highway=scramble is especially tricky as it is not only a new tag but attempt to deprecate use of widely used highway=path in some specific cases, making it extremely hard to achieve.
But in general, I agree with
and discovering such issues earlier than later is a very good thing (but handling it properly is often tricky and hard to do)
Yep, that’s how it is … 
.
I agree to most of what you pointed out as usually and I would not see any reason to skip the policy of ATYL at all - in fact most mappers like to see the fruit of their work on carto asap and this is a reasonable motivation to use established tags instead of any “I know better values”.
Nevertheless it would well be possible to combine the advantages of the “open” system with some kind of moderation and create tagging rules at least for the most common keys which are “prescriptive” which would not mean that nevertheless any mapper could no longer use his “I know better values” as long as they are aware that their work would not find much attention of renderers or routers.
Some kind of moderation of wiki documented main tags would create a lot of benefit for all mappers. for newbies by giving them clear guidelines instead of ambiguous “some mapers do so but others do soso and again you could think about using … instead”, and for experienced mappers by saving them lots of valuable time wasted debating the same issue again and again and again …
Edit: Btw. coincidentially there is another topic dealing with the spongy wiki tagging recommandations here. Is it amenity=dentist or healthcare=dentist or even both of these tags to be on the safe side … it’s your choice …
Hmmm, maybe? Or perhaps we understand term “prescriptive” differently?
To me, it means that only tags which are prescribed/allowed are accepted into OSM database. I.e. it would be enforced - so if you e.g. tried to enter unknown (or deprecated) tag combination into JOSM and click upload, you’d be greeted with an “Error trying to set unapproved value”, and OSM database would remain unchanged. (and I thus find it bad idea, for all the reasons explained earlier).
If you mean some “much lighter” meaning of “prescriptive” like “we should suggest in wiki to users to use some tags and avoid others, but still allow them to upload whatever they want”, that would work, but isn’t that what we’re doing already? Each tag in a wiki has:
osmcarto-rendering= parameter? Would that help?But anyway, if the users still have free will and can decide to ignore those suggestions, I’d call that approach “descriptive”.
if you mean “somewhat stronger than just good docs, but still allowing users to upload whatever they like” like e.g. having JOSM / iD / Vespucci / … validators throw a visible warning to users, that can be (and is) done today already (at least for JOSM I’ve seen it throw yellow triangle on suspicious preset configuration, and it’s validator warn about dubious tagging practices on upload).
If something is missing today in such checks, it can be suggested to respective editor author in their own issue trackers to warn about Deprecated features, so one should feel free to open issues there.
would not mean that nevertheless any mapper could no longer use his “I know better values” as long as they are aware that their work would not find much attention of renderers or routers.
If they’re ever taken a look at the wiki, they’re probably quite aware that such tag will not be rendered or used for routing or anything (especially if they made it up via ATYL and didn’t even document it - it should be pretty obvious that nothing will be using it unless you write that tool yourself or convince others to do it!)
Some kind of moderation of wiki documented main tags would create a lot of benefit for all mappers for newbies by giving them clear guidelines instead of ambiguous “some mapers do so but others do soso and again you could think about using … instead”,
You mean, something like Map features - OpenStreetMap Wiki?
It is linked at the top on main page of the wiki.osm.org, but perhaps it could be made even more prominent somehow? Any ideas?
Also, I’d be wary of some moderation team having such power to decide what is right and what is wrong. Because, it would likely either have to work on:
“random/round-robin” principle (i.e. request goes to random moderator, and s/he is the sole dictator who decides the fate of the tag; which would likely results in either riots, or people resubmitting their tag suggestion ad infinitum until they reach “better” moderator), or
“committee consensus” principle (meaning many things would never ever get a decision, and the tensions would rise. E.g. best I could accomplish with Pedestrian lanes was to document myriad of possible ways how it is mapped currently - and each of those methods has both proponents and vehement opposition. I have no illusions that any kind of representative moderation committee would fare much better)
But, what is the Welcome tool ??
Somewhat related, there’s also the “Welcome Mat”, which is designed for organisations.
(confusing, yes, but not as confusing as the four different “communities” here, here. here and here)
OpenStreetMap is just communityception 
Lol yes. Instead of turtles it’s various social media platforms all the way down. Take your pick
You forgot all local osm Facebook groups!
I guess I’m a Lone Ranger Mapper myself. I’m learning how you people will deal with me in the future. Who watches the Watchmen?
Now, for the real part of my comment, I think “lone ranger mappers” occupy a niche in the OSM community. They will always be around, they will always be under the radar, they don’t want to have interactions with the lousy community, but they contribute data. I would like to ask everyone to leave them alone as long as they don’t become spammers. I know it takes effort, but it’s something I won’t discuss. That’s a hill I will die on.
Are you? Words have a way of picking up different meanings to different people. In this case, “Lone Ranger Mapper” was specifically defined in the beginning of this thread as:
Your profile says you’ve been around for more than a decade, so I’d be hesitant to attribute “beginner” label to yourself. Also, you seem to respond to communication attempts (both here in the forum, as well as in changeset comments), so that too would disqualify you from that definition.
Perhaps you used some other definition of those words, and not the one intended by original poster?
Sure. I don’t think anybody suggested to do otherwise? Was there a heated battle here and I missed it 
? Why would anybody need to die on any hill? Perhaps there is misunderstanding who “them” are?
they don’t want to have interactions with the lousy community, but they contribute data
There is generally no problem with mapper not wanting to interact with (lousy or not) community by talking to them as long as they only contribute useful information to the map.
The problem however arises when someone contributes data that is not useful (e.g. it is incorrect, or is spam, or is from illegal sources etc.) and they refuse to communicate when the community attempts to contact them and ask them to change their behaviour. Would you agree that such situation would be problematic?
I think extreme kindness and persistence is one way that worked for me. For example “Thank you for deleting all the benches in this park! It’s a valuable contribution. Did the town administration remove them recently? Here’s a wiki page about benches. Have a nice day!”
That way in the 99.9% cases where the mapper tried to help, they are greeted with matching good energy, and I think they will respond better than if there is even a hint of anger.
Although my example is a bit passive aggressive, i should work on that.
Only with spammers and people who infringe copyright. I will take the “not useful” information any time instead of no participation/information at all 
.
My experience has been similar to yours. Communicate in good faith and the same good attitude will be returned in kind.
)