please respond, it would be nice to get those clarifications.

I have a few notes here, first, next time please try and keep the geographic area down, this could have been done as 6 ish separate smaller commits and it would have made it easier to review/understand.
second of all, what is your source for the deletion of way/1178243253, I ask because it is there on the latest imagery (National Agriculture Imagery Program, and Miami-Dade County Orthoimagery (Latest)).
Next, for way way/1081964592 why did you remove the bicycle=yes, does that mean that bicycle's aren't allowed because then it should be tagged as bicycle=no, otherwise why remove the tag?
last of all on several ways (such as way/1036045604) you put bicycle=Not Specified, I could not find any previous uses of this value (see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/bicycle#values), what does it mean, shouldn't a more standard tag be used(like possibly permissive), the point I'm trying to make here is that, from my understanding of the tagging in this commit, "yes" seems to get across the same information as "Not Specified" unless there are signs specifying that bicycles aren't allowed on those sidewalks, and if it is that way bicycle=no would be more appropriate from how I see it. Just because there isnt a sign explicitly allowing bicyclists doesn't imply that they aren't allowed on that sidewalk at all, honestly from how I see it it would be the other way, unless otherwise specified you can bike on sidewalks. and generally the use of non standard tagging in cases were there really isnt a good reason to do so is usually not a vary good idea, tagging changes need to be approved through a community vote on the wiki.
otherwise, happy mapping.

wouldn't "updated traffic signals" be a better commit message since it better describes what was done in the commit since it wasn't stop signs that were added rather traffic signals.

when adding stop signs a better commit message would be "added stop sign" since you didn't change the alignment and because it better describes what was actually done in the commit.

wouldn't "added stop sign" be a better (better describes what was done in the commit) change set comment for this since that was what was done, since the actual alignment has not changed.

why did you add this when there is already turn:lanes=* tagging on way way/968569007 which represents the exact same information. If the turn:lanes=* tagging is wrong I feel it would have been better if that had been fixed instead of adding wholly new geometry. what I'm trying to say is that I dont think this is necessary and am wondering why you did added the link.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143557127

just a quick question, what is the source for this commit?

yes, it would be amazing if you would start adding changeset comments to your commits.

yes, please follow the changeset comment guidelines and keep the geographic area smaller, it can be really hard to tell what areas really large changesets like this effect so that they can be verified.

please stop removing the tagging of pedestrian areas, the "highway=pedestrian" specifies that this is a pedestrian area. see highway=pedestrian for more information, this tagging schema is approved so there is no reason to remove the tagging.

I'm sorry if this is me not understanding local slang/colloquialisms but what do you mean by "decoy road"?

also it would be wonderful if you used more words in describing your commits since it can be hard to tell what "around hwy 17 and decoy road", something like "did some edits around hwy 17 and added decoy road" would be better since it it easier to understand since without those extra words we dont have enough words to truly understand what you mean.

has the YouTube channel (USA RAIL GUIDE) given us (OSM) the right to use the channel's videos as sources in commits?

question, I was wondering what the source for these edits is, this is because this commit contains edits within a covered area so the aerial imagery would not be enough to deduce parts of this.

understood, sorry for the inconvenience, I didn't know that.

these features still exist, I an confirm since I saw that they were there around a month ago, so I am reverting these commits. for any questions you can always message me through OSM though I may not be able to respond immediately due to being in the middle of a semester of collage so I cannot due to that taking priority check OSM everyday.

changeset/142602246

these features still exist, I an confirm since I saw that they were there around a month ago, so I am reverting these commits. for any questions you can always message me through OSM though I may not be able to respond immediately due to being in the middle of a semester of collage so I cannot due to that taking priority check OSM everyday.

changeset/142602246

Just a really small nitpicking here, but it would make it easier to understand what you'd done in this change set from the get go if the change set comment had been something along the lines of "fixed typo in turn:lanes of way/345992147". thats all, it would have made it clearer what you had done here.

please describe what you have done in a change set, for more information see the following wiki page:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

for example this commit could be something like "added water bodies and a roundabout". this makes it easier for those reviewing commits and the general community to more easily figure out what you've done in a commit.

Why did you delete all those ponds just to replace them with new water bodies, you could have preserved the history and just updated the alignment of the existing ways. Also, you seemed to have not added back the water=pond that was on some of these, correct my if I'm wrong here but I think that that tagging should persist on the new features added.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142291277

why did you remove all these buildings, they seem to still be there in the "Lee County Orthoimagery (2023)" which I assume would be relatively up to date. if you are removing as to add from the rapid data source it would better if in the future you realigned the existing ways instead deleting and adding new ones as to preserve history, especially if all these buildings are still here and no new construction has happened.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142291402