Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
2011/7/28 Frederik Ramm : > > I hope that I'll soon be able to set up a prototype of this feature and then > we can all look at it together and we'll have a much better idea how it > feels in practice. depending on how the mapper structures his work it might also often be desirable to have more granularity then just a whole changeset (i.e. flag single actions or groups of actions contained in a changeset). In your given example this would not be needed, but I happen to see also very big changesets with hundreds of single actions in them. The simplest solution might be to appeal to the mappers to structure their uploads in a way that they contain only actions for one "task"/one kind of edit and they all adhere ;-) cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, Serge Wroclawski wrote: The experience on Wikipedia is that reverting a changeset is a pretty offensive action to take, requiring great care. If "-1" is a vote for reversion, then presumably equal care ought to be exercised. And IMHO a better option is to discuss the change, rather than to simply vote it down. "Hey, are you sure about tagging these as tracks, they look like walking paths to me?" builds community better than "-1". I concur. I think voting often leads to bad things. Flagging changesets might be useful, with some kind of metamoderation, but /as things stand today/, I think this goes against the spirit of the project because "Who decided whose a moderator". I say it again: In my mind, a "-1" is nothing more or less than "I do not like this". In my mind, everyone should have a right to express that opinion even without giving reasons, although of course it is better if people say why they don't like something. You have a right to dislike a changeset *even* *if* *it* *complies* *with* *any* *rule* *there* *is*, and even if there is no objective reason whatsover for a revert. You can still dislike it, and say so. And, apart from perhaps very extreme cases, I wouldn't say it is a "vote for reverting". Just like a -1 vote on help.openstreetmap.org, I expect that a changeset that has accumulated many negative votes will just sit there as a warning to others: "don't do this", or "don't do it this way", or "a majority of people who saw this disliked it". It was maybe my fault to open this discussion pointing to a negative example so everyone got fixated on the "-1" button but of course there will be a "+1" button to, and again, everyone has the right to like anything. I hope that I'll soon be able to set up a prototype of this feature and then we can all look at it together and we'll have a much better idea how it feels in practice. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> This is however orthogonal to the changeset-based messaging that I have >> suggested. If I want to say something about a specific changeset, it should >> be possible to attach my comment to that changeset instead of having to make >> a general localised note for the area in question, saying "I don't think >> changeset #12345 was a good idea...". > > Commenting on changesets would be good, but it also needs to be easier > to find those changesets, and link that up with other accumulated > local knowledge. I can't really picture how such an interface would > work, but the idea would to be easily see "what's been going on" in > the area you're looking at, participate in conversations about stuff > (individual objects, imagery, changesets...) My motivation wasn't voting, but using the changesets as a sort of flexible discussion system. You could see a communication stream via a bbox. > The experience on Wikipedia is that reverting a changeset is a pretty > offensive action to take, requiring great care. If "-1" is a vote for > reversion, then presumably equal care ought to be exercised. And IMHO > a better option is to discuss the change, rather than to simply vote > it down. "Hey, are you sure about tagging these as tracks, they look > like walking paths to me?" builds community better than "-1". I concur. I think voting often leads to bad things. Flagging changesets might be useful, with some kind of metamoderation, but /as things stand today/, I think this goes against the spirit of the project because "Who decided whose a moderator". - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Anthony wrote: > Really? Whatever happened to "Bold, Revert, Discuss"? In my > experience a revert of a bad edit is a pretty common thing on > Wikipedia. It's not until you get to re-reverts or re-re-reverts that > offending someone becomes likely. That works for particular situations, where people are inhibited from making changes due to complicated local history. It's not standard editing practice. From the guideline: "Note that this process must be used with care and diplomacy; some editors will see it as a challenge, so be considerate and patient. This method can be particularly useful when other dispute resolution for a particular wiki is not present, or has currently failed...In a way, you're actively provoking another person with an edit they may (strongly) disagree on, so you're going to need to use all your tact to explain what you're aiming to achieve." > In any case, the Wikipedia model somewhat fails as there's no easy way > to revert in OSM. There's not even a good diff system. Yeah. This is sort of what I'm agitating for: better visibility of what others are working on, greater ability to manage changes etc. Another reason BRD wouldn't work on OSM is that probably no-one would even notice the B. And if they did, and did the R, probably no one would notice that. And if those steps both succeeded, where would you D? