[OSM-talk] Tag proposal/approval system is too heavyweight
Gervase Markham
gerv-gmane at gerv.net
Wed Mar 19 19:45:44 GMT 2008
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Those who make the decision have no authority anyway. So why not
> record the rationale without the decision, as it is anybody's free
> choice to follow them or not.
Then welcome, everyone, to the world's first anarcho-collaborativist
project.
It's an unusual model you are suggesting, and not one which (as far as I
know) has worked anywhere else. Still, I guess we could try it. After
all, it's not like this project is important or anything.
_Every_ project has authority. It's just a question of whether that
authority is recognised and controlled, or unrecognised and random. If
you say "there is no authority", then in fact authority rests with those
who control the servers, or the root passwords, or those who have more
time to make the database conform to the way they think things should be
(e.g. the Cyprus situation where, so far, we have abdicated authority).
This is generally not a good way to allocate authority, because the only
way the authority can be exercised is "Do what I say, or I'll take my
ball and go home".
In a standard open source software project, authority is (roughly) a
meritocracy. Authority flows to those people who contribute and who
demonstrate themselves competent. This model works quite well. It seems
like an obvious model for OSM to adopt, and it's the one I _thought_ we
were adopting. But hey, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the authority being
exercised by the OSMF in working on the licensing problem is an
illusion. Maybe a project newbie should have just as much weight in
making decisions as those who've been mapping for years.
Gerv
More information about the talk
mailing list