Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/08/2020 02:35, Clay Smalley wrote:
For those who aren't following, the DWG recently decided on a two-day 
ban for the person who posted this, for the exact behavior they're 
exhibiting right now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3850



Indeed, and it wasn't done lightly - only after a very large number of 
public comments (in changesets  and block messages) and private messages 
(OSM PMs and emails) from the DWG.


It can sometimes be difficult to see how something that you see locally 
that appears "wrong" fits into a wider picture, but the way to resolve 
that is to try and understand the wider picture, not just to delete data 
that you don't understand and claim that others are "vandalising the 
map" by adding that data in the first place.  We do get "real" vandalism 
in OSM, but it is thankfully relatively rare - as an example, yesterday 
someone replaced a major US landmark with a priapic "artwork" that was 
swiftly reverted.


That "understanding the wider picture" involves asking why things are 
done as they are and listening to the answer, and if there's a local 
case that doesn't seem to fit discussing among a wider group of people 
how best to resolve the issue (as I've done with the PTv2 stop position 
issue).  Starting mailing list threads with "VANDALISM!" in the subject 
is unlikely to be helpful in doing that.


The converse of that is that sometimes people find "discussing among a 
wider group" difficult for whatever reason - I'd always try and 
understand and assist with that where possible (and have spent 
significant personal time doing so here) but sometimes clear lines have 
to be drawn about what is and what is not acceptable, and when they are 
crossed there needs to be a response.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)



___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 8:36 PM Clay Smalley  wrote:

> For those who aren't following, the DWG recently decided on a two-day ban
> for the person who posted this, for the exact behavior they're exhibiting
> right now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3850
>
> jdd 3, please take a break. You have better things to do.
>
> I look forward to when you demonstrate the ability to communicate
> collaboratively.
>

I feel like now is a good time to remind folks that the wiki should be
descriptive of how things are actually mapped, not strictly proscriptive.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[Clay Smalley]

For those who aren't following, the DWG recently decided on a two-day ban
for the person who posted this, for the exact behavior they're exhibiting
right now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3850

jdd 3, please take a break. You have better things to do.

I look forward to when you demonstrate the ability to communicate
collaboratively.

Best,
Clay

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:08 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> FYI;
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
>
> Purposeful removal or degradation of data that are known to be correct,
>
> Deliberate adding incorrect data;
>
> 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.
>
> Not There;
> Unverified  if someone puts in 400 +  unverified tags in one edit,
>
> If someone reverts, 400 + edits,  in one edit, done on good faith by
> others over the years to conform to there way of thinking,
>
> If someone deletes, 400 + edits,  in one edit, done on good faith by
> others over the years to conform to there way of thinking,
>
> If someone refuses to let others, edit because they have taken over
> that type edit, all bus stops in the same area,
> all train stations in the same area, all boundaries in the same area.
>
> Edits that do not conform to the subject wiki.
>
> if someone downloads data that will create one mulitipolygon, against all
> wikis
>
> Also there is no wiki on unverified edits.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us]

FYI;
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
 
Purposeful removal or degradation of data that are known to be correct,
 
Deliberate adding incorrect data;
 
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.
 
Not There;
Unverified     if someone puts in 400 +   unverified  tags in one edit,
 
If someone reverts, 400 + edits,  in one edit, done on good faith by others 
over the years to conform to there way of thinking,
 
If someone deletes, 400 + edits,  in one edit, done on good faith by others 
over the years to conform to there way of thinking,
 
If someone refuses to let others, edit because they have taken over that type 
edit, all bus stops in the same area,
all train stations in the same area, all boundaries in the same area.
 
Edits that do not conform to the subject wiki. 
 
if someone downloads data that will create one mulitipolygon, against all wikis
 
Also there is no wiki on unverified edits.
 
