Hi Andrew,

Thanks for reaching out.

I understand your position and appreciate the time the DWG takes to help maintain the quality of the OpenStreetMap database. I’d like to clarify that my intent has never been to introduce “test” or “invalid” data into the live map. My edits were made with a real use case in mind, for a legitimate toolchain that depends on certain data visibility. The edits weren’t random or frivolous—they were structured and purposeful, even if unconventional by some standards.

That said, I hear the message loud and clear: OSM contributions need to align with established mapping conventions, and data tailored toward third-party consumption shouldn’t compromise the integrity of the map. I’ll take that into account moving forward and ensure any work I do adheres more closely to those expectations.

I’ll also say that while I respect the community’s desire to maintain standards, I don’t agree with the tone or approach these two users have taken. There’s a big difference between offering helpful feedback and making it personal. I hope we can all operate in a space that’s collaborative, not combative.
