We don't accept sedition on OSM :D
just kidding around, yeah I wish we can fix typos on our changeset notes but I thought it was funny :)

be careful, looks like you dragged node/86186142 accidentally. I put it back to its original spot in changeset/125427649 .

Updated in changeset/125334652, should be a bit cleaner - no more overlapping way!

Hi, thanks for trying to fix the overlap -- though still seems to need work. about way/975501221 - I propose we delete this entirely to get rid of the overlap. Things like bike lanes should be marked in tags(like cycleway:right=lane) of the main road and not drawn as a separate way like it's being done here?
cycleway=*

Hmm... so that 12 year old data was incorrect perhaps? Now I really don't understand what's going on here.

It looks like version 1, h4ck3rm1k3 did the initial POI 12 years ago. Then in version 2, h4ck3rm1ke touched it again and changed man_made=mine.

Then in version 3 you added land_use=quarry, which is probably not correct. But then in version 4, you deleted the POI.

I would expect the POI restored to h4ck3rm1k3's version 2?

I don't know what the extent of this is, but this seems a bit worrisome.

Hi, something looks very weird with the two 'reverts' you did... if you look at the history of node/585383651 it looks like you ended up deleting a bad tag change or something? Not sure exactly of the intent but something seems wrong here

reverted after seeing better imagery and understanding what this is...

I removed the overlapping route in changeset/124358675 as another validation tool requested its revert as a MapRoulette task. In any case, to reiterate, it depends on the renderer whether the route is drawn with the dotted lines or whatnot. Again the CyclOSM/Cycle Map should be the ones that have a complete coloration of the trail and I'm not sure of the render cadence of these representations.

BTW I already deleted way/1081598199 before I noticed the extent of the damage...

I put in a note for myself and others at note/3291112 which needs to be closed once this issue is resolved.

Hi, I noticed you put down a bunch of new ways like way/1081598198 and it's a duplicate of existing ways underneath of it. I think I deleted one of them due to the violation but I noticed you had speed info on some of them. They don't match the speed on existing ways so I'm not sure which one is now correct? Please comment back. Need to fix the overlaps.

hi, I noticed you added way/1041871209 - but it doesn't fully connect through a road that was already on the map -- it overlaps it, could you take a look at the overlap? The overlapping way is way/442904010 . Thanks!

You have a circular and a straw man argument there. Note that there's a person/persons behind validation tool writing and someone who wrote a wiki, and these people are in agreement with each other, and thus it's the ways multiple people do things... and by your argument, it should be approved, even if it disagrees with your view of how things should be done.

Do as you please if it floats your boat, as currently I see only one person thinking your way is the only way to do things.

Hi, thanks for adding.
However just some improvement suggestions: the building is currently at level -1 which implies underground. This surely isn't the case. Unfortunately yes it would conflict with the driveways. Now the advanced tip: I think the best way is to make a tunnel through the building or just terminate the driveways at the building. The latter is acceptable as normally unless you work there, you're normally not allowed to drive through as likely there's a fire truck or closed garage doors blocking. If you want to make a building passage, take a look at way/769945676 which makes a tunnel through the building.

Hi, thanks for adding, I don't know why I never saw something wrong even after driving by many, many times.
However one thing to improve: could you take out the house number and spell out "North Taft Avenue" in the the addr:street tag? That would make things a bit more tidy, thanks!

Hello, welcome to OSM. Thanks for noting that this appears to have overgrown and no longer a beach volleyball area as it has grown over in grasses in the latest imagery. I guess the seniors in this retirement community fell out of playing volleyball and just rather swim in the pool.

However we shouldn't be naming things generically like "Drainage Area" as its official name is likely not "Drainage Area" but rather apparently from your description a "infiltration" basin that water is allowed to soak into the ground after heavy rains. So perhaps it'd be best to not have a name of "drainage area" and change the basin type to infiltration?

Take a look at the existing building that is tagged Buttercream - I cleaned up the duplicate, no further action is needed,

I added shop=groomer to the old tagging and took out the duplicate tag. Take a look/no further action is needed.

Hi again,
Looks like The Dog Pawlour was already tagged as well, however it was not completely tagged and not named properly, perhaps that's why it seems like it was missing. Need to merge the two info together, let me know if you don't understand what I mean.