Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Marc_marc]

Le 22.12.22 à 18:10, Raphael a écrit :

I think we should rather decide where the tagging discussion should
take place and then announce proposals at that place.


the power of discourse, when it 'll be in a "full working state" is that 
is that it allows a unified communication between the users of the mail 
interface (knowing that it is itself connected to others) and those of 
the web interface.

This confrontation is therefore totally counter-productive.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Raphael]

Hello everybody

Sorry for joining this discussion late.

I think we should rather decide where the tagging discussion should
take place and then announce proposals at that place.

Currently, there are many places where tagging discussion take place:
mainly on this mailing list and on the new forum ('OpenStreetMap
Community'), but also on Wiki discussion pages, on Discord, IRC,
Telegram and perhaps also in other places. This makes it difficult to
keep track of the discussions and is inefficient, because the same
topic is often discussed in several places.

Since the new forum is still fairly new, perhaps we should wait a few
more months to see which discussion channel becomes the most popular
and then completely switch to that place.

Best regards

Raphael


On Sun, 18 Dec 2022 at 14:37, Cartographer10 via Tagging
 wrote:
>
> Based on the feedback I have received I made some changes to the proposal:
>
> 1) I added a small change in the proposal template to add notes as reminder 
> that user adds the links of discussion on the forum and ML to the proposal.
>
> 2) I removed the words “new forum” and replaced it with community forum since 
> the forum has been in use for some time already.
>
> 3) I added that it is always the proposal author’s responsibility to make 
> sure announcements get cross posted if needed. The author needs to check the 
> forum or the ML archive to see if the announcement has been cross posted.
>
> 4) On the forum, there is a sub community for tagging discussion. Proposal 
> announcements can be made there. People can follow the tag “wiki-proposal” to 
> subscribe to new topics if they don’t want to follow the entire sub 
> community. If the traffic increases, a special sub community for proposals 
> can be requested (if enough moderators can be found).
>
>
> I hope that with this I addressed everybody their concerns regarding this 
> change.
>
>
> Proposal link: 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Announce_proposals_on_the_community_forum
>
> Vincent
>
>
>
>
> 13 nov. 2022 16:01 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
> I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any, please 
> share it here. I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Vincent
>
>
>
> 6 nov. 2022 09:03 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
> I have updated the proposal a few days back which I would like to receive 
> feedback on.
>
> I removed the transition period and required both the forum and the ML to be 
> notified of a new proposal or vote. One exception I propose is that the 
> proposal should be allowed to be made on behalf of the proposal author on 
> either the ML or the forum.
>
> I hope that this change will satisfy both sides
>
> Vincent
>
>
> 29 okt. 2022 09:34 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new forum 
> for proposal announcements.
>
> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum
>
> Kind regards,
> Vincent
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

Based on the feedback I have received I made some changes to theproposal:


1) I added a smallchange in the proposal template to add notes as reminder that 
useradds the links of discussion on the forum and ML to the proposal.


2) I removed thewords “new forum” and replaced it with community forum since 
theforum has been in use for some time already.


3) I added that it is always the proposal author’s responsibility to make 
sureannouncements get cross posted if needed. The author needs to checkthe 
forum or the ML archive to see if the announcement has been crossposted.


4) On the forum,there is a sub community for tagging discussion. 
Proposalannouncements can be made there. People can follow the 
tag“wiki-proposal” to subscribe to new topics if they don’t wantto follow the 
entire sub community. If the traffic increases, aspecial sub community for 
proposals can be requested (if enoughmoderators can be found).





I hope that withthis I addressed everybody their concerns regarding this change.





Proposal link: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Announce_proposals_on_the_community_forum


Vincent



13 nov. 2022 16:01 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:

> I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any, please 
> share it here. I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Vincent
>
>
>
> 6 nov. 2022 09:03 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
>> I have updated the proposal a few days back which I would like to receive 
>> feedback on.
>>
>> I removed the transition period and required both the forum and the ML to be 
>> notified of a new proposal or vote. One exception I propose is that the 
>> proposal should be allowed to be made on behalf of the proposal author on 
>> either the ML or the forum. 
>>
>> I hope that this change will satisfy both sides
>>
>> Vincent
>>
>>
>> 29 okt. 2022 09:34 van 
>> tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>>
>>> Hello everybody,
>>>
>>> Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new forum 
>>> for proposal announcements. 
>>>
>>> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Vincent
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 10:44 2022-11-23, Zeke Farwell đã viết:
A 100+ message thread on the mailing list is no better than on 
Discourse.  The problem is people spending too much time writing many 
long messages, and not enough time reading and thinking.  Much as I 
would love if everyone could learn to write concisely, this will 
probably always happen on any platform.


If only I could +1 this post without spamming everyone.

--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Zeke Farwell]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:57 AM Matija Nalis <
mnalis-openstreetmapl...@voyager.hr> wrote:

> I find Discourse work well for short discussions (up to max. 10-15
> messages), but becomes totally unusable on
> bigger threads esp. with subthreads (e.g. highway=scramble discussion with
> 100+ messages).
>

A 100+ message thread on the mailing list is no better than on Discourse.
The problem is people spending too much time writing many long messages,
and not enough time reading and thinking.  Much as I would love if everyone
could learn to write concisely, this will probably always happen on any
platform.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 17:54:42 -0800, Minh Nguyen  
wrote:
> Vào lúc 17:24 2022-11-19, Matija Nalis đã viết:
>> Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make 
>> sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would
>> be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both 
>> extremely wasteful, hugely unrealistic,
>> and likely to lead to few participating members willing to do that becoming 
>> burned out prematurely).
>
> Practically speaking, no one can fully understand the discussion in 
> every community. That's a much higher bar than just announcing something.

That is true. But if not even the proponent is equipped/willing to do that,
what are the chances that majority of wiki commenters/voters will be
able/willing to do that? Surely even lower.

> For example, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to alert OSM Japan 
> Slack about my next proposal, but my nonexistent Japanese skills would 
> be catastrophically inadequate to capture the sentiment there. It would 
> be better to candidly state upfront that I'm unable to respond to 
> individual comments there and direct interested mappers to the wiki talk 
> page, where hopefully others can engage as necessary.

That is OK, when it is just read-only announcement, and interested people
are pointed to go to wiki talk page and comment there.

Problem arises when there is discussion on that extra channel and not on wiki
talk page, and nobody forwards it to the proposal wiki talk page, so majority
of people never know that there even was such a discussion, much less what was
suggested.

> All too often, a proposal announcement on this list ends with an 
> exhortation to comment on the wiki talk page, inevitably leading to a 
> long thread here instead. Where is the requirement to summarize the 
> tagging list thread, for the benefit of ordinary mappers who will be 
> voting but can't easily follow Mailman's deeply nested threads split 
> across monthly archives? 

I would recommend that proponent summarize mailing list discussion too, yes.

(although it is arguably somewhat less important when it is only official 
 communication channel, but it would become much more important if other
 official channel were added, as then there would be 50-50 [or whichever]
 chance that the voter did not follow "the other" channel)

Related: I actually find rudimentary mailman web interface more usable 
than Discord for reading tagging proposals. It has nice and easy visual 
threading, and web browser automatically indicate read vs. unread articles 
(even if you did read them in logical, instead of chronological way!), and I 
can much easily open interesting messages in extra tab for later perusing
(without them being mixed up). 
Also, I personally did not find the fact that every month I have to click few
extra times to continue following thread that big an issue (especially
considering all the work that *actual reading* of those dozens of messages 
each month pose by itself!)
(of course, I still prefer news.gmane.io NNTP interface to mailman archive, 
but as mentioned previously, that is likely too arcane suggestion for new
users born into wait-whatdoyoumean-internet-is-more-than-just-www generation :-)

> After all, the proposal guidelines have never required _voters_ to subscribe
> to the tagging list.

And those who didn't follow ML suggestions (and when it wasn't summarized in
wiki), invariably produced less useful input. 

Note that I find voting part of proposal actually unimportant in itself; that
is, important only as it:

- forces proponent to actually pay atention to the suggestions made earlier in 
the RFC
- provides a final date for closure (i.e. discussion not dragging on endlessly)
- weeds out proposals for things that nobody actually care enough even to come 
to vote yes

> Maybe a better model would be for each community to take some of the 
> burden off the proposal and have one or more self-appointed liaisons 
> handle announcements and communicate the most salient ideas back to a 
> single source of truth (the wiki, or wherever we decide to hold votes in 
> the future). This would apply to the tagging list as well as the 
> community forum.

That is a good idea! I've tried to suggest something similar with my
co-proponent comments. The main issue there IMHO is that of "Bystander effect"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

I.e. unless someone is explicitely mentioned by name in the proposal as
liason for some group (and of course accepts such responsibility!), 
it is quite likely that nobody would actually do it.