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > The experience on Wikipedia is that reverting a changeset is a pretty > offensive action to take, requiring great care. Really? Whatever happened to "Bold, Revert, Discuss"? In my experience a revert of a bad edit is a pretty common thing on Wikipedia. It's not until you get to re-reverts or re-re-reverts that offending someone becomes likely. In any case, the Wikipedia model somewhat fails as there's no easy way to revert in OSM. There's not even a good diff system. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > This is however orthogonal to the changeset-based messaging that I have > suggested. If I want to say something about a specific changeset, it should > be possible to attach my comment to that changeset instead of having to make > a general localised note for the area in question, saying "I don't think > changeset #12345 was a good idea...". Commenting on changesets would be good, but it also needs to be easier to find those changesets, and link that up with other accumulated local knowledge. I can't really picture how such an interface would work, but the idea would to be easily see "what's been going on" in the area you're looking at, participate in conversations about stuff (individual objects, imagery, changesets...) > I think it all depends on what you think a "-1" means. The experience on Wikipedia is that reverting a changeset is a pretty offensive action to take, requiring great care. If "-1" is a vote for reversion, then presumably equal care ought to be exercised. And IMHO a better option is to discuss the change, rather than to simply vote it down. "Hey, are you sure about tagging these as tracks, they look like walking paths to me?" builds community better than "-1". > Problem is that there are many things that I see and I find fishy where I > don't have the resources or the patience for extensive research. Currently, > in these cases I do exactly nothing, which means that the information "1 > person found this fishy" is lost. That information in itself does not have a > value. But if there was a sufficient number of other people who were of the > same opinion then maybe someone should/would investigate. Ok, so maybe "-1" is the wrong naming. "Query" or "flag for review" might be better. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, On 07/25/11 09:27, Steve Bennett wrote: Two thinks that Wikipedia has that OSM lacks, are good visibility of recent changes (just click "view history"), and localised forums (talk page). Although it's possible (if difficult) to get the history of a given object in OSM, I don't know of any easy way to get a sense of the recent history of an area. Undoubtedly there are third party websites, but anything built into openstreetmap.org? There's OWL which in the medium term is scheduled to replace/augment the current history view. That should give a good idea of the recent development in an area. And yes, it would be great to have something like localised messaging. I absolutely hate Wikipedia talk pages, to me they are the most useless form of exchange. But it would be great if it were possible to post notes onto OSM with a certain geographic extent, e.g. "caution, Bing imagery for this area is 10 years old and many things have been torn down since", or "mapping party in this area next weekend", or "import of data planned for this area, see <...> for discussion" and so on. This is however orthogonal to the changeset-based messaging that I have suggested. If I want to say something about a specific changeset, it should be possible to attach my comment to that changeset instead of having to make a general localised note for the area in question, saying "I don't think changeset #12345 was a good idea...". Personally, I would have trouble marking many changesets "-1" without doing extensive research. But there are a few where I've queried the author, and in some cases found explanations that weren't obvious at first I think it all depends on what you think a "-1" means. If I find a changeset fishy, then conduct extensive research and find my suspicion confirmed, I will revert it (and not attach a mere -1 to it). Problem is that there are many things that I see and I find fishy where I don't have the resources or the patience for extensive research. Currently, in these cases I do exactly nothing, which means that the information "1 person found this fishy" is lost. That information in itself does not have a value. But if there was a sufficient number of other people who were of the same opinion then maybe someone should/would investigate. (Actually I sometimes to this on IRC: "Does anyone else find this strange?"; then if a few others say "yep" I might actually investigate.) Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I was thinking of voting up or down contributions, and yes, this could also > lead to league tables that identify people with consistently problematic > edits; but that would not be because of who they are, but because of what > they do. Maybe I am the only one seeing a difference here but personally I > have absolutely zero problem in saying something like "this person has > consistently made edits that others in the project found sub-standard". This > has nothing to do with hurling insults at anybody. To continue drawing lessons from Wikipedia, there have been quite a few attempts to build "trust metrics" into Wikipedia, evaluating the likely value of a given change, based on previous rates of reversion of changes made by that editor, and other factors. The change is then displayed in a different colour, accordingly. Research papers have been written, but none of these features have ever made it into the production system. Why? I'm not sure exactly, but I think it basically doesn't offer enough value: what ultimately matters is the content of the change, not who made it. Two thinks that Wikipedia has that OSM lacks, are good visibility of recent changes (just click "view history"), and localised forums (talk page). Although it's possible (if difficult) to get the history of a given object in OSM, I don't know of any easy way to get a sense of the recent history of an area. Undoubtedly there are third party websites, but anything built into openstreetmap.org? And if you do find an issue that you want to discuss, your options are only to email the person privately, or to raise it on the appropriate talk-*@ mailing list, and hope they're listening. Personally, I would have trouble marking many changesets "-1" without doing extensive research. But there are a few where I've queried the author, and in some cases found explanations that weren't obvious at first Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, On Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2011, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Maybe removing the private message function in osm.org (like > > wikipedia) and replacing it with a forum would be enough. This has > > several advantages, such as a possibility to spot predatory > > behavior on new comers. > > I really want to be able to criticize a changeset, not a person. I > wouldn't want a wikipedia style personal page where there are tons of > messages like "in changeset 12345, you did this and that", and nobody > who looks at the changeset sees that message. I like that idea. It would be cool if I could create an issue ticket (in a kind of a bugtracker) for a changeset and add a comment. e.g. "accidental deletion of national cycling route (relation #123423)". e.g. "broken import of 4500 unused nodes" Someone else (a QA-team or the creator of the changeset) could fix the problem and close the issue ticket. Views for the tickets: * tickets of buggy changesets created by a user * tickets opened by user * list of all open tickets * ... Regards Werner ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Anthony wrote: > There's no point in getting other people involved unless there's some > sort of dispute Correction: A note to one of the lists (or in some other public forum), saying that you reverted what you reverted and why, wouldn't be harmful. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:21 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: > My 2p would try and persuade more people to use source tags (and tag:source > tags) so that it's easier to work out where stuff has actually come from. In this case, I'd say 1) try to get in touch with the mapper to ask where s/he got the information; and 2) if s/he doesn't respond, revert. There's no point in getting other people involved unless there's some sort of dispute (e.g. the mapper says s/he is just guessing that toilet:access=customers is correct, but refuses to revert or allow you to revert). Slapping on a -1, a) doesn't actually fix the problem; and b) just wastes more people's time. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:15 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/13 Dave F. : >> On 11/07/2011 22:42, Frederik Ramm wrote: >>> I just stumbled across a changeset where someone helpfully added a >>> "toilet:access=customers" to 1350 pubs in the Greeater London area (thereby >>> adding no information but freshening the time stamp of the objects, giving >>> the cursory visitor the impression that the pub might actually have been >>> resurveyed which it very likely hasn't). > >> This is a perfectly acceptable addition which does add information - that >> it's not a public toilet. You can't just walk in of the street to spend a >> penny. > > > -1 > Unless this person has surveyed the 1350 pubs he doesn't add any > information, because you can already see from the data that the toilet > is inside a pub. Or it could be an import. >> Why is it a problem getting time-stamped? If it doesn't, how would anybody >> know it's been edited & able to verify it? > > > the timestamp suggests that someone verified the existence of the pub > but in the case of this edit you can absolutely not tell whether that > pub existed at the time the edit was performed, as all pubs were > tagged (e.g. a pub which was closed 2 years ago still seems to be open > as of 2011). You can never tell whether the pub existed at the time the edit was performed. The timestamp of the edit merely suggests that someone verified the existence of the pub *at some time prior to the timestamp*. You don't have to edit OSM from your cell phone while sitting on the toilet you're editing. