Hi,
On 06/06/2012 11:09 AM, Worst Fixer wrote:
I did a redraw of them. To make understanding easier.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/WorstFixer/diary/17025
Do you have any comments? What to add? What to remove?
I am very reluctant to have someone who
(1) has created their OSM account only a few weeks ago
(2) has deliberately engaged in behaviour that was clear to upset many
people, including mass-editing without prior discussion, and doing wrong
so that it had to be reverted
(3) now claims that he cannot say his real name because he has made too
many enemies because of (2)
(4) continues to make misleading and offensive statements in their OSM
user blog
play any part in rewriting our import guidelines, or helping to enforce
them.
I know that we don't operate a strict real-name policy at OSM but I
would expect someone who wants to be involved at a level where they make
mass edits and help shape project guidelines to be a real person with an
identity and not just some nickname.
Also, I know that it would be good practice to separate the message from
the messenger, and even someone who does lots of stupid things could in
theory come up with helpful documentation.
In this case, I really have a problem. Yes, the import guidelines could
be improved; but no, I cannot trust "WorstFixer" to do a good job at it.
The complete overhaul suggested by "WorstFixer" is not the way to go. I
support Jaak's points; I dislike the flow chart presentation; and I
think that WorstFixer's chart introduces too many of his own ideas (e.g.
where does "shape aligns well with satellite" come from - it certainly
makes no sense without further qualifying it to a degree not possible in
a flow chart).
I very strongly support Jaak's mentions of "make available instead of
import" (technology for that is becoming ever easier with e.g. Josh
Doe's conflation plugin for JOSM and Potlatch's vector backgrounds and
snapshot server). This is the future of imports that involves the local
mappers instead of just emptying a bucket over the map.
The current import policy, as well as WorstFixer's picture, don't
mention one thing at all which I think is very important - a "community
impact analysis". I think that everyone who proposes an import needs to
show how the import will benefit *the community* (for example: "I want
to import buildings in X, I have talked to the local community and they
are eager to start working with the data, adding house numbers and
metadata...").
Any import with a reasoning of "there's no mappers there anyway, so it's
either import or no data", or "there are no mappers in X but at least
when I do the import my company has something they can show our
customers in X", is, in my opinion, not acceptable.
If you build a factory then this usually has lots of advantages for the
local economy - you create jobs, you pay money to the government, you
increase the importance of the region. But factories can also harm the
environment, something that you don't see immediately; something that
becomes obvious only later. That's why many countries now require people
to assess the environmental impact before a factory is built; and I
would request the same from would-be importers in OSM. Assess the impact
that your import will have on the community.
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
