The problem is not using the data; It is how you have applied it.
it is applied exactly as the source, if you read the email I received its about the data
The email might specifically be about the data, but as highlighted in the below changeset comments, you can not map 1:1 with other data sources (this is the case with 9/10 data sources in other lines of work as well)
I think it would be worth it for you to take a break and come back with a fresh perspective, as all of your messages are one big rant.
that changeset you link is only a tertiary road which my edits dont apply, I did change a couple like this example but they are free to be changed to anyone interpretation because south australia does not officially have tertiary roads, the original plan was to do a collector to tertiary conversion Import/South Australian Roads - OpenStreetMap Wiki , but after researching it they dont translate very well (as the above example shows). so I decided to leave it with just trunk/primary and secondary roads.
to me your comments here are a conflict of interest Conflict of Interest Policy - OpenStreetMap Foundation because you are involved in that changeset
How am I involved in that changeset?
you are in the comments, Im not sure if you understand that I agree with reverting that road back to tertiary, I repetitively say that tertiary roads do not fall under the Data SA classifications but people keep assuming that they do. My changes ONLY apply to Trunk road, Primary roads and Secondary roads. I didnt argue with anyone about that changeset being reverted and I agree with it. I emailed the board about that changeset because the user fortera_au has falsely made many claims about my edits that were all untrue, this changeset infact was the only one he was right about. before this changeset he accused me of making a split in a road which was completely wrong, and before that he changed the classification of a road and made a secondary road out of nowhere because OSMCHA told him to. fizzie banned me for editing OSM for a week for talking to fortera on discord so every interaction I have with him I want either a board member or a DWG member to have a record of it but it doesnt seem like your memory or timelines about things that have happened get recorded at all. its conflict of interest because of the other person involved has been a big part of shaping this Data SA matter, fizzie even leaked a email to me with what has been getting emailed to DWG members from him. Fortera is the one that started this whole thing and I brought you in to that changeset for my own reasons, nothing about being right or wrong. Just wanted that interaction to go about without me getting banned and it worked out.
To me, you haven’t read anything or represented anything correctly at all. The CoI applies to OSMF board members. There’s no interest involved in changesets.
and also the fact I have not made any comments on that changeset 
Hi folks, moderator here. This topic has reached it natural end and will be closed shortly. I would like to remind people that:
- Users of this forum must abide by the Etiquette Guidelines and this site’s guidelines.
- If you would like to discuss the issues raised in the diary post linked to in this topic then please use the diary comment system provided.
- If you have a tagging question that is AU specific then open a new topic in Oceania. If your tagging issue is not specifically related to AU then open a new topic in Tagging general discussion or Tagging help & support.