[OSM-talk] EG/Doxxing | Re: New moderation team & etiquette guidelines for talk@ & osmf-talk@ list

[Mateusz Konieczny]

So expressing
"Anyone who never, ever edited OSM is not my preferred candidate to OSMF board."
would be also bannable offense?"

or 

"I prefer OSMF board candidates who are active mappers with at least several
edits in last year"?

What about
"Anyone with fewer than 15 mapping days in their life should not be allowed to
join OSMF?"

What about people expressing deep confidence what is annoying or problematic
for mappers and who never ever edited?

Is it also bannable to express it somewhere else?

10 cze 2022, 04:34 od allan at mustard.net:

>
> "Edit shaming" is any effort to humiliate or discourage a member      of the OSM community from expressing a viewpoint, opinion, or      fact, or otherwise to participate in OSM community affairs, due to      said member's relatively low number of edits of the OSM geospatial      database ("the map"). Hypothetical examples of "edit shaming"      might be posts to the talk lists including such verbiage as:
>
>
>
> "Who do you think you are to express an opinion on Topic X with      only 863 changesets under your belt?"
>  "Anyone with fewer than 5,000 changesets should not be allowed to      run for the OSMF board."
>  "I don't think that you know what you are talking about, given      that you have only ten days of mapping this year."
>
>
>
> Some members of our community contribute in ways that do not      involve mapping, including voluntary participation in working      groups, operations, event organization, software development, and      overall management of the foundation (*ahem*). Shaming such people      because their mapping activity doesn't meet some other community      member's view of what it should be to have credibility is      unacceptable, intolerable, and will not be countenanced. In short,      efforts to humiliate other community members on these grounds will      rapidly draw the attention of the moderators.
>
>
> This has nothing to do with a community member's command of      English (or any other language) or with the quality of edits. The      former is not a concern at all--we are not a book publisher--and      quality of edits is the domain of the Data Working Group.
>
>
>
> cheers,
>  Allan Mustard
>  apm-wa (only 82 mapping days with 349 changesets in the last year,      a severe dropoff from years past)
>
>
> On 6/9/2022 5:51 PM, Mateusz Konieczny      wrote:
>
>> I send it also to >> talk-owner at openstreetmap.org
>> in attempt to reach moderators
>>
>> 9 cze 2022, 19:51 od >> ajt1047 at gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> On 09/06/2022 18:30, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think “edit shaming” is supposed to mean              “insulting or embarrassing someone for spelling, grammar              or typographical mistakes” but it is not at all clear what              the phrase means. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some extra definition would certainly help here (including          perhaps some examples) as otherwise translators into other          languages are going to struggle to understand what was meant.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Clarification would be helpful as I was sure that        it is about complaining about
>> bad edits. And unsure what actually is forbidden -        for example is
>>
>> "HOT organised editing is a problem because        quality of edits is very often bad
>> and HOT fails to either actually help newbie        mappers, or verify their edits.
>> And HOT primarily tries to bring more newbie        mappers and reach larger edit
>> volume, instead of trying to improve quality and        at least review all edits
>> made as part of HOT organised mapping or focus on        recruiting repeat mappers
>> who would map more than once."
>>
>> qualifying as banned edit shaming?
>> (for reference: I consider above as a real issue        and not an edit shaming
>> Hmmm, maybe it would be useful to write to HOT -        maybe I am wrong
>> and just encountered the worst kind of HOT        activity? Anyone knows
>> what would be a good contact point? )
>>
>> Is "hahaha >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122063728>>  is useless
>> pointless armchair mapping and wrong, this line is        not existing anymore,
>> you should stop mapping" qualifying as banned edit        shaming?
>>
>> (for reference: I linked my own edit and as far as        I know this railway
>> line exists, though I was never there. And I        consider landuse=railway
>> mapping as useful
>> But if it would not be a deliberate example with        myself as target then
>> I would expect it to be an edit shaming - but it        seems so rare
>> and covered by other rules that I am unsure why it        got a separate rule)
>>
>> Or is "hahaha, you missed 'an' article, stop        posting" intended to be banned
>> by edit shaming? Also, why it got a separate rule?
>>
>> BTW, >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Etiquette/Etiquette_Guidelines#Edit_shaming
>> never got any resposne.
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20220610/514b5f62/attachment-0001.htm>