[OSM-talk] [Tagging] This list requires moderation

[80hnhtv4agou at bk.ru]

this person is DWG.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/woodpeck_repair
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/woodpeck
 
and blocks people for ten years,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/woodpeck/blocks_by?page=1
contrary to the OSMF ban policy.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Ban_Policy
  
>Sunday, February 7, 2021 6:34 AM -06:00 from Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
> 
>Hi,
>
>I've chosen a somewhat cheeky subject on purpose. I don't mean to say
>that this list requires a moderator, or that people on this list are
>impolite and offensive and all that stuff - on the contrary, this
>mailing list is a place where discussions are generally factual and we
>don't have trolls, abuse, bigotry, or any of that.
>
>What I am calling for is moderation in the sense of restraint, or (a
>definition from the Merriam-Webster dictionary) "observing reasonable
>limits".
>
>Discussions about tagging are important for OSM, and it is good that
>they are being held here on an open mailing list. It is also good that
>we are actually discussing and not just upvoting and downvoting. I don't
>want to change any of that.
>
>But the sheer volume of discussion is making it difficult for many to
>follow the debates. And let's be honest: About 75% of the discussion
>could be cut if we applied a little bit of ... moderation.
>
>Things that I see too often:
>
>* Repetition of one's own arguments. If you say something, and someone
>else opposes that, simply let it stand. You have said your thing, the
>other guy has said their thing, you don't need to say "but I still think
>that" and then repeat everything in other words.
>
>* Repetition of someone else's arguments in different words. All too
>often we have five people essentially saying the same thing in slightly
>different words. Everyone believes that the other person has got it
>*almost* right but they want to add one tiny bit, or stress another
>aspect, and boom, there goes a new three-page essay.
>
>* Quick-fire responses. One person writes something, and three others
>reply immediately, without having fully read or understood the other
>responses, leading to a broad overlap between responses. If people were
>willing to wait a little longer, maybe they could do away with their
>response altogether because someone else has already said it.
>
>* Mistaking the list for a voting platform - while it is important to
>gauge what the community opinion is, if one person says something and
>three others have opposed, then it is not necessary to add a fourth,
>fifth, and sixth opposing voice. Three against is clear enough.
>
>* Wanting to comment on everything - there's a few people here who seem
>to see it as their responsibility to participate in every single thread.
>I've been there, done that. Nowadays I still read all the threads, and I
>ask myself: Is this an emergency where people will do something really
>bad if I don't join the discussion and try to steer them away? If it
>isn't, then I try to remain silent on that topic even if (!) I think
>that people are maybe overlooking a minor detail or the discussion isn't
>going exactly as I would like it.
>
>Before you post to this mailing list, remember that every single post
>uses some bandwidth, and bandwidth is limited. The more bandwidth is
>wasted on unnecessary "I 99% agree but there's this one little thing
>that I feel I need to write three pages about", the less bandwidth
>remains for the important stuff. And a high-bandwidth mailing list
>presents a higher hurdle for participation, so the more unnecessary
>words we make, the fewer people will be willing and able to participate.
>
>Before you post, ask yourself: Does what I have to say really have an
>impact? Is what I am about to write something that the 100s of readers
>of this list need to read?
>
>Set yourself reasonable limits; think about how you can help us all to
>save bandwidth. For example such limits could be "don't send more than
>one message per day on average", or "try to make it a habit to reply to
>things on the next day, rather than on the same day - unless your reply
>has already been made redundant by then".
>
>I think this mailing list is important and good work is being done here,
>and I want to keep it functioning. Hence this call for "moderation", in
>the sense of "observing reasonable limits". Your help is greatly
>appreciated.
>
>Bye
>Frederik
>
>--
>Frederik Ramm ## eMail  frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210207/b752aaef/attachment.htm>