On 10 June 2011 23:35, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's a flawed analogy, since there were two decisions for smokers: whether > to vote yes or no on the referendum, and (after it passed) whether to > patronize these places. With OSM there is only one decision; someone who > 'votes' against the change gets their contributions removed, as if someone > who voted no on the referendum was no longer allowed to visit the pub and > grab a beer with friends.
Not at all. It's not a perfect analogy, but it covers perfectly the future right of the no voters to continue to use the facility. In the OSM context, this is possible by either accepting the terms and keeping your previous contributions on the map or (for whatever reason) standing by the no vote and creating another account. That the no voter would prefer not to have to do all this is clear, but then democracy always disappoints somebody. Dermot -- -------------------------------------- Igaühel on siin oma laul ja ma oma ei leiagi üles _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
