[OSM-talk-fr] Continued aggression against French contributors (cadastre integration)

[Pieren]

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> The same applies in the case of separate import accounts. We have reasons
> for requiring separate import accounts; they include, but are not limited
> to, the easier separation of surveyed and imported content and easier
> en-bloc reversal of problematic imports.

But we explained that this is solved by other means. And we are even
ready to relieve DWG of this task.
Continue with your analogy : the speed limit is different for hgv's,
it's also changing on the same road if you are in urban area or
country side. Because the rule is adapted to the context.

> Now you may believe that these don't apply to Cadastre work. And I said
> before, if someone imports 100 buildings from Cadastre, they will certainly
> not be contacted by us about that, separate account or no separate account.

You cannot convince people by saying "upload 10 times 1000 buildings
with your account is ok but upload 1001 or 10000 buildings at once is
not". Or "use a script splitting your changeset (or customise josm)
then it will not be detected by our tool". The size of the changeset
is surely an issue if you have to revert it but it has nothing to do
with a seperate account requirement.

> If I do that, would that change the attitude towards the "separate account"
> question, or would it be a a waste of time?

It would help for sure (and probably we could write it ourselves for
JOSM) but it will not avoid mistakes or inhability to understand the
requirement. It remembers me the time when JOSM forced contributors to
enter a non-empty comment at upload. It did not had the effect that
all JOSM changesets contained meaningful comments.

Pieren