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On 18/07/2011 12:15, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: Unless this person has surveyed the 1350 pubs he doesn't add any information, because you can already see from the data that the toilet is inside a pub. There might be pubs which consent general use (not very probable, but in 1350 pubs this might be possible) in which case the edit not only was pointless but actually added wrong information. There are schemes in the UK in which businesses are encouraged by local authorities to allow non-customers to use their facility. There is one in London, although the London local authority's website doesn't mention that it includes any pubs. However, I believe that there are schemes elsewhere in the UK that do. the timestamp suggests that someone verified the existence of the pub, Unfortunately there are too many armchair mappers in OSM for that to be a reasonable assumption these days (although to be fair that's more of an issue with roads, road alignment, and landuse than pubs). In the case of an obviously armchair edit like this one I'd read back down the history to the last "real" edit. My 2p would try and persuade more people to use source tags (and tag:source tags) so that it's easier to work out where stuff has actually come from. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
2011/7/13 Dave F. : > On 11/07/2011 22:42, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> I just stumbled across a changeset where someone helpfully added a >> "toilet:access=customers" to 1350 pubs in the Greeater London area (thereby >> adding no information but freshening the time stamp of the objects, giving >> the cursory visitor the impression that the pub might actually have been >> resurveyed which it very likely hasn't). > This is a perfectly acceptable addition which does add information - that > it's not a public toilet. You can't just walk in of the street to spend a > penny. -1 Unless this person has surveyed the 1350 pubs he doesn't add any information, because you can already see from the data that the toilet is inside a pub. There might be pubs which consent general use (not very probable, but in 1350 pubs this might be possible) in which case the edit not only was pointless but actually added wrong information. > Why is it a problem getting time-stamped? If it doesn't, how would anybody > know it's been edited & able to verify it? the timestamp suggests that someone verified the existence of the pub, but in the case of this edit you can absolutely not tell whether that pub existed at the time the edit was performed, as all pubs were tagged (e.g. a pub which was closed 2 years ago still seems to be open as of 2011). Cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Dave F. wrote: > On 11/07/2011 22:42, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I just stumbled across a changeset where someone helpfully added a >> "toilet:access=customers" to 1350 pubs in the Greeater London area (thereby >> adding no information but freshening the time stamp of the objects, giving >> the cursory visitor the impression that the pub might actually have been >> resurveyed which it very likely hasn't). > > I don't think that this case is a good example to support your argument. > > This is a perfectly acceptable addition which does add information - that > it's not a public toilet. You can't just walk in of the street to spend a > penny. > > Why is it a problem getting time-stamped? If it doesn't, how would anybody > know it's been edited & able to verify it? I was wondering the same thing when I first read this. I think maybe what Frederik means is that someone added the tag to *all* pubs in the Greater London area, and that Frederik believes that this was done indiscriminately, without checking if there actually was toilet access which was only available to customers. If that's the case, yeah, I guess that's bad tagging. Not because it adds no information, but because it potentially adds incorrect information (some of those toilets might be open to non-customers). And I think the fact that you (and, originally, I) have no idea what's wrong with that tagging is a good argument why the ability to add a "-1" to a changeset is useless at best and harmful at worst. All that said, if Frederik wants to write the code to do it, if it doesn't take up much resources on the servers, and if it's kept in a relatively non-obnoxious place on the website, I don't see the harm. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On 11/07/2011 22:42, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, I just stumbled across a changeset where someone helpfully added a "toilet:access=customers" to 1350 pubs in the Greeater London area (thereby adding no information but freshening the time stamp of the objects, giving the cursory visitor the impression that the pub might actually have been resurveyed which it very likely hasn't). I don't think that this case is a good example to support your argument. This is a perfectly acceptable addition which does add information - that it's not a public toilet. You can't just walk in of the street to spend a penny. Why is it a problem getting time-stamped? If it doesn't, how would anybody know it's been edited & able to verify it? I sometimes get the feeling that people get far too involved in OSM that they can't see the woods for trees where common sense & logic go out of the window. