+1. There's also temper and civility issues that make it difficult to amicably resolve issues that have been persistant for a very long time now. His contributions about geography on Wikipedia are a bit stronger and less controversial, perhaps "going with what you're good at" is apropos in the long term. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Serge Wroclawski <emac...@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:07 AM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> wrote: > I see I have some new enemies, and the old ones are coming back to slander > me. > "threatened to remove whole cities from the map", "stomping local knowledge > in Oklahoma", reverting a bunch of relation fixup because you don't like one > particular element - what a crock of shit. This response belies what many of us are feeling, which is a great deal of frustration. And the idea that you call people who disagree with you "enemies" shows that you aren't listening to our feedback. Here's an archive of your threat to remove cities from the map: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2010-November/004777.html You talked about a proposal that you would execute to remove any Census designated places in the US (starting with Florida), and defended this position even after several of us showed you how this designation was useful in other places, such as Silver Spring, Maryland (where I live), Bethesda, Maryland, etc. The theme running through all of our frustration is that you override local knowledge with your assumptions of how things should be. If you want to edit your area, using local knowledge, go ahead, but make up a lot of mapping rules that simply don't apply to other places, and harm the work of other mappers. - Serge _____________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
