[Tagging] solving iD conflict (was: pointlessly inflamatory title)

[Nick Bolten]

> Don't you think that an accusation without a proof (link to mailing list
archive where I can re-read the discussion that happened at that time)
makes your claims more substantial?

Yes, it would substantiate the claim. It would also increase tensions, so
I'm not going to dive into that unless it's absolutely necessary.

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 2:43 PM Michael Reichert <osm-ml at michreichert.de>
wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> Am 23.05.19 um 21:58 schrieb Nick Bolten:
> > # My experience with this mailing list:
> > - Quick to exasperate.
> > - You will be assumed to be coming to the table in bad faith.
> > - You will probably be insulted at some point, potentially sworn at.
> > - The same 8 or so people respond to posts out of a community of tens of
> > thousands of people, companies, non-profits, etc.
> > - The odd situation of absolute certainty in completely incompatible
> > opinions from those that do respond.
> > - Difficult for people to discover. How do we know that the opinions
> shared
> > here are in any way representative of the community, given that so few
> > discover + participate in it?
> > - Difficult to filter for relevance. Have to set up email filters and/or
> > specialized search queries.
> > - Zero real synchronization with OSM editors, the only way people add
> data
> > to the map. Blame doled out everywhere, but very little in the way of
> > collaboration, no real venue for doing so (see previous bullet points).
> >
> > Focusing on the idea of being an "arbiter", does that sound like a good
> way
> > to figure out which tags are good/acceptable?
> >
> > When I was mentoring a group of students a few years ago, several were
> > offended by the condescending and insulting responses they received on
> this
> > mailing list, all because they suggested making a coherent way of
> combining
> > existing tags into a pedestrian schema and doing a carefully-vetted
> import.
> > The import was so carefully-vetted that we later realized it wasn't even
> > really an import, but this didn't stop there being several insulting
> > accusations from several long-term OSMers on these lists. Those students
> > were motivated by helping other people and spent literal months
> attempting
> > to gather enough information from underspecified tagging standards and
> > would have been put off the community entirely if it weren't for the
> > project's momentum and much more productive and friendly interactions
> with
> > local OSMers. I think it's probably a good thing that it's so hard to
> even
> > know that there is a mailing list, as users have a negative experience.
>
> Your criticism might have some true points and I am happy that is a bit
> more elaborated than a simple "mailing lists are bad and a toxic space".
> Don't you think that an accusation without a proof (link to mailing list
> archive where I can re-read the discussion that happened at that time)
> makes your claims more substantial?
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>
>
> --
> Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
> ausgenommen)
> I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190523/31ad3853/attachment-0001.html>