On 03/03/2016, Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote: > My point is that it might attract people that just upload data without > any benefit to OSM (wrong data or data that is added in many > changetsets (because that determines the ranking) instead of 1, as you > would normally do.. > You can even write a script that creates a point in one changeset and > deletes it in another. Over and over again.
Even without talking about nefarious schemes, even well-meaning users will tend to change their mapping behavior because of this. In this case it's about uploading more often, potentially making changes harder to follow. Choose a differnet metric, and it'll have a different problem. The HR industry has tried to find metrics of worker productivity for decades, but most do not work. Plenty of OSM projects have done various levels of edit gamification, and this is fine as long as (counterintuitively) it doesn't push too much contributors to edit. And when your start bringing money (even a tiny amount) into the picture, behaviours can change drastically. But encouraging contributions to OSM is a great idea, and OsmAnd is in a nice position to do that. Some examples that probably wouldn't hurt: * Give access to the paid version of OsmAnd if the user has passed certain editing thresholds. This is similar to the original idea, but there is no money directly involved, and most importantly this is a once-off perk. * Popup notifications about nearby QA issues, like Vespucci does. * Look at the heatmap of the user's editing/visiting locations, and prompt the user to go (re)survey if there is a nearby cold spot. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
