Hello again,

Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7380 we’ve had another complaint about the way that you map things, and from looking at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments.php?uid=4399594 it’s far from the only one.

Unfortunately, some of what you’re doing is beyond “a very unusual mapping style” and is just wrong.

For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263973541 is a private driveway that isn’t connected to anything - that simply does not reflect reality.

The “car parks” that you added such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263973542/history#map=18/53.32168/-6.40398 aren’t in any real sense car parks (even if marked as private)

On https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1016896860/history#map=18/53.29504/-6.49514 you removed footway=sidewalk (which is surely a valid tag here) and added bicycle=dismount (which is implied by the other tagging already).

Previously I wrote:

If you believe that the advice that you are being given is incorrect please discuss at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/ie/54 .

When I asked last time, you did join the discussion at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/access-no-foot-designated-on-highway-footway-should-it-be-reverted/101907/7 (thanks for that) but it’s fair to say that there wasn’t a meeting of minds. It looks like you’ve ignored the good advice there and have carried on in the same way that you always did. This is not OK.

Previously I also wrote:

OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project and we have to work together to create the best map. It is neither your personal project nor mine nor anyone else’s - we have to agree on how to map things.

Because you seem determined not to follow that advice we’ll have to prevent you from mapping for a short period of time. If you’d like to continue before the block expires, please email data@openstreetmap.org with a subject line of “[Ticket#2022082810000151] obyrnegps” promising to work with, not against, the local community, and we’ll revoke this block.

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