[Talk-GB] 3 more changesets from Liam123 for reversion

Peter Miller peter.miller at itoworld.com
Fri Aug 7 15:29:27 BST 2009


On 7 Aug 2009, at 13:32, Andy Allan wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:21 PM, David  
> Earl<david at frankieandshadow.com> wrote:
>> Peter Miller wrote:
>>> 3 more changesets today from Liam123 for reversion.
>>>
>>> I have added them to the revert page and have copied this email the
>>> Andy.
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GB_revert_request_log
>>
>> You got there before me - I was just looking at those too.
>>
>> He's making really subtle edits - like moving a supermarket a few
>> metres, putting a little hook on the end of a railway bridge, things
>> like that, which undermine the accuracy of the map but wouldn't be
>> obvious just looking at it, even if you were the author. He moved the
>> River Yare estuary by a few tens of metres, which from anyone else  
>> I'd
>> have accepted as a surveyed correction. He moved a bit of boundary in
>> the Orwell estuary near Ipswich and changed a railway to goods with
>> lines=8, which again is just plausible but I don't trust it.
>
> I've updated the wiki page. The two changesets I have taken action on*
> are vandalism, and I'd be happy to stand up and explain myself. The
> other two changesets contain literally hundreds of little node moves
> of coastlines and maritime admin boundaries. Since I can't tell
> whether they are vandalism or improvements, I'm going to leave my
> suspicions to one side and wait for any compelling evidence before I
> take action.

Personally I see little justification for not removing every edit done  
by Liam123 until he talks to us or clearly starts to make good useful  
contributions that we can verify. Can I ask you to reconsider you  
decision and remove the changeset where he has made small changed  
because on principle I don't want his work in my area unless he  
changes his ways and starts talking to us or behaving.

The only reason we are not banning him is because he will register one  
or more new names, so... lets treat him as banned and remove all his  
edits.

As you say in you next post we need to increase the quality of our  
immune system. We sucggest that start with new mappers with the  
attitude 'newbie, I might check their work and tweek if necessary and  
offer words of support', then...  'promising developer, I will let  
them get on with it', then...  'hardened trusted mapper, great stuff'.  
We then of course also have the 'looks like trouble, I will give them  
the benefit of the doubt and send a message and revert if no  
response', then 'persistent troublemaker, no response of change of  
behaviour, I will briefly check each changeset briefly and then  
revert, and then finally to  'to all intents this person is banned', I  
will remove all edits on sight'. Personally I think we are definitely  
in the last category with Liam123.



Regards,


Peter

>
> Still, this guy needs banning IMHO, and I'm writing to the DWG to say
> so. Even though I know they know about it.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
> * I'm going to avoid calling it "reverting", since it's not really,
> it's just hopefully patching it up a bit. YMMV etc.





More information about the Talk-GB mailing list