Because very zelous mappers are the last thing we need?
Just because we can use data to catch out stuff then we hardly need to
use it to limit the users, it should be fine to use the data to put the
name on a watch list, making it easier to revert if edits are found to
be harmful (license or correctness).
I personally subscribe to new OSM users feed for two countries which I'm
focused on and check out their first edits, these are not high activity
countries so perhaps others have more problems but so far none appears
to be harmful, the opposite in fact, drive-by mappers that would be
lovely to cajole into active mappers, or even zealous mappers!
Þann 15.05.2014 14:31, Janko Mihelić reit:
I think we should look at those users not as organizational, or paid
users, but as users that have too steep a curve of added nodes over
time. An account registers, and immediately starts adding or modifying
hundreds of nodes. That could either be an import, a very zealous
early mapper, or someone who is paid by node. Either way, they should
be controlled in some way.
Maybe put a limit on number of added nodes over time with some
function that permits long-time mappers to add or modify as many nodes
as they want, and limit new users. Of course, show them a link to
where you can say what that account is doing, and get permission to
add as many as you want even though you are a new user.
Janko
2014-05-15 3:43 GMT+02:00 Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com>:
From: Mikel Maron [mailto:mikel_ma...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Organizational mapping policy
I have to say, my initial reaction to this proposal was that it
was
heavy handed, unnecessarily punitive, over reaching, and not in
the
spirit of OSM. A cure worse than the disease.
To clarify (and I could have made this more explicit) there is
*not* a
proposed policy here.
The DWG is considering if it is necessary to issue guidelines, it
is not
decided that something needs to be issued or the contents of
anything
we'd issue. The items listed are possible requirements and possible
covered activities only. It is extremely unlikely that any policy
resulting from this will include all the possible requirements and
cover
all the possible activities. I'm personally against some of the
requirements listed as possibilities.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk [1]
Links:
------
[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
