On 20/07/2016 13:38, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Victor Grousset wrote: >> On 14/07/2016 17:35, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >>> The person proposing the automated edit isn't the best placed >>> person to weigh that up: they're already convinced of the desirability >>> of the edit (which is why they're proposing it). >> >> The person already weighed that up to decide that the benefit were >> worth many hours in preparation, discussion, execution that will >> possibly end up reverted. > > Which doesn't mean they're automatically right.
And my next phrase was > I do agree that it isn't enough alone but that's opinion worth as much as another. Which doesn't mean they're automatically right, there is no disagreement there. > I'm sure the person who did this automated dupe node merge spent many hours > preparing it, but they still fucked it up, and the damage is still there 6 > years later. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/357366507 Damn, nice catch! At least now there is a note so hopefully it wont stay forgotten for many years again ^^" Cheers, -- tuxayo _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