 ___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[Andy Townsend]

 > If efforts to resolve the issue through discussion are unsuccessful perhaps this is an issue for the Data Working Group (DWG)?If this is where I think it is, I believe that I'm already offering advice to a complaint from one side of this dispute.  I think that what happened was that 10 years ago some NHD river data was imported - a large 131km stretch in one multipolygon.  That's quite complicated and "tends to break". I believe that one party to the dispute was trying to cut it into more manageable chunks, and accidentally deleted a way that was an outer on the MP.  A person who noticed this responded in a tone that was seen a less than friendly, and that's more or less where we are.   I don't believe there's any malice towards OSM data on either side, it's just that mutual understanding and cooperation haven't quite happened yet.More generally there are probably lots of other ex-NHD multipolygons, and it might be worth splitting some of the more complicated ones up, so that (for example) a change in one area that might not be visible in that area doesn't break something else miles away.Also (and apologies to anyone to whom this is an obvious suggestion) after a complicated edit viewing it in something like "achavi" can help show where things have been deleted, perhaps accidentally.Best Regards,Andy   ___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[Mike Thompson]

On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 7:09 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>   IF someone, not local, relying on satellite views, goes after my good
faith edit, based on my on the ground
>
> surveillance thinks my edit was wrong trying to fix broken polygon’s,
 that are making ghosts lines on the
>
> ID edit page. sends me a change-set discussion notice, telling me not to
edit what i edited, and i answer him
>
> with the Wiki rule that was the bases of my edit. then goes after my
current days edit and all related edits
>
> a years worth, (like a revenge thing) some technical but most based on
what he see’s on the satellite view
>
> that are, were WRONG.
I understand your frustration. It is maddening when an outsider edits the
map in your local area when they don't have an appreciation for the local
way of life.
Could you provide some example change sets? Perhaps some of the rest of us
can take a look and provide some comments that might help.
Are they really systematically only undoing your edits, or are they
systematically going after a certain data characteristic?

>
> Not to re-edit fix, who, how do you put it all back ?
You could revert their edits, but given the circumstances as you have
described them, that is likely to only fuel the edit war. If efforts to
resolve the issue through discussion are unsuccessful perhaps this is an
issue for the Data Working Group (DWG)?

Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] VANDALISM !

[80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us]

  IF someone, not local, relying on satellite views, goes after my good faith 
edit, based on my on the ground
 
surveillance thinks my edit was wrong trying to fix broken polygon’s,  that are 
making ghosts lines on the
 
ID edit page. sends me a change-set discussion notice, telling me not to edit 
what i edited, and i answer him
 
with the Wiki rule that was the bases of my edit. then goes after my current 
days edit and all related edits
 
a years worth, (like a revenge thing) some technical but most based on what he 
see’s on the satellite view
 
that are, were WRONG.
 
Not to re-edit fix, who, how do you put it all back ?  
 
 
 
 ___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 08/19/2018 07:27 AM, mr english wrote:
> What's the procedure for revert things like this?

If it's a "country" somewhere in the sea then it's relatively easy to
delete, and everyone is encouraged to delete obvious vandalism like that
on sight.

It is always a good idea to add a public comment to the vandalism edits
explaining that the data has been deleted, and why - more often than
not, the "vandal" thought they were just doodling in their private sandbox!

If the task is too daunting for you, you can bring it to the attention
of other mappers who are more experienced - message to the mailing list
is ok, though a synchronous channel like IRC or Slack might yield
quicker results.

There's also the Data Working Group at d...@osmfoundation.org to deal
with matters that the community cannot easily resolve themselves - for
example, if you have a persistent vandal that needs to be blocked from
making further edits.

The edits you highlighted have been reverted by user Carnildo a couple
hours ago.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Vandalism

[mr english]

 Hello

I stumbled upon this change set where a new country is added called
"Creedon Republic" over much of Canada, USA, and the Atlantic Ocean:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/617866825

Digging into it, I saw the author created a number of seemingly bogus
changes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Ackman12/history over the last
15 hours, but nothing else since a year ago.

What's the procedure for revert things like this?

Thanks

Mark
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Brad Neuhauser]

Since you asked, I think that's an overreaction. It's one small edit, seems
likely it was a mistake by a new user, and the user responded when
contacted. I don't know why we should demonize someone because they tried
to add their business to OSM and messed up.

