On Wed, 5 Oct 2011 23:04:02 +0100 "Andy Robinson" <ajrli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mediation currently appears problematic because only one side of the > discussion is present. Ideally I'd like to see a joint statement from > the two sides (the local mappers) that states what the difference(s) > of position are. If it can't be joint then at least two separate > statements. At the moment we have one side making a lot of noise only > which means there is no practical route to mediation presently. Is it correct that this all started with the now silent 'other side' asking the DWG to step in? In that case maybe the DWG should revert their 'name removal decision' and let the local mappers continue the way things were before. The silent side can always decide to speak up in which case you will have something to mediate. Can we even speak of a dispute if one party is absent? I still think the real dispute is about the name tag and they just want it back, as do I. Lambert Carsten _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
