[OSM-talk] What would make MapRoulette better?

[ajt1047 at gmail.com]

On 24/11/2017 21:18, Dave F wrote:
>
> On 24/11/2017 07:59, joost schouppe wrote:
>> For example, "Skipped" to me means "meh, didn't feel like doing this 
>> task".
>
> No! it's an option to ignore the task if the user doesn't think 
> there's anything wrong. Maproulette is based on guesswork. A task 
> doesn't mean there's an error that definitely needs fixing
>

I presume the "false positive" button is for that (although as I've just 
noted in another reply, that doesn't seem to work for me).

> There appears to be a compulsion by users to complete tasks in 
> Maproulette even when they have no *accurate* knowledge. This is 
> wrong. It adds *erroneous* data to OSM.
>
> There's a clue to Maproulette's randomness & uncertainty in its name.
>
> I believe a good way to improve OSM data is to ban Maproulette.
>

There are a number of these sorts of tools around, and to be honest 
(with a DWG hat on) I see fewer issues raised about Maproulette than, 
say people using HOT's tasking manager and not knowing what they are 
doing (not usually their fault - it's almost always due to not enough 
suitable training).  Maybe people who use Maproulette have an idea of 
what OSM is and are already familiar with one or another editor and 
maybe that isn't true about some HOT mapping.

The only recent Maproulette issue I can think of where dodgy POIs added 
via MAPS.ME had some extra "missing" tags added via Maproulette.  The 
task in Maproulette should really have included "check that these things 
added by MAPS.ME users weren't mistaggings or just personal markers", 
but that's really something that should be in the task definition 
itself.  There's a discussion about a general "form of words" over at 
https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette2/issues/348 - that, together 
with the availability of "false positive" and "skip" buttons should 
allow people to only contribute sensible data.

Best Regards,

Andy