<html><head></head><body><div>Fair point, I meant in the context of the list, as I thought others did too.<br /><br /><div class="acompli_signature">Steve</div><br /></div><br /><br /><br />
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 6:07 PM -0700, "Eugene Alvin Villar" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seav80@gmail.com" target="_blank">seav80@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="3D"ltr"">
<pre>On 6/3/15, Steve Coast <steve@asklater.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:22 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, "pmailkeey ." <pmailkeey@googlemail.com>> <mailto:pmailkeey@googlemail.com>> wrote:
>> > OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. [...] OSM
>> > is 90% argument, 5% dead-end discussions and 5% progress. The whole is
>> > not a marketable product; it's not fit to be rated as 'beta'. Is this a
>> > significant cause of ex-mappers ? It's a flipping brilliant project but
>> > sadly lacking a great leader.
>>
>> It seems you are deeply unsatisfied with how OSM works. And your broad
>> assertions such as that OSM is "not fit" or is "90% argument" are
>> completely unfounded.
>>
>
> I don’t know; there are a bunch of fairly key and active OSM people who
> unsubscribed from the lists precisely because they felt it was mostly
> circular argument.
Yes, people leave mailing lists because of the endless arguments and
constant bike-shedding. But that does not constitute 90% of OSM. I am
willing to bet that majority if not 90% of OSM activity is of mappers
actually mapping. Mailing list discussions is a really small slice of
the overall OSM activity.
</mailto:pmailkeey@googlemail.com></pmailkeey@googlemail.com></seav80@gmail.com></steve@asklater.com></pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body></html>