[talk-au] Suspicious amount of removed bicycle tags

[Diacritic]

Hey all,

Sorry to be a tattle-tale, but this user's behaviour is continuing, 
despite increasing demands on them to engage. 
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=11210886

In the most recent conversation, they have converted a powerline way 
into a footpath in error.

Not sure what the appropriate next steps would be?

On 2021-09-23 12:27, Andrew Harvey wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 22:02, <forster at ozonline.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> I have looked back at months of changesets by this user. Nearly all
>> involve retagging which is at best arguable and at worst wrong. It
>> appears to be largely done from satellite images and not survey.
>> 
>> The largest category is changes of paths, (typically not those beside
>> roads, not what are generally termed footpaths in Australian English)
>> from dual use to bicycle=no on the logic that all paths are footpaths
>> unless otherwise signed under Victorian law.
>> 
>> This argument is questionable at best, these changes are not in "road
>> related areas" (See rules 11-13 of the Road Rules) and not covered by
>> the Victorian no riding on footpaths rule.
>> 
>> Another category of changes is strange instances of bicycle=no. For
>> example you could ride a horse into the Eastern Sewage Plant but not a
>> bicycle. You can drive a car or walk into Wilson Botanic Gardens but
>> not enter on a bike. You can enter the Quarter Circuit residential
>> subdivision by any mode of transport except bicycle. You can travel
>> Browns Lane Aspendale by any mode of transport except a bicycle.
>> 
>> A third category is removal of bicycle=designated, it would require a
>> site visit to establish whether there was signage to designate cycle
>> use and whether this tag should remain.
>> 
>> A fourth is changes of narrow lanes servicing a number of houses to
>> service=driveway despite the wiki indicating that "A driveway is a
>> minor service road leading to a specific property"
>> 
>> They have not edited for the past 3 days. They have had changeset
>> comments on 19 changesets from 10 different commenters but replied to
>> only 3 and accepted that they were in error in 0.
>> 
>> There are 636 changesets by this person with many ways retagged. An
>> estimated 5000 ways have been retagged. An enormous amount of work if
>> each way was to be properly assessed.
>> 
>> Do I have community support for the proposal that they be invited to
>> respond in a constructive way to all the changeset comments and if
>> they do not respond in a timely matter the community should consider
>> mass reversion of all changesets? Is this a matter that can be managed
>> effectively through talk-au or should the DWG be involved?
>> 
>> I deeply regret suggesting that all of a users work might be deleted
>> but the amount of work to check each way is prohibitive. If any one
>> can devise an automated process to protect the few constructive edits,
>> that would be great.
> 
> The shared driveway point was raised by Tom on talk-au today, and it 
> seems like the driveway=pipestem tag could be used in these cases so 
> mark it as a shared driveway.
> 
> Regarding the other changes, I agree with your points, hopefully the 
> mapper can respond to their changeset comments and hopefully work this 
> out though discourse. Failing that, having good changes caught up in 
> reversions is never good, but I understand it's a lot of effort 
> otherwise, wish the tooling handled this better.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20211001/34b5f8d8/attachment.htm>