[Talk-us] Change sets covering entire US?

[brad]

I don't think change sets that cover a large area should be allowed.  
It's makes quality control much harder.  I occasionally look in my area 
for recent changes, but often the bounding box of the change set covers 
my area because of some widely space changes far away from here, making 
it difficult to see the relevant changes.
There could be exceptions for a consistent change such as this,  if it 
had utility and had been discussed as required for mechanical edits.

On 11/7/21 8:50 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
> Change set 113500241 [1] showed up in my RSS feed today. I have mixed feelings about adding name:en=* values for all cities in the US but I guess it makes some sense.
>
> But I really don’t like that this change set and change set 113500319 [2] cover multiple states. Both changes (and a third that just is for Los Angeles [3]) are by a user with very few edits [4] who I suspect is not located in the US. I made a comment on the first change set as it modified the city I live in.
>
> What is should our response be to change sets that touch a large number of objects across the entire US? At the least I would prefer that the geographical extent of each change set be for more limited. Am I just being too sensitive?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> —Tod Fitch
>
> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113500241#map=3/47.35/-120.87
> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113500319#map=4/37.32/-94.95
> [3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113499006
> [4] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kas__/history
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20211108/dae524e0/attachment.htm>