Working Group Minutes/DWG 2018 09 13

From OpenStreetMap Foundation

Public Part

DWG Meeting on Thursday 13th September at 20:00 UTC / 21:00 BST / 22:00 CET.

DWG members present

  • Guillaume Rischard (Stereo)
  • Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse)
  • Sidorela Uku (sidorelauku)
  • Frederik Ramm (woodpeck)
  • Nelson A. De Oliveira (naoliv)
  • Vladimir Marshinin (mavl)
  • Peter Barth (peda)
  • Paul Norman (pnorman - joined later due to prior committments)

Organised editing

The organised editing guidelines have been sent to the board prior to the meeting on 20th September. See for the somewhat convoluted journey that they have taken so far.

User conflicts, data editing blocks (in the light of one recent high profile case)

We've recently had a high profile contributor banned from editing the wiki because of an inability to "play nicely" with other people there (despite years-long attempts by numerous people to try and point them in the right direction). Following this wiki ban this user moved over to the diary entries written by the person they think is in the wrong, writing a number of things that are both untrue and fall far below any "etiquette" guidelines (ref "etiquette" at e.g. ). The diary comments were reported to the site admins; no action yet. No-one has yet requested that tehy be banned from the OSM API, although judging by the comments on changeset discussions, some of the same issues are cropping up there.

We tried to talk through what options there would be to deal with this. A range of views were expressed.

Action: Stereo to come up with a form of words that will both guide the toward the right path and warn them what could happen if they don't.

DWG activity - especially reversions

It's been suggested before, but now (especially in the light of the recent New York vandalism that was fixed quickly in OSM but unfortunately still made its way out into downstream high profile OSM data consumers) it was suggested again - how do people know what reversions / redactions are taking place? If a reversion was particularly high profile or wide-ranging, how best to let people know? How to do that without giving some sort of "target" for every schoolkid troll? One suggestion was a simple list, such as .

Action: Stereo to reply to the latest request for revert details (from a high-profile OSM data consumer) with a link to , noting the "experimental" caveat on that page to them

Use and misuse of "website reporting"

A user who was in an edit war with others and was judged to be the more guilty party has been making frequent use of the "report" button - at one point on every changeset of those who disagreed with them, and numerous other DWG emails containing other threats.

No extra action required currently. If anything needs to happen we can follow as required.

Next meeting

Booked for 20:00 UTC Wednesday 14th November