Hey David, the area is clearly densely forested so it should have natural=wood to denote it is a forest.

Although, the natural=wood polygons that were added by Zack Bowden looked like that they could have stayed.

I just hope that no one moved the stone :)

Again so you can understand it:
* I did not change any data, I only added new data to OSM. You changed all counties in two states (CT, RI) and all COGs. That is a mass edit.
* Providing two numbers is no evidence of any wide consensus as you claim. All I can say is that you are just making it up and present your own ideas as what the community wanted.
* The dispute was not settled and is still active, yet you went ahead and executed your will.

I am accusing you of unethical conduct that is non collegial and is disrupting to the OSM community. If everybody would at like you do you would certainly not like it.

Hi, I am not sure if I wrote this to you (if yes then sorry). There is a better way how to tag hiking trails than describing them in name fields of ways. It is based on relations that group all ways belonging to the trail and no name tag is necessary.
example: relation/2971739

osm.wiki/United_States/Long_distance_trails

I am going to repeat myself here:
1. You have no privilege to mass edit someones OSM contributions.
2. I gave you no permission nor was the conversation finished.
3. You refuse to provide evidence of wide consensus to such tagging.
4. You make your own personal interpretation of tags that many disagree with and made some users upset.

From previous personal conversation with you, I am not surprised you can’t accept your fault.
But I just want to raise this to the community, if we are really fine with this kind of behavior. This approach can be really damaging. What motivation do I have to contribute to OSM if someone can just come and claim it for themself by tagging/modifying it to their liking?

Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG.

Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG.

Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG.

Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG.

Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG.

Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue.

Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue.

Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue.

Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue.

Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue.

These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state.

These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state.

These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state.

These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state.