[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Artificial

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-10-21 10:59, Robert Delmenico wrote:

> I'll do some more research before the vote goes ahead. I've read quite a bit of research around gendered language since first mentioning this idea.  
> 
> I'll be sure to list them in the proposal but feel free to send through any sources that are both for and against the arguments I have raised. I'm thinking that I'll mention the arguments both for and against on the proposal page as this is a big proposal which if it succeeds will have a big impact. 
> 
> If anyone has any arguments for or against that they wish to have included in the proposal, please feel free to leave them on the talk page for the proposal.

If this goes through, it will be traumatic, however you look at it. Do
you have any suggestions how to abstract this specific example into a
more generic process to a) review all tags currently in the database; b)
all wiki content suggesting tagging; and c) all future proposals, to
assess their appropriateness in the current and likely future
environment?  

I don't mean to be flippant - this is a serious suggestion. If we are
going to have this kind of discussion around any graphology
incorporating "possibly offensive" groups of letters we had better have
a proper policy in place and a well-oiled process to deal with it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201021/aff06429/attachment.htm>