I’m Nathan, one of the co-founders of the non-profit BTC Map.
Firstly, we are serious organisation with a small core team of people that have been active in the wider open data world for decades. We deeply appreciate the importance of OSM and of the community rules. Our commitment to OSM is also reflected with our recent sponsorship of the OSM Foundation.
Re this post, we should probably separate people’s concerns into the following:
- The automated Galoy data-load;
- Community organising;
- Bitcoin tagging
I’ll address these in turn.
1 - Galoy Data-load
For context, Galoy are a provider of community banking software with circa. 500 verified merchants using their Bitcoin payment infrastructure. They are separate to BTC Map, although clearly our missions are aligned.
The automated data load was clearly a mistake and it was absolutely right to roll-back their changeset. BTC Map will work more closely with them to ensure that their dataload meets the OSM guidelines for automated edits, if indeed this is the chosen path forward - we prefer manual edits that are individually verified.
2 - Community organising
Thanks for bringing this to our attention (again). We’ll create the appropriate wiki entry for our community this week and provide further guidance to our community, particularly around using community hashtags in edits and avoiding automation without consultation.
We updated the tagging guidance on the Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin and Payment wiki pages a while ago and so we believe these are in-sync with our own.
Despite the Galoy hiccup, the BTC Map community has been hard at work manually verifying (visiting, calling and emailing merchants) the large amount of stale data using the now deprecated
payment:bitcoin tag. You can see the results with here - we have removed almost 1000 old tags, with the majority of those not being migrated to the new
currency:XBT tag as they were verified as either not existing anymore or no longer accepting Bitcoin.
There is much more work to do, but we are slowly and surely getting on with it so that we have an up-to-date dataset that is maintainable by us and the wider OSM community.
3 - Bitcoin tagging
This is probably a longer conversation worthy of a separate thread (or on the original Bitcoin Tagging thread). The Bitcoin community (payment providers, merchants and users) certainly see the value in the Lightning payment tags as it describes how they can interact with Bitcoin network. This matters.
There is not “zero way” editors can know this. It is an important step in the verification process when talking with a payment provider or merchant.
We’ve tried to align with OSM norms when naming these and we are more than happy to take further guidance, but I think we need to move past whether they are useful or not as the people using them clearly think they are.
Please tag me in any future posts that you feel need our attention or email me at
email@example.com. These details will be on our newly created community organiser wiki page soon.
I’m sure there will be further hiccups in the future, but the intent of BTC Map and our community is to sanitise the stale data (not of our making) and work with the wider OSM community to make sure we have a solid and maintainable dataset for the future.
PS. the Shadowy Supertaggers is a self-deprecating, tongue-in-cheek joke. I wouldn’t take it too seriously, we certainly don’t!