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 > <zelonew...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 2:49 AM Marc_marc <marc_m...@mailo.com> 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
