It depends on what we On 26 May 2015 at 15:08, Boris Zbarsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 5/26/15 2:52 PM, Mike Connor wrote: > >> So, I'm a little lost on how this concept solves the original problem >> here. A free-form field means these users could continue to identify as a >> part of Albania. >> > > It also means that we could then ask them to stop doing that without > forcing them to identify as being in Serbia. > Yep, that's a step forward. As long as the search mechanism is able to work. I'm not sure that's a safe assumption. If it's not, it means those users are stuck being difficult/impossible to find. > That is, it would create a _mechanism_ for an accurate identification > here. Whether that mechanism is used is then a policy decision... Whether it's used isn't my concern. It's whether it's _effective_ if used. If the choice is "be findable through search or identify your location accurately" the system is not effective. > Isn't that more divisive and controversial than allowing >> Kosovo into the list? >> > > I'm not sure what you mean. Even if, today, we had Kosovo in the list, > people could still pick "Albania" from the list instead just like they did > already. What would be do in that situation? Presumably ask them politely > to change to "Kosovo" instead, yes? If they do that, it's not really different from me listing my location as New York state. Inaccurate, and it'll make it harder for others to find me. As long as territories don't overlap, it's basically just a user picking the wrong thing. -- Mike _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
