On 04/01/2008, Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >is there an acknowledged way of removing them, without going through > >the whole comments/opinions/voting process? > Ye, it would certainly be good to be more aggressive in cleaning up > up the Proposals page, it is hard to casually browse for "live" proposals.
very hard, i think that's part of the reason so few people look through - there's so much rubbish > Currently, the only mechanism is to move proposals into the "Needs > cleanup/modification" and "Works in Progress/Pending" sections at the > bottom - which are roughly equivalent to the place sick proposals go to die. yeah, i saw that, but i'm not a fan. a vast % fall into one of those categories > I propose: > > 1) Mark redundant proposals with "This proposal appears to be > redundant or duplicated. Unless there are any objections it will be > removed on or after dd-mm-yyyy" and leave it there until you or > someone else is next doing a clean-up round. that's a very good idea, i will do that for lots. i've already moved some duplicates, see earlier concerning roundend/turning_circle > 2) More generally, any proposal that has been there for more than a > year (see the pages "history" tab) be removed. Looking at a few > other proposals, this may be a little too aggressive as the > "riverbank" > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Large_rivers > proposal would go (or perhaps is should?). An alternative would be > to remove any proposal that has been there a year and had no > substantive activity for 6 months. i'll stick with the warning, and give each one two weeks to be resurrected > Here the dates for your example: > > Created - 29 August 2006 > Last substantive comment - Dec 2006 > Last comment of any kind - Apr 2007 yes, there's a lot of that rob _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