And if they accept that obligation, they should be hold to their word; so my
suggestion was to name them as co-proponents, even if their work would be
mostly communication and not technical writing about the topic (even it is
different kind of work, it is still very valuable and worthy of recognition 
there).


-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 10:01:23 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging 
 wrote:
>> Question is: did you then collect all the points those extra communities 
>> made (both those you agreed with, and those
>> that you didn't agree with), and summarized them on wiki /talk page, for 
>> extra period of RFC? Because if you didn't
>> (especially if you didn't include things you _disagreed_ with) then you 
>> abused that input to promote your personal view,
>> and disregarded the best parts that such other views could provide.

> The proposal has a section "external discussion". There the largest external 
> discussions are listed. These are all
> publicly accessible sources so people can read what has been discussed there. 
> I have also send updates when I changed
> major things in the proposal. I can image if you announce it on a closed 
> platform like Discord, that a summary on the
> talk page can be useful. 

It has. I'm not implying that you're trying to hide evidence by omitting those 
sources. :-)

I'm pointing out that:

- the proponent will have to scan those external threads anyway

- it is huge waste of everyones time if *each and every other contributor* has 
to scan those 100+ posts threads again
  for themselves to extract 2-3 possibly useful suggestions in order to suggest 
improvements. (for recent examples, see
  "highway=scramble" and related threads). As such requirement of general OSM 
population would hugely reduce number of
  people putting an effort, and thus result in much lower quality of proposal 
changes (people wasting time on asking
  for already explained things, good suggestions being ignored), and finally in 
voting not being based on available
  input (as it was too hard to process in fullness for average wiki voter), or 
even giving up totally on proposal
  process.
  
- thus, it would be much better if proponent (who have already invested time in 
processing those external sources)
  would summarize that 2-3 suggestions on proposal talk page, and invite people 
for extra RFC commenting on those
  suggestions too. 
  Even in cases when they are publically accessible to everyone (and of course 
always when they are not!)

That is my suggestion on proposal process improvement; and it would allow for 
"legalizing" adding extra external
discussions as regular people would not be burdened by being required to follow 
them, as the onus would be put
on proponent to summarize those on proposal wiki talk page.

>> I can imagine quite bad things, but to be fair, here is a most realistic one 
>> instead: On each changing of status quo,
>> some people will leave the process for good, as that will be the straw that 
>> broke the camel's back. If you need to
>> learn from history, see the debate when OSM changed license from CC-BY-SA to 
>> ODbL. And then, if another proposal
>> changes situation back to what it was before, that will NOT cause (majority 
>> of) people that left to come back.
>> It will instead cause some MORE people to leave for good (in revolt).

> There are always people who don't agree with a change. EVERY proposal or 
> changes has that. If more then 75% of the
> people agree you can assume that enough people support it. And of course, 
> taking the status quo into account is

Sure. I'm just explaining why "well we can change it, and then change it back 
if it doesn't work" has a serious
consequences, as the initial suggestion did not seem to consider them (i.e. 
"What is the worst thing that can happen?")

> important. However, if you can't change the status quo, you never move 
> forward.

Agreed. That is why I am (still) offering suggestions how to move forward, 
instead of being silent until voting period
and casting "no" vote without wasting time on participating in discussions.

At the end, related quote by G.B. Shaw for some smiles:

"Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people attempt 
to adapt the world to themselves. All
progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people."

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 19:10:07 +0100 (CET), Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
 wrote:
>> the first and foremost reason for the tagging mailing list to exist was the 
>> desire to offload tagging discussions on a central place, off the other 
>> channels, because people there felt overwhelmed with the discussions needed 
>> to agree on tags to describe the whole world, and it seemed helpful to 
>> reduce the volume on the talk list to a size that can be followed with 
>> significantly less dedication of time. Moving back to discussing tagging 
>> everywhere will make these other channels less useful for some people, I 
>> guess. Maybe this is unfounded because it came out, tagging is relevant all 
>> over OpenStreetMap (i.e. tagging discussions already happen on all channels, 
>> lately even on osmf-talk) and you can hardly ignore it, and because the 
>> structure of the contributors has changed, or something like 
> The new forum may be also more capable of handling large volume of posts - 
> you can
> easily mute threads and entire categories.

"muting categories" is "unsubscribing from that specific mailing list", right 
(e.g. I can decide to unsubscribe from
"Tagging" or from "Talk-hr" or whichever other list)?

I don't particularly like Discourse "you are subscribed to everything by 
default" philosophy either, as I much prefer
"opt-in" methods like in mailing lists. While you can mute a category (and 
repeat that as new categories get created),
it is annoying (and not easy to find about and actually use -so much about it 
being "newbie friendly"). 

While I find some Discourse features useful (liking posts, multi-post-quoting, 
@mention), others are quite bad:

- horribly confusing replying UI (I guess vast majority of users incorrectly 
replies to whole thread istead of the
  message, and never find an option to create subthread / reply in new linked 
topic)
- horrible thread / subthread following (with no multi-layer threading support)
- no *visual* "threading tree" indication (who replied to what), without doing 
manual tree reconstruction by clicking
  on all posts arrows manually. Even (argumably very rudimentary) Tagging 
mailing list archives do it much better
- practically nonexistent scoring (you can bookmark a specific post, and even 
that in almost unusable way) 
  (mail or news clients can do so much much more to make it usable, especially 
if thread continues for *weeks*)
- no message filter (and lacking search)
- only one discussion (with horrible "drafts" implementation which fails in 
painful ways if one has more than one tab
  open. Even old forum was much much better here!)
- inability to treat different categories differently (yes I can track/watch 
the topic, but I can't make watched topics
  in Talk-hr behaving differently than watched topics in Tagging; and I'd very 
much want to -- alternative is falling
  back to lowest common denominator, which doesn't work well)
- javascript requirement (and accessibility issues)
- GUI requirement
- inability to change UI to access same data (as oposed to mailing list, where 
if I don't like one mail user agent, I
  (or anyone else) can easily switch to another one. Discourse is forcing 
"one-size-fits-all", even if it doesn't fit
  you in particular).

to name but a few.

In short, I find Discourse work well for short discussions (up to max. 10-15 
messages), but becomes totally unusable on
bigger threads esp. with subthreads (e.g. highway=scramble discussion with 100+ 
messages). As tagging topics are more 
likely to produce bigger discussions, I find Discourse poor match for that 
specific purpose. It might be quite better
match for very-low-traffic regional mailing lists (like my country own 
Talk-hr). 

> As result massive posting in one thread is easier to ignore in its entirety.
>
> This is in theory achievable with filtering and so on, but much harder to 
> apply in
> practice, with mailing lists.

I guess it might depend on mail user agent being used. It should be very easy, 
e.g.:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/ignore-threads

With advantages that one can also ignore certain sub-threads only if one so 
chooses.

(note that I'm using more advanced client than that, but for example choose 
Mozilla Thunderbird as common, free, and
easily available newbie-friendly MUA, which still has that feature implemented 
much better than Discourse)

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Davidoskky via Tagging]

The new forum may be also more capable of handling large volume of 
posts - you can

easily mute threads and entire categories.


It's also possible to subscribe to only the first post in a category.

Thus, you may set to be notified whenever a new proposal is posted and 
only then choose if you're interested in such thread and subscribe to 
the replies.


If you're not interested in the proposal you have to do nothing: you 
receive the notification, read through whatever is proposed and close 
the web page.


Which is much better than filtering/muting threads on an email client 
for several reasons.



I do believe that if proposals were being announced on IRC all this 
time, we would now be extensively discussing about the major advantages 
of IRC over forums.


For reference: https://xkcd.com/1782/


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

20 lis 2022, 17:06 od dieterdre...@gmail.com:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 20 Nov 2022, at 02:27, Matija Nalis  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make 
>> sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would
>> be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both 
>> extremely wasteful, hugely unrealistic,
>> and likely to lead to few participating members willing to do that becoming 
>> burned out prematurely).
>>
>
>
> the first and foremost reason for the tagging mailing list to exist was the 
> desire to offload tagging discussions on a central place, off the other 
> channels, because people there felt overwhelmed with the discussions needed 
> to agree on tags to describe the whole world, and it seemed helpful to reduce 
> the volume on the talk list to a size that can be followed with significantly 
> less dedication of time. Moving back to discussing tagging everywhere will 
> make these other channels less useful for some people, I guess. Maybe this is 
> unfounded because it came out, tagging is relevant all over OpenStreetMap 
> (i.e. tagging discussions already happen on all channels, lately even on 
> osmf-talk) and you can hardly ignore it, and because the structure of the 
> contributors has changed, or something like this.
>
The new forum may be also more capable of handling large volume of posts - you 
can
easily mute threads and entire categories.

As result massive posting in one thread is easier to ignore in its entirety.

This is in theory achievable with filtering and so on, but much harder to apply 
in
practice, with mailing lists.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 20 Nov 2022, at 02:27, Matija Nalis  
> wrote:
> 
> Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make 
> sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would
> be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both 
> extremely wasteful, hugely unrealistic,
> and likely to lead to few participating members willing to do that becoming 
> burned out prematurely).


the first and foremost reason for the tagging mailing list to exist was the 
desire to offload tagging discussions on a central place, off the other 
channels, because people there felt overwhelmed with the discussions needed to 
agree on tags to describe the whole world, and it seemed helpful to reduce the 
volume on the talk list to a size that can be followed with significantly less 
dedication of time. Moving back to discussing tagging everywhere will make 
these other channels less useful for some people, I guess. Maybe this is 
unfounded because it came out, tagging is relevant all over OpenStreetMap (i.e. 
tagging discussions already happen on all channels, lately even on osmf-talk) 
and you can hardly ignore it, and because the structure of the contributors has 
changed, or something like this.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

> Question is: did you then collect all the points those extra communities made 
> (both those you agreed with, and those
> that you didn't agree with), and summarized them on wiki /talk page, for 
> extra period of RFC? Because if you didn't
> (especially if you didn't include things you _disagreed_ with) then you 
> abused that input to promote your personal view,
> and disregarded the best parts that such other views could provide.
>
The proposal has a section "external discussion". There the largest external 
discussions are listed. These are all publicly accessible sources so people can 
read what has been discussed there. I have also send updates when I changed 
major things in the proposal. I can image if you announce it on a closed 
platform like Discord, that a summary on the talk page can be useful. 


> I can imagine quite bad things, but to be fair, here is a most realistic one 
> instead: On each changing of status quo,
> some people will leave the process for good, as that will be the straw that 
> broke the camel's back. If you need to
> learn from history, see the debate when OSM changed license from CC-BY-SA to 
> ODbL. And then, if another proposal
> changes situation back to what it was before, that will NOT cause (majority 
> of) people that left to come back.
> It will instead cause some MORE people to leave for good (in revolt).
>
There are always people who don't agree with a change. EVERY proposal or 
changes has that. If more then 75% of the people agree you can assume that 
enough people support it. And of course, taking the status quo into account is 
important. However, if you can't change the status quo, you never move forward.


20 nov. 2022 02:24 van 
mnalis-openstreetmaplist_at_voyager_hr_prfkut...@simplelogin.co:

> This email failed anti-phishing checks when it was received by SimpleLogin, 
> be careful with its content.
> More info on https://simplelogin.io/docs/getting-started/anti-phishing/
>  
> --
> On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 12:12:22 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging 
>  wrote:
>
>> I always had good discussion on several platforms for my proposal. Each 
>> community or person has another view
>> which I collect this way.
>>
>
> Nobody (at least I hope) questions that extra communities (or extra persons 
> is same community) have extra input to
> provide!
>
> Question is: did you then collect all the points those extra communities made 
> (both those you agreed with, and those
> that you didn't agree with), and summarized them on wiki /talk page, for 
> extra period of RFC? Because if you didn't
> (especially if you didn't include things you _disagreed_ with) then you 
> abused that input to promote your personal view,
> and disregarded the best parts that such other views could provide.
>
> And if you did exactly that - I salute you. Could you link to that proposal 
> where that was done?
>
>> This proposal makes sure there are 2 required platforms where people have to 
>> announce it. That way people have the
>> choice to follow one of the two channels of their choice to get updated on 
>> proposals. It is up to the proposal author
>> to announce it on other channels to increase the reach.
>>
>
> I'd at least put in a requirement that if proposal author announces the 
> discussion in X extra channels (i.e. anywhere
> more than Tagging ML), that they must follow ALL that X extra channels and 
> summarize in Wiki Talk page all points that
> have been risen (including those that they think don't matter or disagree 
> with. Especially those!) and THEN have extra
> RFC period after all those X channels have been summarized, before proceeding 
> to the Voting. 
>
> Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make 
> sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would
> be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both 
> extremely wasteful, hugely unrealistic,
> and likely to lead to few participating members willing to do that becoming 
> burned out prematurely).
>
>> And btw, if this proposal really turns out bad (which I doubt), it can 
>> always be reverted by someone creating a
>> proposal for it. Sometimes you also have to try something. What is the worst 
>> thing that can happen?
>>
>
> I can imagine quite bad things, but to be fair, here is a most realistic one 
> instead: On each changing of status quo,
> some people will leave the process for good, as that will be the straw that 
> broke the camel's back. If you need to
> learn from history, see the debate when OSM changed license from CC-BY-SA to 
> ODbL. And then, if another proposal
> changes situation back to what it was before, that will NOT cause (majority 
> of) people that left to come back.
> It will instead cause some MORE people to leave for good (in revolt).
>
> So it not like in math, when you end with what you started, e.g. "(X + Y) - Y 
> = X". It is more like Microsoft windows
> (you can tell I'm Debian GNU/Linux user, 

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 22:07 2022-11-19, Graeme Fitzpatrick đã viết:




On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 15:38, Minh Nguyen 
> wrote:



There are some ways to draw attention to a wiki talk page comment in
general. For example, if I add {{ping|Fizzie41}} to my comment, you'll
get a notification, including by e-mail if you've set that up. If your
comment concerns the veracity of an article, you can add {{dubious}} or
{{disputed}} to the article, which will link to the talk page.


Thanks!

Had never heard of those hacks!

I know that I keep getting advised whenever somebody makes a change to a 
page that I've commented on / edited, so I thought that should also 
apply to others?


You've probably set the preference to automatically add edited pages to 
your watchlist, as well as the preference to e-mail pages when a page on 
your watchlist changes. Neither of these preferences is enabled by default.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 15:38, Minh Nguyen 
wrote:

>
> There are some ways to draw attention to a wiki talk page comment in
> general. For example, if I add {{ping|Fizzie41}} to my comment, you'll
> get a notification, including by e-mail if you've set that up. If your
> comment concerns the veracity of an article, you can add {{dubious}} or
> {{disputed}} to the article, which will link to the talk page.
>

Thanks!

Had never heard of those hacks!

I know that I keep getting advised whenever somebody makes a change to a
page that I've commented on / edited, so I thought that should also apply
to others?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 18:17 2022-11-19, Graeme Fitzpatrick đã viết:

I do have some concerns about the talk pages though.

Over time, I've asked quite a few questions on various talk pages, 
seeking clarification of tag details, or whether this tag would apply in 
these circumstances etc.


I doubt as many as 10% ever get a response :-(


Oh yes, to be clear, I meant the talk page of the proposal in question. 
An active proposal's proposer is typically quite responsive to questions 
on that talk page; otherwise, the proposal stands very little chance of 
passing, and it wouldn't be because of where the announcements are posted.


There are some ways to draw attention to a wiki talk page comment in 
general. For example, if I add {{ping|Fizzie41}} to my comment, you'll 
get a notification, including by e-mail if you've set that up. If your 
comment concerns the veracity of an article, you can add {{dubious}} or 
{{disputed}} to the article, which will link to the talk page.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 19:21:07 -0800, Minh Nguyen  
wrote:
> Vào lúc 17:39 2022-11-18, Matija Nalis đã viết:
>> 1 on twitter and 2 on OSM Diary of proposer. Do you spot the problem here?
>> Because I do.
>
> No one has seriously proposed to make a Twitter announcement part of the
> standard operating procedure for RfCs or votes, whereas someone did seriously
> propose Discourse. Even a slippery slope can have some tactile paving. ;-)

Just wait, it will be suggested soon now that Elon Musk has bought it :-)

>> Like, for example, I'm reading and writing this on NNTP (Usenet News) gateway
>> news.gmane.io, which *is* properly integrated with tagging mailing list.
>> Everything I write here, people will see in their Mail clients, and 
>> everything
>> they reply I will see in my News client.
>
> Yet I recognize that such an arcane configuration cannot possibly get us 
> closer to a goal of ensuring that tagging discussions reach and engage a 
> broad cross section of ordinary mappers and data consumers. That must be 
> our goal; otherwise, the most electorally successful tagging proposal 

Sure. I didn't mean to propose that people should use NNTP to access tagging
proposals (although it does works beautifully for those who are willing to
try!), but to bring up an bright example how external service (like gmane NNTP)
could be seamlessly and correctly integrated with existing Tagging mailing list.

