On 06/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: > On 6 May 2015 at 17:41, moltonel 3x Combo <molto...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 05/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: > >>> If people choose not to (or are "not bothered to") comment, that's an >>> abstention. >>> >>> Indeed, it may reasonably be argued that of they choose not to comment >>> on a proposal to do something, then they are content with the >>> proposal. >> >> It'd only be reasonable if those people were contacted. > > You'll note my use of the word "choose". > > You've neglected to quote the post to which I was replying; it said: > >>>> pretty hard to tell when not all mappers were questioned or bothered to >>>> reply, not ? > > which includes the scenario where some editors "were not bothered to reply".
We agree on the "not bothered to reply, therefore treat it as abstain" scenario. But that original quote also mentioned the "not all mappers were questioned" scenario, which is much more common. As Matthijs said, contacting mappers individually has a very low response rate. So instead, people use wiki votes and mailing list or forum threads as a measure of the general opinion. That's practical but heavily biased. Please don't think that it's the same thing as contacting mappers (and then being able to assume that they agree if they don't respond). Sorry for labouring the point if only replying to the "mappers were contacted" scenario was intentional. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
