But that's got nothing to do with the licensing change - that's an issue of you ripping off Google Maps.
Please everyone, lets not feed the troll. On 9 February 2011 17:26, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Al Haraka <alhar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: >>> http://www.sharedmap.org/bna.html >>> http://www.sharedmap.org/before.PNG >>> http://www.sharedmap.org/after.PNG >> >> I enjoy a thread that is well on its way to a flame war as much as the >> next guy, but do you mind telling us the methodology used to achieve >> this result? Last time it was discussed, there was a lot of debate on >> how to properly tag a node, way, or relation as license compatible or >> not because this is a multi-user system. I am curious: how did you >> reach your conclusions? > > The board voted to delete my contributions, and this is the before and after. > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
