way/1329312751/history - here it is clearly not highway=trunk

Philet2137 is this time basing edit on a different type of official paper, E-road routing

for some reason E75 was not moved to A1/S7 and still goes through city center

luckily for residents it is not anymore very important road, definitely not on national scale so highway=trunk is extremely dubious - especially with "E75 is there" as sole justification

way/339597002/history - Philet2137 and Pan_palat removed ref=5 solely because some official documents supposedly changed

it was still signed last time anyone checked it, and they are not even disputing this (just changing stuff with "official paper says otherwise" as sole reason)

note: at some point removal of ref=5 may be a valid edit, especially after S3 road is opened, 5 road will be likely actually degraded

In general problem here is less with that specific road has some innate primariness and user retagged it to trunk despite it not having trunkiness.

Typically it is not about road being discussed and community reaching conclusion.

Rather the problem is that some mappers (especially Temat-Droga) refused to discuss anything and tried to force their preferred tagging. In unending parade of new accounts. Or with flood of changes.
And then tried to block return to status quo by demanding discussion over each change. Or redoing it again in edit war.
So general strategy was to make 6 changes, and hope that people will revert only some or it will end in an endless discussion.
To combat that Polish community at this point expects discussion to happen BEFORE =trunk is edited, otherwise anyone can revert it for any reason.

So it is more about "totally new account appears, makes changes to from =secondary to =trunk in their first or second edit, continues this kind of editing". @FILszew/history is one just appeared BTW

So in "more unexplained undiscussed nonsense trunk category changes" main problem is 'undiscussed' part and it may be overly procedural and it is a bit tricky to provide proof of no discussion except discussion not taking place.
On account of it being not discussed proving 'nonsense' is tricky - I would need to start several discussions for that, as these edits being not discussed are main problem.
And that is just too much, whole point of "make discussion first" is to move burden on road class warriors.

Hopefully this answers a bit why I though "no discussion happened, nothing linked in changeset" is considered as offense in itself?

Maybe I am overtouchy and it is perfectly normal newbie edit to fiddle with highway=secondary to highway=trunk on long road distance on the second edit?

przypominam że takie edycje zmian klasyfikacji dróg powinny być dyskutowane na forum, na https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40

w przeciwnym razie każdy może je wycofać, bez dalszych powodów

(for this specific account and this edit, I remember we have few more accounts)

OK, that will take a bit more time. Lets start with way/27597535/history or https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/41189769

problem is not with whether it is secondary or primary but because change was motivated by official road classification

while road classes in official classification (either of them) do not match to OSM one, this is documented at osm.wiki/Pl:Key:highway#Warto%C5%9Bci and osm.wiki/Pl:Drogi#Klasyfikacja_dr%C3%B3g

this is also listed at osm.wiki/International_highway_classification_equivalence#Examples_of_cases_contradicting_simple_rules

disclaimer: I authored that

mandatory discussion of changes to high road classes is described and documented for example at osm.wiki/Pl:Znakowanie_dr%C3%B3g_w_Polsce#Drogi_samochodowe

A tiny bit ironically added by Pavv in osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Pl:Znakowanie_dr%C3%B3g_w_Polsce&diff=prev&oldid=2919811 very recently there but this is in general supported and was documented somewhere else already (cannot find it right now)

--------------------

would this be considered sufficient?

I could easily write down more of Temat-Droga class of issues but I hope it is enough

oh, it is more obnoxious as it is either the same person or multiple people with the same trunk-related obsessions, editing similar roads and pope-number obsession and similar communication problems

osm.org/user_blocks/18960 for start @Pan_palat is using photo of me for its avatar, despite having no permission and it being a copyright violation
earlier had photo of someone else, probably was a similar trolling

changeset/174731935 is an invalid edit - blind following official classification, reply that makes no sense

osm.org/user_blocks/18959 - they keep creating useless posts on forum, plenty of heat no light

way/41189769/history - edit warring, no discussion before trunk ( @2137xd was also used )

changeset/174082360 - nonsense road classification that ignored osm.org/user_blocks/18909

osm.org/user_blocks/18961

pope number account (2137 - Temat-0Droga was also using it in their troling) starts editing from =trunk reclassifying in quite obvious socking changeset/167591777

changeset/167623366 unexplained undiscussed road category changes

changeset/168890586 - more unexplained undiscussed nonsense trunk category changes

is it enough? do we need more?

wykonana z konta trolla więc automatycznie podejrzana

node/13296969951/history

w sensie że ten staw jest zasypany?

czy to piaskownica o nazwie staw?

pisałem też na Discordzie, napisze i tutaj: nie zawracaj mi głowy edycjami theDM (czy innych) chyba że są wadliwe, do wycofania i możesz je podlinkować

naprawdę nie brak mi rzeczy do zrobienia, jak nie potrafisz znaleźć tych rzekomo wadliwych edycji to ja ich szukać nie będę

wycofanie zgodnie z dyskusją na forum: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/stosowanie-tagu-highway-trunk-w-polsce/122106/1225 i późniejsze (zwłaszcza https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/stosowanie-tagu-highway-trunk-w-polsce/122106/1259 jest godne uwagi)

changeset/174768562

> Ale to nie ma znaczenia, że Twoja zmiana też ma wadliwe źródło?

???????
niby czemu

> No, nie patrzmy na nic poza moją jedną edycję bez patrzenia na dziesiątki edycji theDM

nie ma obowiązku poprawienia wszystkiego na raz, nawet jak ktoś inny łamie zasady (a nie wiem czy to robi) nie pozwala to robieniu tobie

> albo Twoje reverty, które jako rzekome źródło podają post, który jest czysto informacyjny.

wycofam jeszcze raz - chodziło oczywiście o cały wątek z późniejszymi odpowiedziami

wycofanie podejrzanej edycji zrobionej przez trollkonto

changeset/174761985

wycofanie podejrzanej edycji zrobionej przez trollkonto

changeset/174761977

wycofanie podejrzanej edycji zrobionej przez trollkonto

changeset/174761955

@pavvv jeśli dobrze widzę to pierwsza edycja zrobiona była bez podania linku do forum i nadal nie podałeś gdzie rzekomo była zgoda na tą edycję, nikt się z tobą nie zgadza co do tej drogi a są sprzeciwy

tak, możliwe że nie doceniamy twojego geniuszu

ale "nie ma w nim konsensusu jeżeli chodzi o wycofanie" nie wydaje mi się prawdziwe, plus pomija że konsensus to był potrzebny na twoją edycję a nie na jej wycofanie

wycofanie zgodnie z dyskusją na forum: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/stosowanie-tagu-highway-trunk-w-polsce/122106/1225

changeset/174757932

> Czyli theDM może podwyższać drogi jak chce, ale ja to muszę podawać jakieś linki.

Niczego takiego nie proponuję