If NNTP server can be integrated with mailing list correctly, so can Discourse.
Although I acknowledge it needs some work (proper message referencing and
standard ">" quoting comes to mind), it is far from impossible, and would IMHO
be a great strategy for bringing two communities together WITHOUT either "side"
screaming "bloody murder!"

> could still fail to gain traction among the audiences that matter most, 
> undermining the proposal process. Any temporary fragmentation ahead of a 
> vote would be secondary to that problem.

Well I'm not that sure about /temporary/ fragmentation...

> As a baby step, I just set up an "abuse filter" on the wiki that will 
> tag any change to the |status=, |draftStartDate=, |rfcStartDate=, 
>|voteStartDate=, or |voteEndDate= parameters on a feature proposal page. 
> Rest assured, editing one of these parameters won't send you to the 
> headmaster's office for abusing any privileges, but you can filter 
> Special:RecentChanges, Special:Watchlist, etc. to show only these changes:
>
> 
>
> and you can click the "Atom" link in the sidebar to get a feed to add to 

Wow that's actually quite cool (and something I was looking for just recently)!
Thanks!! That should come handy, especially when proponents forget to notify
mailing list about voting being started.

(Bug report/caveat for others: when removing filters (e.g. "Non-minor"), the RSS
link does not update automatically, one needs to take care to manually refresh
page before clicking on RSS link.)


> This isn't quite what either of us are envisioning, and I personally 
> don't consider RSS feeds to replace that human touch. But it could make 
> it easier for some of us to keep track of proposals. If the feed gets 
> noisy, let me know and I can tighten up the abuse filter's rules.

Another idea, perhaps there could be some (read-only?) Discourse category which
is automatically subscribed to that RSS, so people following that Discourse
category would get automatic announcements of new Proposals / changes?

That might alleviate (at least some) of the concerns of non-technically
inclined persons (who might find RSS as complicated as mailing list)?

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 11:58, Minh Nguyen 
wrote:

>  direct interested mappers to the wiki talk page, where hopefully others
> can engage as necessary.
>

I do have some concerns about the talk pages though.

Over time, I've asked quite a few questions on various talk pages, seeking
clarification of tag details, or whether this tag would apply in these
circumstances etc.

I doubt as many as 10% ever get a response :-(

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 17:24 2022-11-19, Matija Nalis đã viết:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 12:12:22 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging 
 wrote:

This proposal makes sure there are 2 required platforms where people have to 
announce it. That way people have the
choice to follow one of the two channels of their choice to get updated on 
proposals. It is up to the proposal author
to announce it on other channels to increase the reach.


I'd at least put in a requirement that if proposal author announces the 
discussion in X extra channels (i.e. anywhere
more than Tagging ML), that they must follow ALL that X extra channels and 
summarize in Wiki Talk page all points that
have been risen (including those that they think don't matter or disagree with. 
Especially those!) and THEN have extra
RFC period after all those X channels have been summarized, before proceeding 
to the Voting.

Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make 
sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would
be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both 
extremely wasteful, hugely unrealistic,
and likely to lead to few participating members willing to do that becoming 
burned out prematurely).


There are already other communication channels announcing proposals 
independently of the formal requirements. You've mentioned weeklyOSM 
(which has a comments section) and I've mentioned OSMUS Slack. 
Practically speaking, no one can fully understand the discussion in 
every community. That's a much higher bar than just announcing something.


For example, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to alert OSM Japan 
Slack about my next proposal, but my nonexistent Japanese skills would 
be catastrophically inadequate to capture the sentiment there. It would 
be better to candidly state upfront that I'm unable to respond to 
individual comments there and direct interested mappers to the wiki talk 
page, where hopefully others can engage as necessary.


All too often, a proposal announcement on this list ends with an 
exhortation to comment on the wiki talk page, inevitably leading to a 
long thread here instead. Where is the requirement to summarize the 
tagging list thread, for the benefit of ordinary mappers who will be 
voting but can't easily follow Mailman's deeply nested threads split 
across monthly archives? After all, the proposal guidelines have never 
required _voters_ to subscribe to the tagging list.


Maybe a better model would be for each community to take some of the 
burden off the proposal and have one or more self-appointed liaisons 
handle announcements and communicate the most salient ideas back to a 
single source of truth (the wiki, or wherever we decide to hold votes in 
the future). This would apply to the tagging list as well as the 
community forum.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 12:12:22 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging 
 wrote:
> I always had good discussion on several platforms for my proposal. Each 
> community or person has another view
> which I collect this way.

Nobody (at least I hope) questions that extra communities (or extra persons is 
same community) have extra input to
provide!

Question is: did you then collect all the points those extra communities made 
(both those you agreed with, and those
that you didn't agree with), and summarized them on wiki /talk page, for extra 
period of RFC? Because if you didn't
(especially if you didn't include things you _disagreed_ with) then you abused 
that input to promote your personal view,
and disregarded the best parts that such other views could provide.

And if you did exactly that - I salute you. Could you link to that proposal 
where that was done?

> This proposal makes sure there are 2 required platforms where people have to 
> announce it. That way people have the
> choice to follow one of the two channels of their choice to get updated on 
> proposals. It is up to the proposal author
> to announce it on other channels to increase the reach.

I'd at least put in a requirement that if proposal author announces the 
discussion in X extra channels (i.e. anywhere
more than Tagging ML), that they must follow ALL that X extra channels and 
summarize in Wiki Talk page all points that
have been risen (including those that they think don't matter or disagree with. 
Especially those!) and THEN have extra
RFC period after all those X channels have been summarized, before proceeding 
to the Voting. 

Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make 
sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would
be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both 
extremely wasteful, hugely unrealistic,
and likely to lead to few participating members willing to do that becoming 
burned out prematurely).

> And btw, if this proposal really turns out bad (which I doubt), it can always 
> be reverted by someone creating a
> proposal for it. Sometimes you also have to try something. What is the worst 
> thing that can happen?

I can imagine quite bad things, but to be fair, here is a most realistic one 
instead: On each changing of status quo,
some people will leave the process for good, as that will be the straw that 
broke the camel's back. If you need to
learn from history, see the debate when OSM changed license from CC-BY-SA to 
ODbL. And then, if another proposal
changes situation back to what it was before, that will NOT cause (majority of) 
people that left to come back.
It will instead cause some MORE people to leave for good (in revolt).

So it not like in math, when you end with what you started, e.g. "(X + Y) - Y = 
X". It is more like Microsoft windows
(you can tell I'm Debian GNU/Linux user, right?), when you install some random 
.exe file from the internet and you system
breaks. Then you try to install it in hopes your system will came back as it 
was, but instead it breaks some more.

Because, this is how community works.
There is no "undo" on community goodwill.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[stevea]

It is perfectly OK we use many channels to communicate, as they each have their 
specific uses.  And our new forum [1] is becoming a vital resource of a 
community project like OSM.  Emphasis on community.

One person's opinion:  in less than a year, our new forum has grown to a place 
of light-to-moderate (and growing) activity, showing great potential for not 
only community-building (and actually doing so, but a bit at a time — "Rome 
wasn't built in a day") but for flexibility as well:  it continues to become 
better "tuned" to resonate with its users.  Especially because it has dedicated 
people who both listen to ongoing concerns, as well as implementing good 
solutions to them (and august members as moderators, and vibrant community 
participation...), I have high hopes that over the course of years, our new 
forum will be a quite-central hub of OSM communication, proving its usefulness 
as not only "one more, today" channel, but eventually it will become for many 
(most?) of us, a "first among many" channel.

There really isn't any way to enforce that people use a particular channel for 
day-to-day communication, especially with the wide choices out there:  often 
"the latest gadget" attracts some and may or may not have staying power.  Slack 
is popular today (will it be in the future?), but isn't universally subscribed 
to, and in an Open project, this is understandable.  However, with proposal 
announcements, we really do want to be as broad as possible, so they reach 
affected users.  It's difficult or impossible to reach everyone successfully 
100% of the time, the best we can do is strive to reach the most.  We do OK 
here, though we can do better.  We can vote to approve this proposal, and 
establish that proposals are at least in one agreeable-to-all (or most) 
location.  In that way, even "news-like" communication channels (like WeeklyOSM 
[2]) can broadly "announce" new proposals, reaching an even broader audience.  
Of course, it is wise of WeeklyOSM to monitor as many channels as it makes 
sense to "listen to," this is what they do.  They'll keep their finger on the 
pulse of this, and consciously or not, the rest of us will (do) notice these 
distinctions as well.  Over time, things do shift, any longer-term Contributor 
can confirm that.  Importantly, things tend to go from somewhat-blurry to 
rather sharply-focused, though again, this does take time.

