On 4 August 2010 15:13, andrzej zaborowski <balr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Let's look at it practically. If a proxy (e.g. nearmap) user commits > vandalism, there are several things OSM may want to do: 1. undo the > vandalism, 2. contact the user, 3. block the user. > > For 1. it's actually better that the edits are logically grouped into > changesets, rather than imported by a 3rd party in 50000 element > changesets. Obviously it would be even better if all the proxy user's > changesets were grouped in an individual user account. But Ben > mentioned that changes were going to be tagged, so I suppose it will > be possible to locate all the individual human editor's edits. > > For 2. again Ben mentioned that there would be a way to do that, and > for 3. he hasn't said anything but I expect they have thought of it > too. So considering this, blocking the entire account would be > overzealous. But then if it is eventually determined that nearmap.com > were the "bad guys", that would be useful. > > Yes, it would require support in editors like JOSM to see who edited a > given feature last.. on the other hand most of the times if you have > doubts about the quality of some change, you have to see the full > history of the object, because the interesting edit may have been > before last edit. > What nearmap could do is provide some kind of hash in the changeset that could help identify someone. Hopefully, that would allow us to point out to them when someone is behaving very badly. How that hash is defined is of course to be defined (it would probably be a composite key, and they would be the only who knows what it means). Emilie Laffray
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
