[Talk-ko] Talk-ko Digest, Vol 22, Issue 3--Dokdo

Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung wesley96 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 24 23:42:03 BST 2012 

I have an update on the issue.

I managed to talk to the Japanese user that did the edits and
explained that the OSM's On the Ground rule mentioned in the Wiki
would favour the Korean naming conventions. He said he understood the
terms (although he did stand firm on his view on who owns the island)
and so far, no further edits on the island was made by him.

The tone of the reply was also fairly amicable, so I think I can
tentatively say this round of edit war has been averted.

Thank you for everyone's input. It's been a big help.


FYI, Koreans regard that the sovereignty of Dokdo island (technically,
islands) is as sure as that of, say, Jeju island. Bringing the issue
up to ICJ would be seen as admitting that there was some ambiguity on
that, regardless of how clear it would be to win the case.

This is why some Koreans even take issue when the island is referred
to as Liancourt Rocks as if to try to stay neutral - it would imply
that there is indeed ambiguity and need for neutrality.

There's also been a lot of tension on Senkaku isles which is claimed
by the Chinese despite the Japanese having control of it. If you ask
the Japanese government, it'll tell you there's no sovereignty issue
related to the isles. Some Chinese people recently made a landing
there, after which Japanese police swiftly arrested them and then
eventually expelled them.

As a comparison, Japanese boats can't even approach Dokdo thanks to
Korean coast guard. The Korean president even ordered to shoot down a
Japanese survey vessel approaching Dokdo 6 years ago.

So I would say, if Japanese will say Senkaku is theirs, then Dokdo is
obviously Korean. You can't have it both ways, so to speak.


Anyways, now that this has been talked over (hopefully), I'm going
back for more border drawing!

Wesley (OSM: Namuori)

2012. 8. 25. 6:22 Brian McLaughlin <brian.scott.mclaughlin at gmail.com> 작성:

