Complaints against Brazilian category moderators

Caro Emerson,

Fiquei surpreso ao ler sua acusação de que menti em um tópico no fórum da comunidade do OpenStreetMap. No entanto, para que eu possa entender e abordar adequadamente sua preocupação, seria útil se você pudesse fornecer mais detalhes sobre a alegação específica que você acredita ser falsa e o fato real correspondente.

Estou comprometido com a transparência e a precisão em minhas interações online, especialmente em comunidades tão importantes como o OpenStreetMap. Se há algo que precisa ser corrigido ou esclarecido, estou mais do que disposto a discutir isso de forma construtiva e colaborativa.

Por favor, forneça mais informações para que possamos resolver esse mal-entendido da melhor maneira possível.



I have split this topic off from the selection criteria as it was not about selection criteria, but Brazilian moderators. The etiquette guidelines say to start a new thread if you want to introduce a new topic.

I’ve also only skimmed and will look at what I need to read later. If you have a concern about behavior around an organized edit, please contact the DWG. This category is only about Discourse and if you have complaints about behavior somewhere else in OSM you need to take it up with the appropriate body.

You’ve alleged a specific misuse of moderator powers, but I can’t see any links.

Please provide a link to the topic thread where you believe inappropriate moderator action was taken. In general, someone can privately contact the forums governance team at any time if they believe moderators are violating the rules, but in this case the allegations are already public.


One single moderator on Brasil (Brazil) (subforum of a OSMF-sponsored thing) edits content on OpenStreetMap Wiki (OSMF-sponsored thing) related to the company he’s an employee. This situation is relevant because both the history of description for changes from him on, and also when explicitly asked to explain his further edits that remove content, see, he mentions “Brazilian community” to win arguments and continue further edits.

If he wasn’t moderator on Brasil (Brazil), OSM Wiki admins et al would react differently. Actually, even for DWG decide what the level of reaction of what to do (the case still open; only recently in the revalidation process he edited wiki to mark as “done”, so eventually I still need to stop and update DWG), becomes relevant if the edits on complaints for the organized editing are based on false claims of support.

Under this context, the lack of content of discussions on Brasil (Brazil) about this set of problematic organized editing in the region I’m a mapper (such as having public evidence that specific the changes he made aren’t outright invention of the responsible of organized editing) actually are relevant.

I hope I provided sufficient explanation on why the re validation on Brasil (Brazil) should allow vote in 2024.

<snip the parts about wiki / DWG issues, as those are being handled by their respective teams and cannot be handled by Discourse teams like forum-governance - you do realize those are separate functions with separate privileges, right @fititnt?>

Sure, problematic organized editing for some region should be discussed in that forum category, I’m all with you here.
But how is the fact that you (and possibly other parties) didn’t take the effort to discuss the issue in Brasil (Brazil) Discourse category in any way related to Discourse category moderator abusing their Discourse moderation powers in Discourse forum?

From your wording before, I was expected that you started a discussion in Brasil (Brazil) forum category, and that the moderator there with Conflict-of-Interest inappropriately deleted that discussion because they didn’t like it being discussed or whatever. Did that happen, or not? Please answer this question with simple Yes or No.

If they didn’t do that; did they instead break any rules that apply specifically to Discourse category moderators (not wiki, not edits, not mailing lists, not tile usage ToS, not crimes IRL etc.), and if they did, please quote exactly which rule (with a proof of such allegation).


IOW, forum moderators are chosen by their ability to fairly moderate the forum.

And not by their ability to correctly use JOSM and make useful map edits, or to edit the wiki in accepted and understandable way, or to speak clear English, or their ability to lead in a military conflict, write good OSM open source code or play good soccer.

They could be absolutely horrible at any or all of those (which I am neither implying, nor denying; as I have not even had time to look into it), and still be excellent category moderators. In fact, it is statistically almost a rule that if you are good at one thing that you’ll likely be worse at other things.

So, the question pertaining to selection of moderators is “are they doing good job of managing category forum?”, and do people using that category in that forum approve of their use of extended moderator powers in that forum category?

So if they are doing a good job of category moderation, and users of that category approve of the way they use their moderation powers, then everything is as it should be as far as their category moderation status is concerned, I would say.
(until possible overriding OSM global ban is issued, which obviously haven’t happened)

1 Like

I would just like to point out that Community Forum (Discourse) is one thing, OSM Wiki is another, Organized Edit is a third different thing. Let me clarify if it’s still not clear to you:

1 - if you have a problem with a moderator here (Discourse), you bring the problem to @forums-governance (immediately! Not just when revalidating mods)
2 - If you have a problem with any edits (organized or not), contact the mapper first, then local community (if not solved), then DWG (if not solved).
3 - I don’t see any relevance with your complaints with regarding to OSM Wiki Administrators. What should they do? What the Brazilian mods did wrongly on the wiki that the admins there should have done?

