On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 21:04, OSM Volunteer stevea <[email protected]> wrote: >> The import was discussed on talk-ca and in my opinion there was a consensus >> of opinion it should go ahead. The data comes from the municipalities of >> which there are some 37,000 separate ones in Canada. The idea of a single >> import plan was suggested on talk-ca by someone not involved rather than >> have 37,000 different import plans. Many municipalities are very small. > There was a serious dearth of reply, and nothing even approaching "consensus > of opinion," indicating (to me and likely others) that a nationwide import > did not have the wide, national consensus it must have to continue. John, > we're simply going to disagree about that, it seems. Especially in light of > the events in this desire/wiki/project going back to 2017, MUCH more > consensus ought to have been built. I kept my mouth largely shut at the > reboot two months ago, yet here we are.
When no one is responding, sometimes it is because they are fine with the message as-is. I read it. I was fine with it. This isn't an Australian election. I must say I find the panic about imperfect building shapes is a bit amusing considering the very poorly manually-drawn sidewalks I've been seeing and having to fix in Toronto, or thousands of laneways having a descriptive "name" added by our corporate friends. Do we aim for perfect, or for good? Because if it's perfect, I see a _lot_ to be reverted or deleted. --Jarek _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