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Greg Morgan  wrote:

> I think this is still a question for the DWG.  I agree that it would be
> great to look at case from a positive perspective.  In that respect, It
> would have been great if they just added a poi for the business, address,
> etc However, when you look at the user page,
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cheryl%20Daly, then you see that it was
> all about advertisement.  Changing a street name to the person's name and
> business and using the change set description as yet another form of
> advertisement, http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25304540, then you
> see it was nothing more than vandalism.
>
> The map has been fixed. Perhaps the real question for DWG is should the
> person's bio page, the person's bio icon, and the change set description be
> scrubbed by the DWG?  Moreover, should the description say, "Removed
> because of vandalism."  What do you think?
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
>> It happens sometimes.  Had a campground respond and ask if I'd be willing
>> to detail map their property for them.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Hans De Kryger > > wrote:
>>
>>> I'll attempt to reach out. But it always seems that these one edit users
>>> never respond.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans
>>> On Oct 9, 2014 1:12 AM, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>>>
 On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
 > Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
 > I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
 > concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
 > definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
 > newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
 > and offering to help?

 I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
 comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.

 --
 Shawn K. Quinn 


 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Richard Welty]

On 10/9/14 11:24 AM, Greg Morgan wrote:
I think this is still a question for the DWG.  I agree that it would 
be great to look at case from a positive perspective.  In that 
respect, It would have been great if they just added a poi for the 
business, address, etc However, when you look at the user page, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cheryl%20Daly, then you see that it 
was all about advertisement.  Changing a street name to the person's 
name and business and using the change set description as yet another 
form of advertisement, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25304540, then you see it was 
nothing more than vandalism.




this incident is a small one that is on a path to easy resolution w/o DWG
having to engage. i'm pretty sure the members of the DWG prefer it that
way. the DWG is a big hammer, this incident does not require a big hammer.
in general we should be very slow to invoke the DWG, and make an effort
as members of the community to work through these things first.

richard

--
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Marc Gemis]

Since when has the DWG "jurisdiction" on user pages ?
IMHO the DWG can only interfere when the data of OSM was affected.

I'm not saying that I like that persons' user page, but where is it written
that you cannot advertise on that page?

regards

m

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Greg Morgan  wrote:

> I think this is still a question for the DWG.  I agree that it would be
> great to look at case from a positive perspective.  In that respect, It
> would have been great if they just added a poi for the business, address,
> etc However, when you look at the user page,
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cheryl%20Daly, then you see that it was
> all about advertisement.  Changing a street name to the person's name and
> business and using the change set description as yet another form of
> advertisement, http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25304540, then you
> see it was nothing more than vandalism.
>
> The map has been fixed. Perhaps the real question for DWG is should the
> person's bio page, the person's bio icon, and the change set description be
> scrubbed by the DWG?  Moreover, should the description say, "Removed
> because of vandalism."  What do you think?
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
>> It happens sometimes.  Had a campground respond and ask if I'd be willing
>> to detail map their property for them.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Hans De Kryger > > wrote:
>>
>>> I'll attempt to reach out. But it always seems that these one edit users
>>> never respond.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans
>>> On Oct 9, 2014 1:12 AM, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>>>
 On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
 > Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
 > I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
 > concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
 > definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
 > newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
 > and offering to help?

 I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
 comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.

 --
 Shawn K. Quinn 


 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Greg Morgan]

I think this is still a question for the DWG.  I agree that it would be
great to look at case from a positive perspective.  In that respect, It
would have been great if they just added a poi for the business, address,
etc However, when you look at the user page,
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cheryl%20Daly, then you see that it was
all about advertisement.  Changing a street name to the person's name and
business and using the change set description as yet another form of
advertisement, http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25304540, then you
see it was nothing more than vandalism.

The map has been fixed. Perhaps the real question for DWG is should the
person's bio page, the person's bio icon, and the change set description be
scrubbed by the DWG?  Moreover, should the description say, "Removed
because of vandalism."  What do you think?

