Eric Marsden wrote: > Reading odbl.de, 60% of users have accepted the new contributor terms > in Europe (40% in the USA, the proportion worldwide is not shown). > There 417k users. So (extrapolating) 200k have not accepted the > new terms and 190k have accepted. > > Hopefully the decision on whether to go ahead with the odbl transition > will be based on how much data would be deleted, not this kind of > misleading statistic.
Sorry, you've puzzled me a bit here. You state that it's better to cite "how much data would be deleted". However, that directly contradicts your previous paragraph, in which you quote, um, the number of users, not the amount of data. Reading odbl.de, although "60% of users" in Europe have accepted the new contributor terms, that actually equates to between 80% and 92% of nodes, and between 70% and 93% of ways. In North America, your "40% of users" is 54%-94% of nodes, and 66-85% of ways.[1] Would you like to revise your assessment of who's doing the misleading here? cheers Richard [1] I suspect that when obvious bot edits are stripped out, the figure will be a lot higher, especially in America. Certainly, looking around my local area, the only significant "non-relicensable" objects are ways edited by someone who has made a trivial tag search-and-replace, which can easily be reverted without adverse effect on the data. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Announce-Beginning-of-Phase-4-of-license-change-process-tp6475830p6480006.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk