On 18/03/2015, David Bannon <[email protected]> wrote: > No, I'm sorry but I don't see how an interested party can be expected to > objectively determine what the discussion concluded. > [...] > No, sorry, but a vote and an outcome may offend some politically correct > members but it is necessary.
Don't you see the contradiction in those statements ? I fully agree with your first paragraph, but that means that I disagree with the second : a vote is not a good way to determine that the discussion has concluded. > In my experience, a wiki that is 'unmoderated' very quickly becomes such > a mess its unusable. I'm not sure why you see the proposed workflow changes as turning the wiki into an 'unmoderated' thing. > New users to OSM need to see the idea of 'approved' keys and values. I do not see that at all. Only after a few years of editing did I venture into the Proposal namespace on the wiki, and I was still far removed from the concept of "approved proposals". Editor presets, default rendering, existing data, general wiki pages, and taginfo is what guided me (in that order). "Approving" a key has today more to do with politics than with technical/practical considerations, and that's the last thing you want to show to newbies. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