While it is important to understand a distinction between "also move to our new 
forum" and "must move to our new forum," if this proposal passes, this can be 
characterized as "yes to both."  This distinction becomes less important as 
time goes on.  Let's underscore here and now that this ongoing-right-now 
process is somewhat slow (years) in unfolding into our future, stretching far 
ahead.  We don't know now, but we will know better ahead when it makes sense to 
emphasize the forum, or de-emphasize mail-lists, or describe wiki as more 
documentation-like with a certain amount of growth and change, "alive" with 
their Talk pages  — or whatever methodologies might still yet emerge.  I doubt 
we will decide to de-emphasize to the extent we "pull the plug" on any specific 
channel (soon), but I observe that with our discussions, we know when it is 
time to do that, and we will.  (Similar to how, as of now, our old forum [3] is 
being largely deprecated by our new one).  Please take part in guiding this, as 
doing so is another vital part of the feedback loop that continues to improve 
OSM.

This proposal has a unique ability to spark a flame of vitality into what is 
already an important channel.  It seems to be about injecting relevance into 
our new forum.  Making deliberate choices, both as individuals and as members 
of this community, we steer how we both talk among ourselves as well as make 
important community-wide decisions (like about tagging).  But as this vitality 
and relevance are seen as successful with tagging proposals (should this be 
Approved), watch how we'll see momentum gather for similar desired shifts.  
Thanks for reading.

[1] https://community.osm.org
[2] https://weeklyosm.eu
[3]  https://forum.osm.org

> On Nov 19, 2022, at 7:03 AM, Davidoskky via Tagging 
>  wrote:
> 
>> If it is indeed better (which I personally am not convinced), then why not
>> change the proposal to ask that, in addition to the tagging mailing list,
>> proposal might (or should?) be announced at *as many contact channels as
>> possible* of those listed 
>> athttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contact_channels
>> (and the proponents should monitor all of them where they posted, and 
>> incorporete
>> ideas from then on wiki proposal page).


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Davidoskky via Tagging]

If it is indeed better (which I personally am not convinced), then why not
change the proposal to ask that, in addition to the tagging mailing list,
proposal might (or should?) be announced at *as many contact channels as
possible* of those listed athttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contact_channels
(and the proponents should monitor all of them where they posted, and 
incorporete
ideas from then on wiki proposal page).


I'm talking about not cutting out people who use the *official* 
community channel rather than the mailing list; the forums are the first 
resource mentioned on the list you linked.


Since the mailing list has been the place where proposals where 
announced until now, it makes sense to keep announcing them there for 
the people using it.


I'm not saying that we should announce proposals on every communication 
channel people may come up with; I was talking about the mailing list 
since it's been used for this until now and the forum, since it's the 
official discussion platform.




We should work toward*reducing*  that fragmentation, not encouraging
increasing it.
In my opinion, moving everything to the forum is the best way to reduce 
fragmentation. I frankly don't see any great advantage offered by the 
mailing list that is greater than the ease of use of the forum for 
people who are not technologically competent. You have some 
disadvantages with the forum, but I think its inclusiveness is the most 
important factor to consider.


I work on a computer all day, writing software for quantum and 
statistical computations; thus using an email client which supports 
threading to partecipate to a mailing list is no problem to me, but it 
can be for many others.



I think this proposal, if it passes, will move more people towards the 
forums and I think that the mailing list will gradually be abandoned; 
this will reduce fragmentation.


I think this will happen because I believe that many more people will 
subscribe to the forum than to the mailing list, people that weren't 
previously using the mailing list, and thus I believe that most of the 
discussion will automatically move to the forum because most of the 
people discussing about things will be there.


I may be wrong with this; but on the forum you can already find a bunch 
of people that aren't here and that take part in tagging discussions 
from time to time, I believe this is a good indicator that what I'm 
forecasting could realistically happen.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

My experience is that proposals are already announced on several channels other 
then the current required mailing list. I always had good discussion on several 
platforms for my proposal. Each community or person has another view which I 
collect this way.

This proposal makes sure there are 2 required platforms where people have to 
announce it. That way people have the choice to follow one of the two channels 
of their choice to get updated on proposals. It is up to the proposal author to 
announce it on other channels to increase the reach.

And btw, if this proposal really turns out bad (which I doubt), it can always 
be reverted by someone creating a proposal for it. Sometimes you also have to 
try something. What is the worst thing that can happen?


19 nov. 2022 02:39 van 
mnalis-openstreetmaplist_at_voyager_hr_prfkut...@simplelogin.co:

> This email failed anti-phishing checks when it was received by SimpleLogin, 
> be careful with its content.
> More info on https://simplelogin.io/docs/getting-started/anti-phishing/
>  
> --
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 08:49:46 -0500, Brian M. Sperlongano 
>  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 2:49 AM Marc_marc  wrote:
>>
>>> We can see it with the osm-fr experience: the immature forum has split
>>> the community, far from federating
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for clearly describing the root cause of your objection.
>>
>> In my opinion, it is better to let people decide for themselves where they
>> wish to communicate.
>>
>
> If it is indeed better (which I personally am not convinced), then why not
> change the proposal to ask that, in addition to the tagging mailing list,
> proposal might (or should?) be announced at *as many contact channels as
> possible* of those listed at 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contact_channels
> (and the proponents should monitor all of them where they posted, and 
> incorporete 
> ideas from then on wiki proposal page).
>
> That way, maximum reach will be accomplished, and all "people could decide for
> themselves where they wish to communicate". So instead of say 30 messages on
> tagging mailing list for some proposal, we can have 5 messages on tagging ML, 
> 2
> on Discourse, 4 on telegram (1-2 in each of the groups), 2 on Discord, 3 on
> IRC, 3 on Matrix, 2 on Mastodon, 2 on Slack, 2 on Reddit, 2 on facebook,
> 1 on twitter and 2 on OSM Diary of proposer. Do you spot the problem here? 
> Because I do.
>
> So, I still think that the more channels, the less useful the exchange of 
> ideas
> will be, due to fragmentation. Even with "only" wiki talk page + tagging
> mailing list (current situation), the disconnect is quite bad (and were it not
> for few people pulling double-hours on both channels, would be very bad).
> Increasing that fragmentation by another 50% does not sound like good idea to
> me. We should work toward *reducing* that fragmentation, not encouraging
> increasing it.
>
> ---
>
> I'd rather that Tagging ML + Discourse Tagging category become properly
> integrated (i.e. that one participate using EITHER channel, and see all
> comments from BOTH channels) - as I noted in linked github issue on proposal
> talk page.
>
> Like, for example, I'm reading and writing this on NNTP (Usenet News) gateway
> news.gmane.io, which *is* properly integrated with tagging mailing list.
> Everything I write here, people will see in their Mail clients, and everything
> they reply I will see in my News client.
>
> That same level of integration could (hopefully will?) be accomplished with
> Discourse - so people will see the SAME messages whether there use Discourse
> HTTPS, Email SMTP, or News NNTP interface. 
>
> Which solves the whole issue, without raising tensions. Win-win for everyone.
>
> -- 
> Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

Thanks for the reminder, I had a busy week so I didn't have time to change it.
Here it is 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Announce_proposals_on_the_new_forum



19 nov. 2022 02:56 van 
mnalis-openstreetmaplist_at_voyager_hr_prfkut...@simplelogin.co:

> This email failed anti-phishing checks when it was received by SimpleLogin, 
> be careful with its content.
> More info on https://simplelogin.io/docs/getting-started/anti-phishing/
>  
> --
>
> Have you managed to do it yet? Could you post the URL, if so?
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 07:06:10 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging 
>  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the reminder. I indeed forgot to update the title after i changed 
>> the proposal. Will do that soon.
>>
>>> But before we get that far, I recommend that the proposal's title be 
>>> adjusted slightly. The current title implies that discussions would start 
>>> "moving" to the new forums, which implies a loss of activity here. That's 
>>> no longer on the table, so "Announce proposals to the new forum" would 
>>> suffice.
>>>
>
>
> -- 
> Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 17:39 2022-11-18, Matija Nalis đã viết:

That way, maximum reach will be accomplished, and all "people could decide for
themselves where they wish to communicate". So instead of say 30 messages on
tagging mailing list for some proposal, we can have 5 messages on tagging ML, 2
on Discourse, 4 on telegram (1-2 in each of the groups), 2 on Discord, 3 on
IRC, 3 on Matrix, 2 on Mastodon, 2 on Slack, 2 on Reddit, 2 on facebook,
1 on twitter and 2 on OSM Diary of proposer. Do you spot the problem here?
Because I do.


No one has seriously proposed to make a Twitter announcement part of the 
standard operating procedure for RfCs or votes, whereas someone did 
seriously propose Discourse. Even a slippery slope can have some tactile 
paving. ;-)



I'd rather that Tagging ML + Discourse Tagging category become properly
integrated (i.e. that one participate using EITHER channel, and see all
comments from BOTH channels) - as I noted in linked github issue on proposal
talk page.

