[Osmf-talk] Board response: Disputed Area Policy (Crimea request)

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Thu Feb 7 09:57:07 UTC 2019


On 07.02.19 09:59, Tom Hughes wrote:
>> At the same time, we have seen that that in the concrete case of Crimea,
>> making an *exception* from this rule was the option that caused the
>> least strife in the OSM community.
> If the new goal is going to be "least strife" then that is essentially
> admitting that the group that shouts loudest will win in future?

"Least strife" is not necessarily a new goal; in DWG, we have
occasionally asked people to stop doing something that was totally
within the rules but did ruffle too many feathers with the existing

Also, don't confuse "exception" with "new rule"! Just because an
exception has been made, doesn't mean they will continue to be made in
similar situations, otherwise it would not be an exception but a new rule.

> So basically you're inviting every group with a dispute to make a
> nuisance of themselves in every communication channel we have because
> that is the way they will "win" 

A group with a dispute who makes a nuisance of themselves in every
communication channel is an issue that will end up on board's plate one
way or another anyway, whether before or after the Crimea ruling. That
board should decide in their favour is not a given; strife could also be
drastically reduced by other means, like excluding them from the
communication channels in question.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list