{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383/events","html_url":"https://github.com/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383","id":161242202,"number":383,"title":"Policy on what flags should be in the extension (i.e. inclusiveness vs organisation)","user":{"login":"karakalpak","id":17495420,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/17495420?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak","html_url":"https://github.com/karakalpak","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/karakalpak/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"84b6eb"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":53,"created_at":"2016-06-20T16:50:51Z","updated_at":"2016-07-05T18:28:37Z","closed_at":null,"body":"This issue mainly concerns Sweden, Finland and especially the UK.\r\n\r\nAs highlighted in the discussion in issue #381 v2 of the extension, while efficient for most countries, isn't suited to handle the flag circlejerk that is the United Kingdom (and similarly Sweden and Finland but on smaller scales). The fact that there is more than one set of official regions in each of these countries will make organisation and sorting very difficult if the current flag policy (i.e. accepting all flags that are deemed valid) continues being used, for several reasons:\r\n- Towns will have to exist as duplicates in both the folders for the traditional division(s) and the modern division(s).\r\n- Regions such as the East Riding of Yorkshire will have to exist as duplicates (this is where it gets really complicated). With regards to this specific example this is due to the fact that England is directly divided into ceremonial counties, including the East Riding; it is also divided into historical counties including Yorkshire, which the East Riding is a division of. As a result the East Riding of Yorkshire has to simultaneously be a second-level and third-level flag of the UK. Huntingdonshire is in the exact opposite situation, being in the third level ceremonially and the second level traditionally.\r\n- Boroughs, districts and equivalent divisions might have to be resorted into the traditional divisions if users want to use lower-level flags with traditional divisions. Some of these will be bisected by traditional province borders and more duplicates will result. \r\n\r\nIn addition, personally I feel that to maximise convenience for users only one set of administrative regions per country should be used, due to the new version incorporating a dropdown menu.\r\n\r\nFurthermore if all 'valid' flags are to be counted several regions with extremely vague and undefined boundaries will have to be included, making sorting even more difficult (for instance, the Black Country is a cultural region but has an official flag as registered by the Flag Institute, but its borders aren't well defined and the boroughs of the West Midlands cannot be sorted properly into it; \"no two Black Country men or women will agree on where it starts or ends\". Worse still, someone from say Wolverhampton might want to display a Black Country flag before his town as he identifies as part of it while someone else wouldn't. The solution? Even more duplicates). The traditional kingdoms of England (Wessex, Mercia, East Anglia, and Northumbria) are in a worse situation, being much larger. With this confusion it's not difficult to see why /flag/ has always been pissed at the inclusion of traditional regions.\r\n\r\nHowever, if only administrative divisions are used, several flags that people identify with won't be included, the Scottish shires for example. **Yorkshire and Sussex and perhaps Ayrshire can still be included if option 1 is chosen IMO, since the administrative divisions are clearly based off them.**\r\n\r\nAs a result I'm not sure what to do here - **1)** go for organisation and only include flags representing regions used in governmental administration (which will completely solve the organisation problem for the three aforementioned countries), or **2)** go for inclusiveness but a messy folder and confusing dropdown menus. \r\n\r\nMy personal opinion is to go with number 1 (**only accept formal extant divisions used in local administration**) but I think the owner should have the final say.\r\n\r\n**Edit:** France and Portugal appear to be in similar situations and might prove equally problematic.\r\n\r\n**Edit 2:** For England in specific another option might be to accept traditional provinces but scrap the few flags that don't have defined boundaries, i.e. the four historical kingdoms and the Black Country.  These are the ones I find people complain about the most."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/comments/230562019","html_url":"https://github.com/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383#issuecomment-230562019","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/flaghunters/Extra-Flags-for-4chan/issues/383","id":230562019,"user":{"login":"MarkoTulska","id":19914312,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/19914312?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska","html_url":"https://github.com/MarkoTulska","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/MarkoTulska/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-07-05T18:28:37Z","updated_at":"2016-07-05T18:28:37Z","body":"Mate I'm not trying to troll Karak, but legally Yorkshire (as a whole) is a historical region. I can see why you'd want a Yorkshire flag or no council logos and shit like that. However you're being a crybaby spacko reddit autist, Yorkshire has not been removed, you can still select parts of Yorkshire and hopefully soon you'll be able to select having Yorkshire under a historical tab. Why historical? Because a complete Yorkshire is not a current ceremonial county. It hasn't been a complete entity under the view of the law since Jorvik was established it has always been split into ridings.\r\n\r\n>Statements like this are convincing me that UK flaglists should be under another moderator's responsibility.\r\n\r\nreddit pls go"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"MarkoTulska"}}