I said “wow look at the sad old men in this thread, theres even DWG members here as well wow” thats when I first saw the thread. And yeah lmao the users of that thread hid my comment pretty quick

someone linked a mass edit proposal that I made from that thread, and thus my proposal was brigaded by skillful trolls. I had to recreate my mass edit proposal in the end.

and thankyou for creating the thread, I can include it in my police report to show that this project has a coordinated effort behind the harassment I have received from this community

@Richard based on you reply I have made a proposal here https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mass-edit-proposal-south-australias-arterial-traffic-network/110006 , it looks like you are 100% wrong with the designation tag

looks great! good job

@CactiStaccingCrane based on what, genuinely curious. I am actively seeking to improve myself by the way.

@richard the discussion is already happening, you’re welcome to express your opinion

@richard can you please read through the link on the community forum and voice your thoughts there, what I mean is that each classification of road already has their definitions the the Wiki. how does “whats on the ground” have authority over these definitions, please keep that in mind as you read through and respond there please. As that is where the discussion is taking place.

@wynndale if you’re talking about things that I have said on discord in the past that got me my first block I accept that. otherwise I am trying to talk about rules, facts, data and personal opinion. Outside of these diary entrys I dont believe I have ever talked to you in my life. I dont even know you .

@slice0/diary/403433

my new diary entry from todays adventures of “trying to keep factual information on the map”

@mateusz ok I get it, everyone has been against using South Australias legal and official source of road classification data. I have consistently been told that these edits do not match up with OSM rules. I have never been shown an example of this. With in a week of the DWG telling everyone they are free to revert my edits wit-out question a changeset has been made that plainly and clearly violates OSM rules and standards. I have pointed it out here in this diary entry. Yet nothing has been done about it. Can you see from my point of view, that I am the only one here actually sticking to these rules and guidelines. I am the only one providing facts, data and information.

I care a lot about the map and its accuracy. I have been using and editing it for over 10 years. I still have my original Garmin Nuvi. I probably sound annoyed sometimes because I care too much and it comes accorss as nasty. Im also not used to being part of any community in OSM I have always just quiestly edited on my own until I needed to ask a O-T question and found myself joining the discord and I guess after all these years I didnt realise the “community” part of OSM existed. Yes I will try to help and listen to people in the future, I am actually really good at doing OSM things. I never even read the wiki until recently when people started pointing out things, I remember mapping when “mappers preference” was a genuine rule and “map the intended function” and very very loose rules like that just because there were so few people editing. I have spent a lot of nights doing really mundane hard to do edits. and yes I guess it is annoying when someone just randomly comes along and reads the wiki and points out things that could have been done differently but its also very easy to do that as well without adding anything to the map.

@someoneelse so are we going to follow the guidelines for the gawler section? if we are that needs to be put back to secondary

I cant make changeset comments but this is what I wrote https://dit.sa.gov.au/infrastructure/completed_projects/bridge_maxwell_pooraka the intersection was upgraded and a roundabout was built at the nelson road joint and all the road was resurfaced to accommodate a secondary road, this section was classified as secondary in 2019 can I please asked why these are changed

that same user is just randomly deleting secondary roads now, changeset/146839145#map=15/-34.8170/138.6552 the state upgraded the intersection I will make a comment on the changeset

I thought it was funny ill remove it, I drove 450km yesterday. I have been using OSM on my GPS since the project started. People dont realise I know what im talking about when it comes to navigation and roads.

What is not reasonable is where (on your profile) you said “I have made every single Major Traffic Road, Primary Road and Secondary Road a 1 to 1 with the Legal and Official Government Source”. This destroys the work of other mappers and will not be tolerated.

Thats the thing though, the official data does match and line up with OSM policy, the only thing fizzie was asking me for that I couldnt find or provide was the dictionary meaning that the SA government use for Secondary and Primary Roads. I found the Western Australian government one and its the same as OSM but I cant find the SA meanings. people have just been jumping on the bangwagon with out genuinely looking into any of this information. and yes I havent helped with my attitude because I mostly assumed its pretty obvious and I didnt really need to go into detail. This is where I want to find a middle ground and move on, I can speak the someone from the transport department and get the meaning.

@someoneelse im trying to point out that a new DWG policy as directly lead to old outdated and factually incorrect information being put into the map. osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads#Road_Hierarchy ,just the fact that it no longer has a route assignment (B19) means it is no longer a state road and does not meet OSM requirements for a primary classification. Please point out where I am wrong here. Ive been editing OSM for over 10 years never even had any changesets comments until I decided to look into the classification information that we have available and fix all the mistakes.

@wynndale im serious here, a fact has been deleted from the project