OSM is not for just any business listing. If there is no physical presence for your clients to go to, then this cannot be marked. I have removed it.

The data quality is not overall good. You may think it is, but multiple people believe otherwise.

Not all of your arguments are insults, but they are all useless. Continuing to argue when I have probably said more than five times to cut it out is more rude than insulting.

And we're not "doing whatever we want with [your] edits". Your edits violated the community's norms. If anyone else did this, they'd get a talking to. Perhaps the only difference is that they might actually listen.

I'm not going to respond to you anymore, since you are incapable of either listening or arguing in good faith. If your next response is anything but an apology and a promise to not import anything without getting community approval, I'm going to the DWG.

No one was talking about humanitarian mapping. You're changing the subject for the sake of some particularly lame whataboutism. I agree that a lot of humanitarian mapping goes unreviewed and is often low quality, but I don't do that. I focus on helping people who are mapping their own areas because they can do things armchair mappers can't.

It's quite hilarious to question the editing proficiency of someone who helped build the software you use to edit the map.

I don't know why you still believe that you will change people's minds on this. You have so far driven no one else to your cause. All you've done is insult and belittle others, and to a pretty significant extent.

Hand-traced buildings are never a waste of time. If done by a user with basic knowledge of the editor and OSM principles trying their best, they are always more accurate and precise than Bing. If you're so concerned about wasting time, this discussion seems like the best place to save some.

You can tag maxspeed:advisory instead.

Also, not all features need a name. "Foot Path" is just a description of the feature. The name should just be left blank.

I believe it is normal to tag the pharmacy in addition to the drug store. I've seen this many times.

Tough luck. There are no laws against mapping others' property where OSM is based. There is a law against computer vandalism, though. And there are plenty of users who are happy to restore the data as often as is needed.

The other thing is that we're not responsible for misuse of maps using OSM data. Legally or logically. We can certainly take more steps to lower the chances of misuse (and are happy to, so long as this doesn't involve incorrect mapping), but the appropriate response is to put up physical warnings.

We map military installations in countries where doing so is banned. Map making without permission of the Chinese government is also banned, but we do it anyway. Simply put, there's nothing you can do.

I don't say this to be a jerk. People use my driveway all the time, leaving tire marks. I just know the map isn't at fault. People think they can use it as a turnaround or in one case avoid a road closure. They've done it since before OpenStreetMap had my driveway. If I really needed to take action, I'd put "no trespassing" signs up.

Before uploading, please square buildings by selecting them and pressing Q.

Check spelling of "Parker Cemetary"

way/1084830875 Here you added a building that does not exist and never has (at least with a shape anything like that). This was a randomly chosen building from your edit. The error rate is almost certainly higher than 0.015%.

Here is another one. way/1084799272

And another: way/1084896383

It is not hard to find these. I just click on a random way from this changeset, then look at nearby buildings.

Here is a single house represented by three buildings: way/1084884000

Here is a building that no longer exists: way/1084818808

Here is two buildings mapped where only one exists: way/1084879822

Here is a total nonsense building: way/1084771389 (it has a neighbor that is similarly bad)

Here are two buildings mapped as one: way/1084853034

Here is an attached garage mapped as a separate building: way/1084799013

I could go on, but there are two possibilities here: your "manual review" is bad enough that your data quality is harmfully low, or you lied about manual review. You tell me which is the case.

These appear to be Bing footprints. Consider using the MapWithAI plugin (https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/MapWithAI) instead. And as archpdx said, unless you are manually reviewing every single building, you need to go through the import approval process first. You can't rely on other mappers to "fix if there is a problem"; there shouldn't be one in the first place.

kepivar is almost certainly a sockpuppet of some experienced user.

Please orthogonalize the buildings before uploading by pressing Q.

As I have figured out a reliable method to catch all of these errors before submitting the changeset, future changesets will just be labeled "conflation". Note that this method does not work in areas with mixed housing (read: older parts of towns).

No errors introduced this time. I didn't end up doing any bulk moves because the vast majority of the address nodes were already inside the homes. One building was accidentally marked as detached that I corrected before uploading. One preexisting error was also corrected. Note that I did not download 54 buildings added by another user that were tagged generically as building=house. I conflated them in iD in changeset/125495369.

This section should be complete. There wasn't much left to begin with. I figured that conflating one-by-one in JOSM isn't actually much harder than in iD. There were so few that couldn't be done automatically that it was sometimes faster to do this than to bulk move the address nodes.

By making sure I do everything in JOSM, I also avoid accidentally marking garages as detached. I purge them when I see them, and I automatically filter out any buildings less than 100 square meters, but I missed three. This time, I caught them before uploading.

I discovered one error while still in JOSM and corrected it there. I found four more errors in my cleanup, done in changeset/125482353. This means the error rate is similar to my previous edit like this. To mitigate it, I may need to manually review the area before even downloading it in JOSM. The problematic areas are streets that meander so significantly that their predirectional is "wrong", and short cul-de-sacs that don't have their own name or predirectional. When bulk moving the address nodes, these are moved in the direction of the wrong house. To avoid this, I will manually conflate buildings on these cul-de-sacs and on sections of streets that run contrary to their predirectionals. This should add minimal time to the process while hopefully avoiding all errors.

Thank you for the addition, but again, please use better changeset comments. They don't need to be complicated; "added driveway" works fine here.

I uncovered two more errors from a thorough check. One of them was a manual mistake, so I would conclude that in these mixed areas that represent much of the remaining conflation the error rate is 0.5% and easily fixable. All things considered, I was able to conflate about 1,500 buildings in an hour and a half. I imagine that with the experience gained I will be much quicker in my next attempt.

After marking all detached houses as such, I downloaded only those that didn't have an address node inside them (which can be conflated automatically), then for each combination of predirectional and address parity, I moved them in bulk in the direction of the houses, hopefully enough for them to fall within the outline. About half of these were able to be conflated after a single move. I then looked at what was remaining, and again moved them towards their respective buildings. Any that I was unable to conflate by this method, I purged to ensure they would not be moved in the dataset.

Unfortunately, four errors were introduced here. However, these can easily be spotted, as there will seem to be both an extra address node and a house with no address. I corrected them and conflated what even this method missed in changeset/125459918.

This method is more effective than conflating by hand. Though it is not massively faster than conflating one-by-one (no more than twice as fast), this method also results in buildings being tagged in more detail. Additionally, the work is far less menial, because many buildings can be selected with a single drag and they can all be marked as detached, and dozens or more buildings can be conflated with a few clicks.

This method only really works in areas with low setbacks; in Eagle, many nodes could not be moved far enough to be conflated without also moving nodes over a far enough distance to be conflated with the wrong house. It is essentially useless in low-density areas where nodes are often placed on the center of properties, particularly farms. It will almost always be necessary to conflate these manually. Fortunately, these represent a small fraction of the homes in Ada County, and I have already done many, if not most of them.