Re: [talk-au] What are the Facts?
Hi, if I may offer two pieces of advice for a successful discussion on mailing lists. On 23.09.19 12:35, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au wrote: > What are the Facts? > I have decided to publish the discussion brief in two parts: “The Facts” > and then “The Issue”. This is me telling you I am going to do that. I > will send you the first part tomorrow. First, try not to "lead" the discussion. Open a topic, see what people have to say, digest, and reply a couple days later. Repeat that process. If you "drive" things by being very present and writing lots of things in a small timeframe, people will quickly tire of engaging and you will be talking to a brick wall. My second recommendation is, and I admit this is not always possible or easy, try to limit the number of discussions you open simultaneously to one, otherwise people will get confused easily and mix your different issues together ESPECIALLY if the subject is imprecise. Also, I have the impression that the message I am replying to might contain a mix of quoted material and your original writing but it is not obvious to me which are your words and which are copied from elsewhere. I case you have used text formatting to distinguish - e.g. bold, or color - it has not surived! Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What are the Facts?
Herbert, All this is quite a lot and lacks clear issues to discuss. It also reads to me as if you would be writing down some text that has been developed by a larger group and you are writing done their view? Keep in mind that little response to your lengthy text does not mean consent or endorsement. -- On 23 September 2019 8:35:53 pm AEST, "Herbert.Remi via Talk-au" wrote: >What are the Facts? >> ‘Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.’> >— Daniel Patrick Moynihan >I have decided to publish the discussion brief in two parts: “The >Facts” and then “The Issue”. This is me telling you I am going to do >that. I will send you the first part tomorrow. >"The Facts" is a summary of information from various relevant sources >in OSM Wiki, laws and regulations that apply to the ACT and any other >information of a factual nature which may help clarify “The Issue.” >In principle, the facts should be straight forward. >The first step is the pick through what we know and clarify, confirm >and remove any errors that have crept into the brief. This information >creates a level playing field of knowledge. >Your comments are more than welcome. To quote OSM Wiki, “be bold.” >If you think any of the information is in error, please try to provide >the correct information and preferably with a link, or at least mention >the source of this information. At every level in OSM, it always comes >back to the principle of “verifiable”. It is easy to get things wrong >when we are relying on memory. >Please stick to critiquing the facts and not getting off-topic. I will >process your feedback at the end of the calendar day and integrate the >information into the brief or correct it as is required. >The updated and corrected facts section will be published with the full >brief including “The Issue” on the following day. >The same is true for the quality definition. A word can have many >meanings. This is why the OSM technical definition is so valuable. >The purpose of the quality definition is to define in OSM terms, for >example, what a shared bike path is, within the context of its >information provided in “The Facts”. In other words, we cannot have a >quality definition that is illegal under ACT law or unfit for purpose. >Coming tomorrow 24/9/2019 >The Facts for Discussion C: Two steps forward and one step back: >confusion about tagging bike tracks in the ACT ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] What are the Facts?
What are the Facts? > ‘Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.’> — > Daniel Patrick Moynihan I have decided to publish the discussion brief in two parts: “The Facts” and then “The Issue”. This is me telling you I am going to do that. I will send you the first part tomorrow. "The Facts" is a summary of information from various relevant sources in OSM Wiki, laws and regulations that apply to the ACT and any other information of a factual nature which may help clarify “The Issue.” In principle, the facts should be straight forward. The first step is the pick through what we know and clarify, confirm and remove any errors that have crept into the brief. This information creates a level playing field of knowledge. Your comments are more than welcome. To quote OSM Wiki, “be bold.” If you think any of the information is in error, please try to provide the correct information and preferably with a link, or at least mention the source of this information. At every level in OSM, it always comes back to the principle of “verifiable”. It is easy to get things wrong when we are relying on memory. Please stick to critiquing the facts and not getting off-topic. I will process your feedback at the end of the calendar day and integrate the information into the brief or correct it as is required. The updated and corrected facts section will be published with the full brief including “The Issue” on the following day. The same is true for the quality definition. A word can have many meanings. This is why the OSM technical definition is so valuable. The purpose of the quality definition is to define in OSM terms, for example, what a shared bike path is, within the context of its information provided in “The Facts”. In other words, we cannot have a quality definition that is illegal under ACT law or unfit for purpose. Coming tomorrow 24/9/2019 The Facts for Discussion C: Two steps forward and one step back: confusion about tagging bike tracks in the ACT___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
