Already explained many times: One image says itself that it's from another way, the other one had an invalid ID and wasn't displayable

As discussed in other changesets, you have now added a correct image and clarified the mistakes that happened here. If you want, you could even add the obstacle again now.
(But not the image by stillhart obviously as it's showing a different path.)

I never tagged it as ground, it always used to be grass. The fact you didn't walk the path but still changed the attributes added by someone who (which you also have to assume) has actually walked the complete path, is problematic. If you just passed on the main track below, you don't know how everything beyond the first few meters looks like. Therefore you should not change tags at all and even less remove any, they might still be correct for the largest part of the way.

In this case we could now determine the correct tags with someone who has actually walked the way too very recently. This is the way how tags are properly evolving.

Can I just ask you to refrain from removing information added by other users? This would really help not flagging your edits as invalid.

The statement that the unit is optional does not mean that you can simply remove it when someone else decided to add it for additional clarification. It means that you don't have to add the unit when you are adding a height tag in meters. The fundamental guidelines of OSM clearly state that it is not okay to remove information added by others just because you think it's unnecessary. So please add the units again where you previously removed them.

Please be more specific. Which image exactly? We discussed already everything very extensively. Please look at panoramax yourself, the images have a connected location with them as already explained.

You still ignore what we just have discussed. You were the one providing the information to me that was acting as a completely legitimate base for the edit I did today. All other edits were based on investigation on site at the time of editing. Only after these very lengthy discussions we could find out that the information provided by you some days ago was wrong and with the new information you provided today, we agreed that the way is now a path andits surface is ground. Not more and not less.

All other edits were correct at the time of editing and the access tags still are correct too unless you have found clear indications on site that the standard access rights from the law are not applying here.

And no, this was never a consensus. As stated, many times, I have seen multiple times that it was a track until like three months ago. I today restored an earlier version based on your provided hints that were clearly and verifiably indicating that you edited the wrong path. This last step could be clarified with extensive discussions to have a bad base.

The law is giving clear indications for access rights

How do I know it's misplaced? Have you even looked at panormax?! Every image is connected to a location.

@ one I am just referring to what mateusz was writing here.
Why have you removed the proper access tags now?

@ mateusz please don't encourage behaviour that is clearly against basic OSM policies. It is generally not okay to remove information.

Well, the ID of the second image appears to be fixed now, it's just still pointing to the wrong way

@Mateusz now you are pointing to a very special case that it completely irrelevant to the discussion. No, the tag was not changed here but removed.

And no, a panoramax image that was uploaded by stillhart (who was not editing here) and indicates that it was shot on a different path should not be added again. And an image with an invalid ID should be fixed, so it can actually be viewed by anyone.

If this sequence is really coming from the correct way, it would be surprising but possible, then yes, it would now be a path and it would most likely now be surface=ground or surface=dirt
But I still don't get why you were adding an image by stillhart that states that it's showing a different path

No, it is because until like three months ago at least, the way was always wide enough for a four-wheeled vehicle to drive on and I also remember tractor traces. Have you looked at my sources from back when I actually edited it by hand? They clearly state that I was there.

The image by stillhart and its location however are a source that indicate that the changes were made on the wrong way and therefore invalidate the changes.

If the sequence you posted now really is showing the correct path, then yes, it would now be a path and it would most likely now be surface=ground or surface=dirt

Should be appearent: Because I was walking on grass when I added the tag

I have not "reverted it already twice", the first one was just giving an incomplete result.

As said in the other discussion, it would be pretty surprising if the way changed that much in the last about three months since I visited it for the last time, but not in the years before when it always was a track, if these new images are really showing this way: https://panoramax.openstreetmap.fr/?s=fp;s2;pc64f5e61-71d8-4040-9091-2fb5e37fde51;c224.88/14.96/0;m18.13/47.355805/8.495187;vd;bs;udefault
In that case, yes, it would now be a path and it would most likely now be surface=ground or surface=dirt

As explained in your changeset, you added a panoramax image that claims it was uploaded by a different user and on another path. If this is what you have seen, the information given on panoramax would indicate that you were actually on a different path than the one you edited.
If the sequence you are linking now actually shows the edited path, it would be pretty surprising that it changed that much in the last like 3 months but not in the years before. However, I can't see any fallen trees in that sequence. Since OSM is based around verifiability, it is important that sources (and images are very much like a source) are actually aligning with the edit. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to remove information but all the hints you gave were pointing towards a simply wrong edit.

I'm not sure what you mean. The first image shows it was added to panoramax by stillhart, not you, and is from a different path on the connected panoramax map. The second one is always giving an error when trying to load the image for its ID not being valid, so I can't tell anything about it but appearently only valid and publicly available images should be linked.

"For example when tag is wrong."
This is completely false. If the tag became wrong, it has to be changed but NOT deleted.