Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-28 Thread Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com
<ajt1...@gmail.com> Sent: Apr 28, 2018 3:06 PM To: Talk us <talk-us@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair On 23/04/18 10:54, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com wrote: ... T

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-28 Thread Andy Townsend
On 23/04/18 10:54, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com wrote: ... There are 6-8 new users who just started editing in and around Denver. Circumstantial evidence seems to indicagte they are part of a team in that they all started about the same time, their edits are remarkably similar and they

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-23 Thread Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com
reetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 11:42 PM, ajt1...@gmail.com <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote: On 23/04/2018 03:40, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com wrote: I fully suppo

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-23 Thread Greg Morgan
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com < jacknst...@sprynet.com> wrote: > I fully support the efforts of Nakaner. There are 6-8 users creating a > mess in the Denver, Colorado area. > > See here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node= >

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-20 Thread Kevin Kenny
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 1:36 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > While you might think this is a good example for why such a policy is > needed it seems to me that the motivation for both the user blocks by > the DWG and the main argument that led to the conclusion in the German >

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-20 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Friday 20 April 2018, Clifford Snow wrote: > [...] > > Nakaner post a changeset comment which impart said: > > you seem to be part of a paid/organized/commercial editing activity. > We have been telling your workmates for more than one week that you > must add a note to your profile page at

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-20 Thread Clifford Snow
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 9:15 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Friday 20 April 2018, Ian Dees wrote: > > > > I'd be interested in seeing all of these reverts reverted (at least > > in the US) until discussion can take place. > > I don't know about these changes or the reverts of

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-20 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Friday 20 April 2018, Mikel Maron wrote: > > [...]Nakaner seems to be > applying an organized editing policy here without grounds. While you might think this is a good example for why such a policy is needed it seems to me that the motivation for both the user blocks by the DWG and the main

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

2018-04-20 Thread Mikel Maron
> If mappers find edits they consider questionable - either factually or >methodologically - and attempts to get in contact with the mapper making those >edits fail it is commonly accepted practice that mappers can revert such >changes While that is somewhat correct (I question how common or