On 12 August 2010 13:07, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12 August 2010 22:03, Liz <[email protected]> wrote: >> I can immediately think of an edit which could fall into the above category, >> and it would not be classified as "abusive" because it did add additional >> information to the tags. > > Not only that, but others on the talk-au list at the time thought it > was a good idea and added value, I don't recall anyone asking for a > revert, and others had made similar changes in the past, but on a > smaller scale, it was those changes that actually gave me the idea to > do it anyway. >
Sorry, my abuse reply was to the hypothetical question. But the un-winding of edits still stands. Regards Grant _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
