[Tagging] An after-burner meta-discussion

[stevea]

(I said I'm stepping aside yet I add):  consensus does need someone to "call the consensus."  This is someone consensus-process knowledgable who leads it well, true to its tenets.  These people tend to be somewhat rare, but they obviously can be grown, and even emerge.  How we define what that is and how we do it are the current sandbox.  A "redefinition" (of consensus, or what we mean by it, or how we evolve it...) occurs.

(And there sure is a lot of "hot air to spare").

In fact, everything in OSM, especially good data, emerge.  And it is hard to argue with "hard work, and look, it works, too."  We have a great deal of that around here.  It is real, it is here, it works.  I don't throw that overboard lightly AND I love to see the tent get even larger with greater contributions by greater contributors, we have plenty of room for that.

Those who lead by good example with their good works, well, I, for one, respect them.  Made your chops, earned your stripes.  It makes the place pretty awesome around here, we are still young and have much to grow into.

There are a whole lot of things happening here simultaneously, everyone, I'm sure you've noticed.