Hi Robert,
Feel free.
Thanks
2 Likes
They’re doing it again, so https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16581 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16582, reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155236867.
The changeset comment here (“Section of road closed”) isn’t really very helpful; if it was closed permanently then obviously that edit would be fine. However, previous “road closed” edits have been for a road that was closed for a day, hence the revert.
If anyone sees issues with other MKBE_, MKBE_2 or MKBE_3 edits please reply here or email data@openstreetmap.org with a subject line of “[Ticket#2024062610000207] MKBE_ again”.
Edit 18/8/2024: More edits, so blocked again and asked to discuss here.
I have added a little guidance to the wiki for Busmiles users tagging access roads in bus stations, as this seems to be a common cause of misunderstanding.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Busmiles.uk#Tagging_service_roads_in_bus_stations
1 Like
it might also be worth adding a bit that suggests adding the emergency=yes tag to these service roads that don’t have physical barriers that would prevent emergency vehicles too.
1 Like
There are more edits from MKBE_ for temporary closures, depicting various flooded roads as under construction.
1 Like
I’ve just read this thread and I don’t understand what the incentive is that leads people to make these edits.
So people take the bus e.g. the 37 from Buckingham Palace to King’s Cross or whatever and they want to track that with this website that shows them on a map everywhere they’ve been on a bus? So far so good.
To do this, presumably they upload a GPX track of a bus journey, correct? When they then use the premium feature that snaps that track to OSM roads, if the bus took a diversion, then won’t the tool snap the GPX to the diverted route anyway? How does it help the bus miles user to mark a flooded road as under construction?
I’ve reverted the changes for temporary closures of trunk roads, as those were too urgent to leave.
I’ve also reverted a series of edits to a junction in Newport Pagnell.
1 Like
The users don’t have a GPX track, snapping uses a router. We have one Busmiles user who is selfish and arrogant enough to feel that potentially breaking routing for everyone else for weeks is entirely justified if their single bus journey snaps nicely.
1 Like
No I don’t think so. That was my original thought - that this is a bit like CityStrides or Wandrer.earth but for bus travel instead of walking/running/cycling. Those apps really do use uploaded GPX tracks. But it sounds like Busmiles works quite differently. See the comment above from Busmiles: “Busmiles offers a paid tier that includes additional features, one of which is the ‘Snap to roads’ functionality. This feature uses a brouter routing engine”.
So the incentive, I think, is generally to get the routing engine to follow a particular route that does not match the route it would normally choose. It was mentioned above that there is no “waypoint” feature that could force the routing engine along a particular path.
2 Likes
Thanks for reverting. I’ve blocked again at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16714.
Edit: See also https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16715. I’ve blocked https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MKBE_3 for trying to evade the previous block with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157160143 and have reverted that in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157160776.
I’ve also changed the topic title to better reflect the situation - this is one rogue Busmiles user, not a “rogue app”.
2 Likes
Another account: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16718.
Is anyone in a position to see whether edits by that account seem reasonable? I have not reverted yet (and won’t be in a position to do so until later).
Edit: I’ve had a look, and it’s a similar mix to before - some plausible edits (in this case road rerouting due to HS2 construction) and some that make less sense (road closed for 4 days because of flooding?). The changeset comments list more information now, although I’m not sure if the cited “one.network” links are (a) the only source or (b) compatible, perhaps because a waiver has previously been obtained.
A lot of tidy-up (e.g. of cycle and horse network routes) will be needed, but that may need to wait until this bit of HS2 is more complete.
I’ve edited the block messages to make it clear that they need to discuss these edits with the community and that we’ll revoke blocks if they indicate they’re willing to do that.
2 Likes
For the very lengthy closures, hopefully there will be notices in The Gazette, which is OGL.
Just a slight correction, there is the ability to add a custom point to make the routing engine go down a different road. For example, if it automatically routed it down road A as it was the shortest route, the user could add a point along road B to make the engine go down there instead.
The rogue edits seem to stem from one particular user and we have issued warnings to them on our end, and may look to suspend their account if they continue.
6 Likes
After a period of being quiet, one of the Busmiles users has been editing again. I’m not sure I’m happy about people editing OSM to work round problems in 3rd party apps - although their edit should be neutral (adding bus=yes to residential roads), I wonder if perhaps @MileageUK could have a look at potentially fixing Busmiles?
(I’m wary of contacting the person myself - I spent a while trying to persuade them of what “designated” means for example, but they have since forgotten again what it means or they’re trying to work around more Busmiles problems, e.g. Changeset: 157710042 | OpenStreetMap )
Jon
Please, keep commenting on the CSs and possibly invite them to this thread.
I agree with you that both CSs are problematic. The first one is pure nonsense and the latter one deletes a lot of information.
I am happy about new users contributing to OSM but you should tell them that edits that delete information or added useless resp. wrong data to work around problems of a 3rd party app are more or less vandalism.
Additionally, the 3rd party app should make it clear on their site that these edit should not be made.
From post 33 above it doesn’t even seem like this is a limitation of the app as they say you can force a diversion within their software.
This just seems like pure selfish vandalism.
Hi all,
Just an update from our end and to answer some of the new posts.
We have now established a channel in our community chat where possible routing engine issues can be flagged so that users can discuss them there and whether it is suitable for an OSM edit, and if so what tagging should be amended. This should prevent the occurrences of ‘incompetent’ edits, and for full on vandalism we have been taking action on our end with those users.
Apart from the earlier example of vandalism which caused the creation of this thread, the other edits seem to be (new to OSM) users not understanding where the issue lies or the proper resolution, and we are hoping our new channel will help our community collaborate to establish the correct way forward for each issue instead of users trying to take matters into their own hands and causing problems.
I agree with others, please keep raising here if you spot any changesets that raise concern.
As always, feel free to reply to this thread or contact us directly if you have any questions or ideas and we will take them onboard.
Thanks,
The Busmiles Team
4 Likes
To be fair - it’s just muppetry rather than vandalism. Like Pokemon Go “park” adders and iffy golf mappers before them, I don’t believe that these users are actively trying to harm OSM.
3 Likes
My mistake. I thought it was the same user that was reported to have been told about this stuff multiple times in the preceding thread.
You asked me to explain my edits. Some long term closures have re-opened from Road Under Construction that I’ve seen with my own two eyes, exactly what I’m doing now because you said explain not wait for approval