It'd be nice if google dropped the legal posturing and did the right thing already. They're skirting doing evil as it is.

Wow, all aboard the failboat... looks like they're trying to reinvent the wheel in a non-open fashion.

Use JOSM, and keep your changesets open. Upload frequently so related changes appear in the same changeset. Don't sweat closing them, they'll self-commit a few hours after your last edit that changeset.

In JOSM, keep multiple changesets open as you work, upload to related changesets. Don't worry about closing them, they'll self-commit a few hours after your last edit to that set.

osm.org/go/WIDPKSDKW- The Octopus (an 8-way intersection), Beaverton, Oregon
osm.org/go/WIDlNQKB I5 at I405 and OR43, Portland.

Are you using Potlatch? (the edit tab?) If so, that's probably part of your problem. Once you get into heavy editing (and not just fixing a typo or adding a short stub in a session), it's probably more beneficial to use a more robust editor such as JOSM.

I'd put it in the Wiki's legal disclaimers. "Map may contain data from the City of Toronto, which asks us to link to ..." where ... is their license page.

Toucan crossings are pretty well known as a "signal specifically for the bike lane." These are handy things to know about and affect routing more than the map. Don't exclude them just because you don't want them rendered, ie, Don't Tag For The Renderer™. Remember, if you don't like the way the map looks, make your own render of it!

Is New Oregon also full?

I'm suggesting that under US law, where both myself and the subject live, conversations aren't subject to copyright. Publishing emails in such a manner is a relatively common practice here.

The name-calling is still present in the other diary entry there.

And while we're on a roll here playing fast and loose with deleting posts, why don't you go ahead and delete @wallclimber21/diary/8982 and this post while you're at it.

There was no copyright at play, and for it to be libelous, it would have to be a false statement; a fact not in evidence. If you had time to remove the post, you had time to email me.

I'll sleep on it. If cooler heads prevail, I might even change my mind.

I'm not ashamed of what I've done, I don't see anything unlawful or unethical regarding my actions. We have a right to free speech in the US, and plain text email has no reasonable expectation of privacy. We're all entitled to describe the world as we see it. I respectfully disagree that this serves only to alienate.

If Mr. Baldwin or anybody who has commented on this thread wants to be rational and set the record straight, then by all means, let me know when, and let's all come on down to Pioneer Square (osm.org/go/WIDlWPydZ--). We can all have some coffee and talk about this like adults. All parties are invited, and those who this directly concerns already know my phone number, just name the time convenient for you.

Now, if you want to lecture people while hiding behind a keyboard instead of taking me up on the offer to have a rational discussion, then I'm afraid you're the one who's going to have to live with that decision. Realize that by doing so, you're declaring that this just isn't THAT important to you. Merry Christmas. Quit beating a dead horse.

@akuckartz: Most people do not consider email (or anything else) to be private unless reasonable measures have been taken to ensure that only the recipient can read it. Such as encryption, envelopes, closing doors, etc.

@marcschneider: Not disclosing the emails would have only lead to a thread full of people telling me to put up or shut up. I guess no good deed goes unpunished.

I'd like to reiterate as I said in my post originally that I did not approach ByCycle as an OSM representative, I approached ByCycle as a user of that service. This is how ByCycle treats their users. I don't see how this affects us other than I'm putting up the red flag saying, "Hey, landmine over here!"

Yes, I am. How exactly is referring to me as "Uncle Paulie" not name calling? That's not my name, and in the context used, clearly not endearing.

We're on the same team here. At no point did I claim in that conversation that I was representing OSM. In fact, prior to that interaction, I was a bycycle.org user myself. Clearly, at least one member of their staff has some SERIOUS anger management issues, and all I intended to do was provide a heads up to the community so others don't make the same mistake of trying to be reasonable with them that I did.

I guess no good deed goes unpunished.

Ash is right, especially since a little basic research about the subject in question would have shown you that suggestions were solicited.

Now if you want to resort to childish name-calling, you're welcome to do so. I do suggest getting over whatever high-school complex you have going, though.

That's a little besides the point. I approached this reasonably, he took it completely sideways. Normally I wouldn't go publish emails, but again, this was an extreme circumstance. Nobody should treat other people the way Mr. Baldwin treated me with an amicable conversation. If you can deal with an unmitigated asshole any better, join the clergy: They need more good people.

I don't think professional PR does any better job. Go ask Yahoo how their freedom of information lawsuit is going.

I offered to help, he flew off the handle. I'm not sure it's unethical to let the world know about highly unstable people.

Really, I provided constructive criticism. If that's the way Mr. Baldwin is going to roll with it, then really, the public ought to know what kind of monster he really is. But, if he's gonna demonstrate that he's got a touch of the bipolar disorder, then that needs to be public for the safety of the rest of us (particularly his neighbors).