OpenStreetMap
All the work I have put in has basically been deleted. My points from GPX traces are all that remains in most areas I have mapped. Sure, if you want to improve on the accuracy/detail, thats great but to just delete entire suburbs isnt helping anyone!
Discussion
Cummentu dae baditaflorin de su 1 cabudanni 2012 a is 05:41
Can`t you revert the changes /
Cummentu dae andrewmfarrow de su 1 cabudanni 2012 a is 06:07
Hi baditaflorin,
It has been several months since I have been on the site and I’m not sure exactly when this was done. Its not just my work that has been trashed, I have compared the map that I compiled for my Garmin (about 6months ago) to what is left. The damage in Hobart & southern Tasmania is huge. I’m really not interested in trying to fix it. OSM was a nice idea in principle but here ends my involvement.
Cummentu dae Minh Nguyen de su 1 cabudanni 2012 a is 07:17
Much of Australia was heavily affected by the “redaction” process about a month ago that removed contributions by users who didn’t agree to the new contributor terms and license. (This update even calls out Hobart specifically.) If your contributions (other than the GPX traces) consisted of modifying ways and points that these disagreeing users added in the first place, I’m afraid your contributions may have been collateral. If it’s any consolation, there’s a fork of the OpenStreetMap project called FOSM that mostly reflects pre-redaction OpenStreetMap. They accept contributions too.
Cummentu dae andrewmfarrow de su 1 cabudanni 2012 a is 07:42
Hi Minh,
Thanks for that! It does explain what I am seeing. I thought I had actually agreed to the latest terms and conditions … but I must admit, I havent had much time to spend on OSM this year and obviously missed this issue. I am really dissapointed that this has happened and will definetely have a look at FOSM
Cummentu dae TomH de su 1 cabudanni 2012 a is 10:15
You did agree, but other people that edited the same objects presumably didn’t.
Cummentu dae robert de su 1 cabudanni 2012 a is 15:03
“will definetely have a look at FOSM”
Good luck with that.
Your data hasn’t actually been deleted, it’s been “redacted”. If you decide you do agree to the new license, it may be possible to restore your data at some point in the near future.
Cummentu dae z-dude de su 2 cabudanni 2012 a is 16:22
“Contributor terms: Accepted almost 2 years ago “
Robert, the redaction process deleted a lot of my traces as well. I have no faith that the redact bot was working correctly.
Cummentu dae Vincent de Phily de su 3 cabudanni 2012 a is 11:00
The bot did the job it had to do, correctly. The problem is that many people did not fully grasp how that worked, thought “I accepted the CT, so my edits are safe”, and didn’t lookup cleanmap or OSMI to check the facts.
Sadly, Andew is probably not the last person to get surprised at the result, even though there was a lot of communication and a lot of extra time before the redaction. Not sure we could have done much better, the returns had diminished to nothing much at redaction time.
For what it’s worth, most people have cut their losses by now, and resumed mapping as usual.
Cummentu dae z-dude de su 4 cabudanni 2012 a is 02:36
You say the bot was working correctly, but I have seen traces deleted where everyone who edited or split thye the trace accepted the terms.
Cummentu dae Zartbitter de su 4 cabudanni 2012 a is 07:05
“but I have seen traces deleted where everyone who edited or split thye the trace accepted the terms”
Please publish a permalink or better object ids so others can verify this. Some people said the same but no one could prove this suspicion up to now. All suspicious objects named were checked and all are treated correctly by the bot. So please tell us facts to inspect - not just rumours.