Like, for example, I'm reading and writing this on NNTP (Usenet News) gateway
news.gmane.io, which *is* properly integrated with tagging mailing list.
Everything I write here, people will see in their Mail clients, and everything
they reply I will see in my News client.


I'm writing this from Thunderbird hooked up to Gmane's NNTP gateway. I 
set it up over a decade ago and never again subscribed to a Mailman list 
in the normal way when I had a choice. I even enjoyed using Gmane's Web 
interface back when it was still online.


Yet I recognize that such an arcane configuration cannot possibly get us 
closer to a goal of ensuring that tagging discussions reach and engage a 
broad cross section of ordinary mappers and data consumers. That must be 
our goal; otherwise, the most electorally successful tagging proposal 
could still fail to gain traction among the audiences that matter most, 
undermining the proposal process. Any temporary fragmentation ahead of a 
vote would be secondary to that problem.



That same level of integration could (hopefully will?) be accomplished with
Discourse - so people will see the SAME messages whether there use Discourse
HTTPS, Email SMTP, or News NNTP interface.

Which solves the whole issue, without raising tensions. Win-win for everyone.


As a baby step, I just set up an "abuse filter" on the wiki that will 
tag any change to the |status=, |draftStartDate=, |rfcStartDate=, 
|voteStartDate=, or |voteEndDate= parameters on a feature proposal page. 
Rest assured, editing one of these parameters won't send you to the 
headmaster's office for abusing any privileges, but you can filter 
Special:RecentChanges, Special:Watchlist, etc. to show only these changes:




and you can click the "Atom" link in the sidebar to get a feed to add to 
your feed reader. I've taken the liberty of subscribing OSMUS Slack's 
#proposals channel to this feed. Perhaps someone can even set up a bot 
on Twitter, while that's still a thing.


This isn't quite what either of us are envisioning, and I personally 
don't consider RSS feeds to replace that human touch. But it could make 
it easier for some of us to keep track of proposals. If the feed gets 
noisy, let me know and I can tighten up the abuse filter's rules.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 at 11:43, Matija Nalis <
mnalis-openstreetmapl...@voyager.hr> wrote:

> Do you spot the problem here?
> Because I do.
>

Certainly do!

Going back to what I mentioned earlier:

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 08:21, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> So far, there have been 23 responses to Tagging, the original message
> received one "like" in Discourse, & there's been a single response on one
> of the 3 talk pages.
>

I've since posed another couple of questions on tagging, repeated to the
Community, & commented on the Talk pages.

Total posts are now 25 on Tagging, now up to 4 "likes" (but no comments) on
the Community & still only 1 comment over the 3 talk pages.

As OP, am I supposed to copy all those 25 posts from Tagging & repost them
to the other spots to make sure that nobody is missing out on what is being
said?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

Have you managed to do it yet? Could you post the URL, if so?

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 07:06:10 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging 
 wrote:
> Thanks for the reminder. I indeed forgot to update the title after i changed 
> the proposal. Will do that soon.
>
>> But before we get that far, I recommend that the proposal's title be 
>> adjusted slightly. The current title implies that discussions would start 
>> "moving" to the new forums, which implies a loss of activity here. That's no 
>> longer on the table, so "Announce proposals to the new forum" would suffice.


-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Matija Nalis]

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 08:49:46 -0500, Brian M. Sperlongano  
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 2:49 AM Marc_marc  wrote:
>> We can see it with the osm-fr experience: the immature forum has split
>> the community, far from federating
>
> Thank you for clearly describing the root cause of your objection.
>
> In my opinion, it is better to let people decide for themselves where they
> wish to communicate.

If it is indeed better (which I personally am not convinced), then why not
change the proposal to ask that, in addition to the tagging mailing list,
proposal might (or should?) be announced at *as many contact channels as
possible* of those listed at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contact_channels
(and the proponents should monitor all of them where they posted, and 
incorporete 
ideas from then on wiki proposal page).

That way, maximum reach will be accomplished, and all "people could decide for
themselves where they wish to communicate". So instead of say 30 messages on
tagging mailing list for some proposal, we can have 5 messages on tagging ML, 2
on Discourse, 4 on telegram (1-2 in each of the groups), 2 on Discord, 3 on
IRC, 3 on Matrix, 2 on Mastodon, 2 on Slack, 2 on Reddit, 2 on facebook,
1 on twitter and 2 on OSM Diary of proposer. Do you spot the problem here? 
Because I do.

So, I still think that the more channels, the less useful the exchange of ideas
will be, due to fragmentation. Even with "only" wiki talk page + tagging
mailing list (current situation), the disconnect is quite bad (and were it not
for few people pulling double-hours on both channels, would be very bad).
Increasing that fragmentation by another 50% does not sound like good idea to
me. We should work toward *reducing* that fragmentation, not encouraging
increasing it.

---

I'd rather that Tagging ML + Discourse Tagging category become properly
integrated (i.e. that one participate using EITHER channel, and see all
comments from BOTH channels) - as I noted in linked github issue on proposal
talk page.

Like, for example, I'm reading and writing this on NNTP (Usenet News) gateway
news.gmane.io, which *is* properly integrated with tagging mailing list.
Everything I write here, people will see in their Mail clients, and everything
they reply I will see in my News client.

That same level of integration could (hopefully will?) be accomplished with
Discourse - so people will see the SAME messages whether there use Discourse
HTTPS, Email SMTP, or News NNTP interface. 

Which solves the whole issue, without raising tensions. Win-win for everyone.

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Davidoskky via Tagging]

- if a mailing list user want to reply to a message on the forum,
he must subscribe/use the forum 
Note that this is already happening with some things being discussed 
both on the forum and on the mailing list without the requirement to 
post it there.


This has also been the norm until now with people writing on the wiki 
and other on the mailing list and nobody ever complained.



But the proposal is not about this, the proposal is about letting the 
people who are using the forum and not the mailing list know about 
proposals that are being made.


Since, as you say, the community will be split among the two 
communication channels, I don't really see why the people using one of 
the two should be favoured and naturally included in updates about 
tagging and the other ones shouldn't.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Marc_marc]

Le 14.11.22 à 14:49, Brian M. Sperlongano a écrit :
it is better to let people decide for themselves  
where they wish to communicate.


a community split offer a fake "let people decide" :
- if someone want to make a proposal, the notification must be send
to both channel
- if a mailing list user want to reply to a message on the forum,
he must subscribe/use the forum
- if a forum user want to reply to a message on the mailing list,
he must subscribe/use the mailing list

the only choice you have is to ignore the other part of the community.

to offer a real choice of interface, the only solution is to make the 
forum mature, solve the exposed problems and then merge both interfaces 
in one "place to be", then only a user of the forum will be able to 
answer a user of the mailing list and conversely.


the talk-fr experience shows that the division has not increased the 
volume of messages (despite some dual-posted message which artificially 
increases the totals, on the contrary, some people have migrated to the 
forum and are talking to each other, a few others are still on the list 
and are talking to each other, a tiny fraction has freed up the extra 
time needed to manage an extra channel.




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

"here is the logical error: no the forum does not attract a global audience, it 
may one day, now it is in test, half of the things do not work and therefore 
let us leave time to have a functional forum (including by email) in stead of 
trying to an attempts of discussion where the current majority of the 
participants are not, with an aim of satisfying those which do not produce for 
the moment much content level proposal (because if it were the case, the forum 
would be already very used for the discussion of the proposals of these 
people)."

First of all, the new forum is not is testing. You can no longer create topics 
on the old forum. There are already quite some topics being made on the new 
forum.
Secondly, the forum is intended to be a central discussion place for OSM. It 
makes perfectly sense to also require announcements to be made on the new 
forum. 60% votes for this move during the first vote. The current proposal will 
provide a way for everybody to use the platform of their choice. Seems like a 
fair middle ground to me.

"empty argument, the mailinglist is already linked to my osm account email, 
given that you only sign up once for 10 years, such a big change to gain one 
click to sign up is absurd compared to the fragmentation of discussions this 
"too-early" proposal will cause"

Some people don't want to use their private email address for a public mailing 
list. This means they have to use an alias services or secondary email account 
solely for the purpose of this mailing list. So it is not a one click sign up 
for everybody.



14 nov. 2022 08:43 van marc_marc_at_mailo_com_xrkimi...@simplelogin.co:

>
> here is the logical error: no the forum does not attract a global audience, 
> it may one day, now it is in test, half of the things do not work and 
> therefore let us leave time to have a functional forum (including by email) 
> in stead of trying to an attempts of discussion where the current majority of 
> the participants are not, with an aim of satisfying those which do not 
> produce for the moment much content level proposal (because if it were the 
> case, the forum would be already very used for the discussion of the 
> proposals of these people).
>
>> with the new forum linked to your osm.org user account
>>
> empty argument, the mailinglist is already linked to my osm account email, 
> given that you only sign up once for 10 years, such a big change to gain one 
> click to sign up is absurd compared to the fragmentation of discussions this 
> "too-early" proposal will cause
>
>> doesn't require special software
>>
>
> mailing need a email client (including in a browser)
> forum need a browser (which probably needs to be recent, poorly usable on 
> phone, unusable in command line, difficult to interface if you want to make 
> personalized notifications, etc)
> accessibility is certainly not in favour of the forums. (the blind person on 
> the osm-fr mailing list was using email with his braille reader and not a 
> forum)
>
>> pick a winner if and when this occurs.
>>
>
> This is a win-lose vision, whereas by giving the forum time to mature, there 
> could be a merger of the 2 which would be win-win (and would render the 
> current proposal useless as the same content would be accessible both by 
> email and by a web interface, with unified instead
> of fragmented discussions).
> We can see it with the osm-fr experience: the immature forum has split the 
> community, far from federating
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 2:49 AM Marc_marc  wrote:

> We can see it with the osm-fr experience: the immature forum has split
> the community, far from federating
>

Thank you for clearly describing the root cause of your objection.

In my opinion, it is better to let people decide for themselves where they
wish to communicate.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Marc_marc]

Le 13.11.22 à 23:51, Brian M. Sperlongano a écrit :
The standard for a proposal, which purports to change tagging standards 
that affect *the entire community*, should be to advertise it as widely 
as possible.  


of course, and the current proposal is not needed to "to advertise it as 
widely as possible."


it is entirely appropriate to say to a proposer "...and please also post  
a notice on the forum" to ensure maximum visibility and participation.


the current proposal is not about advice


The new forums are attracting a global audience


here is the logical error: no the forum does not attract a global 
audience, it may one day, now it is in test, half of the things do not 
work and therefore let us leave time to have a functional forum 
(including by email) in stead of trying to an attempts of discussion 
where the current majority of the participants are not, with an aim of 
satisfying those which do not produce for the moment much content level 
proposal (because if it were the case, the forum would be already very 
used for the discussion of the proposals of these people).



with the new forum linked to your osm.org user account


empty argument, the mailinglist is already linked to my osm account 
email, given that you only sign up once for 10 years, such a big change 
to gain one click to sign up is absurd compared to the fragmentation of 
discussions this "too-early" proposal will cause



doesn't require special software


mailing need a email client (including in a browser)
forum need a browser (which probably needs to be recent, poorly usable 
on phone, unusable in command line, difficult to interface if you want 
to make personalized notifications, etc)
accessibility is certainly not in favour of the forums. (the blind 
person on the osm-fr mailing list was using email with his braille 
reader and not a forum)



pick a winner if and when this occurs.


This is a win-lose vision, whereas by giving the forum time to mature, 
there could be a merger of the 2 which would be win-win (and would 
render the current proposal useless as the same content would be 
accessible both by email and by a web interface, with unified instead

of fragmented discussions).
We can see it with the osm-fr experience: the immature forum has split 
the community, far from federating




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Marc_marc]

Le 13.11.22 à 20:40, Cartographer10 via Tagging a écrit :

There are quite some people discouraged by the mailing list requirement


You regularly use this argument but it makes no sense.
So there would be people motivated enough to make a proposal but whose 
only blocking factor is to post 2 messages (rfc and vote) on the ml.
I think your solution is to impose a notification on the shadow forum 
(which is already allowed and solves nothing) and allow them to ask 
someone to post the announcement on the mailing list (which they are 
already allowed to do, no one needs a proposal to post on the list). so 
how is your proposal going to solve what you present as the main reason?


I have the impression that the unspoken problem is that the forum is 
little used and that the pro-forum people want to solve this by 
migrating people from the list to the forum including those who prefer 
the list, including premarketing since the tests mentioned here show 
that technically half of the basic requirements for email use don't work 
(including posting an rfc message with 2 tags for your convenience)




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

Thanks for the reminder. I indeed forgot to update the title after i changed 
the proposal. Will do that soon.

> But before we get that far, I recommend that the proposal's title be adjusted 
> slightly. The current title implies that discussions would start "moving" to 
> the new forums, which implies a loss of activity here. That's no longer on 
> the table, so "Announce proposals to the new forum" would suffice.
>
> -- 
> m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 14:51 2022-11-13, Brian M. Sperlongano đã viết:
You're using the wrong metric.  The standard for a proposal, which 
purports to change tagging standards that affect *the entire community*, 
should be to advertise it as widely as possible.  With the new forums 
picking up interest and activity, it is entirely appropriate to say to a 
proposer "...and please also post a notice on the forum" to ensure 
maximum visibility and participation.  The new forums are attracting a 
global audience, rather than the few regional enclaves hosted on the old 
forums.  And, with the new forum linked to your osm.org  
user account, it's neatly tied into the existing OSM infrastructure and 
doesn't require special software or accounts to access.


I also appreciate the accommodation in the proposal for people 
uncomfortable with one platform or another. Asking fellow mappers for 
help is healthy. In fact, some of the best proposals lately (by the 
elusive metric of consensus among voters) have been collaborations among 
multiple mappers. If a mapper needs help to spread the word, they should 
say so.


I don't view this as a "first step towards moving to the forums" that 
the proposal author probably does -- I view it as a recognition that the 
forum has attracted enough interest and maturity in its short existence 
that it's appropriate to demand to proposal authors that they also make 
an announcement post there.  Now, over time, if we find that interest 
has waned in the new forums, or on the flip side, if the forums come to 
largely supplant the mailing lists, we can easily make the decision 
later to eliminate the cross-posting requirement and pick a winner if 
and when this occurs.


And by that point, it won't really be picking a winner; it'll be a 
recognition that mappers will've voted with their feet.


But before we get that far, I recommend that the proposal's title be 
adjusted slightly. The current title implies that discussions would 
start "moving" to the new forums, which implies a loss of activity here. 
That's no longer on the table, so "Announce proposals to the new forum" 
would suffice.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

You're using the wrong metric.  The standard for a proposal, which purports
to change tagging standards that affect *the entire community*, should be
to advertise it as widely as possible.  With the new forums picking up
interest and activity, it is entirely appropriate to say to a proposer
"...and please also post a notice on the forum" to ensure maximum
visibility and participation.  The new forums are attracting a global
audience, rather than the few regional enclaves hosted on the old forums.
And, with the new forum linked to your osm.org user account, it's neatly
tied into the existing OSM infrastructure and doesn't require special
software or accounts to access.

I don't view this as a "first step towards moving to the forums" that the
proposal author probably does -- I view it as a recognition that the forum
has attracted enough interest and maturity in its short existence that it's
appropriate to demand to proposal authors that they also make an
announcement post there.  Now, over time, if we find that interest has
waned in the new forums, or on the flip side, if the forums come to largely
supplant the mailing lists, we can easily make the decision later to
eliminate the cross-posting requirement and pick a winner if and when this
occurs.

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:25 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 01:07, Cartographer10 via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.
>>
>
> It possibly will be one day, but at the moment, no, I don't think that
> we're yet ready to say "You *have* to post there".
>
> I recently started a discussion to clarify some points on existing tags,
> before going into a full RFC / Proposal concerning them.
>
> Posted the same original message, then two further follow-up questions,
> here on Tagging, in Discourse & on the talk page of the three pages
> concerned.
>
> So far, there have been 23 responses to Tagging, the original message
> received one "like" in Discourse, & there's been a single response on one
> of the 3 talk pages.
>
> Possibly the subject under discussion is of no interest to the majority of
> people?, but those results would suggest that, so far, Tagging is still the
> most active site?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> PS & I should add that I am finding the Community site to be quite good,
> although there are still a number of hiccups that need fixing.
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 01:07, Cartographer10 via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.
>

It possibly will be one day, but at the moment, no, I don't think that
we're yet ready to say "You *have* to post there".

I recently started a discussion to clarify some points on existing tags,
before going into a full RFC / Proposal concerning them.

Posted the same original message, then two further follow-up questions,
here on Tagging, in Discourse & on the talk page of the three pages
concerned.

So far, there have been 23 responses to Tagging, the original message
received one "like" in Discourse, & there's been a single response on one
of the 3 talk pages.

Possibly the subject under discussion is of no interest to the majority of
people?, but those results would suggest that, so far, Tagging is still the
most active site?