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > No, I was thinking that people should vote up/down what was *done* in the > changeset. > +1 This is simply communicating the community's opinion about a changeset. It might be nice (but much more complicated) to weight votes based upon how much editing the voter has done in that country/region. As for a league table, I'm not sure of the value, however being able to search for changesets that use a certain tag and have a certain up/down vote rating would be useful. -Josh ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, On 07/13/2011 03:22 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: Also, in case this hasn't become clear, I am not in favour of +1/-1 buttons for *contributors*, but for individual *changesets*. Well, until you start compiling them into a league table of least-liked contributors. Which, erm, you proposed. :) A "witch-hunt", of which you chose to speak, would IMHO be something where I vote up or down a person. I was thinking of voting up or down contributions, and yes, this could also lead to league tables that identify people with consistently problematic edits; but that would not be because of who they are, but because of what they do. Maybe I am the only one seeing a difference here but personally I have absolutely zero problem in saying something like "this person has consistently made edits that others in the project found sub-standard". This has nothing to do with hurling insults at anybody. (But frankly I would expect such a system to be much more fine grained; I would expect the "average" score of most changesets to be positive - just like we have many more up-votes than down-votes on help.osm.org; but if you are a contributor who, like most, does well most of the time, and then you start doing something new and suddenly you're getting bad feedback for that then you might be inclined to re-think. Such negative feedback is possible even today by sending them a message, but that's a much higher hurdle so you'll have many people who say "eek, that looks stupid" but they won't bother writing. A +1/-1 button would be a measure with more participation.) I am not a friend of policies and guidelines Ah. I am. For all the complaints of "wikilawyering" at Wikipedia, at least it means the effort is focused on improving policies and guidelines, rather than simply hurling insults at each other. Or, almost worse, the interminable discussions on the tagging lists that briefly build consensus which is promptly forgotten because it wasn't recorded anywhere. I think there should be policies and guidelines for a few "hard" things but there will always be "soft" things where setting up rules is extremely difficult. Policies for hard things, guidelines for soft things. Why don't you start a committee to set up policies and guidelines, and I do +1/-1 buttons on changesets, and in a year we meet to compare results ;) Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 07/13/11 09:37, Maarten Deen wrote: >> >> But you're still only voting for the comment in the changeset, right? > > No, I was thinking that people should vote up/down what was *done* in the > changeset. -1 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Also, in case this hasn't become clear, I am not in favour of +1/-1 buttons > for *contributors*, but for individual *changesets*. Well, until you start compiling them into a league table of least-liked contributors. Which, erm, you proposed. :) > I am not a friend of policies and guidelines Ah. I am. For all the complaints of "wikilawyering" at Wikipedia, at least it means the effort is focused on improving policies and guidelines, rather than simply hurling insults at each other. Or, almost worse, the interminable discussions on the tagging lists that briefly build consensus which is promptly forgotten because it wasn't recorded anywhere. > I think there should be policies and guidelines for a few "hard" things but > there will always be "soft" things where setting up rules is extremely > difficult. Policies for hard things, guidelines for soft things. > A +1/-1 scheme for changesets could be a replacement for the > tedious and bueraucratic process of setting up guidelines. Such a process is > quickly drowned by all sorts of "but we cannot have this rule because there > is a legitimate situation where you would need to break it...", It's actually pretty easy to have a rule then compile a list of known exceptions. > whereas a > simple +1/-1 for changesets would not have that problem. Nor does it achieve the same thing. So, this was a great changeset over here. How do I know whether that fresh changeset over there is any good? > You could ask > questions like: Show me a changeset with more than 5 "+1" votes that uses > the so-and-so tag - in the hope of finding a good example of how that tag is > used. Yep, it would have some value. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:43:26 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 07/13/11 09:37, Maarten Deen wrote: But you're still only voting for the comment in the changeset, right? No, I was thinking that people should vote up/down what was *done* in the changeset. The comment might be a factor in whether someone likes or dislikes a changeset but unless the comment is offensive I don't think that anyone would vote a changeset down because of the comment alone. Ah, I was straying from the subject. I read your initial post, but that still makes me wonder. As you say, this was very likely unsurveyed but someone just assumed that toilets were only accessible for customers. Is that some general rule-of-thumb in London, because in my experience a lot of pubs don't mind if you ask nicely to use their facilities. If it is unsurveyed, than it's more a question of "revert or not". Because it is probably incorrect. To me it's not a good example of why I want to vote for it. I would vote for style or correctness of the edit. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, On 07/13/11 09:37, Maarten Deen wrote: But you're still only voting for the comment in the changeset, right? No, I was thinking that people should vote up/down what was *done* in the changeset. The comment might be a factor in whether someone likes or dislikes a changeset but unless the comment is offensive I don't think that anyone would vote a changeset down because of the comment alone. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:18:48 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 07/13/11 09:01, Steve Bennett wrote: Did this changeset actually break any guidelines or policies? Is there anything wrong with it other than the fact that you don't personally approve? Let's approach the problem in a spirit of long-term sustainability, not short term witch-hunting. I think you're misinterpreting. Like/dislike buttons are quite common and they don't mean that anyone engages in a "witch hunt". They are just something that helps the collective to form an opinion - if something is liked by 50 and disliked by 50 then it is clear that the community is divided; if it is disliked by 100 then it is clear that this is not what the community approves of. Also, in case this hasn't become clear, I am not in favour of +1/-1 buttons for *contributors*, but for individual *changesets*. But you're still only voting for the comment in the changeset, right? What does the comment do to invalidate the changeset? What is the required course of action against users who typically add "bad" comments (get voted down alot) but make otherwise good changes? In other words: what is the added value. Which actions (if any) will be taken based on this. Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, On 07/13/11 09:01, Steve Bennett wrote: Did this changeset actually break any guidelines or policies? Is there anything wrong with it other than the fact that you don't personally approve? Let's approach the problem in a spirit of long-term sustainability, not short term witch-hunting. I think you're misinterpreting. Like/dislike buttons are quite common and they don't mean that anyone engages in a "witch hunt". They are just something that helps the collective to form an opinion - if something is liked by 50 and disliked by 50 then it is clear that the community is divided; if it is disliked by 100 then it is clear that this is not what the community approves of. Also, in case this hasn't become clear, I am not in favour of +1/-1 buttons for *contributors*, but for individual *changesets*. We're a community of human beings and if someone does something that is disliked by many others, then that *is* a problem. Whether a single individual likes or dislikes something is of no importance; but where a significant number of individuals like or dislike something, a community opinion is expressed. I am not a friend of policies and guidelines (even though the changeset that prompted me to write my original post seems to run foul of at least the draft policy outlined in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group/Mechanical_Edit_Policy). I think there should be policies and guidelines for a few "hard" things but there will always be "soft" things where setting up rules is extremely difficult. A +1/-1 scheme for changesets could be a replacement for the tedious and bueraucratic process of setting up guidelines. Such a process is quickly drowned by all sorts of "but we cannot have this rule because there is a legitimate situation where you would need to break it...", whereas a simple +1/-1 for changesets would not have that problem. You could ask questions like: Show me a changeset with more than 5 "+1" votes that uses the so-and-so tag - in the hope of finding a good example of how that tag is used. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > 1. a facility where I can comment on the perceived usefulness of a > changeset; > > 2. a facility where I can click a "thumbs down" or "thumbs up" in case I > particularly like or dislike the change; > > 3. a league table showing the most liked/disliked changesets and their > perpetrators^Wauthors. Sure, picking on people whose contributions differ from your own preferences is one approach. A much better one would be for use to improve our policies and documentation, and strengthen our community so that our work aligns more closely. Did this changeset actually break any guidelines or policies? Is there anything wrong with it other than the fact that you don't personally approve? Let's approach the problem in a spirit of long-term sustainability, not short term witch-hunting. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, On 07/13/11 07:13, Erik Johansson wrote: There is a reason why there is no dislike or -1 button. This only lead to mobbing of "most disliked persons", and that possible useful discussion about tags to be hidden away in yet another discussion forum. I think the -1 button works well on help.osm.org and doesn't, as far as I can see, lead to mobbing of disliked persons. A -1 button would allow us to easily identify problem cases; it is machine readable, in contrast to a textual comment. Maybe removing the private message function in osm.org (like wikipedia) and replacing it with a forum would be enough. This has several advantages, such as a possibility to spot predatory behavior on new comers. I really want to be able to criticize a changeset, not a person. I wouldn't want a wikipedia style personal page where there are tons of messages like "in changeset 12345, you did this and that", and nobody who looks at the changeset sees that message. