<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><br><br><div dir="ltr">sent from a phone</div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote type="cite">On 24. Dec 2020, at 17:21, Tomas Straupis <tomasstraupis@gmail.com> wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><span> It is not a technical problem.</span><br><span></span><br><span> Where are several ways in principle:</span><br><span> 1. Full democracy - you need thousands of people to vote - hard to do.</span><br><span> 2. Weighted democracy - vote is multiplied by some coefficient - say</span><br><span>by number of edits (but should somehow include other value for OSM</span><br><span>like writing, organising, administering, chapioning etc.) - you would</span><br><span>need less votes as it will be enough to get votes of high</span><br><span>contributors, but will have difficulty/controversy when writing</span><br><span>formula and getting values for the coefficient (especially when</span><br><span>evaluating non tangible things like championing).</span><br><span> 3. Expert lead - experts committee is elected (having real expertise</span><br><span>in the field as well as OSM) - hard to find experts willing to do this</span><br><span>and as has already been demonstrated experts will be massively</span><br><span>outnumbered so it will be hard to force non experts to follow their</span><br><span>decisions. Also this could probably be against "OSM as a free and open</span><br><span>society for everyone".</span></div></blockquote><br><div><br></div><div>4. liquid democracy, have people delegate their votes by topic if they don’t want to vote themselves. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_democracy</a></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers Martin </div></body></html>