Thanks

Graeme

PS & I should add that I am finding the Community site to be quite good,
although there are still a number of hiccups that need fixing.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

I did actually do something with the feedback. Quite some people advised to 
require posting on both platforms. The proposal now requires that. 

However, the first vote did show that quite some people actually support 
including the forum in the proposal process. There are quite some people 
discouraged by the mailing list requirement. These proposals should be 
community proposals but they hardly are if people do no feel confident enough 
to start a proposal or to participate because of the communication platform. 
That is why I made it possible to let others post on the other platform on your 
behalf. 

Same is also the other way around. If you really dislike the forum, then ask 
somebody else to post it there on your behalf. Both platforms are treated 
equally in the proposal this way.

My goal is not to "go on forcing it until it finally passes." but make sure 
that everybody can freely contribute in proposals which it is not the case now.

13 nov. 2022 20:24 van marc_marc_at_mailo_com_xrkimi...@simplelogin.co:

> This email failed anti-phishing checks when it was received by SimpleLogin, 
> be careful with its content.
> More info on https://simplelogin.io/docs/getting-started/anti-phishing/
>  --
> Le 13.11.22 à 16:01, Cartographer10 via Tagging a écrit :
>
>> I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any, 
>> please share it here
>>
>
> I have the impression that you have received a lot of it but you simply 
> refuse to listen to it and go on forcing it until it finally passes.
>
> To return to my main point: the new forum, when it is mature, will allow a 
> mailinglist-web interface merger.
> I don't see any advantage in making a proposal against mailing lists,
> a proposal should be for something
> especially proposing that the people outside the list should ask someone else 
> to post a thread for them which they will not participate in, seems to me to 
> be absurdly absurd advice!
> if your advice seems coherent, why not do the opposite?
> those who post on the list add a line "pleasee vincent crosspost
> to the forum ?
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Marc_marc]

Le 13.11.22 à 16:01, Cartographer10 via Tagging a écrit :
I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any, 
please share it here


I have the impression that you have received a lot of it but you simply 
refuse to listen to it and go on forcing it until it finally passes.


To return to my main point: the new forum, when it is mature, will allow 
a mailinglist-web interface merger.

I don't see any advantage in making a proposal against mailing lists,
a proposal should be for something
especially proposing that the people outside the list should ask someone 
else to post a thread for them which they will not participate in, seems 
to me to be absurdly absurd advice!

if your advice seems coherent, why not do the opposite?
those who post on the list add a line "pleasee vincent crosspost
to the forum ?





___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

It has been discussed with the forum admin here: 
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/moving-to-the-new-forum-for-proposals-and-voting/2940/70?u=cartographer10

He recommends to first start in the tagging sub community. If the volumes get 
really high, we can request a subcommunity. You can also request this community 
now if you can get enough people to moderate it.

In the mean time, each announcement topic should get the tag "wiki-proposal" 
(listed in the proposed template). People can follow that tag (see proposal for 
a tutorial) and get a notification about new posts with that tag. That way they 
don't have to follow the entire tagging sub community.

Regards,
Vincent


13 nov. 2022 19:17 van zelonewolf_at_gmail_com_drz...@simplelogin.co:

>
> This email failed anti-phishing checks when it was received by SimpleLogin, 
> be careful with its content.More info on > anti-phishing measure 
> 
>
> I support the idea that proposals be posted to both the mailing list and the 
> community forums.  Over time we can assess whether one or the other is better.
>
> One thing I think is missing is that I would like to see proposals posted to 
> a dedicated space in the forums that can be subscribed to, that way someone 
> can subscribe to new proposal announcements without having to wade through 
> general tagging discussions.  Has there been any thought to creating a 
> dedicated proposal space, or is there otherwise some functionality that would 
> allow someone to subscribe just to proposal announcements?
>
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:07 AM Cartographer10 via Tagging <> 
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>> I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any, 
>> please share it here. I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Vincent
>>
>>
>>
>> 6 nov. 2022 09:03 van >> 
>> tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co>> :
>>
>>> I have updated the proposal a few days back which I would like to receive 
>>> feedback on.
>>>
>>> I removed the transition period and required both the forum and the ML to 
>>> be notified of a new proposal or vote. One exception I propose is that the 
>>> proposal should be allowed to be made on behalf of the proposal author on 
>>> either the ML or the forum. 
>>>
>>> I hope that this change will satisfy both sides
>>>
>>> Vincent
>>>
>>>
>>> 29 okt. 2022 09:34 van >>> 
>>> tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co>>> :
>>>
 Hello everybody,

 Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new forum 
 for proposal announcements. 

 Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.

 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum
   

 Kind regards,
 Vincent

>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>>  Tagging mailing list
>>  >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>  >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

I support the idea that proposals be posted to both the mailing list and
the community forums.  Over time we can assess whether one or the other is
better.

One thing I think is missing is that I would like to see proposals posted
to a dedicated space in the forums that can be subscribed to, that way
someone can subscribe to new proposal announcements without having to wade
through general tagging discussions.  Has there been any thought to
creating a dedicated proposal space, or is there otherwise some
functionality that would allow someone to subscribe just to proposal
announcements?

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:07 AM Cartographer10 via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any,
> please share it here. I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Vincent
>
>
>
> 6 nov. 2022 09:03 van
> tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
> I have updated the proposal a few days back which I would like to receive
> feedback on.
>
> I removed the transition period and required both the forum and the ML to
> be notified of a new proposal or vote. One exception I propose is that the
> proposal should be allowed to be made on behalf of the proposal author on
> either the ML or the forum.
>
> I hope that this change will satisfy both sides
>
> Vincent
>
>
> 29 okt. 2022 09:34 van
> tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new forum
> for proposal announcements.
>
> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Vincent
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

I didn't receive any feedback on my updated proposal. If you have any, please 
share it here. I hope that the current proposal will for everybody.

Kind regards,

Vincent


6 nov. 2022 09:03 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:

> I have updated the proposal a few days back which I would like to receive 
> feedback on.
>
> I removed the transition period and required both the forum and the ML to be 
> notified of a new proposal or vote. One exception I propose is that the 
> proposal should be allowed to be made on behalf of the proposal author on 
> either the ML or the forum. 
>
> I hope that this change will satisfy both sides
>
> Vincent
>
>
> 29 okt. 2022 09:34 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:
>
>> Hello everybody,
>>
>> Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new forum 
>> for proposal announcements. 
>>
>> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum>>
>>   
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Vincent
>>
>
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

I have updated the proposal a few days back which I would like to receive 
feedback on.

I removed the transition period and required both the forum and the ML to be 
notified of a new proposal or vote. One exception I propose is that the 
proposal should be allowed to be made on behalf of the proposal author on 
either the ML or the forum. 

I hope that this change will satisfy both sides
Vincent

29 okt. 2022 09:34 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:

> Hello everybody,
>
> Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new forum 
> for proposal announcements. 
>
> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum>
>   
>
> Kind regards,
> Vincent
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[Cartographer10 via Tagging]

Hello Yves,

Yes, I saw that. I also described that forum announcements should be made in 
that new subcommunity.

The reason why I prefer following tags is that I only get notifications for new 
proposals and votes. If you follow the entire category, you get a notification 
for every new topic in that category. That is a choice for the user. Because 
this is about proposals, I chose for following tags. 

I will add a remark to the proposal that category following is also possible.
Regards,
Vincent



29 okt. 2022 10:09 van tagging_at_openstreetmap_org_seblajk...@simplelogin.co:

> Vincent,
> I do appreciate your effort with this  new proposal.
> Are you aware that this week a new  category "> Tagging general 
> discussion > "  
>   has been created on > https://community.openstreetmap.org>  ?
> It's probablybetter to follow this category than suscribing to tags 
> (to-date)wiki, wiki-proposal, rfc, vote, proposal, ...
> Regards,
> Yves
>
>
> On 29.10.22 09:34, Cartographer10 via  Tagging wrote:
>
>> Hello everybody,
>>
>> Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal tostart using the new 
>> forum for proposal announcements. 
>>
>> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talkpage.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum>>
>>   
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Vincent
>>
>> ___Tagging mailing list>> 
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
>
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

[yvecai via Tagging]

Vincent,
I do appreciate your effort with this new proposal.
Are you aware that this week a new category "Tagging general discussion 
" has been 
created on https://community.openstreetmap.org ?
It's probably better to follow this category than suscribing to tags 
(to-date) wiki, wiki-proposal, rfc, vote, proposal, ...

Regards,
Yves


On 29.10.22 09:34, Cartographer10 via Tagging wrote:

Hello everybody,

Based on the feedback, I updated the proposal to start using the new 
forum for proposal announcements.


Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Start_moving_proposal_announcements_to_the_new_forum 



Kind regards,
Vincent

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging