<div dir="ltr"><div><div>Frederik,<br><br></div>I think the concerns can be dealt with by requesting that companies, or other organisations, that employ people to enter data into OpenStreetMap follow the community guidelines.<br>
<br></div>If a hired mapper adds loads of data for six months then leaves, that is of more use than the average OSM account which contributes a couple of features then nothing else. If the hired mapper adds lots of detail about a set of gardens their company manages that actually describes the gardens' physical features in a useful way, and not non-physical information about their management for example, then that is all to the good.<br>
<br>I see OSM as much closer to free software projects in this regard, where there is a strong tradition of paid employees contributing within the normal terms of the relevant community.<br><br>Regards,<br>Tom<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 27 November 2013 14:54, Frederik Ramm <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org" target="_blank">frederik@remote.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
<br>
some of you may have read the recent brouhaha about a PR firm<br>
offering to edit Wikpedia to brush up their client's images or advertise<br>
their products.<br>
<br>
Wikimedia Foundation sent them a cease and desist letter<br>
(<a href="http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/11/19/wikimedia-foundation-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-wikipr/" target="_blank">http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/11/19/wikimedia-foundation-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-wikipr/</a>).<br>
<br>
<br>
The main problem, from Wikipedia's point of view, is not so much that<br>
someone receives money for editing Wikipedia, but that<br>
<br>
* content added by the PR firm lacked neutrality and verifiability;<br>
* there were undisclosed conflicts of interest<br>
* a ton of sock puppet accounts had been created by the PR firm.<br>
<br>
Hundreds, likely thousands, of person-hours have been spent by the<br>
Wikipedia community to analyse the problem.<br>
<br>
At OpenStreetMap, we haven't yet had such problems or at least we aren't<br>
aware of them. There have been a couple of "SEO" spammers, and a couple<br>
of people who too prominently added their own business name, but that's<br>
about all. I know of a couple self-employed people who offer to "add<br>
your place to OpenStreetMap" but I don't have reason to believe that<br>
anything improper is going on there.<br>
<br>
Basically, our own rules of verifiablity mean that there's not so much<br>
where a commercial PR firm could put a "spin" on things and thereby<br>
damage our project or reputation. You might say: as long as what they<br>
add is correct, why bother?<br>
<br>
I think it is perhaps not as easy as that, and it is a matter worth<br>
discussing and thinking about.<br>
<br>
One of the reasons for OSM's success is the strong community of people<br>
who care for the data. That's why we have strict rules on imports - we<br>
can't allow an area being plastered with data that would swamp and<br>
discourage the mapping community, *even* *if* the data itself is of high<br>
quality.<br>
<br>
The same caveat might apply to paid editing. Someone who adds data not<br>
because they're passionate but because they're paid, will be lost to us<br>
immediately when their boss decides that attention should be shifted<br>
elsewhere. In paid mapping, it is totally conceivable that some<br>
individual maps from 9 to 5 for a month, and then never again. It is<br>
totally conceivable that that individual isn't at all interested in OSM<br>
or the data, and that they simply do what they're told. It is totally<br>
conceivable that, when asked a few months later, that person will reply<br>
"uh, I don't quite remember, it was just a job I was doing".<br>
<br>
Is that a problem, or could it become one?<br>
<br>
Also, we're giving mappers a huge amount of freedom in tagging and in<br>
deciding what they map. We might shrug if we see that someone<br>
meticuously draws every single tree in their garden, or every patch of<br>
grass, but we'll not usually do something about it and leave the quirky<br>
individual their fun. After all, we want to support "unexpected uses".<br>
If the same were to be done by an organisation with lots of resources,<br>
and we would have to fear that they would neatly "paint" every single<br>
garden of the properties they manage or so, would we still say "ah, give<br>
the individual some leeway in how they contribute to OSM"? Or would we,<br>
when faced with an organisation making cold business decisions rather<br>
than quirky hobbyist decisions, request that they adhere to other standards?<br>
<br>
In the Wikipedia case, one of the issues was that the PR company was not<br>
being open about who they were, what they were editing and why, hiding<br>
behind "sock puppet" accounts. In OSM much as in Wikipedia, we don't<br>
normally expect people to reveal their identity, or tell us why they're<br>
mapping something. Is it different when dealing with a corporate entity?<br>
Would we expect to be told which accounts belong to employees and what<br>
their current goal is (e.g. "we have been asked to improve cycleway<br>
mapping in Frankfurt for a client and expect to spend 3-4 person weeks<br>
on that, and the mapping will be done by our team members A, B, and C")?<br>
<br>
I'm not offering any answers - just questions right now.<br>
<br>
Bye<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">Frederik<br>
<br>
--<br>
Frederik Ramm ## eMail <a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org">frederik@remote.org</a> ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
osmf-talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://tom.acrewoods.net">http://tom.acrewoods.net</a> <a href="http://twitter.com/tom_chance">http://twitter.com/tom_chance</a>
</div>