Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Friday 18 Sep 2009 11:33:59 Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Removing it from 1.x would serve no purpose. I can guarantee Liam123 > would continue editing, and you'd be back within the month demanding > that some other feature you've just hit upon should be banned. Ok, here's an idea. Have a sandbox. Once you identify a user who is vandalising things, give him his own database to play with. Don't delete the account, or anything other than ask him to stop. All his changes are made to the sandbox, and not the live DB. Update the sandbox from the main DB every night, so it looks (to him) as though we are trying to correct his vandalism, without any effort on our part. Whether he gets bored and moves on, or not, is then his problem. Alexander. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
I'm not entirely convinced Dave read my posting, because it wasn't a metric (but no matter). When I tidy up after my children, I just put the bits back in the box, I don't try to undo every single move they made in reverse order. And it's a lot easier if the pieces from different jigsaw puzzles don't get mixed up. Now it may be that it's difficult to distinguish between the batch-edit that is reverting a changeset and any other type of edit. Fair enough. But if we're finding that separating jigsaws is impractical, then maybe trying to keep them separate would be a sensible step to consider, while we're waiting for the magic jigsaw-separator to arrive? Richard On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > Dave Stubbs wrote: > > The problem needs fixing with better tools for sorting out mess, not > > more weird and wonderful metrics for getting in people's way. > > +1 > > Whenever a vandal pops up, we have tons of people coming up with tons of > cool measures to shoot oneself in the foot, and if they had their way > then the damage done by these measures would far outweigh anything > vandals have done until now. > > Bye > Frederik > > ___ > 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] liam123 facts
On 19/09/2009 07:30, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I have reverted the remaining edits so that, to my knowledge as per now, > not as single object should be in the state "last modified by liam123". Thank you very much for doing this. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123 facts
Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > [] > Also, I think I have found one place where liam123 actually did > something good (but I reverted it nonetheless). There is a footway that > goes right across Cumberland drive here in Landon: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28277588 > > Which liam123 had fixed by inserting a junction node into Cumberland drive. > > I hope my changes (changesets 2526266 and 2530162) have made things > better rather than worse on the whole. > > Bye > Frederik > > I'm sure they have, Frederik, well done & thanks. This particular way was one of mine - I never drew it across the road like that though, it was a short path to Cumberland Drive & doesn't cross it - I think Mr123's contribution was to continue it across to another road, which is not correct at all. I'm fairly pedantic about layer & bridge tags & even left a note to say it was an extrapolation from one end of the path... How happy would you be if someone came & made 3000+ malicious minor feasible-looking edits within 30 miles of your house? I think he does merit the nasty things said about him, and we can't just let this kind of activity go unchecked. Thanks, again. Mark ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] liam123 facts
Hi, I have looked into this liam123 thing and found that he made a lifetime total of 5413 edits (due to the way Potlatch "touches" the same object multiple times, that amounts to only 3698 modified objects altogether). All but 1820 of these edits have been dealt with by the community already. (From the noise made on this list, I would have expected liam123 to have tens of thousands of edits and the community fighting a losing battle.) I have reverted the remaining edits so that, to my knowledge as per now, not as single object should be in the state "last modified by liam123". Which of course does not mean that all damage has been undone - some things that he deleted may now be there twice, and some people may happily have built on liam123's edits which I cannot distinguish from fixing his wrongs. The High Speed One line seems to be broken now in this area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.22424&lon=0.71079&zoom=15&layers=B000FTFT# There were some cases in which I had to undo an earlier undo operation, for example PeterIto had removed the node 9780039 claiming to revert vandalism, but I needed that node to revert way 28338728 back to what it was before liam123 touched it. Also, I think I have found one place where liam123 actually did something good (but I reverted it nonetheless). There is a footway that goes right across Cumberland drive here in Landon: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28277588 Which liam123 had fixed by inserting a junction node into Cumberland drive. I hope my changes (changesets 2526266 and 2530162) have made things better rather than worse on the whole. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Hi, Dave Stubbs wrote: > The problem needs fixing with better tools for sorting out mess, not > more weird and wonderful metrics for getting in people's way. +1 Whenever a vandal pops up, we have tons of people coming up with tons of cool measures to shoot oneself in the foot, and if they had their way then the damage done by these measures would far outweigh anything vandals have done until now. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18 Sep 2009, at 17:33, Godfrey Bartlett wrote: >>> >>> 'data protection', 'data monitoring' and 'data moderation' >>> all seem to be good. >>> >>> >> 'data protection' might be confused with 'Data Protection Act', ie, >> legal data issues > > This discussion reminds me of Douglas Adams' Restaurant at the End of > the Universe. > The 3rd ship of hairdressers and management consultants who are > marooned > on prehistoric Earth form a committee to invent things to make life > better. They are incapable of getting round to inventing the wheel, > "the single simplest machine in the entire universe", because they > spend > all their time arguing about what colour it should be. :-) > Given that we are going to live with the name for 2+ years I think it is worth a brief discussion before selecting the name. I have done a post on talk this afternoon and have had a bunch of people add their names to the wiki and commented a bit more about names there so I think we are ready to choose one. But can I suggest we carry on this thread on talk or on the wiki page. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_moderation_list 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] liam123's latest
>> > > 'data protection', 'data monitoring' and 'data moderation' > > all seem to be good. > > > > >'data protection' might be confused with 'Data Protection Act', ie, >legal data issues This discussion reminds me of Douglas Adams' Restaurant at the End of the Universe. The 3rd ship of hairdressers and management consultants who are marooned on prehistoric Earth form a committee to invent things to make life better. They are incapable of getting round to inventing the wheel, "the single simplest machine in the entire universe", because they spend all their time arguing about what colour it should be. :-) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Peter Miller wrote: > 'data protection', 'data monitoring' and 'data moderation' > all seem to be good. > > 'data protection' might be confused with 'Data Protection Act', ie, legal data issues ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Richard Mann wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM, David Earl > wrote: >> >> I agree. I think it would be even more useful to be able to quarantine >> particular users changesets for manual review so the could be let >> through in the end - though there's all the problems of conflicting >> changes building up that that entails (or blocking further changes to >> those objects until the changeset is decided one way or the other), so >> I'm not under any illusion that this is easy. >> >> David > > > I'd suggest locking everything a changeset touches for xx hours, with xx > variable by user. In the quarantine period the changeset can be reverted, > but no other changes are allowed. If it's not reverted in the quarantine > period, everything gets unlocked. So the user sees their edit get rendered, > but anyone can follow them round hitting the undo button. > Revert === Edit which makes it quite hard to make an edit, and would also block people from reverting reverts, or something. Plus it makes DOS attacks really really effective because new users have the biggest lock impact. The problem needs fixing with better tools for sorting out mess, not more weird and wonderful metrics for getting in people's way. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM, David Earl wrote: > I agree. I think it would be even more useful to be able to quarantine > particular users changesets for manual review so the could be let > through in the end - though there's all the problems of conflicting > changes building up that that entails (or blocking further changes to > those objects until the changeset is decided one way or the other), so > I'm not under any illusion that this is easy. > > David > I'd suggest locking everything a changeset touches for xx hours, with xx variable by user. In the quarantine period the changeset can be reverted, but no other changes are allowed. If it's not reverted in the quarantine period, everything gets unlocked. So the user sees their edit get rendered, but anyone can follow them round hitting the undo button. Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
2009/9/18 Dave Stubbs : >> I'm sorry if I seem frustrated by this, but it is because I am. We've >> all spent thousands of hours each on this, and this guy is undermining >> everything we've all done. Even though it's not my area (though close), >> it completely destroys any confidence anyone might have in what they see >> everywhere. >> > > Yeah, it really is frustrating. > Unfortunately we're currently trying to fight this with a pair of > tweezers and a sieve, backed up by a cruise missile and a B52 load of > cluster bombs. Note: A new version of UserActivity was just announced on talk: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UserActivity. It may be of use for detecting future vandals. -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
David Earl wrote: > ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! Does anyone know if there are any discussions ongoing about what restrictions might be put in place on newly registered user who e.g. haven't uploaded any tracks and suddenly start editing in a wide area, to avoid "whack-a-mole" problems? (If there are I'll shut up now). ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
> I'm sorry if I seem frustrated by this, but it is because I am. We've > all spent thousands of hours each on this, and this guy is undermining > everything we've all done. Even though it's not my area (though close), > it completely destroys any confidence anyone might have in what they see > everywhere. > Yeah, it really is frustrating. Unfortunately we're currently trying to fight this with a pair of tweezers and a sieve, backed up by a cruise missile and a B52 load of cluster bombs. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/2009 12:13, Dave Stubbs wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brian Prangle > wrote: >> I may be being a simpleton but can't we just disable write privileges for >> this user to the database? Then he can continue editing but it all has no >> effect >> > > If somebody writes the code to enforce such a block then we'd have that > option. > It sounds like an interesting option to have. I agree. I think it would be even more useful to be able to quarantine particular users changesets for manual review so the could be let through in the end - though there's all the problems of conflicting changes building up that that entails (or blocking further changes to those objects until the changeset is decided one way or the other), so I'm not under any illusion that this is easy. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Someoneelse wrote: >> They would be easier to fix if people didn't start reverting his >> changes by hand the moment he does them, which is what currently >> prevents a clean revert of his latest changesets. > > That could be difficult - it would mean saying to people in potentially > a wide area "please stopping mapping for a while". Certainly, when a No, it would mean saying "please don't revert single changes made by liam123 until a full clean revert has been attempted". The changes I alluded to were part of changesets commented* with 'de-liam123isation', but upon closer inspection I think it reverted all liam123's changes. I thought earlier that he only reverted a few of the changes, which prompted my remark. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2521914 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2521863 -- Lennard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/09 12:13, Dave Stubbs wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brian Prangle > wrote: >> I may be being a simpleton but can't we just disable write privileges for >> this user to the database? Then he can continue editing but it all has no >> effect > > If somebody writes the code to enforce such a block then we'd have that > option. > It sounds like an interesting option to have. Matt is working on some stuff along those lines at the moment I believe, which is what I was alluding to in my earlier message. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brian Prangle wrote: > I may be being a simpleton but can't we just disable write privileges for > this user to the database? Then he can continue editing but it all has no > effect > If somebody writes the code to enforce such a block then we'd have that option. It sounds like an interesting option to have. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/2009 11:52, Tom Hughes wrote: >> Re IP addresses, it depends on how he is connected - mine for example >> never changes so long as I am using the same Mac address to connect. It >> is cited on the DWG page as one course of action, and I think it would >> be more effective than banning the account, as we'll likely lose track >> of him. > > Well bully for you. Now if the entire world is using the same ISP as you > then everything will be fine. Well, it seems a reasonable assumption to me that if my ISP does it this way it might be quite a common practice. But apparently not, so I stand corrected. Doesn't mean it's not worth looking at though - Virgin Media is widely used. >> It is trivial to get hold of the IP address - every HTTP request carries >> it, though a serious hacker would forge or suppress it, I doubt he's >> doing that - if he was not just playing, he'd be using multiple accounts. > > I'm not a complete muppet thank you. I know full well that every HTTP > request has an IP address associated with it. I didn't think you didn't, but you were the one who said it was hard. > The problem is working out which HTTP requests are his! The web server > access logs do not record the authenticated user for each request for > the very simple reason that the web server has no idea as that is a > rails level issue. > > The rails logs also do not log the user details, although they probably > could be made to. It would be on a separate line to the IP address > however which makes pulling them out much harder. I was thinking more along the lines of recording the IP address along with the other changeset information (but not, presumably, exposing it in the API) - after all, that's what the information is wanted in relation to, and it would allow us to see how the address is changing for any particular user. I'm sorry if I seem frustrated by this, but it is because I am. We've all spent thousands of hours each on this, and this guy is undermining everything we've all done. Even though it's not my area (though close), it completely destroys any confidence anyone might have in what they see everywhere. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Lennard wrote: > They would be easier to fix if people didn't start reverting his changes > by hand the moment he does them, which is what currently prevents a > clean revert of his latest changesets. That could be difficult - it would mean saying to people in potentially a wide area "please stopping mapping for a while". Certainly, when a problem with "inappropriate changes" occurred locally I didn't spot that there had been a large number of other similar changes had been made, just that a particular road was classified wrong. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
I may be being a simpleton but can't we just disable write privileges for this user to the database? Then he can continue editing but it all has no effect ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Dave Stubbs wrote: > You seem to think his edits are irreversible -- they are not. They are > not hard to find, and they are not particularly hard to fix -- the They would be easier to fix if people didn't start reverting his changes by hand the moment he does them, which is what currently prevents a clean revert of his latest changesets. -- Lennard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
>We seem unable to contact Liam123 via normal channels. This means we >have to think of other ways of contacting members who continually put >mistakes into the dataset. >Is it not possible to put a flag on his account, so when he logs in he >is told what he has been doing and asked to explain himself? >Preferably with a form box that forwards the message to this list? >Otherwise we are going to go around in circles trying to undo his >work, rather than solving the problem. We need to get him on our side >rather than just having him toy with something we feel is very >important. Couldn't we just kill his account? I guess he could sign up again but in principle it seems reasonable to take this action for blatant abuse. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/09 11:26, David Earl wrote: > On 18/09/2009 10:53, Tom Hughes wrote: >> On 18/09/09 10:33, David Earl wrote: >> >>> ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! >> >> I have repeatedly stated that I am not prepared to block people on my >> own. Get the DWG to order him blocked and I will happily do so. > > How? How does the clamour that's been made over three months actually > get turned into action? As far as I can tell Liam123 was first referred to the DWG on 7th August. Our next meeting was on 25th August and I assume the case was discussed there although I'm having a hard time finding any record of it - most likely somebody was tasked to send him a direct email. The next DWG meeting is next week when I expect it will be discussed again and a decision made on what action to take. Yes we know this is slow, which is why we are working on setting up a ticketing system to allow more work to be done between meetings and why there is work being done to allow more fine grained blocking of users so that temporary suspensions and things can be used while detailed investigation is done. Right now the only things we have are sledgehammers so we have to be careful about how we use them. > Is there a general email address for the members (who I can see on the > wiki, and that you are one of), or do I have to get the email addresses > for each member individually - it doesn't say on the wiki how to make > contact, though obviously I recognise all the names. The address of the DWG is clearly listed on the vandalism page in the wiki although it doesn't currently seem to be on the DWG page for some reason. > Re IP addresses, it depends on how he is connected - mine for example > never changes so long as I am using the same Mac address to connect. It > is cited on the DWG page as one course of action, and I think it would > be more effective than banning the account, as we'll likely lose track > of him. Well bully for you. Now if the entire world is using the same ISP as you then everything will be fine. IP blocks are fragile in a number of ways, both because of the tendency for users to move IP and because they have to be manually configured on each server and therefore have a high chance of getting lost over time. User blocks are much more robust because they act at the rails level by changing the user's record in the database. They are definitely the first choice at the moment. > It is trivial to get hold of the IP address - every HTTP request carries > it, though a serious hacker would forge or suppress it, I doubt he's > doing that - if he was not just playing, he'd be using multiple accounts. I'm not a complete muppet thank you. I know full well that every HTTP request has an IP address associated with it. The problem is working out which HTTP requests are his! The web server access logs do not record the authenticated user for each request for the very simple reason that the web server has no idea as that is a rails level issue. The rails logs also do not log the user details, although they probably could be made to. It would be on a separate line to the IP address however which makes pulling them out much harder. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:26 AM, David Earl wrote: > On 18/09/2009 10:53, Tom Hughes wrote: >> On 18/09/09 10:33, David Earl wrote: >> >>> Tom - this is persistent continuous abuse. I really think we have to >>> block his IP address until such time as we can work out how to deal with >>> the edits. They are just so pervasive and destructive. We've discussed >>> suspending his account and the chances of him switching to a new one. An >>> IP block is not foolproof either, but it is better than nothing, which >>> is what we've got at the moment. >> >> Well (a) we don't know and can't easily find out what IP address he is >> using and (b) in all probability it changes fairly often. The first step >> will be to block his account, not his IP address. >> >>> ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! >> >> I have repeatedly stated that I am not prepared to block people on my >> own. Get the DWG to order him blocked and I will happily do so. > > How? How does the clamour that's been made over three months actually > get turned into action? When we last discussed it it was decided it was better to keep track of him than ban him and not know where he was. We may well re-evaluate that. > > Is there a general email address for the members (who I can see on the > wiki, and that you are one of), or do I have to get the email addresses > for each member individually - it doesn't say on the wiki how to make > contact, though obviously I recognise all the names. > d...@osmfoundation.org > But this has been going for three months and he has poisoned large parts > of Kent. How long and how much damage do we have to sustain before > action is taken? He's spent the last two days doggedly undermining > people's work, and far from Andy's previous assertion that he'll get > bored, he hasn't. Indeed I have wondered whether there is more to this > than just idiocy(*). You seem to think his edits are irreversible -- they are not. They are not hard to find, and they are not particularly hard to fix -- the problem is we lack the necessary tools to do it efficiently (so that one of us actually has enough time to do it before he starts again). If someone somewhere actually develops those tools then we can come back and make sure there's no lasting damage. > > Re IP addresses, it depends on how he is connected - mine for example > never changes so long as I am using the same Mac address to connect. It > is cited on the DWG page as one course of action, and I think it would > be more effective than banning the account, as we'll likely lose track > of him. Except that that's not how most ISPs work -- much of the UK is on a dynamic IP, and you might find yourself banning an entire exchange to stop one user. We can do that, but it really is an extreme measure. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Peter Childs wrote: > Is it a good idea to remove the Live Change Feature in Potlatch > for everyone. > > I'm thinking this is the cause for a lot of our problems. > > I can't see why anyone would want it any more anyway. Its a > dangerous feature without a purpose. *shrugs* You've already made it clear you can't see plenty of things. I know plenty of very experienced users who prefer editing in live mode. It has some significant advantages for the experienced user. Clearly Liam123 knows exactly what he is doing. He has read and deleted messages to him asking him to stop. Live editing mode has nothing to do with it. If you were to ban it, he would just make his changes as per usual and click 'Save'. Then all you've achieved is disadvantaging a lot of existing users for no benefit at all. I'm up for adding a warning the first time a user enters live mode. And I don't anticipate including live mode in Potlatch 2, but that's entirely due to ease of coding. Removing it from 1.x would serve no purpose. I can guarantee Liam123 would continue editing, and you'd be back within the month demanding that some other feature you've just hit upon should be banned. Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Peter Childs wrote: > 2009/9/18 David Earl : >> >> ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! >> > > Is it a good idea to remove the Live Change Feature in Potlatch for everyone. > > I'm thinking this is the cause for a lot of our problems. > > I can't see why anyone would want it any more anyway. Its a dangerous > feature without a purpose. > This case has bugger all to do with Potlatch's live edit mode. Please don't look for scapegoats -- it doesn't help anyone. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/2009 11:17, Lennard wrote: > And about removal/deactivation/hiding of Potlatch's live editing mode: > yes, please. We've had a case in Belgium as well, recently, of someone > dicking about in live mode, apparently unaware of the destructive nature > of their actions. +1 But I don't think that's our problem with liam123 - he's doing this deliberately, I'm certain. He's editing in such a way that the changes are subtle and hard to spot visually (like moving bus stops a hundred metres, changing the number of lanes, one way status and so on), and persistently over several months. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/2009 10:53, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 18/09/09 10:33, David Earl wrote: > >> Tom - this is persistent continuous abuse. I really think we have to >> block his IP address until such time as we can work out how to deal with >> the edits. They are just so pervasive and destructive. We've discussed >> suspending his account and the chances of him switching to a new one. An >> IP block is not foolproof either, but it is better than nothing, which >> is what we've got at the moment. > > Well (a) we don't know and can't easily find out what IP address he is > using and (b) in all probability it changes fairly often. The first step > will be to block his account, not his IP address. > >> ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! > > I have repeatedly stated that I am not prepared to block people on my > own. Get the DWG to order him blocked and I will happily do so. How? How does the clamour that's been made over three months actually get turned into action? Is there a general email address for the members (who I can see on the wiki, and that you are one of), or do I have to get the email addresses for each member individually - it doesn't say on the wiki how to make contact, though obviously I recognise all the names. But this has been going for three months and he has poisoned large parts of Kent. How long and how much damage do we have to sustain before action is taken? He's spent the last two days doggedly undermining people's work, and far from Andy's previous assertion that he'll get bored, he hasn't. Indeed I have wondered whether there is more to this than just idiocy(*). Re IP addresses, it depends on how he is connected - mine for example never changes so long as I am using the same Mac address to connect. It is cited on the DWG page as one course of action, and I think it would be more effective than banning the account, as we'll likely lose track of him. It is trivial to get hold of the IP address - every HTTP request carries it, though a serious hacker would forge or suppress it, I doubt he's doing that - if he was not just playing, he'd be using multiple accounts. David * could he be a plant from OS to demonstrate the vulnerability of crowd source maps? OK< enough conspiracy theories. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Tom Hughes wrote: > I have repeatedly stated that I am not prepared to block people on my > own. Get the DWG to order him blocked and I will happily do so. Not to Tom personally, but: Can the DWG then finally speak up to acknowledge publicly that they *are* working on this case? And about removal/deactivation/hiding of Potlatch's live editing mode: yes, please. We've had a case in Belgium as well, recently, of someone dicking about in live mode, apparently unaware of the destructive nature of their actions. He/she is not as persistant yet as liam123, and I hope it doesn't get to that, because I'd rather not clean up for 3 months without hints that he/she can/will be stopped by the DWG. -- Lennard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
2009/9/18 David Earl : > > ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! > Is it a good idea to remove the Live Change Feature in Potlatch for everyone. I'm thinking this is the cause for a lot of our problems. I can't see why anyone would want it any more anyway. Its a dangerous feature without a purpose. Peter. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18/09/09 10:33, David Earl wrote: > Tom - this is persistent continuous abuse. I really think we have to > block his IP address until such time as we can work out how to deal with > the edits. They are just so pervasive and destructive. We've discussed > suspending his account and the chances of him switching to a new one. An > IP block is not foolproof either, but it is better than nothing, which > is what we've got at the moment. Well (a) we don't know and can't easily find out what IP address he is using and (b) in all probability it changes fairly often. The first step will be to block his account, not his IP address. > ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! I have repeatedly stated that I am not prepared to block people on my own. Get the DWG to order him blocked and I will happily do so. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
> ... talk-dataquality Hey people, Rome is burning - well Orpington and Bromley anyway - and we're discussing the name of a mailing list! Liam is busy again this morning wrecking most of south east England. His attentions have spread as far as the south coast now. Frederick doesn't want me to try reverting with spending much more time learning about how to manually splice changesets together, which I don't have the time to do. So this guy is steadily eroding large parts of SE England and no-one is doing anything about it. Weeks of slogging around places on the ground is being destroyed by this idiot. Tom - this is persistent continuous abuse. I really think we have to block his IP address until such time as we can work out how to deal with the edits. They are just so pervasive and destructive. We've discussed suspending his account and the chances of him switching to a new one. An IP block is not foolproof either, but it is better than nothing, which is what we've got at the moment. ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 18 Sep 2009, at 08:51, Brian Prangle wrote: > I'd support talk-dataquality ( or data protection, or data > monitoring). I'm concerend about what might happen when this sort of > thing starts occurring in the W Mids where I've spent many hours > surveying and editing. I can contribute to the discussion about > process - would be happy to participate in any eventual mentoring > scheme or any other part of any evolving process - can't code tools > though Great. That sounds like enough interest to make the request on talk to bottom out an agreed name and an agreed brief for the list and then set it up. I have set up a wiki page here to continue the discussion: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_moderation_list Personally I think 'data_quality' (or 'dataquality' or 'quality') would attract people who wanted to talk about the correct use of tags and that is something I really really don't want to get mixed into this list. 'data protection', 'data monitoring' and 'data moderation' all seem to be good. I will now do a post to talk now. Regards, Peter > > Regards > > Brian > ___ > 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] liam123's latest
I'd support talk-dataquality ( or data protection, or data monitoring). I'm concerend about what might happen when this sort of thing starts occurring in the W Mids where I've spent many hours surveying and editing. I can contribute to the discussion about process - would be happy to participate in any eventual mentoring scheme or any other part of any evolving process - can't code tools though Regards Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Not a big contributor to the lists, but... 1) Yes I'd support it 2) Yes I'd join (but unlikely to contribute much) Jeni http://blog.jennystuff.com Peter Miller wrote: > The other question though:- > > 1) Would you support the existence of such a list? > 2) Would you join it? > > If no one supports it or would join it from talk-gb then I won't > progress the idea any more! > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
I would be tempted to go for a name such as talk-quality or similar for the list as that isn't as prescriptive as talk-moderation I would subscribe, time to read and reply is a wholly different question :) Cheers Chris On 17/09/09 15:13, Peter Miller wrote: > On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:48, Matt Williams wrote: > > >> 2009/9/17 Peter Miller: >> >>> On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:30, David Earl wrote: >>> >>> On 17/09/2009 14:30, Peter Miller wrote: > Possibly a different name would be clearer > talk-Counter_vandalism_tools, but that is getting a bit long. Any > other ideas or feedback? > talk-reversion-tools? >>> Not very inclusive. I want it to also cover 'patrol' software to spot >>> suspicious sorts of dicking around, such as a new contributor >>> moving a >>> bunch of nodes that have been in one place for a length of time. >>> Looking for offensive phrases in tags. Users who have recently had >>> work reverted who make new edits. Possibly methods of rating >>> contributors with white lists for users who don't get reverted and >>> have been editing for some time etc. >>> >> talk-moderation or talk-moderation_tools? Since this all falls under >> the umbrella of moderating the edits being made. >> > Sounds good to me. > > 'talk-moderation' is short, and makes it clear that it covers all > aspects of both the technology and the associated social side of > managing contributions. Some people may think it is the place to > complain about every bad edit, but we can deflect those requests with > a good wiki. > > The other question though:- > > 1) Would you support the existence of such a list? > 2) Would you join it? > > If no one supports it or would join it from talk-gb then I won't > progress the idea any more! > > > Regards, > > > Peter > > > >> -- >> Matt Williams >> http://milliams.com >> >> ___ >> 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 > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
David,
David Earl wrote:
> ... which also won't revert now its closed ("changeset upload failed:
> 409 Conflict")
I also hear you talk about "automatic reversion" which "gets a failure
rate of about half". Are you sure that you know what you are doing?
Because if not then there's a risk that you make things worse.
Pardon if I'm doing you injustice but it sounds a bit as if you were
just pressing buttons without having given the issue much thought. Have
you tried to combine the edits you want to revert and to sort them in a
meaningful way for reverting? Have you identified those that don't
revert and split up his changesets? etc.
It is certainly not a good idea to blindly run the revert script on
anything liam123 is doing and if that is what you're attempting then I
would urge you to stop that and develop a more sophisticated approach.
Bye
Frederik
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17/09/09 17:58, Ciarán Mooney wrote: > We seem unable to contact Liam123 via normal channels. This means we > have to think of other ways of contacting members who continually put > mistakes into the dataset. Which is why he has been referred to the DWG who have other means of contacting people at their disposal, and the power to take action if people do not respond. > Is it not possible to put a flag on his account, so when he logs in he > is told what he has been doing and asked to explain himself? > Preferably with a form box that forwards the message to this list? That is not an ability we have at the moment, no. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Hi, We seem unable to contact Liam123 via normal channels. This means we have to think of other ways of contacting members who continually put mistakes into the dataset. Is it not possible to put a flag on his account, so when he logs in he is told what he has been doing and asked to explain himself? Preferably with a form box that forwards the message to this list? Otherwise we are going to go around in circles trying to undo his work, rather than solving the problem. We need to get him on our side rather than just having him toy with something we feel is very important. Ciarán ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
... which also won't revert now its closed ("changeset upload failed:
409 Conflict")
On 17/09/2009 17:42, David Earl wrote:
> Yet another one in progress: Dartford in Kent is being steadily ruined
> with random bridges and the like:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2513003
>
> He's spent essentially all day today making random edits across Kent.
