Hello osmkazakhstan,
Could you explain why you deleted all the roads here? Was it a mistake, or was there a problem with them?
Best Regards,
Andy

Not only was way/1061729355/history not "area 51" it wasn't a fence either!

Hello,
According to https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/8477479263 you've reverted an attempt to edit this twice now.
Are you sure that you (based on "Add business according to local social distancing protocol #c4sj #South-Bay-OSM #maproulette " in changeset/100236036 are correct and @pelleairheat is wrong?
The website https://www.pelleheatandairconditioning.com/contact-us/ does seem to check out as their main SJ location, but obviously anyone can create a website...
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

안녕하세요 솔트닉입니다.
절대적으로 명확하게, 당신은 다른 지도에서 물건을 복사할 수 없습니다. https://urban.seoul.go.kr/view/map/main.html?sggCd=11740에 연결된 라이선스가 OSM과 호환되지 않으면 사용할 수 없습니다.
그러나 해당 지역에 대해 잘 알고 있고 공원(및 숲)이라는 것을 알고 있다면 OSM 편집기에서 항공 이미지를 사용하여 그릴 수 있습니다.

완전성을 위해 way/887712955#map=17/37.55264/127.16209
(공원)
이제 의 외부입니다.
relation/14091881#map=16/37.5528/127.1611
(숲)
이제 모든 것이 괜찮습니까?

친애하는,
OSM의 데이터 작업 그룹을 대표하는 Andy Townsend.

Hello SaltNic,
Just to be absolutely clear, you cannot copy things from other maps. Unless the licence associated with https://urban.seoul.go.kr/view/map/main.html?sggCd=11740 is compatible with OSM, you cannot use it.
However, if you are familiar with the area, and know that it is a park (and a forest) then you can use aerial imagery within OSM's editors to draw them.

For completeness, way/887712955#map=17/37.55264/127.16209
(the park)
is now an outer of
relation/14091881#map=16/37.5528/127.1611
(the forest)
Hopefully that is all OK now?

Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Hello,
It looks like the newly created way way/1070778154 here didn't inherit the membership of the Nidderdale AONB relation/6540319 here - I'd have expected JOSM to do that automatically? This resulted in a hole in the Nidderdales AONB. I've joined the two ways again (since the tags were the same) and hopefully the AONB should reappear.
Best Regards,
Andy

Oops - way/825490585 looked a bit of a mess here after this edit. I've reverted it to prior to 122327239 - hope things are OK now.

Hello Jeremyah Lanum
Please use changeset comments that explain to other mappers what you have done. "5653" does not do this.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
You've added a name "Route of Cambrian Way" to way/1069075325 here, but actually that's already mapped - the Cambrian Way is relation/11661295#map=12/52.8883/-4.0284 and you can see (on the OSM way page) that this way is part of it.
See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only for more information.
Any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask!
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
The current mapping in this area is the result of a community discussion, which resulted in https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=606038#p606038 . If you think that the current mapping is incorrect then please do discuss with the rest of the OSM community - at the moment, the main talk list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk is probably the best place to do that.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Hello,
Can you explain what you were trying to do here?
You seem to have deleted a lot of ways.
Best Regards
Andy

Hello,
As requested at osm.org/user_blocks/6059 , what was the source of the data used to add node/9815570430 ?
Best Regards,
Andy

Actually, it looks like changeset/122111489 removed a separate sidewalk here.

Hello,
I've added way/1067934994 to the Mortimer Trail relation/85905#map=15/52.3459/-2.7599 here, which the old path that it replaced was a member of. Hope this is OK.
Best Regards,
Andy

> Do I smell a conspiracy here?

No. It is not OK to "politely" add things that do not exist to OpenStreetMap.

> If you haven't already, please remove all my 22 requests

I will check what is left and will remove them.

> It is obvious that you have no intentions of changing or disciplining the way your volunteer discriminates against a group of people.

You have already been cc:ed on a number of comments that I've made which makes it abundantly clear that that statement is untrue - presumably you are hoping that casual readers here will not be aware of those.

@1T-money Please try and be nice, to avoid outing the inner "Kevin the teenager" in other mappers :)

@opendcc Are you aware of any problematic changes in here? Are you aware of any changes that weren't "social_facility:for=terminal_ill" to "social_facility:for=terminally_ill"?

@Cambridge Dictionary / Emilius123 : What you have appeared to have done here is to have changed hospices from "social_facility:for=terminal_ill" to "social_facility:for=terminally_ill". This is a reasonable edit, in that it's correcting a misspelling / grammar error, and not open to misinterpretation.
However, creating a new account, pretending to be dictionary and generally being a bit of a idiot don't really help. It might have been nice to mention it on the tagging mailing list, to warn people that the edit was going to happen (and in case someone knows of another meaning for the term that might explain the two values - sometimes people merge tags when they shouldn't because there really is a different meaning).

Hello,
As you can see from https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/399713443 another mapper edited and then removed the name here.
Can you have a look and see what names would be appropriate/
I'd expect that the "name" tag should not be in English, but other "name:language" tags might also be appropriated.
Best Regards,
Andy

Actually, "<mode>=unknown" is a perfectly valid tag, but what the wiki says ("verify if it could be tagged with another tag") is also entirely correct.
I regularly use "unknown" when tagging access when it isn't clear from survey, and then often continue investigating to resolve the issue later.