Vào lúc 17:39 2022-11-18, Matija Nalis đã viết:
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.
No one has seriously proposed to make a Twitter announcement part of the
standard operating procedure for RfCs or votes, whereas someone did
seriously propose Discourse. Even a slippery slope can have some tactile
paving. ;-)
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.
I'm writing this from Thunderbird hooked up to Gmane's NNTP gateway. I
set it up over a decade ago and never again subscribed to a Mailman list
in the normal way when I had a choice. I even enjoyed using Gmane's Web
interface back when it was still online.
Yet I recognize that such an arcane configuration cannot possibly get us
closer to a goal of ensuring that tagging discussions reach and engage a
broad cross section of ordinary mappers and data consumers. That must be
our goal; otherwise, the most electorally successful tagging proposal
could still fail to gain traction among the audiences that matter most,
undermining the proposal process. Any temporary fragmentation ahead of a
vote would be secondary to that problem.
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.
As a baby step, I just set up an "abuse filter" on the wiki that will
tag any change to the |status=, |draftStartDate=, |rfcStartDate=,
|voteStartDate=, or |voteEndDate= parameters on a feature proposal page.
Rest assured, editing one of these parameters won't send you to the
headmaster's office for abusing any privileges, but you can filter
Special:RecentChanges, Special:Watchlist, etc. to show only these changes:
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges?tagfilter=proposal-status-changed>
and you can click the "Atom" link in the sidebar to get a feed to add to
your feed reader. I've taken the liberty of subscribing OSMUS Slack's
#proposals channel to this feed. Perhaps someone can even set up a bot
on Twitter, while that's still a thing.
This isn't quite what either of us are envisioning, and I personally
don't consider RSS feeds to replace that human touch. But it could make
it easier for some of us to keep track of proposals. If the feed gets
noisy, let me know and I can tighten up the abuse filter's rules.
--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