>
> David
>
> On 17/09/2009 14:35, David Earl wrote:
>> Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524
>> changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed
>>
>> On 17/09/2009 13:23, David Earl wrote:
>>> Two changesets:
>>>
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510163 reverted cleanly
>>>
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510485 failed to revert
>>> "410 gone" - I suspect there was a node/way changed in the second
>>> changeset that was also in the first.
>>>
>>> The automatic reversion is getting a failure rate of abut half at the
>>> moment, so liam123 is steadily degrading map quality because nothing is
>>> being done to deal with the manual stuff.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] liam123's latest
Yet another one in progress: Dartford in Kent is being steadily ruined with random bridges and the like: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2513003 He's spent essentially all day today making random edits across Kent. David On 17/09/2009 14:35, David Earl wrote: > Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524 > changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed > > On 17/09/2009 13:23, David Earl wrote: >> Two changesets: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510163 reverted cleanly >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510485 failed to revert >> "410 gone" - I suspect there was a node/way changed in the second >> changeset that was also in the first. >> >> The automatic reversion is getting a failure rate of abut half at the >> moment, so liam123 is steadily degrading map quality because nothing is >> being done to deal with the manual stuff. >> >> David >> >> ___ >> 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 > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
I'd join too -- but I doubt I would be of all that much help. JR 2009/9/17 Someoneelse > Peter Miller wrote: > > The other question though:- > > > > 1) Would you support the existence of such a list? > > 2) Would you join it? > > Yes, I'd join. > > ___ > 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] liam123's latest
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Peter Miller wrote: > 'talk-moderation' is short, and makes it clear that it covers all > aspects of both the technology and the associated social side of > managing contributions. Some people may think it is the place to > complain about every bad edit, but we can deflect those requests with > a good wiki. > > The other question though:- > > 1) Would you support the existence of such a list? > 2) Would you join it? talk-moderation sounds like a good name. I like the idea of the list, so I'd support it's existence, but I doubt I'd join it, because I'm signed up to too many lists as it is. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Peter Miller wrote: > The other question though:- > > 1) Would you support the existence of such a list? > 2) Would you join it? Yes, I'd join. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:48, Matt Williams wrote: > 2009/9/17 Peter Miller : >> >> On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:30, David Earl wrote: >> >>> On 17/09/2009 14:30, Peter Miller wrote: Possibly a different name would be clearer talk-Counter_vandalism_tools, but that is getting a bit long. Any other ideas or feedback? >>> >>> talk-reversion-tools? >> >> Not very inclusive. I want it to also cover 'patrol' software to spot >> suspicious sorts of dicking around, such as a new contributor >> moving a >> bunch of nodes that have been in one place for a length of time. >> Looking for offensive phrases in tags. Users who have recently had >> work reverted who make new edits. Possibly methods of rating >> contributors with white lists for users who don't get reverted and >> have been editing for some time etc. > > talk-moderation or talk-moderation_tools? Since this all falls under > the umbrella of moderating the edits being made. Sounds good to me. 'talk-moderation' is short, and makes it clear that it covers all aspects of both the technology and the associated social side of managing contributions. Some people may think it is the place to complain about every bad edit, but we can deflect those requests with a good wiki. The other question though:- 1) Would you support the existence of such a list? 2) Would you join it? If no one supports it or would join it from talk-gb then I won't progress the idea any more! Regards, Peter > > -- > Matt Williams > http://milliams.com > > ___ > 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] liam123's latest
2009/9/17 Peter Miller : > > On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:30, David Earl wrote: > >> On 17/09/2009 14:30, Peter Miller wrote: >>> Possibly a different name would be clearer >>> talk-Counter_vandalism_tools, but that is getting a bit long. Any >>> other ideas or feedback? >> >> talk-reversion-tools? > > Not very inclusive. I want it to also cover 'patrol' software to spot > suspicious sorts of dicking around, such as a new contributor moving a > bunch of nodes that have been in one place for a length of time. > Looking for offensive phrases in tags. Users who have recently had > work reverted who make new edits. Possibly methods of rating > contributors with white lists for users who don't get reverted and > have been editing for some time etc. talk-moderation or talk-moderation_tools? Since this all falls under the umbrella of moderating the edits being made. -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:40 PM, David Earl wrote: > On 17/09/2009 14:38, David Earl wrote: >> On 17/09/2009 14:35, David Earl wrote: >>> Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524 >>> changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed >> >> Actually, on his page it says "still editing". Perhaps that's why and I >> can have another go as soon as it terminates. > > Now he has a second open changeset, while the first is still open: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511982 > That's just because Potlatch doesn't close the changeset unless you manually close it. The server will shut down open changesets after 1 hour in inactivity. If you shut down Potlatch, then reopen it it'll start a new changeset. The 412 can happen any time you try to revert something which has been edited since... if he was still editing it's more than likely -- you might need to consider both changesets together to do a proper revert (assuming Frederick's tool lets you do that.. not sure it does). Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17/09/2009 14:38, David Earl wrote: > On 17/09/2009 14:35, David Earl wrote: >> Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524 >> changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed > > Actually, on his page it says "still editing". Perhaps that's why and I > can have another go as soon as it terminates. Now he has a second open changeset, while the first is still open: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511982 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:30, David Earl wrote: > On 17/09/2009 14:30, Peter Miller wrote: >> Possibly a different name would be clearer >> talk-Counter_vandalism_tools, but that is getting a bit long. Any >> other ideas or feedback? > > talk-reversion-tools? Not very inclusive. I want it to also cover 'patrol' software to spot suspicious sorts of dicking around, such as a new contributor moving a bunch of nodes that have been in one place for a length of time. Looking for offensive phrases in tags. Users who have recently had work reverted who make new edits. Possibly methods of rating contributors with white lists for users who don't get reverted and have been editing for some time etc. Regards, Peter > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17/09/2009 14:35, David Earl wrote: > Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524 > changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed Actually, on his page it says "still editing". Perhaps that's why and I can have another go as soon as it terminates. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524 changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed On 17/09/2009 13:23, David Earl wrote: > Two changesets: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510163 reverted cleanly > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510485 failed to revert > "410 gone" - I suspect there was a node/way changed in the second > changeset that was also in the first. > > The automatic reversion is getting a failure rate of abut half at the > moment, so liam123 is steadily degrading map quality because nothing is > being done to deal with the manual stuff. > > David > > ___ > 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] liam123's latest
On 17/09/2009 14:30, Peter Miller wrote: > Possibly a different name would be clearer > > talk-Counter_vandalism_tools, but that is getting a bit long. Any other > ideas or feedback? talk-reversion-tools? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17 Sep 2009, at 14:18, David Earl wrote: > On 17/09/2009 14:09, Peter Miller wrote: >> Who would join a 'talk-counter_vandalism' list or support its >> creation? > > Yes. But can we call it something less judgemental: not all > incorrect changes are vandalism, and people seeing their account > names on such a list would be most depressing. > > talk-dubious-changes? Sorry, I wasn't clear. The purpose of the list is to allow people to discuss and co-ordinate the creation of good counter-vandalism tools internationally, not to be a public flogging place for people who make mistakes or indeed who scribble on the map or do worse things. Vandalism and mistakes are different but need the same tools. If the list is focused on creating tools to respond to really bad malicious calculated vandalism then it will also provide the tools to recover from innocent mistakes as well. Possibly a different name would be clearer talk-Counter_vandalism_tools, but that is getting a bit long. Any other ideas or feedback? Regards, Peter > > or some such. > > David > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17/09/2009 14:09, Peter Miller wrote: > Who would join a 'talk-counter_vandalism' list or support its creation? Yes. But can we call it something less judgemental: not all incorrect changes are vandalism, and people seeing their account names on such a list would be most depressing. talk-dubious-changes? or some such. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
