pokey's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 103088873 | over 4 years ago | You are correct, and I apologize. I have been meaning to get back to you, and I just never think of it when I'm logged in. Thank you for following up. You are probably also correct about the names of the water bodies being incorrect, but they kept coming up as "Issues" and I couldn't find or think of another way to clear them. What they were was "areas" on top of water bodies. they had all identical points as the water bodies but they were separate objects. In each case the area had those numbers in the name field but no "descriptive tag" (causing the "Issue" flag) and the water body had a descriptive tag, but no name. In order to clear the issue I combined the two objects. I figured that number must be some kind of identifier to someone, or must correlate to a name in some database somewhere. Sometimes you can find names on USGS maps or on town tax maps, but I wasn't able to find names for any of these. If you know of a better way to clear these issues, I'm open to suggestions. |
| 103022388 | over 4 years ago | I had no idea, nor any intention of getting into an edit war with anyone. As I said before, it was a mistake. Unfortunately I rebooted my computer and my browser re-opened at that spot, so I made the same mistake a second time over the top of your edit. I'm sorry that I changed your correction. It was unintentional. As far as what you should or shouldn't keep in mind for the next time you wish to communicate to communicate with me, it doesn't really matter. I don't know you and I don't care to. I've had enough rude and hostile people in my life. I don't need another. In general if you communicate civilly, people respond in kind. Feel free to try it on the next person. |
| 103022388 | over 4 years ago | I can not show you evidence that Loveren's Mill Road has been completely resurfaced, because I loaned my surface sampling equipment to NASA for the next Mars rover (the one with the really cool flexible metal tires). I can not show you the call for bids, because I had to sign an NDA when I reviewed them. I can not show you the discussions held in town meetings, because that's just absurd. One can not show another a discussion. I can only pray to great flying spaghetti monster above that what you request are not the actual prerequisites to editing the map. If they are, then I am guilty of Stalin-esque levels of crimes against humanity via my contributions to the map. Here, to the best of my ability, is my account of the horrific incident, Cthulu take me if I deviate even the slightest from my honest recollection. I looked right, I saw dirt, I logged dirt. Some time later I made an edit. It is entirely conceivable that I am not in fact the quizmaphadarack, the infallible mapping super being, that you seem to think I am. In which case I implore you to consider the possibility (however slim that possibility may be) that I made a mistake. I for my part "find it _extremely_ hard to believe" that you are "extremely confused" by my "efforts to classify parts of Loveren's Mill Road as dirt." If true, and you are "extremely confused" then I must conclude that you are extremely stupid, thus extremely unqualified to review anyone's changes to the map. However I do not think you are actually stupid, so I do not believe you are actually confused. I do, however believe that you are being extremely hyperbolic, and extremely antagonistic. Two character flaws which I find extremely distasteful. I'm not alone in seeing these traits as distasteful, and I suspect its not the first time you've heard this. So if your intent is to make a correction, go ahead and log in and make it. It's not that hard. If your intent is to get me to fix my own mistake, then a simple, "hey, I think you made a mistake," would have done just fine. If your intent is to start a flame war over the surface of single road, or over my edits in general, then you needn't bother. Your self righteous pedantry is not worth any more of my time than I have taken to write this, and only because I find this slightly amusing at the moment. I contribute to the map because I'm some kind of a weirdo, and that's my idea of a good time. Its not because I'm seeking your approval, nor because I wish to argue about the surface of a minor road in a small town that I was passing through on my way to somewhere else with someone who has never even been there. |
| 88574510 | over 5 years ago | No worries. Thanks for looking out. |
| 87892627 | over 5 years ago | I can't comment on the size of the data. Maybe of every road had all the 2-ways data filled in it would break the map. Maybe the field is always there, and the value is null until it's filled in. I have no idea how the database is structured. I just figure more complete data is better, and i suspect the admins "budget" for it. Sometimes I delete redundant points on straight lines for the same reason though.
|
| 87892627 | over 5 years ago | It is implied. So is 2 lanes and asphalt. Verified is better than implied though.
|
| 86430460 | over 5 years ago | I record speed limit signs as I pass them while I'm out driving or motorcycling. I use OSMTracker with a custom button layout that makes recording speed limits and road surfaces very easy and quick. I also use LineageOS which makes switching between OSMAnd and OSMTracker very quick. I took a screenshot, but I don't see a way to post it. Sorry. |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | #my OSMTracker config file (landscape)(for anyone interested)
<layout name="root">
<layout name="more">
<layout name="left">
<layout name="left more">
<layout name="right">
<layout name="right more">
</layouts> |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | #my OSMTracker config file (portrait)(for anyone interested)
<layout name="root">
<layout name="more">
<layout name="left">
<layout name="left more">
<layout name="right">
<layout name="right more">
</layouts> |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | freebeer, you're just a troublemaker. We should hang out. |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | No worries at all. I know the feeling. I'd like to tell people not to use "paved" when the surface is "asphalt" but I don't know how to tell who did what tag. |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | Thanks for catching the mistake, btw. I do my best to be accurate, but sadly perfection continues to elude me. |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | OK. Thank you.
|
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | I use OSMTracker. I use a custom dashboard so that I can hit a button for the speed limit change (or surface transition) right as I get to the speed limit sign (or surface transition). I'm usually pretty accurate. Can you tell me what I got wrong in this one? |
| 81186543 | almost 6 years ago | no worries. I'm using GPS traces that i made a while ago. Trying to clean out my backlog. I may be out of date. Sorry if I "incorrected" anything. |
| 81186326 | almost 6 years ago | Alright. Thanks for the heads up. |
| 50603756 | over 8 years ago | Thanks, Rick.
|
| 50603756 | over 8 years ago | Hi, underorbit. The map says that you made some changes to roads at Exit 6E and Exit 6W on NH route 16. Did you change them to match the satellite images of the area? If so, you should know that there has been a massive construction project in the area, and the roads are drastically different now. The satellite images available in that area are very out of date. For instance, exit 4E has been completely removed, and the General Sullivan Bridge has been demolished and rebuilt in a new location. Several completely new roads have been constructed in the area as well. Unfortunately, none of this can be seen in the satellite photography. I had recorded several traces of the new road layout and made the necessary corrections several months ago, but those corrections have all been removed. I've asked a more experienced editor for assistance in reverting the recent changes, but I would like to let whoever made the changes know why it's being reverted. I think it was you. Either way, thank you for your work on the map. Regards,
|
| 41180749 | over 9 years ago | Thanks, folks.I had no idea how to fix the lake. My only idea was to cut off all the bays and make them individual bodies of water, then do the same with the center while making sure they abut. I tried doing that a couple of times, but never saved the work, because it never completely worked for me. It still doesn't render in the OSMP.org viewer, if you zoom out enough, but it renders close up, and it renders in OSMAnd. I have never tried to edit a relation with Potlatch, but thank you for the heads up. |
| 41180749 | over 9 years ago | I am not the one who broke it. I was editing roads in the area, and i noticed that the lake wasn't rendering. I tried to fix it by linking the broken segments back together but there are too many nodes to save the changes. I use Potlatch2 to edit, and it only allows saving ~2000 nodes per polygon. I tried to save all of the bays as separate bodies of water, and that was working, but, before I could finish, Potlatch crashed on me. I have not had time to try again, and I'm sure its not the correct fix anyway. |