Oh, and speaking of collusion. Since Russian forum moderators are not obligated to have a consensus on every question or decision, it doesn’t really matter if they all can or can not collude - one moderator will never cancel another moderator’s ban or something. While Zverik’s bandwagon still has the majority even if they would need that.

And those who really like to point fingers at people’s lack of merits (like, amount of edits), please, remember:

• Aren’t that you, who repeat the same words about “being kind to novices” all the time when it suits your point better?

• Did you just forget that OSM is not a meritocracy, where someone’s credibility, significance or even right to express a reasonable opinion depend directly on a size of genitalia (amount of edits or lines of OSM-related code, etc.)?

Just stop being so hypocrite and double-faced.

Let me remind everybody who got distracted by the long discussion.

• Conflict of interests exists by default when a person is in the positions where one of these might affect his judgment and actions in the other position. So, it is not even necessary to prove anything - this is a fact that everyone here is aware of. In the real world, this would be enough to even deny a candidate’s application.

• Another moderator is defunct completely (unless somebody starts talking about him), being a “placeholder” or an accomplice in a simple collusion.

These two reasons are quite significant, as well as their initial vendetta-style program. While the personal conflict mentioned above by calmness is just a particular resulting case that illustrates it.

Warin61, a conflict of interests is always a matter of personal features. So, pointing at the relevant ones based on repeating actions is totally valid. But this is just one part of a problem.

This rule has been broken by some of the current moderators in the first place - the part of their election “program” was to get rid of the certain people they don’t like for personal reasons (mostly because their actions were openly criticized, sometimes - in a straightforward manner) while the rest of their programs was vague and unclear. It makes it look just like a personal vendetta, nothing more. Should people, who clearly declare their personal “targets” ever be in charge of keeping a civil discussion?

By the way, the whole situation with maps.me is well-known as a one-sided game, so it doesn’t make any sense to demand using Google Play feedback, GitHub issue tracker or any other service as a “proper” channel of communication - developers just ignore these channels and that has been clearly declared. Therefore, OSM forum as a channel and Zverik as an active member of Maps.me team (exactly how he positioned himself in a community) inevitably became a channel and a target of all that reasonable frustration people started accumulating. So, even totally factual complaints, piling up in a huge heap with everything else, eventually started being disregarded and actively rejected. However, ignoring criticism is one thing, but pursuing a moderator’s position to be able to sweep criticism under the carpet and to punish for the most prominent (not just rude, but detailed and/or pointing at long-lasting fundamental or especially harmful issues) acts of criticism is a totally different thing.

+1. - Conflict of interests exists regardless of anything else, especially - of a whistleblower’s personality. - A conflict between moderators is unacceptable, especially in the passive-aggressive form. - Defunct “placeholder” moderator’s position should be filled with a person who has time/will to fulfill his duty.

This topic should be discussed anywhere else but in Russian OSM forum since there, it is a clear violation of self-proclaimed rules.

Any arguments based an attempt to discredit a person using assumptions and non-related facts are irrelevant and only serve as an indirect proof that “Zverik’s bandwagon” does actually exist.

“Helping” means “doing useful, productive things”, not “doing something”.

@bhousel, my logic that I’ve explained above is quite opposite: neither altar nor garbhargriha should be among the keywords, altar - because it’s not a synonym for a temple, church or cathedral, garbhargriha - for the same reason and because it’s not an English word anyway. That’s what happens when people who have no idea about foreign culture/language and real needs of foreign people start “helping” foreigners. Pretty much like a lot of Russian mappers who add “English” names to everything including a local public toilet in some village.

Several notes on this topic. Usage of a leisure key, actually, might contradict a protection status in a lot of cases, where nature reserve doesn’t allow any leisure activities. Ownership and enforcement are totally different things from protection level. For example, in Russian Federation, there are huge state-owned protected areas with limited access intended for hunting. They have strict protection enforcement and they usually are equal to class 4 or 6. Private hunting lands with similar access restriction, management level, and enforcement exist in other countries. Someone might argue that if hunting is allowed, it is not a protection, but that’s just a personal idea of protection. Actually, it is a broader term than many people think. We already have keys for ownership - no need to introduce anything new and mix it with other features.

However, there is a question about protected areas with different levels. For example, there might exist an area (and I know at least two of them like that) with several adjacents sub-boundaries with different protection class, goals and management levels. Currently, it is unclear how to properly tag something like that using relations, because these aren’t separate areas, these are sub-areas.

“Needed” for what exactly (please, answer with a reasonable logical explanation referring to facts, not with another slogan)?

OSM is an open community, there is no single obstacle for anyone to participate, regardless of their gender. If there are fewer females in OSM, it only reflects their free will (lack of will) to participate, nothing else. Equality is not about “having the equal number of these and those”, it’s about an equal opportunity to exercise own free will.

Во-первых, такие вопросы имеет смысл задавать не в дневниках, а на форуме, в соответствующей теме: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=2094

Во-вторых, shop=country_store - очень широкое понятие, которое описывает “магазин для фермеров”, при том применяется этот тег очень редко, особенно если исключить магазины, которые им отмечены в рамках импорта магазинов американской сети Tractor Supply. И он действительно дублирует shop=agrarian, который (вероятно, т.к. описания тега не существует) обозначает то же самое.

В-третьих, shop=pet - конечно, никакого отношения к скоту не имеет.

Ну и стоит понимать, что в OSM не существует стройной системы обозначения магазинов по конкретному ассортименту - все существующие обозначения - ассоциативные, отражают в той или иной степени стереотипное представление о магазине, а не то, что в нем действительно продают. Так что можете выбрать хоть agrarian, хоть country_store (второе - менее предпочтительно, потому что значение тега содержит товтологию _store - такие теги обычно отвергаются, если выставляются на формальное голосование) и добавить в description описание, что там продается.