[OSM-talk] collateral damage (was: What the license change is going to do to the map)

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Thu Feb 10 13:44:11 GMT 2011

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Hillsman, Edward <hillsman at cutr.usf.edu> wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
> Don't worry about it. You did great work on the area, because (I gather) you live out there. I live and work quite a bit farther east, and I do most of my mapping closer to where I live. I added the bicycle shop and building based on a single visit. I just wanted to bring this example into the discussion, because I don't think the technical details of removing data, or their implications, were well-thought-out.
> Ed Hillsman

Thanks.  Yes, the main reason I knew Grand Plaza was more than one
building was because I've been there.

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Maarten Deen <mdeen at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Am I the only one who is wondering what this whole thread is about? Has
> Anthony's edits been removed? If so, why?
> I haven't heard of the license change actually being implemented ATM, and
> certainly not that edits are being removed.

All my edits were removed because the LWG thinks they were traced from
Google.  It doesn't have anything directly to do with the license
change, though if it weren't for the license change I probably would
have tried to get them to stop.

More information about the talk mailing list