On 22 November 2015 at 19:33, Chris Hill <o...@raggedred.net> wrote: > > Gerd did the work you describe but went ahead with an almost nation-wide > mechanical edit without any prior discussion or description. That's why I > asked him to revert it. Mechanical edits need to be discussed. He then > indicated that he would discuss the tags on tagging@ - indeed he > suggested leaving his edit and discussing it on tagging@. I wanted also > to make it clear that tagging@ is not the best place to discuss > mechanical edits - a lot of people avoid tagging@ to maintain the will to > live. > > I agree that mechanical edits *should* get discussed - I expect many don't due to the negativity of mailing lists and no clear indication of when something is accepted (the tagging mailing list went off topic instantly). However when faced with a non-discussed mechanical edit I feel that a pragmatic approach should be taken. In this instance I feel your response was heavy handed. "OK, a mech edit that has not been discussed and agreed will be reverted. That's the rules." is not particularly helpful or supportive.
I also disagree with the instant revert in this case - perhaps a quick chat on IRC would have helped to see if others wanted an instant revert. It now looks like we have put Gerd off editing in the UK :-( And now I definitely have wasted enough time on this matter! Happy mapping, Rob
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
