Please see notes below:
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Right. So what do you think of the set of rules that I posted a bit ago?
Well... I like mine better. ('natch!) Pursue the truth agreement do
no harm. is a little easier to remember and covers all
Jeff Meyer writes:
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Right. So what do you think of the set of rules that I posted a bit ago?
Well... I like mine better. ('natch!) Pursue the truth agreement do
no harm. is a little easier to remember and
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
People like simple rules because they're simple. But when you go to
figure out what the rules mean, you have to interpret them. What is
agreement? Agreement with you and your buddies as to how to tag?
Agreement with
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Martijn van Exel writes:
1) I don't think it is a good idea to come up with a code of conduct
as a response to particular cases.
Hard cases make bad law, yes. But it's not a difficult decision to say
Don't change other
Anthony writes:
I agree that DWG has the authority to act, here. But as I understand it,
the authority of DWG comes from OSMF, not from the OSM community.
The DWG is specifically asking if it should have the authority to
act. Please read the beginning message of this thread.
Additionally,
Jeff Meyer writes:
- An overarching code of behavior could be very helpful to empower the less
aggressive mapper. Maybe something simple like: Pursue the truth
agreement do no harm. It gives the oppressed some simple question to ask
the difficult mapper. Each of the segments of the code
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 21:22:35 -0400
From: o...@inbox.org
To: rickmastfa...@hotmail.com
CC: talk-us@openstreetmap.org; rich...@weait.com; d...@osmfoundation.org;
g...@ir.bbn.com
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Difficult USA mapper(s)
I'm not sure there is anyone *banned* from the lists
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 8:43 AM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
Anthony, I just got a message back from this person and he told me he was
Forcibly unsubscribed from here on talk-us. That's pretty much a ban IMO.
We are talking about a pattern of behavior, not a specific person.
First, I think Martijn's points have all been right on.
1) I don't think it is a good idea to come up with a code of conduct
as a response to particular cases. When there's an actual dispute on
the table that might be addressed by an as yet imaginary code, we are
in reactionary mode and
On 11/02/2012 05:43 AM, James Mast wrote:
Anthony, I just got a message back from this person and he told me he
was Forcibly unsubscribed from here on talk-us. That's pretty much a
ban IMO.
nerou...@gmail.com is banned from subscribing to talk-us. The archives
are open, though, so anyone can
On 11/02/2012 09:09 AM, Anthony wrote:
Might this not be part of the problem? Why do we allow someone to edit
but not to contribute to the mailing list? Doesn't that promote exactly
the type of behavior that some people are criticizing (i.e. editing
without discussion).
No, I don't think
On 11/02/2012 01:11 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't get it. If the problem is that you don't like the way he edits,
how is blocking him from the mailing list, but allowing him to edit, the
proper solution?
The times that I have moderated folks on this list it was for their
behavior on this list.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
On 11/02/2012 09:09 AM, Anthony wrote:
Might this not be part of the problem? Why do we allow someone to edit
but not to contribute to the mailing list? Doesn't that promote exactly
the type of behavior that some people are
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
On 11/02/2012 01:11 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't get it. If the problem is that you don't like the way he edits,
how is blocking him from the mailing list, but allowing him to edit, the
proper solution?
The times that I have
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Moderation is one thing. Important messages can still go through, if
someone is moderated. But in this case he apparently was kicked off the
list completely. I'm not sure what behavior caused such a severe sanction,
but if it
Martijn van Exel writes:
1) I don't think it is a good idea to come up with a code of conduct
as a response to particular cases.
Hard cases make bad law, yes. But it's not a difficult decision to say
Don't change other people's edits unless you can show that they are
editing in variance to
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
DWG has the administrative tools to block an account. What we don't
have is a clear rule stating that we can block an account for being
difficult.
Questions for the US mapping community:
1) Do you want DWG to act on
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
So, as a generalized example of a specific instance that I have in
mind, I added some tags to some ways which reflected data that anybody
could verify from multiple sources with a little bit of research. I
didn't put a
I'm not sure there is anyone *banned* from the lists. On moderation,
maybe, but so long as the emails are eventually going through that
seems okay.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:16 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
If I think I know who this is all about, maybe he should be un-banned
Hi,
On 01.11.2012 04:26, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
To your question of technical means; you're right that adding
technical means to entirely prevent a malicious user are difficult to
put in place, but they are not impossible, but if it's just a handful
of troublemakers, it's best to address that,
Hi,
On 01.11.2012 01:18, Greg Troxel wrote:
So overall, I would say that if user A complains about user B making
non-local objectionable changes, and that's the only complaint, then
it's really hard to tell. It could be that the non-local user in some
cases is right in a sense (consider
On 11/1/12 12:01 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
If, for example, the US community would express a clear preference for
local mappers having their way in tagging, then a tagging bully would
clearly and visibly operate outside of the rules of accepted
behaviour, and all his explanations about why
Anthony writes:
The key question is, which key was right?
No. Without getting too specific, my key was one of the most
commonly-used keys, while e's key was one e invented. The situation
was:
a=b
e changed it to:
c=b
where e should have done:
a=b
c=b
and left this commonplace a= tagging
These guidelines are all nice, but I have two reservations about where
this discussion is headed.
1) I don't think it is a good idea to come up with a code of conduct
as a response to particular cases. When there's an actual dispute on
the table that might be addressed by an as yet imaginary code,
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Anthony writes:
The key question is, which key was right?
No. Without getting too specific, my key was one of the most
commonly-used keys, while e's key was one e invented.
Without getting specific, how can we figure
Anthony writes:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Anthony writes:
The key question is, which key was right?
No. Without getting too specific, my key was one of the most
commonly-used keys, while e's key was one e invented.
Without
Hi,
Summary
The Data Working Group has had a high number of complaints about a
small number of mappers in the USA. The matter falls outside the
normal activities of DWG. DWG would like to help, but need your
guidance in how to do so.
What is the Data Working Group?
The Data Working Group
It would help to know the concrete incidences - any way to know more details?
On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:11 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Hi,
Summary
The Data Working Group has had a high number of complaints about a
small number of mappers in the USA. The matter falls outside
Richard,
Thank you for this well thought out email and summary of the DWG.
You've touched on an important issue, which is that the complains here
are a bit outside the scope of normal DWG functions, and more toward
conflict resolution and code of conduct.
This is not a role that's unfamiliar to
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.comwrote:
Richard,
Thank you for this well thought out email and summary of the DWG.
You've touched on an important issue, which is that the complains here
are a bit outside the scope of normal DWG functions, and more toward
It's hard to come up with guidelines when you don't know the
specifics, but let me throw in some thoughts based on what I read:
1) If you were to take administrative action on an account, blocking
it either temporarily or permanently, how do you prevent the same
person (or group of people, or bot,
Account restrictions could be of help for new mappers making large
mistakes. IE dragging a large selection, destroying relations ect.
Pushing good tutorials on new users would probably do more though.
Regardless restrictions only help minimize the accidental type issues but
do very little for
Richard Weait writes:
I would prefer to discuss this in general, and in the open.
Okay. In general, then, I have said that I believe the proper way to
edit is to not disturb anything that anybody else does[1]. That should
be rule #1, yet DUM[2] (Difficult USA Mapper) seems to feel that e[3]
can
Given what I've observed and heard about from other mappers, I am not
particularly surprised to hear that the DWG has been getting complaints
(although I have not filed a complaint myself). I think it's helpful to
talk about the general problem, separately from any identities.
My impression is
If I think I know who this is all about, maybe he should be un-banned from
talk-us so he might be able to defend himself at least? --James
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
James Mast writes:
If I think I know who this is all about, maybe he should be un-banned from
talk-us so he might be able to defend himself at least? --James
No. This isn't about a person. This is about a style of mapping. If
you think that only one person is capable of defending this style
From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 2:18 PM
To: Richard Weait
Cc: Serge Wroclawski; d...@osmfoundation.org; Ian Dees; talk-
u...@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Difficult USA mapper(s)
It's hard to come up with guidelines
Martijn,
Thank you for this thoughtful and wise-reaching response.
I think that the kinds of issues you address in your email do deserve
consideration and contemplation, but most are not the focus of this
discussion we're having right now, which is the role of DWG in
handling what are
Greg Troxel writes:
First, there's the notion that the local mappers should have priority in
deciding how things should be tagged. I don't mean that one shouldn't
make non-local edits - I do that after visiting places. But I don't
make edits that I think a local might object to.
Me too.
39 matches
Mail list logo
