[Talk-us] Removal of sensitive data in East Bay Regional Park District, CA

[Mike Thompson]

Here is a response from the original mapper:

Took a look at the archive of posts. Strong opinions! I’ll need some time
to sign up and possibly post a response myself, but I would say that I am
strongly opposed to outright removing these. These sites are regularly
walked over by large cattle and rutted by feral hogs. There is no danger
posed by hikers visiting them under park rules, and there are legitimate
reasons people might want to visit them respectfully and without impact. At
most, adding a note or similar call-out on the sites might be added - but
at the risk of drawing the very unwanted attention being discussed.

Defending against illegal acts through censorship of maps is a very
slippery slope along which everything of significance which conceivably
could be put at risk gets deleted from OSM.

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 8:57 AM Brian Stromberg <brian.stromberg at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think the concern is probably that OSM is fed directly into various apps
> and services. The maps on the park's website may contain the same
> information but they are not distributed in the same way.
>
> Although, after looking at the maps they provide, I don't think the
> cultural resources are included on the park maps, so the argument that "the
> information is available anyway" doesn't really hold up.
>
> https://www.ebparks.org/sites/default/files/morgan_territory_map.pdf
>
> --
> Brian
>
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:42 AM Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 8:30 AM Clay Smalley <claysmalley at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:25 AM Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The argument being made by the Park District is that having this
>>>> information available to the public endangers these sites.  That argument
>>>> doesn't make sense when the information is already available to the public
>>>> elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps the East Bay Regional Park District has also contacted this
>>> source of information and requested that they remove it as well. This
>>> doesn't mean it belongs on OSM.
>>>
>> Perhaps, but we don't know that.   There is also a guidebook (available
>> on the website in question), are they going after the author and publisher
>> of that?
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20220512/e725d04b/attachment-0001.htm>