[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Tagging disputed boundaries

[Jan S]

Am 14. März 2019 01:02:56 MEZ schrieb Sergio Manzi <smz at smz.it>:
>On 2019-03-14 00:26, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 08:06, Sergio Manzi <smz at smz.it
><mailto:smz at smz.it>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     I was advicing somebody something completely different as of
>lately: to form a hidden, underground, group of motivated persons to
>draft proposals that are already agreed upon by at least "some" before
>going public with the proposal...
>>
>>     Your opinion?
>>
>>
>> Did see that, & thought Hmmm?
>>
>> The problem I can see, & yes, of course there'll be ways around it,
>is how do you pick their conspirators collaborators team?
>>
>> Do you stick up a post saying I'm thinking about a new way of mapping
>disputed boundaries, anybody interested please contact me privately, or
>do you send private messages to me, Joseph, Kevin, Dave etc etc to say
>the same thing?

That somehow sounds like the working group I had brought up earlier. I think its a good way to proceed on fundamental and complex issues.

It wouldn't have to be secret group though. A call for participants and then a list of participants could be published on the proposal page. Also, and in general, proposals should, IMO, be linked on the wiki pages that are concerned, so as to raise more attention and more participation in the voting process.

Maybe it would be viable to initially propose that a complex situation is to be resolved and that a working group shall be established to that end. Thus, people don't have to vote complex proposals but rather only determine that an issue is complex and that a working group shall be conformed to resolve it.

The (working/secret ;)) group would then develop a solution that would have to be approved by simple majority of the votes cast (with working group members excluded from voting). A qualified majority as in individual proposals doesn't seem to be necessary to be, because a working-group proposal is more reliable than individual proposals and thus doesn't require the same level of approval by the community.

This procedure is more complex than that for individual proposals. It also presupposes a degree of confidence in the work of the group. But it might be a way to get better results for complicated problems.

Best, Jan