[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[Liz]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Alex L. Mauer wrote:
> OK, but how does that mean it was "forced"?  No one was (or is) held at
> gunpoint and ordered to use highway=path.  We followed the standard,
> documented procedure for adding a tag to the wiki.  We did nothing
> nefarious to stuff the votes (at least I didn't, and I am not aware of
> any sock-puppets or anything like that)
>
> I don't even know where the idea of needing a mandate[1] comes in.  No
> one's being elected to represent someone else.  There are no policies
> that some hypothetical person who would have been elected could have
> made public.  And no goverment(!?) is trying to implement a policy here.
>  So, uh... what?
>
> -Alex Mauer "hawke"

I was not making a personal attack. I am looking at the "rules" and I find 
that neither justice nor good decision making is necessary with the rules as 
they stand.
I am talking about making sure that changes are deliberated by a broader 
church than current procedure demands.

As far as you are concerned you followed the rules.
However, by following those rules to the letter, you have actually been party 
to a fairly big split.
Here it's winter, the nights are long and I have time to read the wiki and 
mailing lists.
When its summer I won't be, I'll be out mapping and having a lot more fun.
So the next contentious issue you wish to get through, do it in my summer, so 
I don't notice until late in winter.