I just came across this OSM user diary which links to yet another article
on how to manipulate OSM for Pokemon:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/-karlos-/diary/40684
The bothersome part is the replies to the diary entry where people bring up
the new edits they've made for the game. Since I'm nowhere near any of
them, I don't know if they're good or bad edits.
On the plus side, the linked article (
http://pokemongoinformer.com/create-your-own-nest-in-pokemon-go/) very
clearly and specifically says that OSM is used for a lot of things and for
people NOT to create items near their homes just for their own use, and to
only create things that exist in the real world.
--jack
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Brian May wrote:
> Been following the thread - my two cents on what I'm seeing around
> Florida.
>
> 1) Seems like a major increase in new mappers and edits in just the past
> two weeks, and before that an increase overall since the pokemon / osm
> connection was publicized.
> 2) Many /most of the influx of new mappers are adding footways, parks,
> meadows, and water.
> 3) A decent number of are completely fake - 15%?
> 4) Some are a mixture of real and fake.
> 5) Most are small edits, like adding a few features in one or two
> changesets, but some are very prolific adding hundreds of features in many
> changesets.
> 6) Many edits are not very spatially accurate, but some are really great.
> 7) A few mappers are breaking every rule in the book and making really bad
> edits.
> 8) Overall its a net gain, but its a lot of work to try and review these
> edits, make contact, do reverts if necessary, cleanup, etc.
>
> In some cases, I'm not sure what to do. For example, one mapper is really
> prolific, but just mostly wrong in they way they are mapping things.
>
> Another case, looks like a mapper mapped a large paved area next to a road
> as a park, and named it whatever he wanted (he has also named many paths
> and lakes what appear to be fantasy / fake names). I asked him if there was
> really a park there and the reply was there was street art displayed there,
> so its a park.
>
> Another mapper converted a section of a primary road running through South
> Beach Miami to a footpath and extended a park to cover it. The changeset
> comment was something like "making the park look more like it does in real
> life." Another mapper and I commented on his changeset, he didn't respond,
> I reverted and cleaned it up, and he appears to be doing more edits that
> are tied to reality.
>
> Another one said "a park is here" and put the park over relatively new
> single family houses.
>
> Overall, its really interesting to see such a large and focused group
> descending on (embracing?) OSM so quickly. So now I'm thinking how do we
> get large numbers of other sub-groups as interested in adding to the map as
> the pokemon people? Is this a one off random thing? Or is it possible to
> influence and steer large focused groups towards OSM? And at the same time
> provide enough guidance so these new groups are adding useful features to
> the map with a minimal amount of mistakes and fake features.
>
> Brian
>
>
> On 1/30/2017 7:09 PM, Will Senechal wrote:
>
> I do in fact know one of the areas that he edited quite well. He added
> "Mission Koi Pond" at a location that contained a large building (shown on
> the Bing imagery) that I can confirm was still there yesterday. It is the
> site of Mission Neurology, at 890 Hendersonville Rd #200, Asheville, NC
> 28803, see http://www.mission-health.org/the-nervous-system.php#locations.
> I would guess the edits are this person's home and work addresses, again to
> try to cheat at Pokemon Go.
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
>> On 27/01/2017 22:49, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On 27/01/2017 06:20, Will Senechal wrote:
>>>
I'll try to keep an eye on activity around here, and will try to
continue updating my area.
>>>
>>> They've just "edited" again, and I've blocked in
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1169 , so I'd be grateful if
>>> people could keep an eye out for other problematical edits in the area from
>>> other names too...
>>>
>>
>> The Data Working Group have just had a mail from the mapper saying that
>> although the _previous_ ones were fake, their _last_ edit
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45573753 was actually valid (and
>> said "If there needs to be photographs taken I will gladly"). I replied
>> suggesting that they might want to post here to explain what happened, and
>> accepted their offer of photgraphic evidence. I have to say I'm still
>> somewhat sceptical - the features in http://www.openstreetmap.org/c
>> hangeset/45573753 were remarkably Pokemon-friendly, and the "cars parked
>> in something now mapped as a duck pond" made it seem even more unlikely.
>>
>> I'd be delighted to be wrong of course - it'd be great if this really was
>> someone trying to map real things (but perhaps
