Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Andy, On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 17/11/2017 22:52, Clifford Snow wrote: > > > Frederik, > I think we are all thankful for the newsletter. And believe they are free > to publish to their own standards. However, because they use OSM resources > by publishing on our

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Whataboutism at its best? John Oliver: https://youtu.be/1ZAPwfrtAFY?t=6m2s On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 17/11/2017 22:52, Clifford Snow wrote: > > > Frederik, > I think we are all thankful for the newsletter. And believe they are free > to publish to their own sta

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On 17/11/2017 22:52, Clifford Snow wrote: Frederik, I think we are all thankful for the newsletter. And believe they are free to publish to their own standards. However, because they use OSM resources by publishing on our mailing lists they need respect our values. I don't think asking a publ

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Sheesh, you lot are hilarious sometimes. Publications have an inviolable duty to be impartial? That’s great. Very interesting attitude in 2017. Tell me when you’ve found one such. WeeklyOSM writes what WeeklyOSM wants. If you don’t like it, contribute or start your own. It saddens me that the s

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > > I'm immensely thankful that we have the weekly, and that it has formed > independently of the powers that be in the OSMF, and that it dares to > report things the OSMF wouldn't necessarily blog about, and that they > aren't required to su

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On 17/11/2017 22:04, Frederik Ramm wrote: many papers had misunderstood their journalistic impartiality as having to give both sides of an argument equal coverage Oh really?!! Well at least we now know where you stand, in case you ever put yourself forward as a candidate for the OSMF board.

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Hi, On 11/17/2017 07:34 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > Also, there is such a thing as "fake balance". Imagine you're > running an article about someone who's discussing ways to offset the > problems caused by the Mercator projection; you don't then need to also > quote someone from the Flat Earth Soc

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

One request. Can we not relitigate thie topic of Yuri's tool on this thread. Want to focus on helping WeeklyOSM to improve its coverage of our whole community. * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron On Friday, November 17, 2017, 4:29:39 PM EST, Steve Doerr wrote: On 17/11/2

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On 17/11/2017 20:50, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: One important aspect was missing in the announcement. The tool's new name is a tiny part of a much bigger set of community suggested and requested changes. Fully ignoring functionality changes that many community members suggested is biased. Mechanic

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

One important aspect was missing in the announcement. The tool's new name is a tiny part of a much bigger set of community suggested and requested changes. Fully ignoring functionality changes that many community members suggested is biased. Mechanical edit claim was also never justified -- saying

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

> I don't think you could argue with "perceived by many as unreasonable" - just >wade through the recent archives of the talk mailing list again and weigh the >arguments for and against. It's just not ok to call out an individual like that. It's not appropriate, not correct and not helpful.  The

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On 17/11/2017 17:52, Mikel Maron wrote: Yes, doing this is hard work, and appreciate the job WeeklyOSM has to do. Point is, statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, and there are many better ways to summarize the to

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On Friday 17 November 2017, Mikel Maron wrote: > statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and > tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, First: This is not what weeklyOSM has written. Second: I disagree this is inappropriate - inprecise maybe, but not inappropri

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Le 17 novembre 2017 17:27:05 GMT+01:00, Mikel Maron a écrit : >> Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list >about the tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite >contentious. >* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron > >On Friday, November 17,

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Yes, doing this is hard work, and appreciate the job WeeklyOSM has to do. Point is, statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, and there are many better ways to summarize the topic. * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel

[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Carto release v4.5.0

Dear all, Today, v4.5.0 of the openstreetmap-carto stylesheet (the default stylesheet on openstreetmap.org) has been released. Changes include: Major changes - Cleaning up low zoom levels (z5-z7): - Rendering roads from z6 instead of z5 - Rendering national parks from z8 instead of z7 - R

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

2017-11-17 17:27 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron : > > Good point. Try this.. > > > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about > the tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite > contentious. > but then the message boils down to: "Yuri Astrakhan is discussing

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

> believe the version you propose is still biased, because Yuri says his tool >isn't about performing mechanical edits. Good point. Try this.. > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the >tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite contentious. *

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Friday 17 November 2017, Mikel Maron wrote: > > > > > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list > > > about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). > > > The discussion continues to be quite

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Good exercise Mikel, but using only 'contentious' you don't mention the issues raised in the discussion. Yves ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On Friday 17 November 2017, Mikel Maron wrote: > > > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list > > about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). > > The discussion continues to be quite contentious. > > This is better. It gets the same substantial informat

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

2017-11-17 16:53 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron : > Now try this version... > > > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about > the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). The discussion > continues to be quite contentious. > > This is better. It gets the same sub

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

> Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at  >impartiality Impartiality is an ongoing issue for any journalistic enterprise. WeeklyOSM has at times done better, and done worse. I think WeeklyOSM is a really valuable service, and I hope the editors there are open to our h

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Hi: I've read the majority of the posts of the "New OSM Quick-Fix service" thread in OSM-talk, and I don't see any partiality in the post of the WeeklyOSM. In fact, I think they have been very polite and diplomatic. Cheers, Rafael. On 17/11/17 11:34, Steve Doerr wrote: On 17/11/2017 08:20,

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On Friday 17 November 2017, Steve Doerr wrote: > > Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at > impartiality. Huh? "perceived by many as unreasonable as before" is a clear statement of distancing themselves from this opinion. Impartiality does not mean you have to prese

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

On 17/11/2017 08:20, weeklyteam wrote: Yuri Astrakhanre-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called/Sophox/). Yuri is perceived by many as unreasonable as before a

[OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 382, is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/9699/ Enjoy! weeklyOSM? who?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages