On reflection, I don't really laugh with scorn in the face of the Mechanical
Edit Policy. But it certainly looks like a mess to me.
My take would be to attempt to extract the spirit of that policy and not bother
kvetching over the letter of it. The phrase "rough consensus and running code"
is okay, as long as you dont beat non-coders over the head with it.
I'm hoping to have a blitz edit of policy docs during the festives, there is a
link to my dewrite of the DWG's draft Mapping Code of Conduct which i should
really dare post here :)
Jo / zool
On December 18, 2014 6:59:24 PM GMT, Rovastar <rovas...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Andy,
>
>"[Citation needed] :-) "
>;-)
>
>Well please share the thoughts about what suggestions you have.
>
>I shudder to think how many man hours Math has placed/wasted into doing
>this
>so far, and how many more he should do for these (small) changes.
>
>Cheers,
>John
>
>
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/No-more-voting-on-mechanical-edits-tp5827513p5827661.html
>Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
