[Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-25 Thread Michael Montani
incere apologies, Michael Da: Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging Inviato: martedì 4 agosto 2020 10:14 A: Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging Cc: Mateusz Konieczny ; Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Oggetto: Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed re

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread pangoSE
I agree. Colin Smale skrev: (4 augusti 2020 11:26:30 CEST) >On 2020-08-04 10:06, Andrew Harvey wrote: > >> I'd suggest that if you vote no, it will be helpful for the community >if you could elaborate on why you're voting no, without enforcing a >reason as mandatory. Is it because this feature

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Aug 2020, at 11:44, Jez Nicholson wrote: > > Frederik asks, "was our voting process changed recently", to which I believe > the answer is, "yes, abstentions are no longer included in the count" The “new” process is also flawed, as a no vote can bring a proposal to

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Aug 2020, at 11:16, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > It might actually be better to introduce the opposite rule - that > yes-votes need to explain why they are willing to dismiss sustained > critical voices in the discussion. This is a good point, and it is also

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Jez Nicholson
Frederik asks, "was our voting process changed recently", to which I believe the answer is, "yes, abstentions are no longer included in the count" Please correct me if I'm mistaken. I don't at first glance see anything in the process rules, but I'm outside in the sun using a phone... On Tue, 4

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Andy Mabbett
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 09:46, Frederik Ramm wrote: > On 04.08.20 10:06, Andy Mabbett wrote: > >> Have our tagging voting rules changed recently? > > > Which rules? > > Should I have written "was our voting process changed recently", or what > exactly are you asking? I meant the established way of

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Andy Mabbett
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 10:26, Colin Smale wrote: > Putting a proposal to the vote should IMHO not be done unless the > discussions are clearly pointing towards approval. A vote is not a > substitute for the discussion, it should be a confirmation that > consensus has been achieved. With all the

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Colin Smale
On 2020-08-04 10:06, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I'd suggest that if you vote no, it will be helpful for the community if you > could elaborate on why you're voting no, without enforcing a reason as > mandatory. Is it because this feature shouldn't be mapped, is it because > there is an alternative

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Tuesday 04 August 2020, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > looking at the "bare_soil" proposal I was surprised to read: > > "Any opposition vote without reason or suggestion will not be counted > in the voting process." > > Is that something that we have added by consensus? I don't think so - but

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, On 04.08.20 10:06, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> Have our tagging voting rules changed recently? > Which rules? Should I have written "was our voting process changed recently", or what exactly are you asking? I meant the established way of proposing and voting for tags as outlined in

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Aug 2020, at 09:59, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Has this been used in other votes in the past? the instructions have always stated that opposing votes should explain why they are against it. In practice this is not a significant hurdle, because many reasons go like

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
To be more clear: in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/Ground=2018441=2018440 I removed "Any opposition vote without reason or suggestion will not be counted in the voting process."as it is an undiscussed modification of a proposal voting and a refusal to

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
I partially reverted https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/Ground=prev=2014966 and followed https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Voting Note that "People should not just vote "oppose", they should give a reason for their proposal, and/or

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Andy Mabbett
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 08:57, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Have our tagging voting rules changed recently? Which rules? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Andrew Harvey
I'd suggest that if you vote no, it will be helpful for the community if you could elaborate on why you're voting no, without enforcing a reason as mandatory. Is it because this feature shouldn't be mapped, is it because there is an alternative tag. So if the vote fails all this feedback can be

[Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

2020-08-04 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, looking at the "bare_soil" proposal I was surprised to read: "Any opposition vote without reason or suggestion will not be counted in the voting process." Is that something that we have added by consensus? It sounds like a somewhat sneaky measure to ignore opposition votes, or discourage