[OSM-talk] Automated edits code of conduct

Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net
Thu Jul 14 12:00:31 UTC 2016

√Čric Gillet wrote:
> That would be slightly faster to execute than the first approach I was
> suggesting, but then how would you prove that you checked every 
> and all features ?

Well, the best way to prove that you checked everything is not to fuck
things up, which of course you won't, because you've checked everything.

If you fuck things up (for example, by changing name=McDonalds to
name=McDonald's on an independent restaurant that is actually called
McDonalds), then by definition you haven't checked sufficiently, have you?


View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Automated-edits-code-of-conduct-tp5877825p5878305.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the talk mailing list