Re: [Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
Bryce, I think this proposal is far to complicated to be developed on a mailing list. And probably on a Forum. Is it time your bare bones plan move to a wiki page, perhaps as a Best Practice document ? Then we can concentrate on each section, bit by bit and massage it into something great. I do think its heading in the right direction. But detail, always details On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 14:14 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Criticising to improve and clarify, not shoot down You have not mentioned the process before creation of a Proposed Tag Page. Assume pretty much as now, default being discussion on this List, a Forum or SE ? This is a proposed new method of managing tag pages. It mashes up the schemes from Kotya, Moltonel, Hoess, and others. In this scheme there are five valid states for a tag page: * Proposed Tag Page * Proposed Tagging Convention Change or Extension * Active Tag * Deprecated Tag * Redirect Voting on a proposal opens whenever the proponent decides it's open, and stays open forever. Votes are not deleted, but horizontal lines may be placed in the voting stream to indicate alterations to the proposal. Now, 'horizontal lines', an innovation. Do you see people re-voting every time there is a horizontal line ? I may fail to do so because its some minor change, unless someone trawls through the history, hard to see impact of changes. What about the process to manage changes to a PTP (Proposed Tag Page) ? If I make a change to a PTP that is completely contrary to its existing theme, is it reverted ? New votes deleted ? And if my change is just a bit contrary ? And so on There is no specific vote threshold. However, convention is that an active mapper other than a proponent must execute state changes (e.g. from Active to Deprecated or back). Essentially the third party mapper acts as Judge Jury, evaluating the full weight of the evidence from mailing list discussion through Taginfo. As we've learned no one threshold applies in all cases. Nice model ! other than a proponent ? Note use of a not the, at what point do I become a proponent ? By speaking up in List/Forum ? By voting. By sleeping with original page writer ? Tagging changes may be followed by a retagging proposal, after a suitable maturation period, with a goal of keeping the data consistent enough for rational machine processing. Now, that needs further details, make no mistake. Please elaborate. Each state change has a compulsory notification sent to the tagging mailing list. I think each state change needs to be foreshadowed in the List/Forum. And people given the chance to object. David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:14 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Now, 'horizontal lines', an innovation. Do you see people re-voting every time there is a horizontal line ? I may fail to do so because its some minor change, unless someone trawls through the history, hard to see impact of changes. The goal here is to be less binary. That a mapper considering a tag can scan the page and see the history. A lot of green, maybe they map. A lot of red/green, maybe they decide to look farther. -- The proposal comes down to show the history, let the mapper decide, but ensure that one person acting alone is not making tagging policy. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
On 20/03/2015 9:42 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:14 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net mailto:dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Now, 'horizontal lines', an innovation. Do you see people re-voting every time there is a horizontal line ? I may fail to do so because its some minor change, unless someone trawls through the history, hard to see impact of changes. The goal here is to be less binary. That a mapper considering a tag can scan the page and see the history. A lot of green, maybe they map. A lot of red/green, maybe they decide to look farther. -- The proposal comes down to show the history, let the mapper decide, but ensure that one person acting alone is not making tagging policy. When choosing to use a tag I want to look at the tag alone. I chose it based on its suitability for my situation. I don't look at who proposed it, who voted for/against and the variations. I look at the tag. Past historic discussions that probably have no bearing on my situation simply confuse, I want to make a quick simple decision based on the present tag and my situation. --- An proposer is bound to find one other person to make the tag 'valid' under this idea. I think that is a bad idea ... may become divided into groups that promote each others tags? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: An proposer is bound to find one other person to make the tag 'valid' under this idea. I think that is a bad idea ... may become divided into groups that promote each others tags? Community pressure would quickly come to bear, if stinker proposals are promoted to Active, with lots of negative votes. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
On 20/03/2015 11:18 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: An proposer is bound to find one other person to make the tag 'valid' under this idea. I think that is a bad idea ... may become divided into groups that promote each others tags? Community pressure would quickly come to bear, if stinker proposals are promoted to Active, with lots of negative votes. How is it determined that it is a majority view? Vote? .. back to square one. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 15:26 +1100, Warin wrote: if stinker proposals are promoted to Active, with lots of negative votes. How is it determined that it is a majority view? Vote? .. back to square one. Possibly, but probably not in most cases. I doubt too many people on this list would be dishonest in getting a proposal up. After all, its would be easy now, anyone unaware of how easy it would be to make, say, 8 extra wiki accounts ? Get a bad proposal up via trickery, its still a bad proposal, it won't get used if its that bad. If its only a bit bad, and does get use, then its the use that matters, isn't it ? And addressing your concern about forming groups trading approvals. Same answer. While we are looking for documentable process, it always has to be open and transparent too. And dependant on the good will of the OSM community. David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Wiki 2.0 Proposal: Unregulated voting : But you must convince another mapper to finalize changes
While the wiki vote process is controversial, it has *tremendous importance* as wiki opinion flows directly into editing tools such as iD and Taginfo. This is a proposed new method of managing tag pages. It mashes up the schemes from Kotya, Moltonel, Hoess, and others. In this scheme there are five valid states for a tag page: - Proposed Tag Page - Proposed Tagging Convention Change or Extension - Active Tag - Deprecated Tag - Redirect Voting on a proposal opens whenever the proponent decides it's open, and stays open forever. Votes are not deleted, but horizontal lines may be placed in the voting stream to indicate alterations to the proposal. There is no specific vote threshold. However, convention is that *an active mapper other than a proponent* must execute state changes (e.g. from Active to Deprecated or back). Essentially the third party mapper acts as Judge Jury, evaluating the full weight of the evidence from mailing list discussion through Taginfo. As we've learned no one threshold applies in all cases. Tagging changes may be followed by a retagging proposal, after a suitable maturation period, with a goal of keeping the data consistent enough for rational machine processing. Each state change has a compulsory notification sent to the tagging mailing list. That's it. -- In each tag I have proposed, commentators have added value, and altered the tag scheme for the better. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
