[Tagging] Wiki vote threshold
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Mar 4 09:46:14 UTC 2015
2015-03-04 9:35 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com>:
> After, say, 1 year in any one status, move them to status ... 'Expired',
> 'Resting', 'Paused ' or ? They could later be 'resuscitated' to some other
> status? Unless they are in status 'Voting' then judged on the total votes?
Everyone can see from the dates since when a proposal is proposed.
Something like "expired", "resting" or "paused" does not have any benefit
besides discouraging unexperienced mappers from using it, while it may
already be "de-facto" approved.
Here's an example for a proposal that has been a long time in proposed
state but has already some "not to bad" usage numbers:
4 yrs old, 13K uses:
Here is another proposal, also not voted AFAIK:
4yrs old, 3,3K uses:
4yrs old, 697 uses
Here's another one,
4yrs old, 278 uses
And here yet another one,
4 yrs old, 163 uses
Now, how can we determine that usage is high and the proposal can be
considered "active by use"? 13K uses seems a lot, but compared to
advertising objects that are covered by this proposal and exist in the
world, it is likely a very low percentage of them mapped.
On the other hand, 163 uses don't seem much, but if you have a look how
many obelisks there are in the world, maybe the percentage is not too bad,
likely higher than that of the advertising proposal. The same holds true
for historic aqueducts (the proposal above is just for historic ones).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging