<div dir="ltr">> Again, it's a fall back scenario in case local communities cannot agree and escalate it with editing wars. <div>> Of course, local communities disagree with international organisations.<br></div><div><br></div><div>IMHO: Why not focus on the "root cause" ---> We can't support multiple points of view (worldview) yet </div><div> ( example: <a href="https://github.com/nvkelso/natural-earth-vector/issues/301">https://github.com/nvkelso/natural-earth-vector/issues/301</a> )</div><div><br></div><div>For solving the community problems: the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediation">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediation</a> process is better because it has a Nonzero-Sum approach.</div><div>The "UN" fallback scenario is a ~ Zero-Sum approach .. with winners and losers.</div><div>And we need to think about the "Second-order effect": If the "looser" community does not accept the solution; We have to prepare some community forking. </div><div>At worst, there will be 3 similar but incompatible community geodatabase in 2030<br></div><div><br></div><div><i>"Second Order Effect refers to the idea that every action has a consequence, and each consequence has a subsequent consequence. In other words, this means that a single decision can initiate a series of cause-and-effects, something which we might not have knowledge or control of."</i></div><div><br></div><div>So let's focus on:</div><div>- Localized Map rendering -> <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Top_Ten_Tasks#Localized_map_rendering">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Top_Ten_Tasks#Localized_map_rendering</a></div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div> Imre</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Bert -Araali- Van Opstal <<a href="mailto:bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com">bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com</a>> ezt írta (időpont: 2021. júl. 14., Sze, 13:47):<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p><br>
</p>
<div>On 13/07/2021 16:47, Brian M.
Sperlongano wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:38
AM Bert -Araali- Van Opstal <<a href="mailto:bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com" target="_blank">bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>On 13/07/2021 09:11, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Jul 12, 2021, 16:17 by <a href="mailto:bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com" target="_blank">bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com</a>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px">
<div> C. if the above fail to reach a consensus, what
is the fall back scenario. Do we define a reference
framework, like the UN or others ?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto">No.<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Definite no to putting "regulations from
the UN" above actual situation.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
I agree, it is not what I said as to be proposed. I said
resolutions from the UN are fall back reference frames
when the OSM community fails to reach a consensus using
our own guidelines framework.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I do not think that this is a workable solution. There
are many cases where a local community is not in agreement
with international organizations, and this would effectively
be choosing a winner based on fiat rather than doing the
more difficult but necessary work of achieving a compromise
that all sides can live with.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I agree that it's not desirable. Again, it's a fall back scenario in
case local communities cannot agree and escalate it with editing
wars. Of course, local communities disagree with international
organisations. In my proposal I will include some suggestions how
dialogue and a process to consensus between local communities could
be improved, rather then starting editing wars and escalating them
to other map features.It shouldn't be a desired permanent situation
though, if through other processes a consensus is reached of course
as a community we will allow the name tag to reflect local use, as
intended and guided in our wiki. <br>
<p>Leaving the name field empty or freezing it on a biased status
is, I believe not favoured by the majority. Is not going to stop
the wars which, at the same time undermine the dialogue which
might be ongoing in a search for consensus. But we are open to
alternative suggestions of course.</p>
<p>Greetings,</p>
<p>Bert Araali<br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a><br>
</blockquote></div>