I've been thinking about this for a while. Is he doing anything (legally) wrong? Is he always connecting from the same IP address? Can the login script be amended to point suspect users to a "You've been dicking about with the map - we're going to let you continue in the hope that at some point you're going to mature into somebody who wants to be helpful rather than a pain in the backside" page? Presumably his IP address is known... Can somebody contact his ISP and get them to do something or forward a letter? Chances are that if it's a kid, mummy and daddy are paying for the Internet connection. Nick. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On 17 Sep 2009, at 13:23, David Earl wrote: > Two changesets: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510163 reverted cleanly > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510485 failed to revert > "410 gone" - I suspect there was a node/way changed in the second > changeset that was also in the first. > > The automatic reversion is getting a failure rate of abut half at the > moment, so liam123 is steadily degrading map quality because nothing > is > being done to deal with the manual stuff. > Vandalism has already got to the top on my priority list (along with getting the license changed to avoid loosing too much data when it eventually happens). Who would join a 'talk-counter_vandalism' list or support its creation? Talk-gb and talk-transit (two lists I find very useful) are partly useful because they are focused. I believe a talk-counter_vandalism list would help provide the focus for the many many tools and approaches that could be developed to protect the work done in OSM to data and would result in better tools being created sooned. If we have 4-5 people in the UK then I will propose we request a list and promote it on other lists including talk. Regards, Peter > David > > ___ > 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
[Talk-GB] liam123's latest
Two changesets: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510163 reverted cleanly http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2510485 failed to revert "410 gone" - I suspect there was a node/way changed in the second changeset that was also in the first. The automatic reversion is getting a failure rate of abut half at the moment, so liam123 is steadily degrading map quality because nothing is being done to deal with the manual stuff. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123
On 15/09/2009 00:59, Lennard wrote: > David Earl wrote: >> Unfortunately, I can't use the revert script to rever this. Though the >> edits are all his, the same way appears twice in the same changeset >> and this seems to upset Frederick's script. I don't know whether it is >> a bug or not. > > He touched the same way twice, some 5 seconds apart. > >> I can't see any other reason why this changeset shouldn't be >> revertable as I write - all the other items still have the top copy as >> part of that changeset. > > Frederik's script doesn't remember duplicate objects, which is > problematic when reverting potlatch live mode changesets. I've hacked in > a hash so it remembers duplicate actions on the same object, and the > revert has now gone through cleanly. It might still not handle cases > where a user has modified an element and subsequently deleted it, but if > he modified it twice, the script will now cope and undo it only once. Excellent, thanks. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123
David Earl wrote: > Unfortunately, I can't use the revert script to rever this. Though the > edits are all his, the same way appears twice in the same changeset and > this seems to upset Frederick's script. I don't know whether it is a bug > or not. He touched the same way twice, some 5 seconds apart. > I can't see any other reason why this changeset shouldn't be revertable > as I write - all the other items still have the top copy as part of that > changeset. Frederik's script doesn't remember duplicate objects, which is problematic when reverting potlatch live mode changesets. I've hacked in a hash so it remembers duplicate actions on the same object, and the revert has now gone through cleanly. It might still not handle cases where a user has modified an element and subsequently deleted it, but if he modified it twice, the script will now cope and undo it only once. -- Lennard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123
On 14/09/2009 22:30, Someoneelse wrote: > I notice that liam123's been editing in SE London again tonight. Seems > to consist of lots of oneway=yes changed to oneway=no, among others. Unfortunately, I can't use the revert script to rever this. Though the edits are all his, the same way appears twice in the same changeset and this seems to upset Frederick's script. I don't know whether it is a bug or not. Frederick - it's changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2485165 and the problem way seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4428287 The script says way 4428287 last edited as v4; restoring previous version 2 by 'Sorbus_x_kewensis' way 4428287 last edited as v4; restoring previous version 2 by 'Sorbus_x_kewensis' I can't see any other reason why this changeset shouldn't be revertable as I write - all the other items still have the top copy as part of that changeset. Any thoughts? David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] liam123
I notice that liam123's been editing in SE London again tonight. Seems to consist of lots of oneway=yes changed to oneway=no, among others. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 back again - can we check if this is vandalism?
On 3 Sep 2009, at 23:15, Mark Williams wrote: > David Earl wrote: >> On 03/09/2009 14:53, Peter Miller wrote: >>> This looks like messing with a street and yahoo photography shows >>> it as going through a house. This appears to be straight forward >>> vandalism >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5215590 >> Yes, looking at the Yahoo images, I agree completely. >> I'm going to revert these two changesets now. >> I suggest we waste no more time on this guy - we revert all his >> future changesets immediately until such time as he talks to us, >> and stop worrying about the minutiae of whether he's doing valid >> edits or not. >> David > > +1 > > He has done loads & I have seen none with merit, lots of utter > nonsense & some sneaky. If I could twit-list edits he'd have been > there for months. Here is a copy of a post to just put talk[1] which suggests how to grade contributors leading to a 'delete' immediately and don't even check their work (which is where we seem to be with Liam123 and I don't disagree about that at all. Post on talk follows... I think we need to agree on some guidance for response to possible vandals and what level of checking should be performed prior to reversion. I would add a rider to it now, which is that in the final stage one concludes that it would be safest for the project to remove all the other work they did which was not already been reverted and for which one gave them the benefit of the doubt. Here is the post Personally I would suggest:- 1) We should expect that all contributors should at all time attempt to make good, accurate and well researched changes 2) We need to ensure that every contributor is on-balance making the dataset better, not worse. If the contribution is in doubt we owe it to other contributors to investigate and respond. 3) We should be aware that people make mistakes, need time to learn and newbies often need and will respond to support 4) We can request, but not require contributors to add a comments to their changesets and to have created a useful personal user page with some details about their interest and knowledge. Doing this makes reversion less likely and make it more likely that the person will be helped if needed. 5) In the event that someone seems to be doing strange edits one should initially assume 'good faith' but should watch carefully and discuss with others if appropriate. 6) If a significant number of edits to ways can be definitively proved to be malicious, obscene, libelous or it is considered that they might bring the project into disrepute then the related change-sets can be reverted immediately without discussion and without 100% checking of the rest of the change-set. 7) If the edits are dubious but it can't be proved to be incorrect then one should contact the person and ask for some additional information. If one doesn't get a reasonable response (or gets no response) and the dubious edits continue and there are not a good number of balancing clearly positive contributions then one should look to prove at least one bad edit and may then come to the decision in discussion with others that it is appropriate to revert the change- set in question and potentially all changesets by that person. 8) Once someone has been identified as a problematic contributor then one only needs to perform a brief of inspection of subsequent edits before reversion future changesets. Liam123 is in this category now. 9) If the problem continues (Liam123 is actually probably in this category) then one puts then on 'virtual ban' where their edits get reverted with no inspection of the merit of the changes unless the person contacts a sys-admin and says they have grown-up and want another chance. 10) If someone performs bad edits in any part of the world then they can expect to be a global response because it seems very unlikely that someone would mess with Ireland and do good work in Iceland and I am not sure I would want to work out what was going on in their head - I would prefer to protect the good work of others from mischief that allow good work to be messed on the off-chance that some good edits are also made in amongst the nonsense. 11) People who revert other people's work should expect to be able to demonstrate that the reversion was well reasoned and proportionate to the issue. Can we work on this a little on the list and if there is agreement copy to resulting text to the wiki? [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-September/041553.html Regards, Peter > > Mark > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 back again - can we check if this is vandalism?
David Earl wrote: > On 03/09/2009 14:53, Peter Miller wrote: >> This looks like messing with a street and yahoo photography shows it >> as going through a house. This appears to be straight forward vandalism >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5215590 > > Yes, looking at the Yahoo images, I agree completely. > > I'm going to revert these two changesets now. > > I suggest we waste no more time on this guy - we revert all his future > changesets immediately until such time as he talks to us, and stop > worrying about the minutiae of whether he's doing valid edits or not. > > David +1 He has done loads & I have seen none with merit, lots of utter nonsense & some sneaky. If I could twit-list edits he'd have been there for months. Mark ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 back again - can we check if this is vandalism?
On 03/09/2009 18:18, David Earl wrote: > I'm going to revert these two changesets now. 2359068 was OK, but the later one, 2359116 already has a conflict. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 back again - can we check if this is vandalism?
On 03/09/2009 14:53, Peter Miller wrote: > This looks like messing with a street and yahoo photography shows it > as going through a house. This appears to be straight forward vandalism > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5215590 Yes, looking at the Yahoo images, I agree completely. I'm going to revert these two changesets now. I suggest we waste no more time on this guy - we revert all his future changesets immediately until such time as he talks to us, and stop worrying about the minutiae of whether he's doing valid edits or not. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 back again - can we check if this is vandalism?
On 03/09/2009 14:53, Peter Miller wrote: > Here he has added goods=yes to a railway line. Is this correct? > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4356960/history No: I just did a search for a journey on the national rail website and it gives me trains between the two stations either side, with a 4 minute journey time. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Liam123 back again - can we check if this is vandalism?
Liam123 is back, however some of his edits moving bus stops might be reasonable. This might be ok (moving bus stop to side of road) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/469765466 Here he has added goods=yes to a railway line. Is this correct? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4356960/history This one is moving null nodes around? Why are they there at all? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/447066274/history This looks like messing with a street and yahoo photography shows it as going through a house. This appears to be straight forward vandalism http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5215590 Regards Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
2009/8/8 Dave Stubbs : > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Jeffrey Martin wrote: >> Maybe we want different policies for different areas and different kinds of >> data. >> >> For example once all the roads are mapped we freeze the roads, but we allow >> free changing of street names until they reach a freeze point. >> >> Here in Korea I just want data and the more the better. In downtown London I >> would assume all the roads can be frozen >> except for major construction. > > > That would be a very bad assumption, as every single one of our > continuing London mapping parties shows. I'm constantly moving and > renaming roads as the data we get becomes more precise. > > Nevermind the more technical issues such as adding and connecting > roads to existing roads, or foot paths, or cyclepaths, or any of the > other stuff which might not be considered mapping the roads but still > requires editing them. > > Dave > I'm wondering whether some kind of Checking and Verification could be done. ie A Live edit map that it what new edits go into, then a checked map that people can say yes I agree that is what is there, Anybody can sign any edit off just not there own... Of course this causes problems with areas where nobody else goes But we should be able to join the two maps together with some kind of overlay. If someone is adding footpaths etc they should not be moving major roads very far. We could even let people sign there own edits with the GPS trail it came from, and hence see that someone went there and saw it. Rather than just made it up. So its either checked by the GPS or by another mapper. Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Jeffrey Martin wrote: > Maybe we want different policies for different areas and different kinds of > data. > > For example once all the roads are mapped we freeze the roads, but we allow > free changing of street names until they reach a freeze point. > > Here in Korea I just want data and the more the better. In downtown London I > would assume all the roads can be frozen > except for major construction. That would be a very bad assumption, as every single one of our continuing London mapping parties shows. I'm constantly moving and renaming roads as the data we get becomes more precise. Nevermind the more technical issues such as adding and connecting roads to existing roads, or foot paths, or cyclepaths, or any of the other stuff which might not be considered mapping the roads but still requires editing them. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Maybe we want different policies for different areas and different kinds of data. For example once all the roads are mapped we freeze the roads, but we allow free changing of street names until they reach a freeze point. Here in Korea I just want data and the more the better. In downtown London I would assume all the roads can be frozen except for major construction. On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 4:40 AM, Russ wrote: > Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Oh yeah, and let's also get their addresses and hang them! I am amazed > > at how much hostility this Liam123 is able to provoke. > > I'm not. I think it's similar to the way people react to virus writers > after their computer is infected. I've heard plenty of people suggest > that they should get all sorts of severe punishments, up to and > including hanging. I'd guess it's frustration at the sheer mindlessness > of the attacks. > > > We must improve our means to detect and deal with vandalism, not circle > > the wagons and make participation more difficult for the > 99% of > > well-meaning users just because there's < 1% of killjoys. That would be > > the worst thing we could do. > > I agree. I'd like to see a situation where someone can see something is > wrong (their road name is spelled wrong, say) and they can fix it, > easily. I haven't made major changes in Wikipedia, but I've made plenty > of small changes, fixing typos and things, and I did it because it was > drop-dead simple. I've got an account, but I didn't even bother logging > in to make most of those changes, because it wasn't worth the hassle. A > few fixed typos can make an article significantly more readable. In our > case, if a town has been mapped using Yahoo, we may not have road names, > but if locals can log in and each fill in a few names, the map becomes > much better. > > Russ > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > -- Jeffrey John Martin dogs...@gmail.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123
2009/8/7 Vic Morgan : > It would appear the Liam123 has been acting illegally under section 3 of > the Misuse of Computers Act 1990. This should be reported to the Police. > Even if it's not worth a prosecution the Police will know how best to > curtail Liam123's activities. Just because OSM-ers' contributions are > free doesn't mean that the accumulated data has no value. A company with > equivalent assets would act to protect its assets. So should we. > Seriously, we all love our beautiful maps and data, but reporting this guy for some relatively minor fiddling is completely out of proportion. His fiddling has been removed, his account is been watched like a hawk and once the his case has gone through procedure [1] his access will likely be revoked. 1: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism / Grant ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123
On 07/08/09 22:36, Vic Morgan wrote: > It would appear the Liam123 has been acting illegally under section 3 of > the Misuse of Computers Act 1990. This should be reported to the Police. > Even if it's not worth a prosecution the Police will know how best to > curtail Liam123's activities. Just because OSM-ers' contributions are > free doesn't mean that the accumulated data has no value. A company with > equivalent assets would act to protect its assets. So should we. Well assuming you meant the Computer Misuse Act then, if I recall correctly, section 3 makes somebody guilty of an offence if "he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer". His changes are clearly authorised, as by allowing him to create and account we have authorised him to edit the database. So your theory is complete nonsense. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Liam123
It would appear the Liam123 has been acting illegally under section 3 of the Misuse of Computers Act 1990. This should be reported to the Police. Even if it's not worth a prosecution the Police will know how best to curtail Liam123's activities. Just because OSM-ers' contributions are free doesn't mean that the accumulated data has no value. A company with equivalent assets would act to protect its assets. So should we. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Frederik Ramm wrote: > Oh yeah, and let's also get their addresses and hang them! I am amazed > at how much hostility this Liam123 is able to provoke. I'm not. I think it's similar to the way people react to virus writers after their computer is infected. I've heard plenty of people suggest that they should get all sorts of severe punishments, up to and including hanging. I'd guess it's frustration at the sheer mindlessness of the attacks. > We must improve our means to detect and deal with vandalism, not circle > the wagons and make participation more difficult for the > 99% of > well-meaning users just because there's < 1% of killjoys. That would be > the worst thing we could do. I agree. I'd like to see a situation where someone can see something is wrong (their road name is spelled wrong, say) and they can fix it, easily. I haven't made major changes in Wikipedia, but I've made plenty of small changes, fixing typos and things, and I did it because it was drop-dead simple. I've got an account, but I didn't even bother logging in to make most of those changes, because it wasn't worth the hassle. A few fixed typos can make an article significantly more readable. In our case, if a town has been mapped using Yahoo, we may not have road names, but if locals can log in and each fill in a few names, the map becomes much better. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Hi, Kevin Peat wrote: > This whole wikipedia comparison seems bogus to me. Kids use wikipedia to do > their homework, people don't trust their lives to it like they do with maps > every day of the week. I've used an OS map many times to navigate > across Dartmoor in bad weather. I would like to do the same with an OSM map > but I don't want to end up falling into a quarry because of some idiot's > vandalism. Then don't use OSM. Seriously. If you want something with all the checks in place to blindly trust it with your life (and, I guess, want someone you can sue if you fall into a quarry and live to tell the story), then don't use OSM. But don't ruin our project by demanding that we aim to fill this role. Before long you'll say that "if OSM wants to be taken seriously they must implement ISO 9001". > I don't think that putting some basic restrictions on newbies for a few > weeks (maybe just being able to add POI's or raise bugs on existing work) > would discourage people who really want to get involved Those who "really want to get involved" are already involved, at least in most of Europe. We're extending our reach towards those whose involvement can perhaps be described as casual. The time of people who singlehandedly map their town is mostly over. We have to lower the barrier of entry, not build additional obstacles. > but it would stop > random kids from signing up and immediately screwing up months of other > people's efforts. Oh yeah, and let's also get their addresses and hang them! I am amazed at how much hostility this Liam123 is able to provoke. We must improve our means to detect and deal with vandalism, not circle the wagons and make participation more difficult for the > 99% of well-meaning users just because there's < 1% of killjoys. That would be the worst thing we could do. 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] Liam123 again
Maybe stopping people moving ways (or deleting or moving individual points in ways by more than a few metres) for the first months. I don't think I've ever done the former (except in error), and it took me a while to realise that Yahoo needed moving (using the spacebar), rather than the data, with regard to the latter. How much of L123's vandalism would that have stopped? Richard On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Kevin Peat wrote: > "these data may contain errors, you can use it at your own risk, but >> you can't sue us." >> >> > This whole wikipedia comparison seems bogus to me. Kids use wikipedia to > do their homework, people don't trust their lives to it like they do with > maps every day of the week. I've used an OS map many times to navigate > across Dartmoor in bad weather. I would like to do the same with an OSM > map but I don't want to end up falling into a quarry because of some idiot's > vandalism. > > Total freedom to edit can only work if the number of "good" mappers > outweighs the "bad" in a particular area. This might be the case in > Birmingham or Bonn but I bet there are loads of smaller towns and rural > areas even in the UK where one mapper has done the bulk of the work. > > I don't think that putting some basic restrictions on newbies for a few > weeks (maybe just being able to add POI's or raise bugs on existing work) > would discourage people who really want to get involved but it would stop > random kids from signing up and immediately screwing up months of other > people's efforts. > > Kevin > > > ___ > 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] Liam123 again
> > "these data may contain errors, you can use it at your own risk, but > you can't sue us." > > This whole wikipedia comparison seems bogus to me. Kids use wikipedia to do their homework, people don't trust their lives to it like they do with maps every day of the week. I've used an OS map many times to navigate across Dartmoor in bad weather. I would like to do the same with an OSM map but I don't want to end up falling into a quarry because of some idiot's vandalism. Total freedom to edit can only work if the number of "good" mappers outweighs the "bad" in a particular area. This might be the case in Birmingham or Bonn but I bet there are loads of smaller towns and rural areas even in the UK where one mapper has done the bulk of the work. I don't think that putting some basic restrictions on newbies for a few weeks (maybe just being able to add POI's or raise bugs on existing work) would discourage people who really want to get involved but it would stop random kids from signing up and immediately screwing up months of other people's efforts. Kevin ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > Nick Barnes wrote: >> Point taken, but Wikipedia isn't trying to position itself as a viable >> and reliable alternative for a mission critical commercial solution (I'm >> thinking about mapping for SatNav devices here). > > I don't think we should either, because this leads to more control and > less freedom. +1 even "mission critical commercial solution" providers have a limitation of liability in their terms of use which basically says "these data may contain errors, you can use it at your own risk, but you can't sue us." e.g: 10a from the tomtom ToS: "TomTom does not and cannot warrant that the Products operate in a manner that is completely error-free nor that any information provided is always accurate. Calculation errors may occur when using navigation systems such as those caused by local environmental conditions and/or incomplete or incorrect data." e.g: from Garmin's about page: "The user is solely responsible for safe navigation and the prudent use of any Garmin Cartography product." i tend to find that commercial solutions are often no better than free ones, they just give you someone to sue. ubuntu and redhat offer commercial support, but i don't think their commercial offerings are technically better than their free ones - they just give you someone to scream at over the phone when your boss is screaming at you and you can't fix it yourself ;-) cheers, matt ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Christopher Osborne wrote: > I'd like to hear from the DWG on how they handle the edit wars in Cyprus. > Must be some kind of precedent? Handled, past tense, I believe. I've heard that it's now resolved. Anyway, that was a dispute, not vandalism, so it's quite different really. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Hi,
Nick Barnes wrote:
> Point taken, but Wikipedia isn't trying to position itself as a viable
> and reliable alternative for a mission critical commercial solution (I'm
> thinking about mapping for SatNav devices here).
