When using rapid or mapwithai, the user must first accept a suggested building footprint. Only then can it be edited, whether that by moving or splitting. It is up to the user to decide if they want to substantially tweak each suggested building footprint, or accept them all as-is and upload to OSM. In my view, if large amounts of building footprints are accepted without modification, that counts as a form of import (particularly given the huge amount of buildings some users have added). In my view, itâs wrong that at least two individuals âimportedâ over 150,000 ai buildings each without following the same proposal process as an import. No doubt, if they had to go through that process, the import would have been rejected due to the poor quality of buildings being suggested.
I think the distinction Iâd make is that with these tools theyâre being manually reviewed (or, at least, can be manually reviewed) whereas with an import there is an assumption of âblindnessâ, so to speak - that is, an import might result in everything 50 metres to the south of where they should be, and nobody notices until the script has put half a million new objects into the database. This isnât happening here.
For what itâs worth I donât think these add a lot of value but if weâre keeping poorly separated pavements then I think we should keep these too, with the overarching principle being âimprove, donât removeâ. At least, sticking to a broad principle seems more valuable than making an exception for a case that doesnât seem to cause much harm.
just because you can use rapid/mapwithai to manually review ai slop buildings, it doesnt mean that people do, the very first example at the top of this blinking thread shows theyre not being manually checked properly!
Iâm taking the poll as a definitive mandate to get rid of particularly poor AI buildings. Junk like this just needs to go: (Clearly âimportedâ rather than manually reviewed)
Iâm not going to delete unsplit buildings if the geometry is at least accurate, but I might add some fixmes to flag them. Itâs incredibly frustrating that the user that imported many many thousands of buildings like this is still active but doesnât seem interested in cleaning up after the mess theyâve made :/
In those cases I think deletion is the only way.
If they care about the buildings being on the map, itâll send a message that the way theyâre doing it is not acceptable.
If they donât care, then that leaves no one who actually wants them or thinks theyâre good.