Ich sehe es gleich wie Nightdive; allerdings kann man einen Versatz im Satelitenbild mit GPS korrigieren, sofern man dazu eine Stelle hat, bei der ein gutes, unkompromitiertes GPS-Signal vorliegt. Insofern würde ich die Frage nicht mit entweder/oder beantworten, sondern die Mischung machts. Man sollte bei jeder Datenquelle (egal ob GPS, Bilder, Rasterdaten) über mögliche Fehlerquellen bescheid wissen und diese in die Evaluation und Beeurteilung mit einfliessen lassen. Manchmal erweisen sich auch Importdaten (z.b. Bushaltestellen o.ä., welche über genaue, gesicherte Koordinaten verfügen) als sehr hilfreich, um die eigene Signalqualität sichtbar zu machen. Man muss halt wissen, was für Datenquellen im jeweiligen Gebiet verfügbar sind.

spam

@TomH: makes sense, I'm against a system where the crowd can delete other posts too... but what about just hiding them based on user voting? then the ones currently removing the spam can review them and finally delete the post and its author, or - if the system gets abused by users - kick the voters arses!

this wish is expressed every two weeks... so I ask myself who's responsible for this part (user profile section) of the OSM-system? maybe we should talk with this guy...

SPAM

the ideas with nofollow and creating links to white-listed pages and so on are all nice, but they don't solve the problem that users can post whatever they want and nobody does something about it if content is not appropriate. that's in the end a conceptual problem of the software and of our community.

I like the idea of moderating content, on some sort of common sense our community clearly has. but who moderates them? who does it currently? is there a list containing people that have administration/moderation rights? how can one apply for this job? such a system works only if we have enough (and trustworthy) people doing it and if everybody knows how it works. and thats missing: I still have to comment "SPAM" and hope that someone sees it and does something about it. the other system would be some sort of voting system: if 10 people mark the entry as spam, it gets hidden. if that happens x times, the user gets blocked automatically. an administrator than has to check it and eventually can delete the user and his content. votes shouldn't be anonymous (moderators should see who reported a given message) so the system doesn't get abused in some "political" discussion (I doubt our users would behave in a such childish way, but better be sure...).

I definitely like the first idea better, since it is a common way of handling spam problems in communities (forums, wikipedia etc.). The first system combined with a "report as spam"-button (email notification to moderators) and the traditional anti-spambot-measures used everywhere should be the best solution to handle the problem. and I clearly can't see any reason why such a system hasn't been integrated a long time ago. the spam problem isn't new at all and I'm someway disappointed that "nothing" has been done so far. I think there are currently enough trustworthy netheads in our community that can help to check and eventually moderate reported entries. if spamers see our community is moderated and spam gets deleted within minutes, they eventually lose interest.

spam

SPAM please remove

spam. please remove.

you can change or edit a node the same way you added it :) just drag&drop it in potlach or josm, depending on what you are using. by the way make sure that all the tags are used correctly. E.g. the opening_hours have a standardized format. Take the wiki (osm.wiki/Key:opening_hours) as reference. Same applies to cuisine for instance: use "sandwich" instead of "sandwiches" and a semicolon to separate multiple values as described on the wiki (osm.wiki/Key:cuisine). it's important that everybody talks "the same language" and therefore uses the common tags from the wiki wherever possible. but there are often situations when the current set of tags is not enough to represent something on OMS, then new tag proposals can be made. But for starters the wiki itself gives more than enough to work with :)

hope you enjoy your future work on OSM!

die halbe Schweiz scheint kaputt zu sein, so sind Ortschaften, die im Kanton Aargau liegen im Kanton Zürich oder Kanton Bern gem. Nominatim. Da muss jemand, der das System versteht (ich blick da nicht durch) mal kurz die gnaze Schweiz nach Fehlern abgrasen und diese beheben. Auf talk-ch wurde bereits ansatzweise darüber diskutiert.

spam!

I definitley agree with you on the stubs issue. we have notes, comments, fixme and source tags. so use them when you know there is a street you haven't mapped yet. It's better to have a stub with a fixme and note tag than nothing at all. at least the next mapper knows where to continue...

und das schöne am m-241 ist das eingebaute Display und die Möglichkeit die Zeit anzeigen zu lassen. Kurz mit der Digicam abfotografieren und schon kann man sehr einfach die Zeit der Bilder in JOSM synchornisieren... super einfach! Viel Spass mit den Dingern.

super Sache :) im deutschen Bereich des OSM-Forums gibts sonst einen Thread von jemandem, der versucht eine Einsteiger-Freundliche Variante des Schemas zu schreiben. Ggf. kannst du - wenn du dich einliest - gerade auch deine Verständnisprobleme etc. bechreiben, damit man etwas Input hat und dies Berücksichtigen kann beim Schreiben einer user-friendly-Version des ÖPNV-Schemas. Link: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5762

super Sache :) gleich nach dem ÖPNV-Schema?

we definitely need a "report this entry"-button...

I face the same problem. Maybe audio notes could resolve the problem?

its not about how he answered. Indeed his last email isn't that exemplary either. but does it make a difference? it was a reaction to something. and we should find out to what. because there are always people out there reacting in a manner you'd not expect. and therefore we should explore ways to alter this reaction, even if it seems unlikely he'd (or someone else, doesn't matter) reacted different on another occasion. indeed not all professional PR do the job better, but they have at least one advantage: they're officials and therefore have a completely different image. that's why I support any movement towards official OSM representatives / official PR teams, even if they are not professionals. In the end it's all about image and appearance.

It's the same with recruiting new data sources: once you've asked someone the door is closed. And if you're doing it wrong, its not about your personal failure, its about the loss to OSM and the whole community. That's why I am cautious on the entire topic of contacting external (not part of the OSM community or my circle of friends) people. Predicting how you are perceived by others is one of the hardest tasks whenever communicating. And using indirect communication surely doesn't make it easier for us all... we should bear that in mind. and - with any respect - your communication is not that passive and can be - and actually is - perceived in many different ways. It's not about how you meant something (to mean ill) but about how people understand what you're telling them. So just don't be surprised when people react like Baldwin. Actually that's the only thing you and we all (including me) should be aware of.

that's a fine example why any project and in this case especially OSM needs a dedicated public relations team. sorry mate, your motivation might have been commendable and I definitely like that and give you credit for that, but the implementation is just way off the mark.

If you're going to persuade someone that has put a lot of effort in an existing project you don't do it by actually telling him how stupid he was (in a roundabout way...) and how bad his decisions for a specific technology where by undermining that his "partner" (google) doesn't care for him. you just leave that completely out. sure OSM has some benefits over google in terms of data ownership and so on, but he will discover them sooner or later if he does care. Try to argue on another level: a level that does not generate that much dissonance in the cognition of your respondent and that does not devaluate his current work (and yes, your email does in my opinion). in this case: highlight the specific pros of OSM in terms of cyclist detail (you already mentioned them, well done!) that google does not provide currently, mayby show him some implementations and highlight the community standing behind it and offer your help. and that's it. Any discussion about his shortcomings are a matter of later talks.

if he's still not interested, just leave it alone. I'd cut your balls of in court if you publish my emails and make your own personal pillory. inform the community that he has no interest in working with OSM so no one resurvey position of contacts him again. case closed.