[OSM-talk] Oxford University use without attribution

[Dave Stubbs]

On 22/10/2007, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/22/07, Peter Miller <peter.miller at itoworld.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This is great, but it would be embarrassing for the University and very
> > damaging for OSM if the data was vandalised in their patch and appeared on
> > the University web site for any length of time.
> >
> > Scenario: someone fiddles with the data, goes to Oxford University Web,
> > checks that their vandalism is visible, takes a screengrab and posts it on
> > some blog site and then loads of people follow the link back to the main
> > university site and it ends up on the TV news. Far fetched? Possibly not,
> I
> > remember the CIA hack that turned it into the Central Stupidity Agency,
> and
> > someone could do something about as high profile using our maps.
> >
> > So... is their progress on the system to allow contributors to 'watch'
> areas
> > that they caretake, and an 'undo' for malicious changes? I think we need
> > that functionality asap and have a few people watch Oxford.
> >
> > Personally I keep an eye on central London and on Ipswich and the only
> > vandalism I had noticed until recently had been in central London and was
> > basically down to a small number of people scribbling across the map area
> > which wasn't even visible because it wasn't tagged, but last week I
> noticed
> > that someone calling themselves 'randomjunk' had changed the name of a
> > section of Bishopsgate to 'Norton Folgate' (follow link below to see it).
>
> Peter
> randomjunk is a prolific and highly regarded OSMer.
>
> Wikipedia revealed that "Norton Folgate is a short length of street in
> London, connecting Bishopsgate with Shoreditch High Street on the northern
> edge of its financial district, the City of London."
>
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Folgate
>
> So I think randomjunk is innocent ;)
>

Phew :-)... although whether that road is "between" or merely a
"terrace" type affair is not obvious from the ground... the name
appears on the east side only -- the section on the right side is
currently a massive building site.

But anyway, I didn't actually add this as such -- there were actually
two ways following the same segments. What I did recently was
reclassify the sections as primary where they were previously marked
trunk in line with the principal of green signed A roads being trunk
and white signed ones being primary. I may have deleted one or the
other, I can't remember.