Regards,
Greg


On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> It happens sometimes.  Had a campground respond and ask if I'd be willing
> to detail map their property for them.
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Hans De Kryger 
> wrote:
>
>> I'll attempt to reach out. But it always seems that these one edit users
>> never respond.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>> On Oct 9, 2014 1:12 AM, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> > Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
>>> > I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
>>> > concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
>>> > definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
>>> > newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
>>> > and offering to help?
>>>
>>> I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
>>> comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Shawn K. Quinn 
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Mike Henson]

I contacted the realty group through their website (
http://www.lovingphoenix.com)
Here is the conversation:

__
Welcome to LovingPhoenix.com. Is there anything I can help you with today?
→I looked you up, because It looks like you renamed North 77th Avenue to
Cheryl Daly - Realty One Group. in openstreetmap.org. The road has been
changed back to North 77 avenue.
→I am trying to find the exact location of your business, so it can be
added to OSM (openstreetmap.org)
Danette: Ok, here is the contact information :
Danette: Realty One Group 17235 N 75th Ave #C-190 Glendale, AZ 85308
623-206-9936
→can you follow this link (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.63669/-112.21890&layers=N) and a
note (far left, bottom button) then move the "blue" pin to the exact
location of the office on the map? then on the left enter Realty One Group.
then press add note
Danette: I will have our realtor contact you directly to assist. I will
need your name and a contact number or email so we can reach you.
→I live in Oklahoma, and I am trying to fix an issue in Openstreetmap.org.
Danette: No problem. I will follow up, right away.


We will see if a map note shows up or not.


On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> It happens sometimes.  Had a campground respond and ask if I'd be willing
> to detail map their property for them.
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Hans De Kryger 
> wrote:
>
>> I'll attempt to reach out. But it always seems that these one edit users
>> never respond.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>> On Oct 9, 2014 1:12 AM, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> > Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
>>> > I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
>>> > concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
>>> > definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
>>> > newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
>>> > and offering to help?
>>>
>>> I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
>>> comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Shawn K. Quinn 
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Paul Johnson]

It happens sometimes.  Had a campground respond and ask if I'd be willing
to detail map their property for them.

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Hans De Kryger 
wrote:

> I'll attempt to reach out. But it always seems that these one edit users
> never respond.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
> On Oct 9, 2014 1:12 AM, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> > Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
>> > I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
>> > concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
>> > definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
>> > newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
>> > and offering to help?
>>
>> I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
>> comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.
>>
>> --
>> Shawn K. Quinn 
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Hans De Kryger]

I'll attempt to reach out. But it always seems that these one edit users
never respond.

Regards,
Hans
On Oct 9, 2014 1:12 AM, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:

> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
> > I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
> > concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
> > definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
> > newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
> > and offering to help?
>
> I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
> comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.
>
> --
> Shawn K. Quinn 
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 02:44 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that
> I'd rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to
> concur that we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what
> definitely seems well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith
> newbie attempt gone wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user
> and offering to help?

I reverted the edit (to minimize the damage), but I'm not nearly as
comfortable doing the reaching out part at the moment.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Paul Johnson]

Yeah, umm...I realize I have a bit of a history on this subject that I'd
rather not rehash in detail right now, but I'm going to have to concur that
we should not go zero to vandalism accusations for what definitely seems
well within a reasonable doubt of being a good faith newbie attempt gone
wrong.  Did anybody try reaching out to the user and offering to help?

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:24 AM, Shawn K. Quinn  wrote:

> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 09:14 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
> > In this case I don't mind, the user made only one edit with the
> > purpose of advertising a business.
> >
> >
> >  But imaging what the effect would be when you make your first edit in
> > OSM, and are immediately called vandal. Would you continue editing ? I
> > doubt so.
> > IMHO The best solution in such a case is first contact the mapper and
> > friendly point out that he/she made a mistake. That it is simply to
> > correct this. Suggest how it can be fixed.
> > Immediately start yelling vandalism and contacting the DWR for such a
> > small issue is an overkill and turns aways new mappers.
>
> I agree the DWG shouldn't be contacted over one edit, whether a user's
> first edit or not. However there's still a net effect of vandalism for
> the users who were looking for the original street name. I agree it
> probably was not intentional.
>
> Even if made to the correct object, there appeared to be ad-copy-like
> text in this edit. Do we not already have a rule against that
> specifically?
>
> --
> Shawn K. Quinn 
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 09:14 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
> In this case I don't mind, the user made only one edit with the
> purpose of advertising a business.
> 
> 
>  But imaging what the effect would be when you make your first edit in
> OSM, and are immediately called vandal. Would you continue editing ? I
> doubt so.
> IMHO The best solution in such a case is first contact the mapper and
> friendly point out that he/she made a mistake. That it is simply to
> correct this. Suggest how it can be fixed.
> Immediately start yelling vandalism and contacting the DWR for such a
> small issue is an overkill and turns aways new mappers.

