[Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits

Peter Miller peter.miller at itoworld.com
Tue Jul 21 10:44:39 BST 2009


On 21 Jul 2009, at 10:24, Tom Hughes wrote:

> On 21/07/09 10:10, Peter Miller wrote:
>
>> I am not hearing anyone saying we should not revert all Liam123's  
>> edits
>> for which he is still the most recent editor. Can someone do it?
>
> That will be up to the Data Working Group surely?


Possibly.

>
>> Should we set up a vandalism response process and team for England,  
>> or
>> the East of England, GB or UK which can deal with UK related  
>> vandalism?
>> One reason for doing this on at a territorial level is because issues
>> will be different in different territories - the middle east and  
>> Cyprus
>> have different issues from this part of the wold. Possibly we start  
>> with
>> the GB area (to match with talk-gb) and then consider breaking it  
>> out to
>> England, Scotland and Wales at a later point if necessary and  
>> possibly
>> into regions but only if there is a good reason.
>
> It's called the Data Working Group and it already exists and is due  
> to meet in the near future - I assume this will be on the agenda.

Thanks Tom.

The vandalism page says one should (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism):-
" 1. Make direct human contact. Be polite and assume the best. Wait  
adequate time for response. This is always the first course of action.
"2. Consult with lists and/or trusted individuals and the local  
community to examine problem. If necessary the data working group will  
help identify "investigators" within the community who can research  
the issues.
"3. Report vandalism to the data working group  
(data at osmfoundation.org). This should be the last resort!

Fyi, we have done 1. We are in the process of doing 2. We should then  
do 3, but only after we have agreement on 2. I think we are also  
talking about how we should "Consult with lists and/or trusted  
individuals and the local community to examine problem" in the UK in  
the future to quickly get to the point where we agree a revert is  
needed.

My intention would be that it should then be pretty much a matter of  
pressing the 'revert' button by someone in the data group after the  
local group has reached agreement.

I would hope that the revert could happen within hours of the report -  
it should not required to wait for a meeting by which time the  
vandalism will have filtered out onto the rendering and into weekly  
planet files etc etc.

I suggest that most of the work of the Data Working Group will be  
dealing with complex issues with potential mass copyright infringement  
or robot-based mass damage. I really hope that this central working  
group doesn't get distracted by every clown in the world who messes  
with an area for a few hours after an evening in the pub!

Btw, would it be worth creating a 'Data Working Group' wiki page (I  
think this is slightly different from vandalism) and there is  
currently no wiki page for it that I can find.



Regards,



peter



>
>> To be clear, we should only apply a revert to malicious edits;  
>> newbies
>> errors should be tweeked and dealt with much more sensitively  
>> (speaking
>> as one who has broken the coastline and sunk the east coast on more  
>> than
>> one occasion).
>
> I'm still not clear on what this user has been doing and what the  
> evidence is that it is indeed malicious. This whole thread started  
> with the statement that "Liam123 is still active unfortunately"  
> which implies there is some history, but I have no memory of that  
> history and there doesn't seem to have been any clear statement in  
> this thread of what he has been doing and why it is thought to be  
> malicious.
>
> Tom
>
> -- 
> Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
> http://www.compton.nu/





More information about the Talk-GB mailing list