> Wesley,
> Even though I’m a foreigner I do take your side concerning Dokdo.
> However, I wouldn’t expect most people in the international community
> to even be aware of the issue, much less take sides since most nations
> that have friendly relations with Korea also maintain friendly
> relations with Japan. I’m well aware of the bad blood between the two
> countries, and hopefully in the near future both nations can solve the
> border dispute themselves. National pride aside I know there is a lot
> more at stake such as a large untapped energy resource, and access to
> exclusive fishing grounds. I don’t expect Japan or Korea to solve this
> disagreement amicably. I wish Korea would take Japan up on their offer
> and have this issue solved by the International Court of Justice. From
> my understanding of the issue, Japan didn’t annex Dokdo (Takeshima)
> until 1905. As a result of losing WWII Japan was forced to surrender
> all territory gained during that time frame. I think Korea could
> easily win the argument based on that argument. That’s just my opinion
> since I’m not aware of all the facts in the case, or passionate about
> the issue (don’t tell my Korean wife that).
>
> In the interest of the OSM community (don’t expect the mediators to
> take sides either) we don’t want to start an editing war. I think the
> best solution is to label it undesignated sovereignty, and note that
> it’s claimed by both Korea and Japan, but occupied by Korea. The
> official name should be Liancourt Rocks (Its internationally known
> name), but it should be tagged to reflect the Korean and Japanese
> names. Relations should be shown to their corresponding provinces in
> Korea as well as Japan. Perhaps consider including a link
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liancourt_Rocks_dispute. I know that
> solution is probably unacceptable to many Japanese or Korean
> nationals, but I believe it is in the best interests of the
> international community and for OSM.
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM,  <talk-ko-request at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>> Send Talk-ko mailing list submissions to
>>        talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>        http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>        talk-ko-request at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>        talk-ko-owner at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ko digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>   1. Possible border dispute brewing? (Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung)
>>   2. Re: Possible border dispute brewing? (Mikel Maron)
>>   3. Re: Possible border dispute brewing? (Andrew Errington)
>>   4. Re: Possible border dispute brewing? (Mikel Maron)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 22:07:21 +0900
>> From: Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>> To: "Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>> Message-ID: <-3257708996796017652 at unknownmsgid>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> While I was editing the administrative border for
>> Gyeongsangbuk-do(Gyeongbuk), it came to my attention that a user named
>> kazuchi has removed Dokdo's maritime border. This was noticeable since
>> Dokdo is part of Gyeongbuk.
>>
>> My suspicion is that the user in question is a Japanese. In any case, while
>> I was doing further edits to complete the admin borders for Gyeongbuk, the
>> editor spewed out save errors. Seeing the problem might not be on my end, I
>> checked the relation.
>>
>> To my horror, the very same user decided to outright delete all relations
>> that were related to the maritime border I set up around Dokdo, and then
>> some. Here's the changeset:
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/12829541
>>
>> Basically, this guy had the balls to delete the relations for the admin
>> borders for the entire South Korea, as well as Gyeongbuk, Gangwon, and the
>> Dokdo itself.
>>
>> I was able to restore the data up to the previous saved point for now, but
>> some progress on Gyeongbuk has been lost.
>>
>> I fear that this may not be the end of the story, as the Japanese
>> government has sharply increased the rhetoric on the claim that
>> Dokdo(a.k.a. Takeshima) is its territory in the recent weeks as a
>> retaliation against the South Korean president visiting the island. I've
>> seen similar instances of vandalism on Wikipedia already.
>>
>> The problem has been reported to OSM's mediator, but I'm not sure if that
>> would do any good if this ever escalates.
>>
>> I realize that many of you who are doing map edits on South Korea are of
>> foreign nationality. So I can't simply ask you to just take my side, but I
>> think everyone should know what's going on. At the least, please help
>> restore data points that are supposed to be unrelated to these spats if
>> they ever get deleted like this.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> - Wesley (OSM: Namuori)
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ko/attachments/20120823/5ea6b114/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 06:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
>> To: Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>,
>>        "Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>> Message-ID:
>>        <1345728656.6119.YahooMailNeo at web161601.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I was asked by the poster of this thread to act in mediation on this issue. I am happy to do so.
>>
>> The same issue has been raised to me multiple times after I visited South Korea in May (when I joined this list). Each time I have said the same thing initially, and received no further ?response. The first step for dispute mediation in OSM is for those affected to attempt dialogue directly with the other mappers involved; and failing that, the other community involved, if it exists and is active.?http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes
>>
>> Has this been tried by anyone? The Japanese OSM community has a mailing list, and the main members are the same that are organizing this year's SOTM. In short, I would expect a reasonable and open response to communication.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Mikel
>>
>> ?
>>
>> * Mikel Maron *?+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>>
>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:07 AM
>>> Subject: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>>>
