I am reading through the comment log which resulted in a 10 year ban for using junction nodes incorrectly, when can they be used

osm.org/changeset/149827539#map=12/-34.8875/138.5788

osm.org/changeset/150094405#map=12/-34.8875/138.5788

these particular junction nodes are the only junction nodes ever to be deleted and removed, how are these any different to any other junction nodes on the map and why didnt the user who deleted these ones delete any other ones?

I am just seeking help with junction nodes, not sure how to use them correctly as the reason for their removal is not a direct quote from any part of the junction nodes wiki. hoping a discussion here would help shed some light on their removal.

NationalMap is a open and public resource, it has datasets from every state and territory.

discussion is here https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/new-nation-wide-resource-national-map-australia/115499

posting to my personal diary in-case it gets deleted from there and also for more visibility

EDIT THE CONSENCOUS HAS NOW CHANGED TO SAY THAT THIS DATA IS REMOVED BECAUSE OF A UNDOCUMENTED IMPORT WHICH IS EXACTLY THE REASON I SAID IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED UNDER NOT BECAUSE OF A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION

context https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/apparent-use-of-unauthorised-source-for-beach-names-in-australia/108721

The names of our beaches is open and public data in Australia, the names of our beaches have been deleted for no reason at all.

this removal was based on a unofficial chat room discussion which is not documented for anybody to see.

the surf life saving club does not own the right to the names of our beaches, however granted the the surf life saving club may not the the most direct source of this information. but we have a full waiver to use this information none-the-less from our government.

there was never a formal proposal about the removal of this information

along with this massive deletion was other information such as boat ramps and beaches drawn in clearly by using imagery.

posting here because my comments keep getting removed by the moderators now.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/south-australia-road-classification-proposal/112068

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/was-changing-the-road-classifications-to-align-with-south-australias-bypass-law-really-an-import/111445

-

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposal-to-add-the-emoji-as-a-reaction/107167/1

this thread which is even has 2 DWG participants started off as a joke but has turned into coordinated harassment and trolling, they even praise “skillful trolling” I am going to let people read this for themselves. This is the backbone of OSM everybody.

it’s me again speaking from beyond the grave lmao!, todays diary entry consists of a bait and switch a user is trying to do first by removing a simple note from South Australias Major Traffic Network, and therefore after based on “Whats on the Ground” change the classifications of the road network to whatever the user feels. The problem with this is that “Whats on the Ground” literally has no authority over “actual nature of the road”. If this does not make sense please read the community link below.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/automated-edit-to-remove-note-on-highway-trunk-in-sa/108612/12

last week the OSM Board and the DWG have given permission to anybody to change my 100% factual edits with out any intervention. This has already lead to the map displaying old outdated information. The changeset i’m bringing attention to osm.org/changeset/146818956 The Gawler Bypass which even has it’s own wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gawler_Bypass was completed in 2010, its intended function was to divert all traffic wanting to go north of Gawler to go around the entire town. The section of Main North Road that goes through Gawler was officially downgraded to a secondary road plus it’s route number B19 was also removed. When this section was classed in OSM I suspect it was based on its class before the license change and its was kept as “primary” which was not wrong, it is a fact that it was a primary road at the time. https://imgur.com/ZrpOFr8 My edit clearly with supported information is correct to class it as secondary. I would like to ask The DWG how we move forward as a community and keeping the integrity of the information at the same time. OSM is a important project to me and I would like to find a way to work together here without slowly watching road by road the factual information fall apart. more relevant links posted below https://data.sa.gov.au/data/dataset/trailblazer-roads osm.org/changeset/12436982#map=15/-34.5780/138.7422 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_North_Road#cite_note-8 https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/nsc/northern_expressway osm.org/#map=13/-34.6025/138.7299

previous diary entry osm.org/user/slice0/diary/403361

https://imgur.com/a/qNROb4E

When a mapping service chooses to pay for the rights for the street data and navigation they turn to the government, the state government hand over the map of their roads and classifications of the roads. The government of South Australia has given this information to the OpenStreetMap project for free all that needed to be done is for someone to translate the data onto the map. I was that person, and it has done nothing except for russle peoples jimmys all the way to the OSM board. The classification of roads goes way beyond a single dictionary meaning and has lots of different considerations such as traffic volume, width of the road, whether there are hazards such as railway crossings that the roads are engineered to avoid, speed, intersections etc. Thankfully the people who plan and engineer the roads take all of this into consideration and classify roads accordingly to what the intention of the road actually is. As far as OSM is concerned none of this matters and “what someone thinks it is from the ground” is far far more important and accurate. I 100% get that when this project started not a single government anywhere in the world gave this information over to the project and OSM needed to come up with some meaning and right and wrong way to classify roads. So the project decided on “Use highway=secondary to tag highways which are not part of major routes, but nevertheless form a link in the national route network. Secondary highways are generally specified by country road classification bylaws”. Which is fine and people were happy with that… but it leaves out a situation where. what if a government somewhere comes along and says “heres what our roads are feel free to use this” well what you see in the above screenshot happens, OSM does not allow for Real factual official government data to be allowed and I think this needs to change.

-

-

-

-