"do you dare to contradict official data" - sure, it is probably right in itself, what's *objectively wrong* is how they this data is used and positioned - in such a way that in a lot of cases give no helpful information of how to actually get to the building with this address, I mean someone's gotta be blind or something not to notice that, I don't really understand what you are trying to defend here, and "rightously" reverting my changesets which are just moving them to their building, where they should've been in the first place...

regarding second comment, ehhm, I have zero clue what you are talking about here, as you answered me in this first thread only after I asked you to do it here, you ignored me for almost 10 days there...

well, that's interesting, weird and hilarious in a way...

Firstly, well yeah, you kinda have to answer other people who are also committing to OSM if you want to have a productive collaboration and find solution of different problems, and not ignoring questions. Even DWG says that people should answer and explain themselves before taking any action against them.

Secondly, which community are you talking about when you are saying that "it's fine with it"? From what I saw, Telegram chat consist of like.. less than 10 active people who actually interact there, it's not like there are a lot of people committing to OSM here, and when the question was raised regarding those weird positioning of addresses, responses from different people were, quoting:
- "Yeah I don't like that either..."
- "not sure who had the bright idea to let address points hang "in the air"
- "it makes sense sometimes (like an empty land parcel where there's no physical feature to put the addr on), but most times it's annoying."
- "I like mapping the addresses as a point, but those are too close to the road, they should be over the middle point of the building"
- "features have addresses, so address points should be attached to features, imo"
There were no people who were saying that yeah those addresses make complete sense, lol.

And lastly, well, Bucharest in itself the only, how to say, sloppily mapped big city which I saw for now, starting from those addresses which are just floating in the air and often give 0 value to actual users who use this map, then there are just so many buildings which are completely missing in the center of the city, I'd expect that the capital city wouldn't have this, but here were are and nobody is really fixing it here. And then there is a hideous infestation of extremely incorrect mapping of every individual tree in many places in the city, which is just surreal, nobody does that, makes no sense.

And them I'm the traveller who visited you country and decided to make the map better, and here you are gatekeeping hard af. Well I don't live here, so I don't really care that much about the map in Romania, but you should really think twice about what you are doing, because no matter the amount of changesets, you with 40k have the same "rights" as me with 1k, and you are not "owning" the country here lol, I have the same option to report you and rollback your changes to my changesets.

hi, noticed in this changeset that you changed/added quite some buildings, mainly hotels (for example way/896579306#map=19/42.86977/27.89568 or way/230952112#map=19/42.86584/27.89757) without building: yes tag, so the building is not showing on the map at all, gonna fix this, be careful! :)

and while we are here - maybe you'll answer my questions which I asked in another changeset after all?

changeset/139977200

btw in last sentence I'm not suggesting to actually report but quoting you, you do you of course.

I'd rather make a thread on forum and see what community thinks of what is the right way to position address POIs

a huge number of those addresses here or in Bucharest are in front of NOTHING.

Examples from SInaia.
node/9587611380
node/8092889260
node/2411079007
node/3412415126
node/9587657637
node/9587611385
node/9584754765
node/2411336824

Extremely notable place in Bucharest, seems VERY well positioned: osm.org/#map=19/44.43777/26.11880

Please explain that.

And how some addresses by you are positioned in such a way that they are right on the place of already existing address POI which were already added (I wrote you a comment of such a place, but you didn't bother answering).

"we don't need mappers of such kind" - do we need those who add info on the map in such a way that it can't provide any value to users?

Report a complain, yeah, would be interesting to see what DWG will say about sublime mapping like that.

the point I'm making is that "removing detail from the map" can be fine and you also understand that from your last message, and it's kinda hard to really see the benefit to map obvious tree row as individual trees instead of "tree row" way

just to refer to it, in older thread here (changeset/139177539) I've made arguments and examples that places which are translated mechanically by avinet_ua have no name in Russia. This is also one of many changesets which were reverted again by this new user.

also I'm pretty sure that this is again a working of avinet_ua even after his ban or something like that as he's quoting your words in this thread https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/100629/90

@SomeoneElse Hi again Andy, so what do we do here? the author doesn't answer as it seems, and I do want to revert those vandalism changesets which do not have any proper names again, only I afraid this new user will revert it again...

hm, aight, just for to make a point clear - if there is a forest and someone mapped 10k individual trees there instead of just making it a forest area, would you also consider someone removing all those trees and just putting a forest there "removing detail from the map" and revert it back? even if it makes no sense to map those trees individually and it just clutters the server and possibly a render?

hi, is it your opinion? There is no need to map individual trees in a obvious tree row when there is... well... a separate tree row line type, it's just cluttering a map and database then it's basically the same thing

понял, спасибо :) на всякий чтоб понимать)

добрый день, а есть проект постройки на этом месте?

and there are "building crossing each other" issues for every house...

hi, wanted to understand - those are separate houses in bottom row, is there a reason to make 3 buildings for each house there?

hi, noticed that you added missing addresses for some buildings which in fact have address POI already, and hence they are duplicated and standing on the same spot, was it done mechanically without checking?

Example:
node/4759235516#map=19/45.63754/25.57995 (6 years ago)
node/4759247829 (you, 1 year ago)

I will remove duplicated addresses, hope thats okay for you?

hi, noticed the changes of paths in Parcul Sportiv to Cycle and Foot path, there is a designated cicle road right near the fountain but nowhere else?

hi! thanks for contributing! question regarding number of houses on Strada Nicopole: you mapped houses starting from 10 and going up.
Where those numbers are coming from? Asking because according to HereWeGo maps and just counting them by myself, house which you mapped as 10 is maybe 12? so what's the source basically? thanks :)

isn't it that house 10 is on the other side of Strada de Mijloc?

thanks for answer! important thing here is - all those changesets which were reverted by me and them reverted two times already by two new users - are all from this user you are talking about, didn't remove anything else