Thank you for raising these concerns.
First, we would like to acknowledge that the quality of a number of the edits in question did not meet the standards expected from organized editing activities. Following an internal review, we identified cases where barrier=toll_booth was removed without the feature being adequately represented with an alternative tag or retained where the available sources did not support a clear determination. Those edits are being reviewed and corrected, and we are conducting additional internal training and refresher activities with the editors involved to reinforce tagging practices, quality expectations, and escalation procedures. As I understand, Metauro was correcting some of their previous edits following a QC and failed to check the inbox to see the message requesting the pause in time.
Regarding the scope of the activity, the intent was not to remove valid barrier=toll_booth features from the map. The scope was limited to cases where the tag appeared to be used inconsistently with its documented meaning and where a different representation of the feature was considered more appropriate according to current wiki guidance. The task itself originated from internal feedback and was reviewed by local TomTom staff before execution. However, it is clear from the outcome that the activity did not consistently achieve the intended result.
We also acknowledge the concern regarding transparency. TomTom maintains a public overview of its organized editing activities on the OSM Wiki under the sections “Map Data Improvements” and “TomTom Map Feedback”: TomTom Organised Editing Activities
Because the content, geographic scope, and timing of individual projects vary substantially, these categories are used to describe the general types of activities undertaken rather than every individual task. Nevertheless, we recognize that a dedicated discussion with the UK community before starting this specific activity would likely have prevented much of the confusion and concern that followed. We will review our internal workflows to identify where additional community consultation and communication should be expected and to improve transparency around future organized editing activities. @pzachee will be initiating such discussions in the future.
We would also like to address the delays in responding to changeset comments. Initial acknowledgements were posted, but detailed investigation and review could only begin once the editor and project management team returned to work at the start of the week. While this explains part of the delay, we understand that timely communication is important, particularly when local contributors raise concerns about organized editing activities.
Finally, we appreciate the community members who took the time to review the edits, raise concerns, and provide feedback. OpenStreetMap depends on collaboration between local contributors and organized editing teams, and we recognize that maintaining trust requires both high-quality edits and transparent communication. We will use this incident as an opportunity to strengthen our processes in both areas.
Thank you for your patience and understanding while we complete the review and corrective actions.
Can - on behalf of TomTom’s OSM program.
@trigpoint if it would be agreeable to you too, we would like to request the lift of the user ban. Metauro would be reassigned different tasks, and will not continue their edits in the UK during this period.