[Tagging] Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

[Dave Swarthout]

+1 "Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor."

I joined this group to effect changes in tagging things of interest to me.
But the discussions inevitably go round and round with nary a thing getting
resolved. If someone has what seems like a good idea there is always
someone else who takes issue with it.

Frankly, getting anything done is just too time consuming. I realize
getting consensus on a topic is a difficult goal but I decided to just
avoid using any controversial tags. There's enough basic mapping needed
where I live to keep me plenty busy.

.

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>  On 24/01/2015 11:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: ON the subject of
>> man_made=tap
>>
>>  On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan <kotya.lists at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > As of today, a total of 16 votes have been submitted, 11 of them are
>>> > approvals. Since 2 weeks have passed and the required number of votes
>>> > (15) has been reached, I have closed the voting and will proceed with
>>> > clean up.
>>>
>>>
>>  In fact, the proposal passed the wiki vote ONLY because the three
>> people voted no at the
>> last minute.  If it were not for those 'no' votes, the proposal would
>> have failed.
>>
>>  All that shows in part how dysfunctional the wiki vote system is
>>
>> Here here!
>> It also shows how dysfunctional this group is .. not many of you vote!
>>
>
> OK, well, I'm going to have to swap out my normal role as the crazy map
> bear <http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?Paul%20Johnson> for a minute to be the
> unpopular opinion puffin:  Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless
> endeavor.  And I don't mean like pointless like being one of the (far too
> few) voters who isn't too insane or stupid to be able to hold down a day
> job, yet willing to risk taking a half-day off work on a non-holiday
> Tuesday off to actually go vote in Oklahoma, where voting could actually
> have an impact if the non-insane idiot contingent could actually get a
> quorum over the elections regulars.  But actually, entirely pointless,
> since tags reach a uniform consensus not by how they're decreed in some
> wiki through a convoluted proposal and elections process, but by people who
> just start using them.
>
> And it seems for the most part, the tags with the most staying power seem
> to be ones that were natural fits, and *then* were documented *how
> they're actually used* in the wiki retroactively.
>
>
>> I would suggest
>> 1) Continued membership of this group be conditional on voting on at
>> least half the tags presented for voting over say the last year.
>> 2) Rejoining members be conditional on voting on at least 8 of the next
>> 10 tags presented for voting.
>> 3) Tag voting may only cease when at least 25%? of the tag group members
>> have voted and 3? weeks have elapsed.
>>
>
> I say scrap the whole thing and let the wiki document the map much like
> the map documents the ground truth.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150124/4a9195a2/attachment-0001.html>