[Tagging] Revisiting proposal/voting scheme

moltonel 3x Combo moltonel at gmail.com
Thu Mar 19 09:24:35 UTC 2015

On 18/03/2015, David Bannon <dbannon at internode.on.net> wrote:
> No, I'm sorry but I don't see how an interested party can be expected to
> objectively determine what the discussion concluded.
> [...]
> No, sorry, but a vote and an outcome may offend some politically correct
> members but it is necessary.

Don't you see the contradiction in those statements ? I fully agree
with your first paragraph, but that means that I disagree with the
second : a vote is not a good way to determine that the discussion has

> In my experience, a wiki that is 'unmoderated' very quickly becomes such
> a mess its unusable.

I'm not sure why you see the proposed workflow changes as turning the
wiki into an 'unmoderated' thing.

> New users to OSM need to see the idea of 'approved' keys and values.

I do not see that at all. Only after a few years of editing did I
venture into the Proposal namespace on the wiki, and I was still far
removed from the concept of "approved proposals". Editor presets,
default rendering, existing data, general wiki pages, and taginfo is
what guided me (in that order).

"Approving" a key has today more to do with politics than with
technical/practical considerations, and that's the last thing you want
to show to newbies.

More information about the Tagging mailing list