same issue on this changeset as in changeset/157817730.

same issue on this changeset as in changeset/157817730.

this added quite a few nodes that aren't connected to any way without any tags and I don't know if it's because of this commit but the multipolygon for lake mead (relation/1275469) has an unenclosed part. I understand this had to happen because of the vandalism and these issues are likely because like any other software osmtools isn't perfect, and I definitely not advocating for any future vandalism fixing to not happen. I'm just pointing the issue out so that someone with more knowledge on multipolygons and landuse than I can fix this. I noticed this and personally don't think I am knowledgeable and experienced enough to feel comfortable to do the required changes, I'm not 100% sure the exact details of what needs doing.

please stop marking sidewalk and crossings that don't have signs prohibiting bike use as not usable by bikes. I looked around the area with the bing streetside imagery and saw no signs specifying that bikes aren't allowed to cross there, please stop doing this. unless there are signs that specify that a certain use is prohibited that normally would be allowed it is implied that it is allowed as it is in this case.

sidewalks don't have names except for a few rare occasions and this isn't one of those occasions. for more info see the following wiki page osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions .

ignore the warnings:ambiguous_crossing:crossing_conflict they are from ways that are tagged correctly and Rapid wants to add implied tags on crossings; they are not ambiguous. aka crossing=uncontrolled & unmarked imply crossing:signals=no and crossing=crossing=traffic_signals implies crossing:signals=yes so I am not adding duplicated information.

ignore the warnings:ambiguous_crossing:crossing_conflict they are from ways that are tagged correctly and Rapid wants to add implied tags on crossings; they are not ambiguous. aka crossing=uncontrolled & unmarked imply crossing:signals=no and crossing=crossing=traffic_signals implies crossing:signals=yes so I am not adding duplicated information.

please respond

Agreed

Based on the latest aerial and street side imagery I doubt that this is private since there aren’t any gates anywhere on or leading to this road.

based on the latest aerial and streetside imagery (Bing both) there is one, please check with all the imagery before deleting a way next time.

this is incorrect as on the latest imagery there are service roads here so that track should been converted to serviced road not deleted.

I have pointed this out before, if there is not sign for whether or not bikes are allowed on a road (or sidewalk/crossing) it is implied to be access of the way. so in this case "bicycle=not designated" would be the same as bicycle=commercial since this road would likely be access=commercial. please stop doing this.

* and Southwest 84th Avenue

this is incorrect, if you look at the latest imagery (the Bing areal imagery) there is a small stub of road their meaning that likely after construction is complete on what ever their building on that lot there will be a service road there so as to maintain history we should keep that way until construction completes and extend it to the new aliment at that time.

looking further into other edits made by this account it seems like this and many other changeset's produced by this account are vandalism. many of the roads and buildings added/edited by this account have alignments that aren't aligned to any available imagery (in iD) in the area. so either this contributor is adding buildings have been built within the last year (or possibly less) or this is vandalism. this is especially clear at Lake Mead were were edits made by this account in two different commits create geometry that I severely doubt the correctness of. If the Lake Mead edits are "correct" as in their not vandalism then they are extremely sloppy to the point were there is at least 1 multipolygon loop in the geometry that I saw.
This user has also added residential areas that have really odd shapes and residential roads that are in the middle of nowhere and do not connect to other roads that intersect with them. all of this compounds to making me think that most if not all of the edits by this user are vandalism.

I am just not 100% sure since most of the edits I saw from this account when looking through on OSMCha are in Las Vegas and Buenos Aires which are cities I know next to nothing about so I cant tell what's being built were. but still based on the edits them selves this account seems to be doing vandalism.

this seems to be vandalism to me, I don't know the area but I doubt that changes like this would happen; and if there is some truth to this the geometry is really sloppy so someone with local knowledge should give this a second look.

two notes here:
first next time can you please leave a better changeset comment, for more information see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

second next time try to not have the bounding box of the changeset spanning multiple continents or even countries, try to keep them local.

next time please leave a changeset comment describing what you did in the commit, for more information see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

A few points here:
first of all, the tag "bicycle=not specified" is not used anywhere else according to taginfo. this means that this is something you made up, there is no community consensus on this and thus probably shouldn't be used. there is also the fact that if there is not sign explicitly not allowing bikes on a way the assumed value is that it is the same as the normal access on the way. for Miami dade the defaults for public sidewalks is "access=yes".

the second issue is that you added access=permissive on way/1144585259 which is in the public facing part of the zoo so would in actuality be "access=customers;employees" because that way is only allowed for customers who payed to get in to the zoo and employees of the zoo.