[Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes

David Bannon dbannon at internode.on.net
Thu Mar 19 22:14:09 UTC 2015

Bryce, I think this proposal is far to complicated to be developed on a
mailing list. And probably on a Forum.  Is it time your bare bones plan
move to a wiki page, perhaps as a Best Practice document ?

Then we can concentrate on each section, bit by bit and massage it into
something great. I do think its heading in the right direction. But
detail, always details ....

On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 14:14 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:

Criticising to improve and clarify, not shoot down ....

You have not mentioned the process before creation of a Proposed Tag
Page. Assume pretty much as now, default being discussion on this List,
a Forum or SE ? 

> This is a proposed new method of managing tag pages. It mashes up the
> schemes from Kotya, Moltonel, Hoess, and others.  In this scheme there
> are five valid states for a tag page:
>       * Proposed Tag Page
>       * Proposed Tagging Convention Change or Extension
>       * Active Tag
>       * Deprecated Tag
>       * Redirect
> Voting on a proposal opens whenever the proponent decides it's open,
> and stays open forever.  Votes are not deleted, but horizontal lines
> may be placed in the voting stream to indicate alterations to the
> proposal.
Now, 'horizontal lines', an innovation. Do you see people re-voting
every time there is a horizontal line ? I may fail to do so because its
some minor change, unless someone trawls through the history, hard to
see impact of changes. 

What about the process to manage changes to a PTP (Proposed Tag Page) ?
If I make a change to a PTP that is completely contrary to its existing
theme, is it reverted ?  New votes deleted ? 

And if my change is just a bit contrary ? And so on ....
> There is no specific vote threshold.  However, convention is that an
> active mapper other than a proponent must execute state changes (e.g.
> from Active to Deprecated or back).  Essentially the third party
> mapper acts as Judge & Jury, evaluating the full weight of the
> evidence from mailing list discussion through Taginfo.  As we've
> learned no one threshold applies in all cases.
Nice model ! "other than a proponent" ?  Note use of "a" not "the", at
what point do I become a proponent ? By speaking up in List/Forum ? By
voting. By sleeping with original page writer ?
> Tagging changes may be followed by a retagging proposal, after a
> suitable maturation period, with a goal of keeping the data consistent
> enough for rational machine processing.

Now, that needs further details, make no mistake. Please elaborate.

> Each state change has a compulsory notification sent to the tagging
> mailing list.

I think each state change needs to be foreshadowed in the List/Forum.
And people given the chance to object.


More information about the Tagging mailing list