I don't think we should either, because this leads to more control and
less freedom.
> Understood, but if OSM is ever to be taken seriously there needs to be
> more control. Without control, OSM is a toy.
In that case, I would prefer not to be taken seriously.
Honestly, OSM is good and will be good for many purposes, seriously or
not. If someone operating an ambulance service does not trust OSM then
that might be a sensible choice. If the price for being taken seriously
is to take the map away from people, to raise walls, fences, and guards
that say who may edit what under what circumstances ("do you have your
OSM license yet?") then we will soon be at a point where our data is as
outdated as anyone else's, and fixing errors will take weeks or months
for the "approval process". I have presented OSM to many people and a
key moment is always when they smugly point out an error and you simply
fix it and tell them: You could have done that, right here, in an
instant. - On the day I have to tell people that they have to apply for
an account, get it approved and vouched for, then enter a mentoring
period where their edits will be watched by "superiors" until they
finally get a diploma that allows them to edit in the wild, I'll cease
showing OSM to people - it will not be "everyone's map" then, but the
map of a select team of people good enough to be allowed to edit!
> What happens if there are 100 Liam123's appearing during the school
> holidays this summer? 100 would seriously trash the database wouldn't
> they? How would 100 be dealt with? At the moment we're lucky it's only one.
And what if 100 eager new mappers appear during the school holidays?
Would whatever guards and fences you devise not also discourage them?
> Actually, another thought occurs to me... If I were Liam123, hell bent
> on trashing the database, I'd have two or more accounts - one headline
> one in which big edits will be made and the other ones for making lots
> and lots of small edits. This way, the firefighting would be on the big
> edits, but the damage would really be done by the massive number of
> small edits.
Actually, if I wanted to break OSM's back, I'd just make a few accounts,
do a little bit of damage, let the people get all heated up about it and
lock down their edit function... ;-)
Bye
Frederik
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
I'd like to hear from the DWG on how they handle the edit wars in Cyprus. Must be some kind of precedent? Chris ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Nick Barnes wrote: > To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless: No, no, no - completely wrong approach. Think using Dettol continuously to keep your house clean - most people now realise that healthy immune systems come from exposure to tolerable infections etc. So where we are at is that we've got a body (OSM db) and not much immune system (powers to deal with mistakes, vandalism etc). You're suggesting we use dettol and I think we should take a more laid back approach and work improving our capacity to deal with the problems. Our policies are improving. Our tools are improving. Things are getting better. As to your point about trusting OSM - global consistency is a mirage. The only way we'd get that is emptying the DB and letting nobody edit. But if we start with the assumption that there is *always* something wrong in OSM and that there always will be, we can come up with ways of dealing with it. For example, you could take the planet file, wait for a fortnight, and apply any anti-vandalism fixes that have occurred since. Or there's other ways of doing things along those lines. We'll never make every single edit perfect so we shouldn't aim on relying on such. Finally, yes, I think from his actions there's a strong possibility Liam123 is poking the ants' nest. However, he'll get bored and move on eventually. Let's work on making life easier for us than for him, and keep assuming that 99.995% of people's first, second, third and all subsequent edits are positive - and keep the baby in the bathtub. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Frederik Ramm wrote: > No, millions of Wikipedia contributors think it is a good thing (and > they even allow edits from people without an account) ;-) Point taken, but Wikipedia isn't trying to position itself as a viable and reliable alternative for a mission critical commercial solution (I'm thinking about mapping for SatNav devices here). Sure, Wikipedia is the first place people go to, but anybody worth their salt will *always* check 'facts' with another resource if it is important. How many people do you know who carry two SatNavs with them in case the data on one of them is incorrect? I'd also argue that information on Wikipedia can be very easily reverted when a rogue edit is discovered. Because of the nature of the data, one can't just revert an OSM edit without causing more problems as a result (if we could, we wouldn't be having this discussion and Liam123 wouldn't be a problem). Comparing OSM and Wikipedia socially, technically or commercially just doesn't work, IMHO. >> The only reason we found out about Liam123 was because somebody said >> "This doesn't look right to me". How do we know there isn't another user >> who's messing about with things somewhere else? > > We don't. Indeed. FWIW, my answer would be "We don't and there probably is." >> To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless: > A rather draconian way of reducing the freedom of contributors. We *do* > want to give newcomers the rewarding experience of fixing a bug and > seeing it fixed on the map more or less immediately. Understood, but if OSM is ever to be taken seriously there needs to be more control. Without control, OSM is a toy. Note that I enjoy playing with OSM. I'm talking about the bigger picture. > A moderator approving something is surely the last thing we want (or > can handle technically for that matter). Understood. But there must be an effective way to stop this happening. What happens if there are 100 Liam123's appearing during the school holidays this summer? 100 would seriously trash the database wouldn't they? How would 100 be dealt with? At the moment we're lucky it's only one. Actually, another thought occurs to me... If I were Liam123, hell bent on trashing the database, I'd have two or more accounts - one headline one in which big edits will be made and the other ones for making lots and lots of small edits. This way, the firefighting would be on the big edits, but the damage would really be done by the massive number of small edits. Nick. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Hi, Nick Barnes wrote: > Is it just me who thinks that having a wiki which is open to everybody > and doesn't have any controls over who can do what is utterly ludicrous? No, millions of Wikipedia contributors think it is a good thing (and they even allow edits from people without an account) ;-) > The only reason we found out about Liam123 was because somebody said > "This doesn't look right to me". How do we know there isn't another user > who's messing about with things somewhere else? We don't. > To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless: > 1 - They have uploaded n tracks, > 2 - They have had m edits approved by a moderator > 3 - They are vouched for by somebody who has made many many edits A rather draconian way of reducing the freedom of contributors. We *do* want to give newcomers the rewarding experience of fixing a bug and seeing it fixed on the map more or less immediately. A moderator approving something is surely the last thing we want (or can handle technically for that matter). Bye Frederik ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Tom Hughes wrote: > Well it will have to go to the WG for that. They will doubtless start by > sending him a direct email. Is it just me who thinks that having a wiki which is open to everybody and doesn't have any controls over who can do what is utterly ludicrous? Yes, I'm a trusting soul, but even I think there ought to be limits. The thing which worries me most is that how can we expect organisations to take OSM seriously when we cannot be sure that the information in it isn't garbage and even when we do find garbage, we do nothing about making sure it doesn't happen again. The only reason we found out about Liam123 was because somebody said "This doesn't look right to me". How do we know there isn't another user who's messing about with things somewhere else? To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless: 1 - They have uploaded n tracks, 2 - They have had m edits approved by a moderator 3 - They are vouched for by somebody who has made many many edits (insert 'and' or 'or' or 'and/or' as appropriate) Anyway. Another thought occurred to me. If I were Liam123, I'd be signed up to the mailing lists - where's the fun in distrubing the ants nest if you don't get to see the ants scurrying about trying to repair things? In that case, I'd say "Hello Liam123. If you would like to do something constructive, my money's betting that every single person on this list would like to help you help us." Nick. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
The only thing that ever worked with graffiti on the railway was painting it over in all the obvious places. I'm afraid we just have to find a way to undo or redo his works. In our context, obvious is anything big, and anything new. Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On 07/08/09 12:34, Grant Slater wrote: > 2009/8/7 David Earl: >> This time he's invented a fictitious railway line into Great Yarmouth >> >> This needs reverting: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2063848 >> > > The "interesting" ways: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661915 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661939 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661935 > > If these 3 ways are indeed fictitious, I'd say he has qualified > himself for an account block. Well it will have to go to the WG for that. They will doubtless start by sending him a direct email. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On 7 Aug 2009, at 12:34, Grant Slater wrote: > 2009/8/7 David Earl : >> This time he's invented a fictitious railway line into Great Yarmouth >> >> This needs reverting: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2063848 >> > > The "interesting" ways: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661915 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661939 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661935 > > If these 3 ways are indeed fictitious, I'd say he has qualified > himself for an account block. > Problem is, if we block his account will he rush off and create a > new account? Which leads us to need a tool with a white -list of trusted contributors and a mechanism to watch for edits by less-trusted people within a particular area. I would, for example be happy to monitor the East of England for rogue editors, but not the whole of the UK or Europe. For Wikipedia there is a product called Huggle that does this and maintains a white-list somehow (ie this is not an OSM or Wikipedia thing, it is definitely not a foundation thing, it is an independent tool) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Huggle/Whitelist We would someone to create some tools to monitor the minutely feed with edits from non-trusted contributors within an agreed area. Anyway, for now I recommend that we don't block him or he will start jumping around user-names which will make him harder to follow. Let's only block im when we have defences in place for what might be the next game! Regards, Peter > > / Grant > > ___ > 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] Liam123 again
Grant Slater wrote: > 2009/8/7 David Earl : >> This time he's invented a fictitious railway line into Great Yarmouth >> >> This needs reverting: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2063848 >> > > The "interesting" ways: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661915 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661939 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661935 > > If these 3 ways are indeed fictitious, They definitely are fictitious - and he's move the route of the real railway near the Yarmouth end too. > I'd say he has qualified himself for an account block. Problem is, if we > block > his account will he rush off and create a new account? I think that's quite likely. He's persistent. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
2009/8/7 David Earl : > This time he's invented a fictitious railway line into Great Yarmouth > > This needs reverting: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2063848 > The "interesting" ways: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661915 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661939 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38661935 If these 3 ways are indeed fictitious, I'd say he has qualified himself for an account block. Problem is, if we block his account will he rush off and create a new account? / Grant ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Liam123 again
This time he's invented a fictitious railway line into Great Yarmouth This needs reverting: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2063848 added to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=GB_revert_request_log David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 alert!
On 5 Aug 2009, at 14:47, Ciarán Mooney wrote: > Hi, > > I'm quite pleased to see the problems being caused by Liam123 being > mediated in a sensible way. > > I just feel that if they are mindless edits, and he has two email > accounts (one personal, one for signing up to stuff) then he may not > be getting the messages we send him. > > Is it possible to publish the IP addresses he is making the edits > from? Then we may have a chance of tracking him down. This sounds > incredibly intrusive, but we may have people on the ground who may be > able to contact him personally, somehow?!?, and make sure our message > gets across. Even possibly banning his known IP address for a period > of time? This does seem heavy handed but may save us endless work > reverting his edits. If one Google's Liam123 one finds various other services with a Liam123 that could well be the same person. Possibly a few polite tweet's might help get the message across (remembering that we might not be talking to the same person)? 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] Liam123 alert!
On 05/08/09 14:47, Ciarán Mooney wrote: > Is it possible to publish the IP addresses he is making the edits > from? No. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 alert!
Hi, I'm quite pleased to see the problems being caused by Liam123 being mediated in a sensible way. I just feel that if they are mindless edits, and he has two email accounts (one personal, one for signing up to stuff) then he may not be getting the messages we send him. Is it possible to publish the IP addresses he is making the edits from? Then we may have a chance of tracking him down. This sounds incredibly intrusive, but we may have people on the ground who may be able to contact him personally, somehow?!?, and make sure our message gets across. Even possibly banning his known IP address for a period of time? This does seem heavy handed but may save us endless work reverting his edits. I suggest if he continues to become even more bothersome, could we add in some kind of message prompt to Potlatch? As that is what he is using to edit, and is perhaps a more direct way of contacting him? This poses the question, for serious offenders rather than contact via messaging, putting a flag on their account that brings up a different page on login. Rather than preseting him with his user account or Potlatch just have a static message "You've done bad. Contact the Admins", but a bit more verbose. Ciarán Ciarán ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 alert!
On 5 Aug 2009, at 14:28, Andy Allan wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Peter Miller > wrote: > >> Can I suggest that you (David) immediately add this to the GB Revert >> Request log (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ >> GB_revert_request_log) , send Liam123 asking him to stop and forward >> the revert request to Andy Allan requesting a revert. Please can no- >> one revert any of Lian123's edits in the mean time and leave these to >> be done by Andy Allen. > > Reverted. I know the policy on reverts is that it's best to contact > the person first, but I'm exempting myself from this policy in > Liam123's case and if anyone wants to complain about my behaviour then > fair enough. > > I did send an after-the-fact message to him, text is below. Apart from > what I mention there was a smattering of nodes moved around in various > places, given the lack of imagery I'm of the opinion it's mindless > tinkering rather than useful edits. It's hard to validate whether > there's legitimate work in amongst it; it's also worth if anyone has > the time checking that the revert handled everything properly. Thanks Andy, After the chaos he has caused I think we can reasonably that we assume that his contributions are unhelpful unless or until we see some useful work coming in. I suggest it is only necessary to check one node of a way and is clearly wrong before reverting the changeset and also that you can trust a known established contributor who requests a revert saying that it is vandalism. We still do, of course, need some better industrial-strength tools to deal with this sort of problem - imagine a clever robot based 'chaos generator' using multiple sign-ins and doing random edits around the planet - we are just not ready to deal with that sort of thing. Liam123 still has many edits still in place that we just don't have the time to fix manually. By way of comparison this is the sort of thing that Wikipedia has available to deal with vandalism:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc And this is only one of many tools used to monitor contributions and speed up the process of recovering from problematic edits. Regards, Peter > > Cheers, > Andy > > > > Hi there, > > My name is Andy and I'm another OpenStreetMap contributor from London. > I noticed today that you've made some edits to various objects, but > I'm afraid that I had to change many things back to the way they were > before because you appear to have made some mistakes. For example, > > * you added a tracktype=grade1 to the highspeed 1 railway line, but > that tag isn't for railways > * you changed a pier in the thames, making it much longer than it > should be > * you changed lots of maxspeed tags to put them in mph, but without > units, they mean kph. See > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed > > Please be careful when editing OpenStreetMap to make sure everything > is correct when you are doing it. If you need any help or have any > questions you can either ask me, or join one of the mailing lists like > talk-gb@openstreetmap.org - see > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london > > Thanks, > Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 alert!
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Peter Miller wrote: > Can I suggest that you (David) immediately add this to the GB Revert > Request log (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ > GB_revert_request_log) , send Liam123 asking him to stop and forward > the revert request to Andy Allan requesting a revert. Please can no- > one revert any of Lian123's edits in the mean time and leave these to > be done by Andy Allen. Reverted. I know the policy on reverts is that it's best to contact the person first, but I'm exempting myself from this policy in Liam123's case and if anyone wants to complain about my behaviour then fair enough. I did send an after-the-fact message to him, text is below. Apart from what I mention there was a smattering of nodes moved around in various places, given the lack of imagery I'm of the opinion it's mindless tinkering rather than useful edits. It's hard to validate whether there's legitimate work in amongst it; it's also worth if anyone has the time checking that the revert handled everything properly. Cheers, Andy Hi there, My name is Andy and I'm another OpenStreetMap contributor from London. I noticed today that you've made some edits to various objects, but I'm afraid that I had to change many things back to the way they were before because you appear to have made some mistakes. For example, * you added a tracktype=grade1 to the highspeed 1 railway line, but that tag isn't for railways * you changed a pier in the thames, making it much longer than it should be * you changed lots of maxspeed tags to put them in mph, but without units, they mean kph. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed Please be careful when editing OpenStreetMap to make sure everything is correct when you are doing it. If you need any help or have any questions you can either ask me, or join one of the mailing lists like talk-gb@openstreetmap.org - see http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london Thanks, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 alert!
On 5 Aug 2009, at 12:30, David Earl wrote: > David Earl wrote: >> David Earl wrote: >>> liam123 has been active again this morning - the first changeset >>> for a >>> while: >>> >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2043351 >>> >>> I have no idea whether this represents valid data or rubbish. It >>> seems >>> to be related to the high speed rail line through Kent. >> >> Among other things, he has changed a slip road onto the A13 from >> oneway=yes to oneway=no >> >> I very much doubt that is a valid change. > > He's also extended this pier > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/8917529/history > out into the middle of the Thames, which I can see from Yahoo is > clearly > wrong. > > He's also done something very subtle to Chafford Hundred railway > station > which I can't quite work out (though there's something wrong with the > railway there anyway - there's a very, very short section of rail > connecting to it underneath the main line). Can I suggest that you (David) immediately add this to the GB Revert Request log (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ GB_revert_request_log) , send Liam123 asking him to stop and forward the revert request to Andy Allan requesting a revert. Please can no- one revert any of Lian123's edits in the mean time and leave these to be done by Andy Allen. We do of course still have the previous nonsense changes made by Liam123 which are too extensive for manual reversion and which no one seems to have the technology to revert automatically. I am hoping that someone will put some thought to the tools required to sort out this sort of mess in due course. Regards, Peter > > David > > ___ > 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] Liam123 alert!
David Earl wrote: > David Earl wrote: >> liam123 has been active again this morning - the first changeset for a >> while: >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2043351 >> >> I have no idea whether this represents valid data or rubbish. It seems >> to be related to the high speed rail line through Kent. > > Among other things, he has changed a slip road onto the A13 from > oneway=yes to oneway=no > > I very much doubt that is a valid change. He's also extended this pier http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/8917529/history out into the middle of the Thames, which I can see from Yahoo is clearly wrong. He's also done something very subtle to Chafford Hundred railway station which I can't quite work out (though there's something wrong with the railway there anyway - there's a very, very short section of rail connecting to it underneath the main line). David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 alert!
David Earl wrote: > liam123 has been active again this morning - the first changeset for a > while: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2043351 > > I have no idea whether this represents valid data or rubbish. It seems > to be related to the high speed rail line through Kent. Among other things, he has changed a slip road onto the A13 from oneway=yes to oneway=no I very much doubt that is a valid change. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
