On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Ervin Malicdem <schad...@gmail.com> wrote: > Assigning local DWGs gets the job done faster in a local level as they can > easily find out if the edits are vandalized due to first-hand knowledge of > the data; and immediate lock out of the account can help control additional > vandalized edits. And this can be performed faster as the local DWG is on > the same time zone.
Dear Ervin, I think that we are in agreement on almost everything. Let me list the points that I believe we are expressing as complete agreement. - additional DWG-actors is beneficial. - additional DWG-type coverage of timezones is beneficial. - the process of local discussion, plus gradual escalation is appropriate. - immediate reversion of obvious vandalism by local mappers is appropriate. - probably others as well. :-) The only place we are differing on this matter, that I am aware of is the description of the DWG-actor. I prefer that they call themselves "a DWG member based in $locality". It seems that you prefer that they describe themselves as "representative of the $locality-DWG". The difference is subtle, and I believe that this subtle difference is important. - In the description that I prefer, the DWG and the members thereof each do their best to serve the entire OpenStreetMap community, not merely fractions of it. - In the description that I prefer, any mapper who seeks assistance in any place reaches out to only one DWG, and has assistance available from each of the members as appropriate. Maning asked, after I started this reply, would "DWG consider one member from the PH community to be a DWG member and will the main person to look into PH related reports?" I will answer, not for DWG but for myself. I expect that DWG will respond after they have had a chance to discuss the matter and come to a consensus. DWG, if I am wrong and spouting nonsense, please correct me here. Otherwise, perhaps we can let this thread rest, and presume that DWG will contact you within a few days? So, answering for myself and guessing for DWG:-) : I hope that DWG will respond as follows: Maning: would "DWG consider one member from the PH community to be a DWG member [continued]" DWG(guess): Yes! Enthusiastically welcomed. Maning: "[continues] and will the main person to look into PH related reports?" DWG(guess): They should serve the entire community as best they can. It is likely that they will be an obvious choice to be involved when geography, time zones and personalities overlap. In past, new DWG members have taken the opportunity to observe-only, for a period of time. They are active within DWG and share experience, and freely ask and answer within DWG, but take action externally, only with guidance from a more-experienced DWG member. [end of me awkwardly guessing what DWG might say. :-) ] If we imagine a situation where two mappers from different places disagree about their edits in a third place, it might not be clear to which DWG a third concerned mapper (from a fourth place?) should report. With one DWG, and many talented committed members, a mapper reports to one place after attempting the earlier mediation options. Best regards and happy mapping, Richard _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
