"do projo" is not a good changeset description; it would have been better to explain (in Polish of course) what you did and why - e.g. "removed footway at Zator station because it is closed" or so.

In this changeset you deleted a footway (350581730) that gave access to the railway platform at Zator station. On the ortophoto it looks as if this footway is still there. Has it been closed? If so, how doe people coming from Kolejowa now reach the northern of the two tracks?

Ah sorry I hadn't seen that. They wrote to DWG asking to have the tracks removed since they were dangerous for people to work on due to high speed cars, I said that we can mark them private or maybe they should be racetracks, and they agreed that racetracks would be good - I note that only a fraction of what is visible on aerial imagery is actually drawn, and seems to have come from TIGER. Absolutely happy for a local mapper to step in.

Thank you. You're not doing this "for me", you're doing it "for the OpenStreetMap community" - whose infrastructure you are using and who have created the project that lets you contribute data in the first place. You might have come to OpenStreetMap by way of a Red Cross project but you are now contributing to OpenStreetMap. If you do not add a meaningful comment, what you are essentially saying is "if you're not with the Red Cross then fuck off we don't need to talk to you". And you don't want to say that.

Hello again Dirk, 12 days ago in changeset/105182588 I have asked you to use changeset comments that explain what you're doing, and you replied "Thank you, I'll do my best". Three days ago I repeated that request in changeset/105675614 since the overwhelming majority of your changes still only bear a mumble of hashtags but not a human-readable complaint :( please try to improve this, it is not much work, and not explaining to other OSMers what you're doing is disrespectful.

DannyMcD, I'm afraid this is not going to cut it. OSM is a collaborative project. You can't go round telling everyone you have a disagreement with that you'd rather not talk to them again becasue it is too stressful to you. To be perfectly clear, you were the aggressive party in this. You reverted something without specifying a reason, and not for the first time. When asked about the revert, you refused to say why you did it and became all defensive. To this day you have not said why you did it - only that it was a mistake. You say you re-added the items later which I accept (and was not clear about, so thank you for putting that right) but still, now you are listed as the "original contributor" of these objects whereas you have denied that to the actual original contributor whose work you have deleted. And now you're speaking of the "stress" this situation causes for you and making it sound like you're the victim. You are not the victim; you have done something offensive, been caught out, and now you are unhappy about how stressful it is when you're caught doing something you shouldn't have been doing in the first place.

OSM is a community project, we need to talk to each other. Everyone is expected to provide good changeset comments when they upload a change, please do that in the future. You can of course revert vandalism or the bumbling edits of a newbie that went wrong, but if you do, write a changeset comment that explains why you did that, or if the other person is an experienced mapper, give them a chance to repair the damage themselves. You cannot ever opt out of discussing your edits with others (as long as they are reasonable and not doing this to troll you), so any form of "please do not contact me again" - to me or others - is inappropriate. Any other mapper has the right to contact you about any of your edits and receive a response - a process that happens hundreds if not thousands of times every day.

If you find that interacting with other mappers is stressful, you can do your part to reduce questions about your mapping, by providing good changeset comments (see link I already provided), and by refraining from summarily reverting whole changesets.

I totally understand that this can be stressful at times - but talking to each other is a requirement in a collaborative project. I am pretty sure the parties whose edits you have wiped out without even a comment did not exactly feel joy about that either.

I will let this matter rest here but please consider, in your future edits, that even if you are sitting in front of a computer screen, you are dealing with human beings here, and treat them accordingly. If interacting with other human beings is too stressful for you then OSM is, too.

To be extra clear, the problem is not reverting something, the problem is reverting something without any explanation, and aggravated by the refusal to give an explanation even when asked for one.

Danny, I am a member of OpenStreetMap's Data Working Group and one of our mandates is to step in when there are disputes or edit wars between users. Reverting someone else's edits without any explanation whatsoever is an extremely hostile action. When challenged by *anyone*, DWG or not, someone who has executed such a revert should be straightforward with and explanation. You say that "you are here to map things, not write justifications". Even if you are not reverting, explaining your actions is something the community has a right to expect from you (osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments). Even more so if you revert the contributions from someone else - which is precisely not "mapping things" but "unmapping things". And thrice so if your thoughtless reverts actually introduce errors like I pointed out in that other changeset. If you could now please find the courtesy to explain the reason for this revert? As for future mapping activity, if you insist on reverting changes without explaining why because it is "your style", then it will be "my style" to prevent further contributions from you until you change your style.

Why did you delete these buildings?

In this changeset you changed what was formerly a golf fairway to an agrarian shop: way/905227139/history
This seems to be an error. Can you revisit that?

In this changeset you have mapped way/835785516 with "smoothness=impassable". Don't do that. If something is impassable then it is not a track anymore; delete it, or use "abandoned:highway=track" or something like that.

Will you be able to remove the duplicate objects or do you need help with that?

Dear Alizair19, you're editing schools all over the US and applying a hash tag of "#schools". Can you explain what or who is driving this activity? How do you choose the schools you are working on?

It also appears that this edit is similar to one that has been done a few hours ago in changeset/105710358 by the user DhiaeAGroom whose account has meanwhile been deleted?

Dear user DMAGM, please explain what you did here. Your changeset bears the tags typically associated with the use of the iD editor. Yet you have somehow amassed 2585 previous empty changesets with this new account which makes it look like you are using some form of scripted upload. Also, this changeset contains many duplicate buildings like way/949626613 and way/949626320, both added on top of a building that has been existing here for 6 years, way/342692673. This is not something that would happen during normal use of the iD editor. Please fix these problems, and explain what software and process you are using to upload these edits.

Hello DannyMcD, in this changeset you have modified node/8569961926 to have an "addr:street" tag of "Michael Streetoqua Street". Actually you had contributed this name two months ago, and it had meanwhile been repaired to match the actual name of the nearby street, "Michael Stoqua Street". You have reset this to "Michael Streetoqua Street". Have actually looked at this, or was this a blind revert without care? Because if the street is really called "Michael Streetoqua Street" it would make sense to rename the nearby street also. What is going on here?

Sorry for not making it clear enough. I want that you explain why you reverted this. Only then will I even be able to form an opinion on whether I disagree or not. And I want that you do not ever again revert anything without giving a proper reason, something you owe to your fellow mappers who are looking at edits in the area and trying to understand what is happening.

Dear DhiaeAGroom, can you explain what happened here? You uploaded over 400 buildings with a source of "own data", and then removed them again. What kind of "own data" is this? Are you working for a construction company or planning office or something like that?

"reverter plugin" I meant to say.

Hey there DannyMcD, the use of the reverted plugin to revert whole changesets is a relatively drastic action that requires a good reason. You have not given any in this changeset comment. Why did you revert these edits?