Re: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
On 20 Jul 2009, at 22:32, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > Peter Miller wrote: >> My reasoning is firstly many of his edits are clearly just plain >> wrong and are certainly breaking previously good maps. Secondly >> that he has failed to respond to a polite message asking him for >> an explanation. Thirdly, given that he is not responding to >> messages he is unlikely to agree to the new license! > > I cannot say anything about #1 and #2, but #3 must not come into the > picture. It would be absolutely wrong to judge someone's > contribution today, even if only in an ancillary way, based on > whether or not he is likely to agree to some new license which we're > not even sure will ever be implemented. That was not my point which was that there are two ways to removed vandalism once one has determined that it is vandalism- the first is to repair the damage by moving things back to where they should be and re-entering the correct information in tags, the other is to revert the data to before the person touched it. In the situation where there is a potential license change coming up the later seems the best approach once one has determined that it is vandalism. Currently people are using a mixture of repairing the damage which leaving the person in the IPR chain, and reverting ways one by one which is slow. However... there is too much damage to efficiently do this manually, hence my question with regard to a programatic removal of the edits which I understand is possible. To be clear, this person has probably damage about 1000 ways in ways that are visible and/or damage routing. He comes back to do more work from time to time and we are having difficulty agreeing to have it removed. I will ask again. Does anyone support a programatic removal of all this person's edits? Does any object to a programatic removal of all this person's edits. Before saying you object please check a selection of his changes and note that some have been reverted already so might look ok, but were not ok at the time. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/liam123/edits Regards, Peter > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" > E008°23'33" ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Estimating coverage
Peter Reed wrote: > There have been a number of attempts to estimate the level of UK > coverage, of varying levels of sophistication, but I've not seen any that > compare the length of roads mapped against actual road lengths. > Over the last couple of weeks, I've had a first attempt at doing this for > about 100 local authorities with decent boundaries. This looks like fantastic work. By way of helping to inform debate, with a real-world usage example: We have a need for a programmatic means to detect the very rough level of completeness of an area. For instance, we know from personal experience that http://cambridge.cyclestreets.net/ is very complete, but I can tell (to take a random example) that http://lichfield.cyclestreets.net/ is not very complete so far. As a result, people doing route-planning on cyclestreets.net will get poorer routes in the latter area because the data isn't there to plan over. However, we can't tell this programmatically. The benefit, if we could, would be that we can manage user expectations with a message that "routing in this area will not yet work well because the map data is incomplete", and know better where to target a roll-out of the system out around the country in a way that gives us more confidence about the results people in each area will get. I'm not quite sure what the solution could be, particularly as the preloaded areas (map centre-points): http://www.cyclestreets.net/area/#england do not correspond to local authority areas as such. But I thought I'd throw in this real-world example to help inform debate.. Martin, ** CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists Developer, CycleStreets ** http://www.cyclestreets.net/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
Hi, Peter Miller wrote: > My reasoning is firstly many of his edits are clearly just plain wrong > and are certainly breaking previously good maps. Secondly that he has > failed to respond to a polite message asking him for an explanation. > Thirdly, given that he is not responding to messages he is unlikely to > agree to the new license! I cannot say anything about #1 and #2, but #3 must not come into the picture. It would be absolutely wrong to judge someone's contribution today, even if only in an ancillary way, based on whether or not he is likely to agree to some new license which we're not even sure will ever be implemented. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Liam123 is still active unfortunately
Hi all, I had the same problem with reverting some of liam123's edits as Peter described. Although the reversion looked ok, the upload in Potlatch went ok, when viewed the data had not changed. The liam123 edits that didn't seem to respond to Potlatch reverts were major changes in the positioning of ways. Simpler reverts of changes in tag (eg landuse: leisure changed back to the correct 'industrial') seemed to work ok however. In the end a complete JOSM delete and re-draw of ways in my home town of Brentwood was required. I'm new here, but if there is anyway that a blanket revert for all edits by a malicious user can be implemented it would get my support. I spent ages yesterday getting rid of all signs of a new mythical underground railway running throughout Essex from Upminster to Billericay, Brentwood and beyond. Edits like this are easy to spot, it's harder to detect the many spurious non-existent pubs or amenties that this tiresome person has dotted all over the map. Such a waste of time when there is so much else to do. Best wishes, Qichina ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Chatham Town Centre
If anyone happens to be in Chatham, it needs remapping (again), they have removed a major flyover and are looking and further work. Not sure how much data we can extract from Medway's website, http://www.medway.gov.uk/index/business/medwayrenaissance/chathamfuture.htm without copyright issues. Or if we can get any more details from Medway Council without hitting the good old OS issues. Currently I've just deleted the flyover which has been knocked down, but I think we need some more ground work done. Peter. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
If you Google for 'liam123' there are lots of links and they all suggest a young male teenager, most likely living in the London area where he's editing. The times of the majority of his edits (9-10 am) suggest boredom from not being at school, http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/liam123/edits I'd suggest he's not even aware of the chaos he's causing. because someone who is malicious would escalate to major deletions, he seems to be experimenting. This link suggests a positive character. http://liam123.livejournal.com/ (presuming it's the same Liam123, it does fit the profile) I'd be optimistic that he could be enticed into being constructive. the idea of inviting him to a mapping party might well be a constructive way of diverting his interest into being productive, but that migth not be an option if he's a minor. Mario ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
Forwarded to Data@ Can you confirm what correspondence there has been with the user please. Thanks Andy >-Original Message- >From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- >boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Peter Miller >Sent: 20 July 2009 2:57 PM >To: Talk GB >Subject: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits > > >I am proposing that we get all Liam123's edits removed from OSM. > >My reasoning is firstly many of his edits are clearly just plain wrong >and are certainly breaking previously good maps. Secondly that he has >failed to respond to a polite message asking him for an explanation. >Thirdly, given that he is not responding to messages he is unlikely to >agree to the new license! > >To be clear, this is likely to also result in loosing any subsequent >work on the ways he touched. I suggest that most of these edits are >attempts to sort out the mess anyway. > >Do I have some support for this? > >Does anyone object? > > >Regards, > > > >Peter > > > >___ >Talk-GB mailing list >Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
Peter Miller wrote: > Do I have some support for this? Yes. Definitely. I am surprised that this has not already happened. > Does anyone object? Probably. ;-) Nick. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
I am proposing that we get all Liam123's edits removed from OSM. My reasoning is firstly many of his edits are clearly just plain wrong and are certainly breaking previously good maps. Secondly that he has failed to respond to a polite message asking him for an explanation. Thirdly, given that he is not responding to messages he is unlikely to agree to the new license! To be clear, this is likely to also result in loosing any subsequent work on the ways he touched. I suggest that most of these edits are attempts to sort out the mess anyway. Do I have some support for this? Does anyone object? Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 is still active unfortunately
2009/7/20 Mark Williams : > Peter Miller wrote: >> On 19 Jul 2009, at 23:02, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Peter Miller wrote: We really need some better tools for reverting this sort of nonsense and a way of patrolling the edits of new contributors . This isn't a discussion for talk-gb really, but possibly it is a good place to start. >>> See also the recent discussion on talk that started with this: >>> >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-July/038575.html >>> >>> where the author asked >>> >>> "Now we have the changesets like >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/1815935 ... Is it >>> possible to add an "undo request button" or "spam button" to this >>> page?" >> >> Thanks Frederik. I have read the thread, but there doesn't seem to be >> a conclusion yet? I will continue the discussion about this problem >> there. > > Surely this is a Blacklisting issue as well, in this case? > > I found myself looking at an un-named Public Building round the corner > from my house yesterday, scratching my head, 'til I saw the author. > > I haven't seen any constructive effort from him - have you? > > Mark > I would suggest barring him to, But He'll only open another account and start again under a different alias. Has anyone invited him to the Dartford Mapping Party at the Weekend? Peter. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 is still active unfortunately
Peter Miller wrote: > On 19 Jul 2009, at 23:02, Frederik Ramm wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Peter Miller wrote: >>> We really need some better tools for reverting this sort of >>> nonsense and a way of patrolling the edits of new contributors . >>> This isn't a discussion for talk-gb really, but possibly it is a >>> good place to start. >> See also the recent discussion on talk that started with this: >> >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-July/038575.html >> >> where the author asked >> >> "Now we have the changesets like >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/1815935 ... Is it >> possible to add an "undo request button" or "spam button" to this >> page?" > > Thanks Frederik. I have read the thread, but there doesn't seem to be > a conclusion yet? I will continue the discussion about this problem > there. Surely this is a Blacklisting issue as well, in this case? I found myself looking at an un-named Public Building round the corner from my house yesterday, scratching my head, 'til I saw the author. I haven't seen any constructive effort from him - have you? Mark ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
