Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Greetings. I am one of the coordinators for the mSpray organized mapping. We are aware of the issues that have been raised and we are working on them. James ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

, 23 May 2020 8:57 AM To: Andy Townsend Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping >If the person doing the editing is just a geography student going through the >motions for a course credit it's less likely to, I agree. Or a Comms

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

>If the person doing the editing is just a geography student going through the motions for a course credit it's less likely to, I agree. Or a Comms class at a certain university 臘‍♂️ We are still trying to clean that mess up in Ottawa On Fri., May 22, 2020, 6:52 p.m. Andy Townsend, wrote: > On

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 22/05/2020 23:37, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: May 22, 2020, 16:58 by ajt1...@gmail.com: No-one has left any changeset discussion comments: In part because bothering someone who is victim of poorly organized group editing is unlikely to work well. It depends on how engaged they

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

May 22, 2020, 21:49 by j...@liotier.org: > On 5/22/20 10:52 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > >> >> I just noticed a serie of mspray[numerical suffix] (>> mspray16 >> >> , >> mspray15 >> >> , >>

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

May 22, 2020, 16:58 by ajt1...@gmail.com: > No-one has left any changeset discussion comments: > In part because bothering someone who is victim of poorly organized group editing is unlikely to work well. Targeting source of this large-scale confusion is necessary.

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

May 22, 2020, 17:29 by pierz...@yahoo.fr: > Le vendredi 22 mai 2020 10 h 40 min 51 s UTC−4, Mateusz Konieczny via talk > a écrit : > > > > > Are you sure that in > 72427535 > > > > buildings were > > > just moved? > > If I place the

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

May 22, 2020, 17:33 by ajt1...@gmail.com: > But still, I suspect, a human being, and one that has no idea that what > they're doing is causing a problem. > Yes, and I am irritated at organizers who failed to do what they should do (even after getting blocked). Mapper is innocent, but

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

(answer cc: to talk...@openstreetmap.org and talk@openstreetmap.org) Thanks for taking care of our feedback. In Senegal and Mali, Openstreetmap has a long history of low quality buildings produced in massive quantities by humanitarian actors. Cleaning up after them is considerable work, which

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 5/22/20 10:52 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: I just noticed a serie of mspray[numerical suffix] (mspray16 , mspray15 , mspray13 and mspray4

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 22/05/2020 16:10, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: On 5/22/20 4:58 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: On 22/05/2020 14:45, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: On 5/22/20 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: the "mspray" accounts were blocked in July 2019 for problematic edits and failing to document properly The

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Le vendredi 22 mai 2020 10 h 40 min 51 s UTC−4, Mateusz Konieczny via talk a écrit : > Are you sure that in 72427535 buildings were just moved? If I place the mouse over a red oultine (old building), Achavi reports «Modify geometry» Loading the changeset in an editor for validation, I

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 5/22/20 4:58 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: On 22/05/2020 14:45, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: On 5/22/20 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: the "mspray" accounts were blocked in July 2019 for problematic edits and failing to document properly The "problematic edits" part is still current - this

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 5/22/20 12:48 PM, Mikel Maron wrote: Does possibly look like organized editing. No need to invoke intention — if this was “stealth” that means they are intentionally trying to hide. More likely case is they simply aren’t aware of the guidelines. In the case of individual errant mappers, I

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 22/05/2020 14:45, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: On 5/22/20 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: the "mspray" accounts were blocked in July 2019 for problematic edits and failing to document properly The "problematic edits" part is still current - this changeset of mine for example is mostly about

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Before everyone jumps to revert undelete block etc I’ve gotten in touch with the teams at Akros and am helping to work out what’s happening here and resolve. More soon. Mikel On Friday, May 22, 2020, 10:33 AM, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: Are you sure that in 72427535 buildings were

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Are you sure that in 72427535 buildings were just moved? buildings and college that used to be mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-12.94547/28.64318 It is gone thanks to https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=72427535 BTW how

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Nice busy beaver. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/mapper Graffiti put on over 800 000 objects, cleanup will take some time. For blocking given that they got warning already that was completely ignored. May 22, 2020, 15:47 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > Le vendredi 22 mai 2020 07 h 29 min

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Le vendredi 22 mai 2020 07 h 29 min 19 s UTC−4, Frederik Ramm a écrit : > Sometimes users deleted a large number of > buildings e.g. here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=72427535 > without giving a clear reason Looking at Achavi, red outlines make us think objects were deleted. But

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

On 5/22/20 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: the "mspray" accounts were blocked in July 2019 for problematic edits and failing to document properly The "problematic edits" part is still current - this changeset of mine for example is mostly about deleting buildings from mspray16:

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

May 22, 2020, 13:23 by frede...@remote.org: > no documentation of the project > (...) > If you feel they are disregarding that message, we are happy to block > them again. > Neither https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities nor

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Hi, the "mspray" accounts were blocked in July 2019 for problematic edits and failing to document properly. The project leader has contacted DWG on 15 May 2020 asking what needs to be done to unblock the accounts, and was informed by us that: > the "mspray" users have only been blocked until

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

Does possibly look like organized editing. No need to invoke intention — if this was “stealth” that means they are intentionally trying to hide. More likely case is they simply aren’t aware of the guidelines. Mikel On Friday, May 22, 2020, 4:52 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: I just noticed

Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

You might also check here and get in touch with the project manager https://tasks.hotosm.org/projects/8631 Cheers - Phil, On the road with his iPad > On 22 May 2020, at 6:55 pm, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > >  > I just noticed a serie of mspray[numerical suffix] (mspray16, mspray15, >

[OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping

I just noticed a serie of mspray[numerical suffix] (mspray16 , mspray15 , mspray13 and mspray4 for example) are