I agree the DWG shouldn't be contacted over one edit, whether a user's
first edit or not. However there's still a net effect of vandalism for
the users who were looking for the original street name. I agree it
probably was not intentional.

Even if made to the correct object, there appeared to be ad-copy-like
text in this edit. Do we not already have a rule against that
specifically?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Marc Gemis]

In this case I don't mind, the user made only one edit with the purpose of
advertising a business.

 But imaging what the effect would be when you make your first edit in OSM,
and are immediately called vandal. Would you continue editing ? I doubt so.
IMHO The best solution in such a case is first contact the mapper and
friendly point out that he/she made a mistake. That it is simply to correct
this. Suggest how it can be fixed.
Immediately start yelling vandalism and contacting the DWR for such a small
issue is an overkill and turns aways new mappers.

regards

m

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Shawn K. Quinn  wrote:

> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 08:42 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
> > Is this really vandalism or a user that wanted to add her/his company
> > to the map (o.a. for advertising purposes) and accidentally selected
> > the street instead of the building ?
>
> I fixed it. The comment I put on the changeset calls it vandalism, as
> the user changed a street to advertise their business. It may be
> unintentional but the change had what amounted to a vandalistic effect.
>
>
> --
> Shawn K. Quinn 
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 08:42 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
> Is this really vandalism or a user that wanted to add her/his company
> to the map (o.a. for advertising purposes) and accidentally selected
> the street instead of the building ?

I fixed it. The comment I put on the changeset calls it vandalism, as
the user changed a street to advertise their business. It may be
unintentional but the change had what amounted to a vandalistic effect.


-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism

[Marc Gemis]

Is this really vandalism or a user that wanted to add her/his company to
the map (o.a. for advertising purposes) and accidentally selected the
street instead of the building ?

regards

m

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Hans De Kryger 
wrote:

> I'd like to report vandalism from this user - (http://goo.gl/K0utbF) for
> this changeset - (http://goo.gl/s1eooa)
>
> Anyone have the DWG's email?
>
> *Regards,*
>
> *Hans*
>
>
> *http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
> *
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Vandalism

[Hans De Kryger]

I'd like to report vandalism from this user - (http://goo.gl/K0utbF) for
this changeset - (http://goo.gl/s1eooa)

Anyone have the DWG's email?

*Regards,*

*Hans*


*http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
*
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism in NYC - reverted

[Serge Wroclawski]

Alex (or anyone else),

If you find vandalism like this, please do not email DWG members
individually, but instead, you should:

1. Free free to revert it. You do not need "permission" to do so.

2. Message the user through the OSM message system

3. If you want help, please email d...@osmfoundation.org. We have
people in the DWG with geographic, cultural and linguistic diversity,
along with access to (as mentioned) put temporary blocks on users or
remove data where necessary.

- Serge

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Vandalism in NYC - reverted

[Alex Barth]

Changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/21580748 by
user alejandroflores removed a series of roads in lower Manhattan:

http://cl.ly/image/3U0E262u0d1g

I just reverted with:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/21582260

Using the JOSM reversion plugin.

Paul: could you block and message user alejandroflores to check on his
intentions? There's a chance this was accidental as it's one edit many
months after he signed on. I have not reached out to him yet.

Alex
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Vandalism by ZeGermanata needs sorting out

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 05/16/2012 05:52 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ZeGermanata/edits


Yes, I have written to ZeGermanata and the local user who first noticed 
the problem is cleaning up the stuff that I haven't automatically reverted.


Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Vandalism by ZeGermanata needs sorting out

[Nathan Edgars II]

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ZeGermanata/edits

Vandalism includes the following:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/21523281/history changing ref=US 
41 to US 241
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/163035927/history fake motorway 
bypass

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/162757131/history fake subway


woodpeck_repair reverted some *but not all* of the vandalism (for 
example, US 241 is still tagged as such). Subsequent edits have also 
been made by Tom Layo e.g. here: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/17892247/history

So reverting is complicated.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us