On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 10:01:23 +0100 (CET), Cartographer10 via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: >> Question is: did you then collect all the points those extra communities >> made (both those you agreed with, and those >> that you didn't agree with), and summarized them on wiki /talk page, for >> extra period of RFC? Because if you didn't >> (especially if you didn't include things you _disagreed_ with) then you >> abused that input to promote your personal view, >> and disregarded the best parts that such other views could provide.
> The proposal has a section "external discussion". There the largest external > discussions are listed. These are all > publicly accessible sources so people can read what has been discussed there. > I have also send updates when I changed > major things in the proposal. I can image if you announce it on a closed > platform like Discord, that a summary on the > talk page can be useful. It has. I'm not implying that you're trying to hide evidence by omitting those sources. :-) I'm pointing out that: - the proponent will have to scan those external threads anyway - it is huge waste of everyones time if *each and every other contributor* has to scan those 100+ posts threads again for themselves to extract 2-3 possibly useful suggestions in order to suggest improvements. (for recent examples, see "highway=scramble" and related threads). As such requirement of general OSM population would hugely reduce number of people putting an effort, and thus result in much lower quality of proposal changes (people wasting time on asking for already explained things, good suggestions being ignored), and finally in voting not being based on available input (as it was too hard to process in fullness for average wiki voter), or even giving up totally on proposal process. - thus, it would be much better if proponent (who have already invested time in processing those external sources) would summarize that 2-3 suggestions on proposal talk page, and invite people for extra RFC commenting on those suggestions too. Even in cases when they are publically accessible to everyone (and of course always when they are not!) That is my suggestion on proposal process improvement; and it would allow for "legalizing" adding extra external discussions as regular people would not be burdened by being required to follow them, as the onus would be put on proponent to summarize those on proposal wiki talk page. >> I can imagine quite bad things, but to be fair, here is a most realistic one >> instead: On each changing of status quo, >> some people will leave the process for good, as that will be the straw that >> broke the camel's back. If you need to >> learn from history, see the debate when OSM changed license from CC-BY-SA to >> ODbL. And then, if another proposal >> changes situation back to what it was before, that will NOT cause (majority >> of) people that left to come back. >> It will instead cause some MORE people to leave for good (in revolt). > There are always people who don't agree with a change. EVERY proposal or > changes has that. If more then 75% of the > people agree you can assume that enough people support it. And of course, > taking the status quo into account is Sure. I'm just explaining why "well we can change it, and then change it back if it doesn't work" has a serious consequences, as the initial suggestion did not seem to consider them (i.e. "What is the worst thing that can happen?") > important. However, if you can't change the status quo, you never move > forward. Agreed. That is why I am (still) offering suggestions how to move forward, instead of being silent until voting period and casting "no" vote without wasting time on participating in discussions. At the end, related quote by G.B. Shaw for some smiles: "Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people." -- Opinions above are GNU-copylefted. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
