[Tagging] Tag:amenity=motorcycle_taxi not approved

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> (especially those approved after, say, 2012)

The proposal process became more difficult after March 2015, when the
standard for approval was changed from >50% to >74%:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposal_process&type=revision&diff=1150734&oldid=1143140

This has been helpful in preventing bad ideas from being approved without
consensus.

But it has made it more likely that a proposal will not be approved, even
though the majority accepts it.

--Joseph Eisenberg

On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 3:21 PM Jarek Piórkowski <jarek at piorkowski.ca> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 09:05, s8evq <s8evqq at runbox.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 May 2020 08:43:27 -0400, Jarek Piórkowski <jarek at piorkowski.ca>
wrote:
> > > How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
> > > oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
> > > that, they think that. A discussion would just print the arguments
> > > back and forth.
> >
> > If these arguments were given beforehand, perhaps the proposal could
have changed, or opinions could have been changed?
>
> Honestly - I remember following the discussion on this mailing list
> for a while and my impression was that the arguments _were_ given.
> These arguments are not a surprise. Here's a version of this exact
> argument in February:
>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-February/051250.html
>
> Subsequent discussion here is an example of what happened. Some
> people, _after having read the rationale offered_, think that a
> separate tag is not warranted. Some people think that it is. You won't
> win an argument by telling others they're wrong.
>
> > I hardly have any experience in proposals and the voting system. But
I've seen 3 proposal so far, where I know the author doesn't want to bring
it to vote, fearing the proposal would be rejected. The rationale behind
it: status Rejected is worse than having the proposal in the "Draft" state
forever.
> >
> > And then some people in this very thread suggest to just ignore a
rejection and start using it anyway. What's the use of the whole voting
system then? Why even bother writing a proposal in the first place? I'll
just do whatever.
>
> Yeah I understand. I myself rejected Joseph's suggestion to make a tag
> I used locally and documented on wiki into a "proposal", because I
> don't want the hassle.
>
> My interpretation is that "approved" is a _lot_ higher status than "in
> use", precisely because how harsh the proposal process is. That's just
> I see it being in OSM - you can have in-use tags, locally-accepted
> tags, and then the "approved" tags are really really accepted
> (especially those approved after, say, 2012).
>
> Failing a proposal isn't a bad thing. Tag what you like. (With some
> exceptions, like straight-up vandalism or trolltags)
>
> --Jarek
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200508/cba89509/attachment.htm>