User talk:Tuxayo/Automated edits code of conduct and DWG: Follow up to mailing list discussion and proposals

While I appreciate that someone cares to push forward the issue and has worked through the results, I dispute that some of the fidings are results of the mailing list discussion.

See details of this on a post to do on the mailing list.

The key differences are:

- There is no agreement (yet) what an automated edit is or not. Hence, most of the proposed activities simply do not make sense without a proper definition.

- Most reverts are (already) done by mappers outside the DWG. This is a feature and not a bug.

And as an addtional remark: Either we agree on rules or we abstain from producing more text. There is abundant advice and there are abundant ideas out there, but they are not necessarily consent. --Drolbr mdv (talk) 05:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

You are right, it was a legacy of how this page started.

But now, it's misleading and the intro isn't enough to clarify that.

So I changed the name, is that correct now? (for others, old name was Automated_edits_code_of_conduct_and_DWG:_Mailing_list_discussion_summary_and_proposals)

See some responses to other point on the mailing list:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-May/077946.html

> And as an addtional remark: Either we agree on rules or we abstain from

> producing more text. There is abundant advice and there are abundant ideas out

> there, but they are not necessarily consent.

I'm not sure to understand that part. (I'm not a native speaker)

Isn't debate needed to agree on rules and find consent?

Tuxayo (talk) 16:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC)