Hi Roland, On 04.12.2017 09:42, Roland Olbricht wrote: > We recently had an experienced and productive community member, Ilya, > putting a lot of time in a Wiki Proposal just to see the whole process > fail.
there's an important distinction here: It's Ilya's proposal that has failed (for now at least), not the proposal process. That proposals are sometimes rejected is an inherent part of that process. I've written several proposals over the years, and while some of them have been accepted, I've always learned something from the ones that weren't. Just because I'm an experienced contributor doesn't mean all my ideas are great – and the proposal process is a way to weed out those of my ideas that aren't. I'm not trying to suggest that the proposal system cannot possibly be improved upon. However, Ilya's proposal was pretty unusual as far as proposals go: It had a couple specific flaws which you already hinted at (such as trying to do too much at once and writing in a "documentation page" format instead of describing the changes to be voted on), so it's likely not the best basis for generalizing observations to the proposal process as a whole. > I suggest to replace the Proposal process by three more specialized > and therefore much simpler processes. They are structured by what they > can affect. [...] > === Distinguished Documentation === [...] > === Wiki Cleanup === [...] > === Tag Disambiguation === At the moment, the proposal process isn't really intended for things that _only_ affect the wiki, it's always an attempt to come to an agreement on how to tag things in the database. So most of these items seem to be outside the scope of what proposals are suitable for. Generally, I don't believe a democratic process is the best way to produce well-written documentation. Tobias _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
