On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:20 AM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
**
...
Marsland Street (way 12700863) has many extraneous tags which are nonsense
and can/should be removed: access, area, bridge, cutting, embankment,
junction, oneway and tunnel, if not more. ...
I believe the
Out of curiosity, is asking someone to leave the project something that we
have done before? I'm wondering what kind of precedents we've set for
ourself. I am only vaguely familiar with the circumstances around this user
being removed from the list, so I'm curious about the decision to ban
someone
I don't agree. NE2’s edits, most of all the route relations, are enormously
valuable to OSM in the US. I'm not aware of any precedent for banning a user
like this, and I'm not eager to see one set.
-mike.
---
michal migurski http://mike.teczno.com
On Feb
On 2/10/13 8:56 AM, Michal Migurski wrote:
I don't agree. NE2’s edits, most of all the route relations, are enormously
valuable to OSM in the US. I'm not aware of any precedent for banning a user
like this, and I'm not eager to see one set.
i'm with mike. while i, like many, have butted heads
This issue has come up before and the problem is that it falls
through the cracks of OSM's governing bodies.
The DWG often handles issues of vandalism or copyright violation, but
NE2's edits are neither obvious vandalism, nor direct copyright
violations as far as anyone can tell.
But this type
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Michal Migurski m...@teczno.com wrote:
I don't agree. NE2’s edits, most of all the route relations, are enormously
valuable to OSM in the US. I'm not aware of any precedent for banning a user
like this, and I'm not eager to see one set.
Mike,
Your
I'm familiar with his work and have run afoul of his views in the past, most
recently when I performed a large scale edit to US route relation tags, some of
which he did not agree with. I don't know if any were reverted. Nevertheless, I
don't see the value in running him out on a rail without
+ 4 to what Mike said. What is the precedent from other bans? Is there a
wiki page of bannination?
Randy
Randal Hale, GISP
North River Geographic Systems, Inc
http://www.northrivergeographic.com
423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
twitter:rjhale
http://about.me/rjhale
On 02/10/2013
I would suggest inviting him back on the mailing lists, with the
knowledge that being banned from the mailing lists means being banned
from OSM.
This situation where he is allowed to edit, but he isn't allowed to
join the mailing lists to discuss his edits, is an utter failure.
On Sun, Feb 10,
Michal Migurski writes:
I'm familiar with his work and have run afoul of his views in the
past, most recently when I performed a large scale edit to US route
relation tags, some of which he did not agree with. I don't know if
any were reverted. Nevertheless, I don't see the value in
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
His malice is encapsulated in his inability to work with other
people.
Furthermore, he makes mass edits. There are not edits that one can
accomplish simply by hand. He is doing many thousands of edits, and we
have evidence
Hi all,
This thread is getting unproductive and crossing into personal attacks.
Please consider if talk-us is the best place to talk about one person
behind essentially behind their back.
If you feel there's a problem with a particular mapper please contact the
mapper and the Data Working Group
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
Your information on NE2 is grossly inaccurate.
NE2 makes very few positive edits, and many, many destructive ones, as
well as previous threats to make more edits that conform with his (and
only his) vision of the
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
His malice is encapsulated in his inability to work with other
people. For example, I dislike a particular global modification to my
work that he has made. I know that he has more spare time than me to
pursue his ideas,
On 2/10/2013 10:32 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
So I have resigned myself to allowing OSM to be a little bit worse
because of him. How many other people have made the same decision? How
much worse is OSM because of NE2? Does this outweigh his positive
accomplishments?
I don't think I'm the only
Hi John,
On 29 January 2013 03:21, the Old Topo Depot oldto...@novacell.com wrote:
Message sent to user via osm messaging
Have you had any success communicating with pxptyrone?
If not then I think it makes sense to undelete the objects and tags
that were removed by this user. Some of it was
NE2 asked me to share this diary entry with the list:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/NE2/diary/18600
richard
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
So he's conveniently ignoring the left turn only arrow there preventing a
straight-on movement?
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote:
NE2 asked me to share this diary entry with the list:
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 15:51:43 -0500
From: dygitulju...@gmail.com
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Turn restriction dispute
At the risk of sounding like I'm defending NE2, one of Ian's points is that
NE2 is banned from the list and that discussing this, here, does
On 2/10/2013 6:12 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
So he's conveniently ignoring the left turn only arrow there preventing
a straight-on movement?
I would just observe that the red line can be seen as a large version
of the white left turn arrow above it.(Other than that, no opinion).
Richard Welty writes:
NE2 asked me to share this diary entry with the list:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/NE2/diary/18600
That's interesting, but I'll note three things:
o the tire tracks with one exception turn left, and
o the one set of tire tracks that goes
The question isn't whether or not it's popular. It's popular to drive the
wrong way on one-way streets or left of the centerlines in Portland. But
that doesn't make it legal.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:21 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.comwrote:
Well, if you do look at the imagery, it
I think that what he would say to the judge, when defending his
traffic ticket in court, was that he *did* make a left ... and then a
quick right. Since at no time did he move against the flow of traffic,
he might prevail. There's a traffic light at that intersection, so it
seems safe enough, if a
Looking through the making turns section of the Florida driver's manual,
the maneuver NE2 proposes and the argument you're giving to explain it
still doesn't work. You turn into the corresponding lane after a turn in
Florida, no lane changes permitted in the intersection. You can only turn
left
The same one. It also says to look at the diagram for examples, and shows
turns into the nearest available lane.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Heh, by the way, I just looked at the 2012 Florida Driver's Handbook
(page 32). It explicitly says A left turn may
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 18:22 -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
The point behind turn restrictions is that a routing algorithm is
going to be looking for them to create a route.
And I think this is enough reason that the turn restriction should stay;
I wouldn't want directions to include it and I doubt
Yes, because it also says not to change lanes. Also, it says you can only
cross a solid lane line to avoid a hazard. I'm seeing more ways to
interpret what's going on as not allowing the ramp-to-ramp movement than
those allowing it to the point where you'd pretty much have to be making
the
For the sake of the strength of the project, for the sake of due process,
and for the sake of being able to defend any sort of ban or other action,
NE2 must have his day in court. He (and those that may defend him) must
be able to speak their minds. On the other hand, those the present
situation
Paul Johnson writes:
Looking through the making turns section of the Florida driver's manual,
the maneuver NE2 proposes and the argument you're giving to explain it
still doesn't work.
Mercy, Jesus, Mary, Mother of God!! I can't believe we're arguing the
minutia of Florida traffic law here!
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Put the turn restriction back in. And NE2, if you're reading this?
Leave it there.
Done.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Wait, what? It's clearly part of the same intersection.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Put the turn
Someone with local knowledge might want to look over the ref=* tags in
Florida, a lot seem to be missing the context that let you know what
network they're a part of.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14989711
NE2 has ignored the discussion intentionally and reverted against consensus.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Put the turn
33 matches
Mail list logo
