On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Tomas Straupis <tomasstrau...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What we are doing in Lithuania for the last 5 years or so is we have a > patrolling mechanism similar to wikipedia. That is all changesets in > the region (in our case in Lithuania) are filtered out and placed into > "check list". If the editor is known good mapper - his/her edits are > "approved" automatically. Otherwise somebody with a status of "known" > mapper should approve it. But when the changeset is approved - it does > not show up for other "approvers". This way we avoid double work. So > in practice this allows us to review only "suspicious" changes and in > 5 year of experience this worked out perfectly - all bad/suspicious > changes have been noticed in a matter of hours! (for example all > suspicious crap.me edits can be reverted promptly) > Is your process documented anywhere and is the code available? This sounds like a reasonable solution to the problem. I especially like that people aren't double checking new users. It sounds like an approach much like Martijn Van Exel's Maproulette but without the random picking of the user. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
