Chill out guys, I'm merely pointing out an interesting anomaly with the current voting scheme. I don't particularly care if you change it or not. I am not having a go at you Robin, who are doing a terrific job.
Cheers, Brent. *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 14/01/2008 at 7:54 PM Robin Paulson wrote: >On 14/01/2008, Brent Easton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If there are votes both for and against, then it requires 14 Yes votes >to get something through, but only 1 No vote to can it. >> >> In fact, the No voters are more likely to prevent a proposal by NOT >voting against a proposal once the first No vote is registered! >> > >i'll admit, the voting proposal scheme seems a bit odd, but some >things are important in this partcular proposal: > >1. voting was open for 8 months >2. the no votes pointed out that there were a lot fo unanswered points >3. it's a (sort of) duplicate of sport=swimming > >if it had solely been 11 yes votes and 3 no votes, i would have put it >in the approved features page, but the proposal makes no sense at all, >so that would be bad. >there's no reason it can't be proposed again, coupled with making >sport=swimming obsolete which would probably be best because it's such >a muddled mess > >if you would like to change the voting numbers, there's no reason it >can't be discussed, as with anything else on osm > >_______________________________________________ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.2/1222 - Release Date: 13/01/2008 >12:23 PM ____________________________________________________________ Brent Easton Analyst/Programmer University of Western Sydney Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