>>>
>>> While I was editing the administrative border for Gyeongsangbuk-do(Gyeongbuk), it came to my attention that a user named kazuchi has removed Dokdo's maritime border. This was noticeable since Dokdo is part of Gyeongbuk.
>>>
>>> My suspicion is that the user in question is a Japanese. In any case, while I was doing further edits to complete the admin borders for Gyeongbuk, the editor spewed out save errors. Seeing the problem might not be on my end, I checked the relation.
>>>
>>> To my horror, the very same user decided to outright delete all relations that were related to the maritime border I set up around Dokdo, and then some. Here's the changeset:
>>>
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/12829541
>>>
>>> Basically, this guy had the balls to delete the relations for the admin borders for the entire South Korea, as well as Gyeongbuk, Gangwon, and the Dokdo itself.
>>>
>>> I was able to restore the data up to the previous saved point for now, but some progress on Gyeongbuk has been lost.
>>>
>>> I fear that this may not be the end of the story, as the Japanese government has sharply increased the rhetoric on the claim that Dokdo(a.k.a. Takeshima) is its territory in the recent weeks as a retaliation against the South Korean president visiting the island. I've seen similar instances of vandalism on Wikipedia already.
>>>
>>> The problem has been reported to OSM's mediator, but I'm not sure if that would do any good if this ever escalates.
>>>
>>> I realize that many of you who are doing map edits on South Korea are of foreign nationality. So I can't simply ask you to just take my side, but I think everyone should know what's going on. At the least, please help restore data points that are supposed to be unrelated to these spats if they ever get deleted like this.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> - Wesley (OSM: Namuori)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-ko mailing list
>>> Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ko/attachments/20120823/40a076f5/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 23:37:59 +0900
>> From: Andrew Errington <erringtona at gmail.com>
>> To: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>, talk-ko at openstreetmap.org,
>>        Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>> Message-ID: <201208232338.00488.erringtona at gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-15"
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I asked someone for advice about this and indeed was told to try approaching
>> the mappers directly.
>>
>> I did ask a couple of mappers to stop, but it was a couple of months ago and I
>> never received a reply.  Since then I have looked at the area again and seen
>> more damage.  It is frustrating to me as I care a lot about the map.
>>
>> I am not going to choose sides, but I think that since Dokdo is currently
>> protected by Korea it should be labelled as Korean territory.  If this
>> changes in the future then of course it can be re-labelled.  Naturally,
>> tagging can include :ko and :ja tags simultaneously.
>>
>> I have not attempted to contact any Japanese group.  Has anyone else?
>>
>> Finally, just FYI there are 34 addresses on this mailing list (a couple of
>> which are 'bots) and it's usually quiet.  I don't know if this represents
>> all, most, some or a few of the mappers in Korea.  Also, Korean mappers speak
>> Korean, so we need a volunteer translator (or several) to translate anything
>> important between Korean and English.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 22:30:56 Mikel Maron wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I was asked by the poster of this thread to act in mediation on this issue.
>>> I am happy to do so.
>>>
>>> The same issue has been raised to me multiple times after I visited South
>>> Korea in May (when I joined this list). Each time I have said the same
>>> thing initially, and received no further ?response. The first step for
>>> dispute mediation in OSM is for those affected to attempt dialogue directly
>>> with the other mappers involved; and failing that, the other community
>>> involved, if it exists and is
>>> active.?http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes
>>>
>>> Has this been tried by anyone? The Japanese OSM community has a mailing
>>> list, and the main members are the same that are organizing this year's
>>> SOTM. In short, I would expect a reasonable and open response to
>>> communication.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Mikel
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> * Mikel Maron *?+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>>>> To: "Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:07 AM
>>>> Subject: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While I was editing the administrative border for
>>>> Gyeongsangbuk-do(Gyeongbuk), it came to my attention that a user named
>>>> kazuchi has removed Dokdo's maritime border. This was noticeable since
>>>> Dokdo is part of Gyeongbuk.
>>>>
>>>> My suspicion is that the user in question is a Japanese. In any case,
>>>> while I was doing further edits to complete the admin borders for
>>>> Gyeongbuk, the editor spewed out save errors. Seeing the problem might
>>>> not be on my end, I checked the relation.
>>>>
>>>> To my horror, the very same user decided to outright delete all relations
>>>> that were related to the maritime border I set up around Dokdo, and then
>>>> some. Here's the changeset:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/12829541
>>>>
>>>> Basically, this guy had the balls to delete the relations for the admin
>>>> borders for the entire South Korea, as well as Gyeongbuk, Gangwon, and
>>>> the Dokdo itself.
>>>>
>>>> I was able to restore the data up to the previous saved point for now, but
>>>> some progress on Gyeongbuk has been lost.
>>>>
>>>> I fear that this may not be the end of the story, as the Japanese
>>>> government has sharply increased the rhetoric on the claim that
>>>> Dokdo(a.k.a. Takeshima) is its territory in the recent weeks as a
>>>> retaliation against the South Korean president visiting the island. I've
>>>> seen similar instances of vandalism on Wikipedia already.
>>>>
>>>> The problem has been reported to OSM's mediator, but I'm not sure if that
>>>> would do any good if this ever escalates.
>>>>
>>>> I realize that many of you who are doing map edits on South Korea are of
>>>> foreign nationality. So I can't simply ask you to just take my side, but
>>>> I think everyone should know what's going on. At the least, please help
>>>> restore data points that are supposed to be unrelated to these spats if
>>>> they ever get deleted like this.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> - Wesley (OSM: Namuori)
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Talk-ko mailing list
>>>> Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 07:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
>> To: Andrew Errington <erringtona at gmail.com>,
>>        "talk-ko at openstreetmap.org" <talk-ko at openstreetmap.org>,        Wesley
>>        Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>> Message-ID:
>>        <1345732882.29549.YahooMailNeo at web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Yes, I think it may be more productive in this case to approach the leaders of the OSM Japan community, rather than individual mappers.
>> ?
>> * Mikel Maron *?+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>>
>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Andrew Errington <erringtona at gmail.com>
>>> To: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>; talk-ko at openstreetmap.org; Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 9:37 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I asked someone for advice about this and indeed was told to try approaching
>>> the mappers directly.
>>>
>>> I did ask a couple of mappers to stop, but it was a couple of months ago and I
>>> never received a reply.? Since then I have looked at the area again and seen
>>> more damage.? It is frustrating to me as I care a lot about the map.
>>>
>>> I am not going to choose sides, but I think that since Dokdo is currently
>>> protected by Korea it should be labelled as Korean territory.? If this
>>> changes in the future then of course it can be re-labelled.? Naturally,
>>> tagging can include :ko and :ja tags simultaneously.
>>>
>>> I have not attempted to contact any Japanese group.? Has anyone else?
>>>
>>> Finally, just FYI there are 34 addresses on this mailing list (a couple of
>>> which are 'bots) and it's usually quiet.? I don't know if this represents
>>> all, most, some or a few of the mappers in Korea.? Also, Korean mappers speak
>>> Korean, so we need a volunteer translator (or several) to translate anything
>>> important between Korean and English.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 22:30:56 Mikel Maron wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I was asked by the poster of this thread to act in mediation on this issue.
>>>> I am happy to do so.
>>>>
>>>> The same issue has been raised to me multiple times after I visited South
>>>> Korea in May (when I joined this list). Each time I have said the same
>>>> thing initially, and received no further ?response. The first step for
>>>> dispute mediation in OSM is for those affected to attempt dialogue directly
>>>> with the other mappers involved; and failing that, the other community
>>>> involved, if it exists and is
>>>> active.?http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes
>>>>
>>>> Has this been tried by anyone? The Japanese OSM community has a mailing
>>>> list, and the main members are the same that are organizing this year's
>>>> SOTM. In short, I would expect a reasonable and open response to
>>>> communication.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Mikel
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> * Mikel Maron *?+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung <wesley96 at gmail.com>
>>>>> To: "Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org" <Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:07 AM
>>>>> Subject: [Talk-ko] Possible border dispute brewing?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> While I was editing the administrative border for
>>>>> Gyeongsangbuk-do(Gyeongbuk), it came to my attention that a user named
>>>>> kazuchi has removed Dokdo's maritime border. This was noticeable since
>>>>> Dokdo is part of Gyeongbuk.
>>>>>
>>>>> My suspicion is that the user in question is a Japanese. In any case,
>>>>> while I was doing further edits to complete the admin borders for
>>>>> Gyeongbuk, the editor spewed out save errors. Seeing the problem might
>>>>> not be on my end, I checked the relation.
>>>>>
>>>>> To my horror, the very same user decided to outright delete all relations
>>>>> that were related to the maritime border I set up around Dokdo, and then
>>>>> some. Here's the changeset:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/12829541
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically, this guy had the balls to delete the relations for the admin
>>>>> borders for the entire South Korea, as well as Gyeongbuk, Gangwon, and
>>>>> the Dokdo itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was able to restore the data up to the previous saved point for now, but
>>>>> some progress on Gyeongbuk has been lost.
>>>>>
>>>>> I fear that this may not be the end of the story, as the Japanese
>>>>> government has sharply increased the rhetoric on the claim that
>>>>> Dokdo(a.k.a. Takeshima) is its territory in the recent weeks as a
>>>>> retaliation against the South Korean president visiting the island. I've
>>>>> seen similar instances of vandalism on Wikipedia already.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem has been reported to OSM's mediator, but I'm not sure if that
>>>>> would do any good if this ever escalates.
>>>>>
>>>>> I realize that many of you who are doing map edits on South Korea are of
>>>>> foreign nationality. So I can't simply ask you to just take my side, but
>>>>> I think everyone should know what's going on. At the least, please help
>>>>> restore data points that are supposed to be unrelated to these spats if
>>>>> they ever get deleted like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Wesley (OSM: Namuori)
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Talk-ko mailing list
>>>>> Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
>>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ko/attachments/20120823/f14841f8/attachment.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-ko mailing list
>> Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>>
>>
>> End of Talk-ko Digest, Vol 22, Issue 3
>> **************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ko mailing list
> Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko

More information about the Talk-ko mailing list