Hi,
On 09/21/12 14:12, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
No problems, let's discuss. But while we do talk about a future rule, the
previous one should (I mean "must") still apply until the new one is ready to
replace it.
This is not about "one rule". This is about the whole question of rules
and authority.
No need to say what was the previous rule right ?
You mean the previous rule as in yesterday? Half a year ago? Two years
ago? Or back when we had nodes and segments in our data model ;)
The current situation is that DWG does their job as they see fit and
defines rules they think are necessary.
For example: We do not have a rule in OSM that says "you must use a
changeset comment", and we don't have a rule that says "you must reply
when other mappers send you messages". It's good style to do it but
there's no rule that you *must*.
Creating rules for these situations would be awkward - it would raise
all kinds of questions like "what exactly counts as a reply" and so on.
And it would also sound like contributing to OSM was a major problem
because there are so many rules.
So we don't have any.
However, every once in a while DWG gets a complaint about a particular
user making lots of edits that are questionable. Not outright vandalism
or edit warring, but something exotic enough to make other mappers in
the area uneasy. The other mappers watch the user in question but it is
hard to watch him because all his changeset comments are just "small
fixes". The other mappers try to contact the user but he never replies.
In cases like this, I have occasionally told the mapper in question that
OSM is a teamwork project, and that he must be a teamplayer and
communicate with his peers, else we cannot use his work even if it is
good. I have occasionally had to put a block on people like that in
order to get them to reply at all.
Now there's no written rule for this. If the guy started a thread on the
talk list about "where is it written that you need to respond to
emails?????" I would not even be able to point to a wiki page - it's
simply something that we take for granted.
The "separate account" rule is just such a rule, that DWG has created to
do their job. I will not continue discussing this: As long as DWG have
to clean up the mess they will make the rules governing imports and
mechanical edits. Exceptions from the rules can be negotiated with DWG
in advance if someone thinks they really need one.
I say "as long as..." because the subsidiarity I mentioned in my post is
a real possibility; if the French community has a couple of willing and
capable people maybe we could experiment with setting up a sub-DWG
responsible for France only. Maybe we should just try it out and see if
it improves the situation.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
