 incidents.
Example: incident b9b4f392 is labelled "100 South Mosher" and pinned at Westmed — two different places, on the page whose entire job is telling you where something is happening.
This is worse than having no pin. A missing pin reads as missing data; a confidently wrong pin reads as fact. For a public-safety product where someone may act on the map, that distinction matters.
Related but separate: location is not validated at all, so bare numbers land in it — incident 9d376ffe has location: "49", title: "Flames — TGID 383", and an AI summary that dutifully repeats "at location 49".
Fix direction: treat the label and the coordinates as one value that is written together, and never keep coordinates whose source string is no longer the incident's location. If they cannot be reconciled, show no pin.
Full analysis: CORRELATION_REVIEW_0820.md (project root, not in git).
`location` (the human label) and `location_coords` (the map pin) are written independently, each last-write-wins, so they drift apart as calls are added. In the 2026-08-19 dump they disagreed in **5 of 6 incidents**.
Example: incident `b9b4f392` is labelled "100 South Mosher" and pinned at `Westmed` — two different places, on the page whose entire job is telling you where something is happening.
This is worse than having no pin. A missing pin reads as missing data; a confidently wrong pin reads as fact. For a public-safety product where someone may act on the map, that distinction matters.
Related but separate: `location` is not validated at all, so bare numbers land in it — incident `9d376ffe` has `location: "49"`, `title: "Flames — TGID 383"`, and an AI summary that dutifully repeats "at location 49".
Fix direction: treat the label and the coordinates as one value that is written together, and never keep coordinates whose source string is no longer the incident's location. If they cannot be reconciled, show no pin.
Full analysis: `CORRELATION_REVIEW_0820.md` (project root, not in git).
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
location(the human label) andlocation_coords(the map pin) are written independently, each last-write-wins, so they drift apart as calls are added. In the 2026-08-19 dump they disagreed in 5 of 6 incidents.Example: incident
b9b4f392is labelled "100 South Mosher" and pinned atWestmed— two different places, on the page whose entire job is telling you where something is happening.This is worse than having no pin. A missing pin reads as missing data; a confidently wrong pin reads as fact. For a public-safety product where someone may act on the map, that distinction matters.
Related but separate:
locationis not validated at all, so bare numbers land in it — incident9d376ffehaslocation: "49",title: "Flames — TGID 383", and an AI summary that dutifully repeats "at location 49".Fix direction: treat the label and the coordinates as one value that is written together, and never keep coordinates whose source string is no longer the incident's location. If they cannot be reconciled, show no pin.
Full analysis:
CORRELATION_REVIEW_0820.md(project root, not in git).