[talk-au] Suspicious amount of removed bicycle tags

[forster at ozonline.com.au]

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.

Thanks
Tony