[OSM-talk] Edit Attacks

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Jun 10 23:12:17 UTC 2020


The Changeset: 85357849 comment is "multipolygons for the entire river 
offer no tangible advantages and not to be used."

Sorry but I don't think that is a great comment.
Is there any advantage in what you did?
If so, what did you do and what are the advantages?


On 11/6/20 8:40 am, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote:
>
> when i look at the changeset it went to the guy, but did not tell me 
> what he did. i have had that discussion
>
> before with somebody else that must be listed and we agreed it was a 
> land fill, with a golf course on top it
>
> is a very small part of the top of the hill only 9 holes only,
>
> how many times do i have to go back and defend my edits ? how many 
> times do i have to go back
> and redo my edits.
> it is a very big hill that is collecting gas and making electricity. 
> and there still digging on it, and a snow hill
> and park on the back side.
> if the edit is wrong then add and correct not do what was done i have 
> had 2 people ask me to explane my
> one edit and have me look what i did and correct not jump in and demand.


People ask questions whey they don't understand.


Explain your edits better in the change set comments, it helps others 
understand what is being done, why it is being done and the source of 
the information. I note that there is no source given ... is that a 
'feature' of iD? In JOSM there is a source statement for each change 
set, if it is there ... use it.


If they understand but disagree then discussion should take place. Don't 
take it personally, most are here to help make the map better.

>     Wednesday, June 10, 2020 4:53 PM -05:00 from Andy Townsend
>     <ajt1047 at gmail.com </compose?To=ajt1047 at gmail.com>>:
>     On 10/06/2020 22:41, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us wrote:
>     > this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with
>     > somebody that was
>     > calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat
>     > surface and then explaned
>     > how to list it as non active.
>     > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160
>
>
>     Well that's been a golf course for only a month:
>
>     http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=802256628
>
>     If that isn't a golf course, I suggest you discuss that with the
>     person
>     who added that in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84983669 .
>
>
>     > but the thing is the river was a 10 year old 81 mile download that
>     > maye should not be as to the Wiki.
>     > and this guy must be a river freak just like the bus stop guy who
>     > thought he own the map.
>     >
>     As I suggested earlier, it'd definitely make sense to split up some of
>     the huge "natural=water; water=river" areas such as
>     https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949 , but anyone who
>     does that
>     will need to do it in such as way that it doesn't accidentally delete
>     large lengths of riverbank (which happened last time).
>
> i do not think i did, is says do not do the entire river, i broke it 
> up into little bits, and only
> the wide parts.
> and what ever he did the ghosts are back.
>
>
>     Best Regards,
>
>     Andy
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20200611/96779cf2/attachment.htm>


More information about the talk mailing list