On Friday 24 May 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On 5/24/19 6:04 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > This is evidently something that is becoming more and more > > important as OSM grows as a project and it becomes increasingly > > difficult for a single person to be knowledgable about every aspect > > of it. > > In the din of voices here, how does one assess who is most qualified > to make such decisions?
Through arguments and reasoning and through critical evaluation of opinions and decisions. You should not assume just because people articulate all kinds of strange views and opinions on these channels that are evidently flawed that the discourse on a whole is pointless. If you engage in discussions in the OSM community for a longer time you will learn which people on what subjects tend to have views and ideas that in the long term hold up to critical assessment and usually turn out to be correct. Likewise you also learn which people might have an interesting perspective on things but frequently draw the wrong conclusions. This helps a lot - but is of course no replacement for critical evaluation of ideas on a case-by-case bases. Everyone can make errors in judgement - even experts in their respective fields. Also allowing the articulation of highly opinionated and unqualified ideas is a necesssity in a community that wants to be open and be able to develop and adjust the a changing environment. Because many innnovative ideas start as something that is universally considered to be a bad idea (or even offensive or toxic as some like to call it). > Beware of elevating, 'I disagree with this decision,' to, 'the people > who made this decision were irresponsible. If they had consulted a > competent authority, they would not have made it.' In this forum, it > risks being interpreted as an arrogant belief that you are the only > truly competent authority, unless you accompany it with a proposal > for constituting a governing body. I think you got the wrong impression here that i advocate the creation of formal authorities based on some codified system of qualifications. In my opinion the only practical way to effectively select qualified people to making decisions is through competition - in arguments and reasoning in the process leading up to the decisions and between different decisions and those making them afterwards. What i criticize in case of iD presets and validations is not primarily that iD developers make decisions the way they do (which i do but which i also consider to be their legitimate decision) but that the OSMF endorses this as the default way of editing OSM online via the website giving it an unfair advantage over any competing system of presets and validation. That adds on top of the pre-existing advantage of being financially backed in a significant way (by paying developers) by multiple (and in parts still anonymous) financiers. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging