<html>
<head>
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<blockquote style="border-left:3px solid #ccc; padding-left:10px;margin:0;">
<span dir="ltr" style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">So I wouldn't suggest worrying too much about the lists. Theory and practice of community interaction elsewhere in OSM is absolutely a valid and interesting topic, but the lists belong to pretty much the same period in OSM history as IRC and Potlatch, and I say that as someone who still uses both. :)</span> <br>
</blockquote> <br> <span dir="ltr" style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Mhh, the tagging proposal workflow still involves tagging@ as a requirement. And many of the tagging@ members flamed against a proposed move over to Discourse . This change would had allowed me to participate in tagging discussions again :)</span> <br>
<div><br>
<div>
<p>May 3, 2023 11:23:06 Richard Fairhurst <richard@systemed.net>:</p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0;border-left:3px solid #ccc; padding-left:10px">
<div name="messageBodySection">
<div dir="auto">
Courtney wrote:<br> > Or is it going to keep doing the same old flame wars?<br> <br> To be honest, the mailing lists have been on the way out for a long time now, and talk@ is no exception. Some once busy lists are now basically dead (dev@, legal-talk@, talk-de@). Others are noticeably quieter (talk@, talk-fr@, osmf-talk@). A few local communities still prefer mailing lists but they're fewer in number every year. Generally, the vital new stuff in OSM doesn't happen on mailing lists.<br> <br> So I wouldn't suggest worrying too much about the lists. Theory and practice of community interaction elsewhere in OSM is absolutely a valid and interesting topic, but the lists belong to pretty much the same period in OSM history as IRC and Potlatch, and I say that as someone who still uses both. :)<br> <br> Richard
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>