[OSM-talk] komoot wiki on OSM

Eleonora Balbi eleonora at komoot.de
Wed Nov 3 15:48:56 UTC 2021

Hi Mateusz,

Thanks for asking! We really appreciate all of the feedback we've gotten
from the OSM community and every time we've made a mistake we've learned
from it and have changed our process accordingly.

To give you some background about how we got here:

   - We experienced an increase in these reports over the last couple of
   years but they went up dramatically in 2020, as did most areas of the
   outdoor market. We were not prepared for this increase at all and therefore
   started out with a process that was relatively basic and experimental.
   - We had little experience working with the OSM community directly at
   that time. A lot of our focus and energy went into figuring out how to
   treat different types of content on our platform, understanding the types
   of problems people were experiencing, and figuring out how to engage with
   our users about these topics.
   - That is to say: We dropped the ball completely on filling in the
   remaining loop in this process, which is feedback and engagement with the
   OSM community. This wasn't intentional and it wasn't out of lack of
   interest or care. It was purely a question of the capacity that we had
   available at the time.

To answer your specific question about how we want to reduce our error rate:

   - We had some issues internally with our process that meant comments on
   our changesets got neglected. This is something that we've already solved,
   and it won't happen again. We will always react quickly and respond
   immediately, should someone ask for further information about an edit we
   - As I said above, we learn from every piece of feedback that we've
   received and it's definitely been a huge learning process for us. In some
   of the cases, it was simply a mistake on our end. In other cases, it was
   caused by false information provided to us by the relevant landowners and
   even public authorities and organisations. In yet other cases, it's because
   of a continuing conflict on the ground where the actual regulations aren't
   - We have over time become more and more conservative with the edits
   that we make and we request more and more information from people before we
   make any edits on their behalf. We're developing a much better
   understanding of when and how to identify cases that might be questionable
   and will always avoid making the edit in these cases.
   - We never make any edit simply to avoid a conflict or because we don't
   understand that people can legally access paths, even if they belong to
   private parties, under some circumstances. We also never make edits simply
   because one of our users reported a path that they walked past. We only do
   so when someone who is actually responsible for that land or property
   contacts us and only when they provide sufficient information that we feel
   it's a reasonable request. We make everyone go through a lengthy and
   stringent reporting process before we act on anything.
   - We compare against any and all other sources of information we have
   available (e.g. via Google Streetview) to see if there's anything we might
   be missing or misunderstanding. If we have any reason to believe that the
   request isn't valid or if the information is incomplete, contradictory, or
   otherwise not clear, we never change anything on OSM and will always
   explain why. At most, we direct those requests to the Data Working Group at
   - We will provide more information in our comments from now on about the
   proof we asked for and received, so that it's clearer what we worked with.

This isn't to say that I can promise we'll get to 100% accuracy because
truly, sometimes it is due to us falsely trusting the source of the
information and some of the edits we've made that have been reverted came
from public authorities but we're doing our best to reduce the instances of
these and are constantly tweaking our process in response.

I hope that helps provide a tiny bit more context! If there's anything else
we can answer or help with, please let us know.


On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 at 16:22, Mateusz Konieczny via talk <
talk at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/komoot
> mention handling of paths that are private
> How are you planning to reduce error rate mentioned in
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5404 and in changeset
> discussions
> in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Access%20Claims%20(komoot)/history ?
> Nov 2, 2021, 14:27 by talk at openstreetmap.org:
> Dear OSM-contributors,
> Per the Organised Editing Guidelines (OEG), komoot has updated their OSM
> wiki page:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/komoot
> If there are questions about our activity, please don't hesitate to get in
> touch.
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



Customer Support | komoot - We are hiring! <https://www.komoot.com/jobs>

<https://www.komoot.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/komoot/>
<https://www.instagram.com/komoot/> <https://twitter.com/komoot>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20211103/93522f91/attachment.htm>

More information about the talk mailing list