richard at weait.com
Sun Feb 26 19:25:17 GMT 2012
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Cobra <cobra_osm at yahoo.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
> The worst case would be a single way split by a decliner which would then
> cause the whole relation to be deleted. This is not acceptable to me.
I think that it is not required to delete a relation because one
aspect of it was contributed by a non-agreer. Describing a relation
with a member removed as damaged or misleading seems over-stated;
after all, if a non-agreer had to add a member, surely the previous
version was equally "damaged or misleading". It doesn't seem like a
dire emergency. It's just "mapping". We don't finish everything at
I'm indifferent to how we detect these objects that might want some
attention. We could add specific tags like note="members removed by
cleaner bot", but the object history would also show that, would it
not? I'd prefer not to use a special tag; I think the TIGER tags
demonstrate that they aren't particularly helpful.
vN+1, changeset=123456, username=CleanerBot, date=01April2012, ...etc.
Either way, by tags or by changesets, I imagine that some enterprising
member of the community will provide a list of "Objects for
consideration" perhaps by country or state, for us to examine. That
will be simpler than digging through the tags or the changesets.
More information about the Rebuild