[Tagging] is the wiki descriptive or prescriptive?

[mail at marcos-martinez.net]

Thanks to Joost for bringing this up because imho this puts the finger
in the wound of THE core issue underlying OSM. And, please, let's not
stray form the subject, this is not about the principle of verifiability
or imports or any other thing. 

This is about HOW we actually achieve consensus because it seems there
is nothing we have agreed on what consensus actually is. 

First of all: I assume consensus is something we want and strive for.
Consensus is not only good but also necessary for a global project like
OSM. 

So, is it the Wiki? Is it proposals and voting outcomes? Is it taginfo?
Is it local communities (and if so, how was THEIR consensus
achieved...)? Is it the forums, Telegrams and other social media? Is it
editing tools, favoring one tagging option instead of another?Is it
those who shout the most or those who are most prolific participating in
debates? Is it putting the finger in the air to feel how the wind blows?
Well, it seems it is nothing of the above and all of the above at once. 

Even if we all, who write on this list, agreed on what consensus
represents it wouldn't be worth a dime - please chose reason above and
correct me if I am wrong. 

The sad thing for me is that if all of the above was strictly true our
database would be a chaos nobody could work with due to its
inconsistency. Strangely, this is not happening. Consensus seems to
crystallize somehow although in many occasions it is difficult to track
down how. This can only mean that consensus ultimately is pushed by
those who can harness the parameters I have listed before in the most
efficient way. It does not mean it is necessarily done with bad
intentions but it does mean that it is not open and transparent. The
powerful element of belonging to a "democratic" project, where everybody
has a say, is the feeling that when it comes to making a decision my
vote can make a difference. Right now, I don't have this feeling which
is why I don't vote proposals anymore. I don't want to vote and it may
or may not count for nothing, who will ever know. 

Andy has asked the relevant question:  

 	* I'd ask "what should it be" and more importantly "what do we need to
do to get from here to there"?

Let's discuss it with the aim to get an actual outcome. And this is what
I advocate for: I vote for having a Wiki that is prescriptive and based
on proposals and votes. It can contain all kinds of local community
exceptions and peculiarities but it should be prescriptive. Votes should
happen on an official channel and to those who claim that e.g. this list
or the proposal discussing page do not represent the whole OSM
community: Well, if you want that your opinion counts for decision
making please join us. If you want to be part of the deciding part of
the community then join where decisions are made. The alternative is
that decisions are made nonetheless, somewhere and somehow, but without
you. 

If our tools at this moment are not suitable to achieve this goal,
should we agree on it, then we need to find and implement them. 

This is a core discussion and I have scratched just the surface of all
possible arguments and ramifications but my mail is already too long and
somebody has to get this debate going. 

Cheers 

> _______________________________________________
> 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/20211117/73245e43/attachment.htm>