[OSM-talk] Automated edits code of conduct
victor at tuxayo.net
Wed Jul 20 17:56:22 UTC 2016
On 20/07/2016 13:38, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Victor Grousset wrote:
>> On 14/07/2016 17:35, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>>> The person proposing the automated edit isn't the best placed
>>> person to weigh that up: they're already convinced of the desirability
>>> of the edit (which is why they're proposing it).
>> The person already weighed that up to decide that the benefit were
>> worth many hours in preparation, discussion, execution that will
>> possibly end up reverted.
> Which doesn't mean they're automatically right.
And my next phrase was
> I do agree that it isn't enough alone but that's opinion worth as much
Which doesn't mean they're automatically right, there is no disagreement
> I'm sure the person who did this automated dupe node merge spent many hours
> preparing it, but they still fucked it up, and the damage is still there 6
> years later.
Damn, nice catch! At least now there is a note so hopefully it wont stay
forgotten for many years again ^^"
More information about the talk