[OSM-talk] OSM Note 1000000

[Greg Troxel]

Dave F <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com> writes:

> On 26/05/2017 09:43, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>>
>> So who is at fault? The one mentioning somethings missing - or the one
>> putting some information into the map without closing the note?
>
> I think you're missing the point. There are a large number of
> pointless notes, such as mentioning things which *aren't* missing, or
> ones such as this, added today:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1008125#c2036202
>
> We have no way of communicating with this person to ask them to stop
> or confirm they're intentions.

Around me, I've been deleting confused notes, but I have also left a
number of non-anonymous notes on the map.  Many are sort of
notes-to-self, that somebody I need to look up land ownership because
there are what looks like trails in conservation land but it seems not
to be conservation, etc.

I've also seen anonymous notes that say "missing street <name>".
Usually, I've seen the street on imagery/tiger/assessor-parcels and been
able to add it.  So if they are not confused, they are useful.

So I think we are all talking about low-quality anonymous notes here,
and perhaps the way forward is to stop having anonymous notes.   We
could even let people sign up for a notes-only account (with 2-way
email) without agreeing to the CT, in some lighter-weight way.  But
probably this is not worth the dev/sysadmin time.

Another approach would be to prohibit apps from entering anonymous
notes, but to allow the website to do it.  Or to somehow have guidelines
for the apps to get the quality up.  Someone using maps.me or equivalent
that navigates to an OSM feature and is saying "I am x m from the
feature's location and the feature <type, name> is not here." is
actually pretty useful, even if sometimes wrong.   So some leaing on
apps could help.

Separately, we could agree that it's ok to just summarily close a note
if you're a mapper in the area and you either are confident that it
can't be understood or is confused.   Having read this discussion I
certainly will be less hesitant to click Closed for notes where I feel
local.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 162 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20170526/665f9cb3/attachment.sig>