On Tuesday 25 February 2020, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > But more broadly, we value data for its correctness, not for its > provenance (assuming licence-compatible). You are inventing a > suspected rationale ("an advertising campaign") on the part of the > contributor; judging them by your own standards which aren't the > agreed/stated values of OSM anywhere I can see; and concluding that > the data should be deleted. That's... a stretch?
Not necessarily. OSM - like almost any other social cooperation on the internet - is strongly based on reputation of its contributors. I can't check every contribution of any contributor in even a small area but i can look at the contributor's history of contributions and their background as a contributor (their reputation so to speak) to assess how trustworthy they are. And yes, this is unfair in the way that i will make assumptions on a newcomer corporate mappers based on my (bad) experience with other corporate mappers from the past. That's collatoral damage inevitable to maintain a functioning system of social cooperation in the presence of a large volume of organized activities. You can blame it on the corporations/organizations that have lobbied successfully against more meaningful regulation of said activities. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging