Don't even remember doing this area, if something is strange from 4 years ago fix it to match what exists now or revert the changeset. If it's an import it then it would just be me mistakenly not logging into my import account but there was a large import in Texas a few years back.

Ah but this data I have created myself using tools in the same way as your example so how is it an import?

Look at other vegetation areas and you will see discontinuity, holes, and areas that claim a vegetation but don't have it as well. Georgia has been mentioned and I've seen it in others too. I looked at different vegetation areas on the map prior to doing this changeset to see if it stood up to others. I believe this still comes down to personal preference. Hopefully the chap who did the revert went back and checked to make sure it didn't leave artifacts since I had made corrections and edits in subsequent changesets.

From what I can see of this process is a few of you on slack decided you did not like the edit. You failed to reach out to the broader community through the mailing list to reach a consensus. Then when challenged backup was called to make it seem like in the comments there was a consensus and one person did a revert under his own authority. DWG has been on this changeset before and they didn't do a revert so either they didn't deem it important or they found some logic in my defense. DWG should have been the one to do a revert but that didn't work so here we are. What's done is done and no manner of explanation or excuse will make this 'process' seem to be anything else than at best 5-10 people railroading over a local editor from hundreds of miles away.

Again by that definition of an outside data source being an import I could use a handheld gps and bring those points into JOSM and that would be considered an import.
It seems that there isn't a very defined nature to the process which is a shame.
I asked how many people, what authority, and what percentage of the whole. Were there any Texans? Anybody from remotely close to the area? This sounds like some people on slack (not even the mailing list) decided and that was that. Doesn't exactly seem like a very good process especially since there are other areas that match your concerns that aren't being reverted.

Just to satisfy my curiosity under what authority did you revert my dataset, how many people on slack agreed, and what percentage of total mappers would this consensus constitute if it was only a slack discussion used as your authority? I would also point out that the import guidelines need some updating with firmer definitions as one could construe uploading data collected in Vespucci as an import based on the definitions provided.

I apologize for typos, my baby is trying to type for me.

The powers that be that I referenced is the DWG, especially since someone from the DWG had commented here. As for personal aesthetic that comment was directed at large since many comments have been about how it looks rather than any other objective criteria. My comment about professionals is a rebuttal to your low quality comments, I'm sure OSM could care less who does what but when making a decision about quality and accuracy I'm sure knowing it's a professional and authoritative original source has merit and since you alone do not speak for OSM I'm sure others in the decision making might care.

I know I'm not wholly objective in this case because it is my edit and work but I'm not sure you are being objective anymore because any argument against your position continues to bring out more unsubstantiated claims meaning emotion rather than objectivity. This time it is a claim of copyright infringement which I'm sure you know is not applicable in this case. Data released by the federal government in the United States automatically is part of the public domain and is not copyrighted therefore any derivative of thar days is not subject to copyright violations.

MikeN if that is what is decided by the DWG or a community consensus (more than a couple of people) then feel free to revert the changeset. I have defended my edits and will disagree with the decision but again I'm adult and I'm not going to throw a fit or do anything rash or detrimental to the map. I honestly thought after discussing it with another DWG member months ago they had removed it. I just don't stand by random individuals deciding they don't like something and reverting it.