[Tagging] Revisiting proposal/voting scheme

David Bannon dbannon at internode.on.net
Wed Mar 18 21:58:16 UTC 2015

On Wed, 2015-03-18 at 21:40 +0100, Kotya Karapetyan wrote:

>  ..... would it make sense to change the current proposal/voting
> mechanism like follows?
> - When the discussion calms down (which can even be defined
> mathematically if needed), this very page is converted into a feature
> page. It is never "approved" or "rejected", but the opinions are made
> clear. 

No, I'm sorry but I don't see how an interested party can be expected to
objectively determine what the discussion concluded.  If we absolutely
must measure data in the database, how can we do otherwise in our
processes ?

About the only way would be to count up the emails for/against. And then
discount the early ones as they would apply to early drafts of the
proposal. Try and allow for the "fence sitters"....

No, sorry, but a vote and an outcome may offend some politically correct
members but it is necessary. 

> - People can add their concerns later just by editing the page. 

At present, people wanting to edit (more then typo) test the list's
opinion first. Thats important.
> The advantage of such approach would be:

>  ...Adherence to the wiki idea, when the community develops a good
> page by working on it more than by discussing it; ....

In my experience, a wiki that is 'unmoderated' very quickly becomes such
a mess its unusable. Fun for the few who know their way around it but a
mystery to everyone else. And thats many years of leading a technical
and very focused team using wiki as core documentation. 

The current system is not too bad. Lets correct the voting number
anomaly first. You did seem to me have consensus there but given what I
said above, does it need to be treated as a proposal ?

New users to OSM need to see the idea of 'approved' keys and values. Its
not enforced, we make that clear but a new user needs some initial

Then maybe we look at the Forum idea ? 


More information about the Tagging mailing list