Are you saying that those 18 people on that wiki page are accomplices to any wrong behavior in the wiki (which are still not clear to me)? I would not like to be accused to that, thankfully I’m not a wiki admin!

You made several accusations to all Discourse @mods-brazil in the past weeks, and yet you haven’t provided any proof. Also, you’re constantly violating the Etiquette Guidelines, which is not the first occurrence, since you were banned last year about the very same thing.

I even myself translated that page to Portuguese, just to make the guidelines clear to Portuguese-speakers. Have you EVER read that page?

Finally, could you please respect our free time, and stop accusing us in many topics, but when we ask you anything you simply don’t answer? You didn’t answer here, nor here, here, not even a thread you opened here or here.


You are making a very, very serious accusation, and then citing Etiquete.

I provided the link to OSM Wiki (another OSMF-sponsored) about one moderator deleting/editing content from organized Editing he’s part of and arguing some supposedly support of “Brazilian community”.

So, your accusation is false. I am presenting proofs.

Am I?

Where? Where did Everton or any Brazilian mod did something off the rules in this very same forum? Everybody is asking for proofs for many days, and yet you haven’t provided.

Did you read what all the other people wrote to you? Do you understand the difference between Discourse, Wiki, OSM Edits?

Matija has wrote you several messages, and you haven’t answered any of that.

So I’ll insist: please provide where any Brazilian moderator is not doing their job properly here on the Community forum. No need to over-explain, just post a single link where this happened.

We are here to help you, but you have to help us first.

1 Like

Trecho do dialogo com Mateusz Konieczny no User talk:Everton Bortolini - OpenStreetMap Wiki

O que foi “apagado” está na documentação do projeto específico.

Você contactou a comunidade brasileira antes de contactar o DWG?


the forums governance team has reviewed the evidence provided by Rocha (@fititnt) and no evidence provided supports there being any issues with the Brazil category moderation. We also found no evidence on the cited wiki pages of the Brazilian category moderators claiming any authority outside the Brazil category. In fact, we found no mention of moderators or moderation at all.

Rocha was asked multiple times by multiple people to supply evidence to moderation-related misconduct and did not provide any. If he had evidence, this was the time to supply it.

Although in some cases conduct in some other location may impact someone’s ability to be a moderator here, it would be unusual and normally involve measures taken by the other location’s moderation (e.g. DWG or Wiki admins). This is not the case here, and Rocha has a previous history of assuming improper behavior of Brazilian moderators without evidence, when the alleged improper behavior did not happen.

The issues appear to all stem from a dispute over organised edits. Handling this is the job of the Data Working Group, not of forum moderators or the forum governance team. We are not equipped to handle editing disputes, nor do we have any powers on the OSM API as part of our forum work.

If an individual believes misconduct has happened they can raise it with @forums-governance at any time. They do not need to wait for annual health checks and if there is misconduct it is better to deal with it at the time. We can check what moderation actions were taken on a topic and verify what happened.

In addition we have found that Rocha’s actions on Discourse, viewed as a whole, fall well short of the expected behaviors in the etiquette guidelines and repeatedly claiming a group of people are misusing moderation powers while failing to provide evidence when asked multiple times is not acceptable behavior. This serves as a formal warning, and repeating this behavior may lead to blocks or other actions from the global moderators or forums governance team.


I discovered in the middle of the revalidation here Brasil - Revalidação dos moderadores - fevereiro de 2024 - #28 by Matija_Nalis that even to enable voting in the annual health check, it would be necessary to provide a longer justification. Done in English instead of Portuguese here because was a reply to this, because it also helps to contextualise one moderator deleted his messages and other content outside this Discourse, such as telegram channel he was in contact with local community. He also makes threats of taking legal action in the very place that other mappers would vote.

I repeated multiple times the reason to add this information here is to enable voting, and still waiting for this yes or no to the original request. The context of what’s happened is bad enough for mappers express they dislike; even if voting become more a act of protest than majority in the first year, it work as deterrent for moderators here, in Telegram, and on OSM Wiki to stop using Etiquette to censor complains for data-related issues. It is also relevant because (based on what happened here in Rio Grande do Sul) helps require in future that any individual claiming to represent “Brazilian community” for self interest become expected to provide evidence of where it was decided (which is very relevant to DWG complaints).

With all this said:

  1. Can @forums-governance provided where I affirmed justifications are for the permanent health check, instead of the voting justification?

  2. Can @forums-governance explain that it was not me that created the title of this thread “Complaints against Brazilian category moderators”?

  3. Can @forums-governance, also considering your reply from the Q1 and my previos replies in this thread, look at the 5 links with “proofs” that I do not reply answers here and pinpoint which one I was required to reply?

As context 2 of the 5 questions are… related to my membership on Engineering Working Group which I cannot simply reply in public without consult other members.

Olá Emerson, poderia detalhar quando e onde isto aconteceu?

I’m not sure what you’re saying. Perhaps there is a language barrier.

Polls are sometimes required with health checks, but it is not automatic. In cases where there is disagreement over if a poll is required the forum governance team will decide if it is needed, and we have not made a decision yet on this.

Yes, this topic was split from the moderator selection criteria as it was far off topic. You can see this in the original topic. I was the one who split it and named it because the discussion has mainly about your complaints against the Brazilian category moderators.

You’ve been asked many times. The most recent ask from me was this

For the five links, there have been multiple posts with links - can you restate the five links?

To be relevant they must be linking to a post where moderator action was taken on Discourse by someone who is a moderator of the Brazilian category or a specific case where a moderator was the one to bring up their status. If it is an off-forum link please additionally quote the exact sentence where moderator status is mentioned.


Ok, these five.

[quote="matheusgomesms, post:19, topic:110407"]
Finally, could you please respect our free time, and stop accusing us in many topics, but when we ask you anything you simply don’t answer? You didn’t answer [here ](, nor [here ](, [here ](, not even a thread you opened [here ]( or [here ](

additional context

From the question asked, there notable two

reply to this: this time, the answer is: no.

(Trivia: in last 6 months, discussions moved to telegram, just look at the gap on posts on Brasil (Brazil))

and this one, which I still drafting a reply. I’m on OpenStreetMap as volunteer, and in the last weeks I’m busy.

Should I reply this?

But other than these two above, there’s several questions such as

I mean, I’m being spammed by questions without any relation to the case, or borderline assuming I’m a retarded. But maybe the more absurd (which seems to be attempt on rethorical question) would be this one

This question seems to imply I’m accusing Wiki Admins of something, which is not the case.

Olá Emerson! Como os administradores da OSM Wiki reagiriam se a situação envolvesse alguém que não fosse um moderador deste fórum? Qual seria o motivo para eles adotarem um tratamento diferenciado nesse caso?

​Everton, I will reply your question if you answer (without weasel words) or “asking for further clarification” as you done here Complaints against Brazilian category moderators - #14 by EvertonBortolini the following:

The edits you made on the OSM Wiki page with your personal account about complaints against the organized editing you are part of, were made “in the name of Brazilian community” or made by you, as an individual?

It was recommended here to me to move the complaint to DWG. However this single, direct reply likely affects their response.

Olá Emerson! Apenas copiei para a página do projeto as observações que você tinha feito na página geral.

Yes, the notes were copied to 2023 Brazil Floods - OpenStreetMap Wiki and this activity already listed in Organised Editing/Activities/Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team - OpenStreetMap Wiki.

No caso é necessário ver se estas observações feitas por você foram discutidas na comunidade brasileira, porque elas estavam documentadas na coluna “community objections” na edição que você fez originalmente → Organised Editing/Activities: Difference between revisions - OpenStreetMap Wiki.


“In this case, it is necessary to see if these observations made by you were discussed in the Brazilian community” (“No caso é necessário ver se estas observações feitas por você foram discutidas na comunidade brasileira”).

please do not reply to a direct question about the changes already made by your personal account in the past with… another question/action to be done in the future.

The list of issues I (as local mapper, e.g. I’m able to do a quick travel and check in person to prove) compiled and uploaded to the wiki are different from what someone with account “Everton_Bortolini” left. It already was asked in your talk page. to explain the edits.

Please respond: Who is behind the difference between what I uploaded on 2023-12-19 (and was deleted, twice) and the account “Everton_Bortolini” between 2023-12-20 and 2024-03-06 changed on the OSM Wiki page about the activity you are listed as organizer?

If you insist on avoiding a direct response, I would kindly already ask someone from @osmf-data-wg to come here and make the direct question public.