[Tagging] Revisiting proposal/voting scheme

Dan S danstowell+osm at gmail.com
Wed Mar 18 22:21:44 UTC 2015

2015-03-18 21:58 GMT+00:00 David Bannon <dbannon at internode.on.net>:
> 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.

It has nothing to do with "politically correct" - what a curious idea!
It's about designing the mechanism so that it does what we want it to
do. Lots of people repeatedly say that it doesn't. We don't all agree
what's broken about it...

I like the general approach Kotya proposes. It seems correct that we
want to keep the positive aspects of voting (discussion, refinement,
in one focal place, with some "straw poll" of community acceptance)
but the biggest issue people seem concerned about here is that
converting that straw poll into a blunt "approved/rejected" is not
helpful because it conflates some very different situations.

So here's how I would answer your question of how would "an interested
party [...] objectively determine what the discussion concluded":
instead of approved/rejected, some sort of visual widget on the wiki
page which summarised the {{yes}} and {{no}} with something like "76%
support [out of 98 opinions]". The poll would give a quick guide to
mappers, and encourage others to chip in with their opinion - any user
could add or remove their {{yes}}/{{no}} at any point.


More information about the Tagging mailing list