[Tagging] Changing proposal process rules - RFC

Brian M. Sperlongano zelonewolf at gmail.com
Wed Jan 6 12:45:42 UTC 2021


>
> Rather than eliminating voices, we should be focused on attracting more
> voters and more diverse perspectives, ideally at the RFC stage, before
> the vote. Perhaps if we work on making tagging proposals more organized
> and discoverable, we can lessen the burden on proposers to canvass for
> votes (which can skew any vote because our communication channels are so
> fragmented).


+1

I dislike the fact that RFC and voting announcements are mixed with general
discussion on the tagging list.  I think many people prefer not to
subscribe to the list because it is high volume, but would be interested in
subscribing to a list that only has RFC/vote announcements.  I would be in
favor of a separate mailing list that people could subscribe to for just
those announcements.  The key would be moderating that list in such a way
that only announcements are posted there while discussion still happens on
tagging in the usual way.

It would also be good to expose proposals in some other way to the map
editing community, but I'm not sure where that should go.  If we can solve
the discoverability problem (maybe with DataItems), then perhaps editors
might be willing to expose the existence of RFCs/votes to mappers in some
way.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210106/01f6b4a1/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list