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > 1. a facility where I can comment on the perceived usefulness of a > changeset; > > 2. a facility where I can click a "thumbs down" or "thumbs up" in case I > particularly like or dislike the change; > > 3. a league table showing the most liked/disliked changesets and their > perpetrators^Wauthors. IMHO: There is a reason why there is no dislike or -1 button. This only lead to mobbing of "most disliked persons", and that possible useful discussion about tags to be hidden away in yet another discussion forum. Maybe removing the private message function in osm.org (like wikipedia) and replacing it with a forum would be enough. This has several advantages, such as a possibility to spot predatory behavior on new comers. /Erik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Yup, I'd played with that idea, both actually. I think commenting has value (and have the code around here somewhere to start on it- there's not a lot to it). Voting on changesets is more difficult. Initially that was my whole goal, but my concern is that OSM could become too vote-oriented, and thought comments made more sense. I also think that changeset comments could help local communities, by letting people subscribe to a bounding box, much like how OWL works. I have some code around here for what I was working on. I haven't looked at it in a while, I think all I had were models. If people are interested in working on this, I'd be happy to dust off my code, or work with others. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
On 11/07/2011 22:42, Frederik Ramm wrote: ... But what if I had 1. a facility where I can comment on the perceived usefulness of a changeset; 2. a facility where I can click a "thumbs down" or "thumbs up" in case I particularly like or dislike the change; 3. a league table showing the most liked/disliked changesets and their perpetrators^Wauthors. Interesting - (like many people I'm sure) I try and incorporate some idea of "data quality" into the Garmin maps that I create for my own use (i.e. what to map next), indicating what's likely to have come just from aerial tracing (and missing out e.g. shop names) and what's likely to be dodgy GPS traces or not-joined-up-in-potlatch ways. This is all user based, so a changeset data quality metric (which could be accumulated into a user data quality metric) would certainly be useful to me. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Peter, Peter Wendorff wrote: I would like to see a facility (or even API feature) to avoid the need to change an object for setting it as valid. This is a completely separate topic which should ideally be discussed in a thread of its own. If changesets like the one you mentioned are for "refreshing" objects, that would be a much better solution, I guess. The changeset I mentioned was clearly not for "refreshing" anything; it could only (inadvertently) have created the impression that it refreshed something. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
I would (first) prefer the other way around: I would like to see a facility (or even API feature) to avoid the need to change an object for setting it as valid. Something like: yes, this pub exists and the tags (or even better: the marked tags) are valid up to $NOW If changesets like the one you mentioned are for "refreshing" objects, that would be a much better solution, I guess. regards Peter Am 11.07.2011 23:42, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hi, I just stumbled across a changeset where someone helpfully added a "toilet:access=customers" to 1350 pubs in the Greeater London area (thereby adding no information but freshening the time stamp of the objects, giving the cursory visitor the impression that the pub might actually have been resurveyed which it very likely hasn't). This is not a big deal, not something that I would normally write to the list (or the author) about. It happens all the time, too often to get upset. But what if I had 1. a facility where I can comment on the perceived usefulness of a changeset; 2. a facility where I can click a "thumbs down" or "thumbs up" in case I particularly like or dislike the change; 3. a league table showing the most liked/disliked changesets and their perpetrators^Wauthors. Now before I start hacking on something like that - wasn't somebody toying with the very same idea? Serge, was that you perhaps? Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Commenting and thumbs up/down feature for changesets
Hi, I just stumbled across a changeset where someone helpfully added a "toilet:access=customers" to 1350 pubs in the Greeater London area (thereby adding no information but freshening the time stamp of the objects, giving the cursory visitor the impression that the pub might actually have been resurveyed which it very likely hasn't). This is not a big deal, not something that I would normally write to the list (or the author) about. It happens all the time, too often to get upset. But what if I had 1. a facility where I can comment on the perceived usefulness of a changeset; 2. a facility where I can click a "thumbs down" or "thumbs up" in case I particularly like or dislike the change; 3. a league table showing the most liked/disliked changesets and their perpetrators^Wauthors. Now before I start hacking on something like that - wasn't somebody toying with the very same idea? Serge, was that you perhaps? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
