[Tagging] An after-burner meta-discussion

[Kevin Kenny]

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:56 AM bkil <bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd strongly suggest to reconsider the `WHO` part. I think opinions
> should be weighted according to how much `skin` one has `in the game`.
>
> I.e., if I am mapping something and I need to specify a property,
> those should have less `say` about the final decision who never map
> such things in the first place. Otherwise it usually ends with
> bikeshedding:
>

I think that you most likely didn't clarify, rather than intending the
following, but as stated, your argument undervalues data consumers.  My
belief is that data consumers deserve a disproportionately strong voice in
the process, because map data that are never consumed are nearly worthless
(except, perhaps, as works of art).  Some people/projects that consume OSM
data and contribute great value to the OSM ecosystem are not heavily
involved with entering the data that they consume.

"No objections" is an intolerable burden to bear.  Human nature being what
it is, there will always be people who are obstructionist, or who simply
insist on getting their own way. The best we can hope for is "all
objections have been given a fair hearing. For those that have not been
withdrawn, a decision has been made not to address them, and the rationale
documented," Consensus is not unanimity. You don't want some random holdout
being able to stall all progress forever, which appears to me to be what
happens in several corners of OSM.

Fortunately, for the core activity of mapping and assigning tags to
objects, "he who does the work makes the rules" has been working out
reasonably well in practice. These tagging arguments can get as ugly as
they do precisely because so little is at stake. The actual practice of
mapping is not blocked when an argument goes awry.

-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220216/1bd954d3/attachment.htm>