On 08/10/2009 05:31 PM, Liz wrote: > On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Dave Stubbs wrote: >> Anarchy in tagging died a bit back when some guys on the wiki decided >> ochlocracy was the way to go. >> Tagging used to be occasionally a confused mess. >> Now it's an organised, and "approved" confused mess where anyone with >> a clue automatically withdraws from discussions to keep their sanity >> intact (and to give them some more time to go and actually map >> something), knowing full well that not being there won't make much >> difference to the eventual stupid decision. >> >> Gah... must... be... more... positive... > > I would consider that if we have thousands of mappers, that we should set a > quorum for a vote > so that unless at least x hundred people vote the vote is not valid
From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Proposal_Status_Process: "8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a majority approval" It seems to me that we have one. -Alex Mauer "hawke"
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
