<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>You fail to see my point: it would have been completely possible
      to create HOT in a fashion that protected the interests of the
      OSMF at the time, and for reasons that are not completely clear
      that did not happen and it is difficult to determine who did what
      (because the relevant original documents are not available in an
      easily accessible fashion). <br>
    </p>
    <p>None of "doing it properly" would have likely had an impact on
      where HOT would be now except for its relationship to the OSMF.  <br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 16.12.2018 um 20:35 schrieb Dale
      Kunce:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CADOF=4+41eRg4k-aWYTLB6ymdDbLWb9OPW+BhR=Xc+JAPZW=ZQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="auto">
        <div>Again I wasn't around for those early days and only know
          first hand the story I've participated in since 2012.
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">All of HOTs 990s (US NGO tax paperwork) are
            online you can see that for years HOT wasn't and still isn't
            a money making venture. Yes HOTs finances are in a stable
            place but that is because of hard work by many volunteers
            and staff over the years to build a solid functioning NGO
            that actually supports emergent mapping communities. HOT,
            the NGO, continues to prudently reinvest in the OSM
            community and tools to acheive it's stated goals. It's not
            some giant money making scheme that it's made out to be.</div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>I've worked for a non-profit in case you didn't know and when you
      subtract the need to make shareholders happy in one way or the
      other "for profits" and "non-profits" are not really that
      different. I didn't offer an opinion on HOTs current financials
      (outside of saying that it was successful), just that the
      organisation got kick started at the OSMFs expense. <br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CADOF=4+41eRg4k-aWYTLB6ymdDbLWb9OPW+BhR=Xc+JAPZW=ZQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="auto">
        <div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">Bluntly, I'm tired if HOT being used as the
            boogyman on the OSM lists. I'm tired of the
            anti-humanitarian vibe of these list serves by a small group
            of very loud and active posters. I'm tired of being told
            that my mapping or opinion doesn't count because I have a
            non-European centric view of OSM and I wasn't around at some
            magic gathering in a pub 14 years ago. That just because I
            got paid to do OSM I'm somehow less.</div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>I think you would find that if the OSMF was an US organisation we
      wouldn't be having this discussion because the relationship
      between HOT and the OSMF would be very different.</p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CADOF=4+41eRg4k-aWYTLB6ymdDbLWb9OPW+BhR=Xc+JAPZW=ZQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="auto">
        <div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">For OSM to grow we need many mappers, many
            communities, many partners. The constant othering of folks
            that don't conform to your magic ideal of OSM is old and
            tired.</div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>What does that have to do with the topic at hand? It's the OSM
      equivalent of pulling the "crying baby" card.</p>
    <p>Simon<br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CADOF=4+41eRg4k-aWYTLB6ymdDbLWb9OPW+BhR=Xc+JAPZW=ZQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="auto">
        <div>
          <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
            <div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 16, 2018 10:50 AM, "Simon
              Poole" <<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch"
                moz-do-not-send="true">simon@poole.ch</a>> wrote:<br
                type="attribution">
              <blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0
                .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
                <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                  <p>To be blunt: MIkel was a board member of the OSMF
                    at the time and had a fiduciary duty to protect the
                    interests of the OSMF, just as the other board
                    members, naturally. I fail to see how protecting
                    said interests would have any impact on what
                    contributors could map, where they could engage
                    themselves and what kind of activities they should
                    support.</p>
                  <div class="signature-text"><br>
                  </div>
                  <div class="signature-text">
                    <p>Simon<br>
                    </p>
                  </div>
                  <div class="elided-text">
                    <div class="m_5858047920185003090moz-cite-prefix">Am
                      16.12.2018 um 19:35 schrieb Dale Kunce:<br>
                    </div>
                    <blockquote type="cite">
                      <div dir="auto">
                        <div dir="auto">From my perspective, and I
                          wasn't around during the early days, OSMF
                          basically abecated it's responsibilities for
                          the type of mapping HOT and other humanitarian
                          groups do. </div>
                        <div dir="auto"><br>
                        </div>
                        <div dir="auto">It's constantly said that OSM is
                          a do-acracy. Mikel and the other early HOT
                          mappers did. They stepped up into a niche area
                          that was underserved and did the hard work. We
                          shouldnt be angry that others were drawn to
                          supporting this type of work. We should
                          celebrate and support it however we can. This
                          is the type of direct community building we
                          want for our project to be successful.</div>
                        <div dir="auto"><br>
                        </div>
                        <div dir="auto">I 100% support OSMF getting more
                          involved in supporting local mapping
                          communities through partnerships with those
                          groups best suited. Sometimes this will be HOT
                          other times it will be with another local
                          group. I'm happy to share effective models
                          we've implemented in the past few years.</div>
                        <br>
                        <div class="gmail_quote">
                          <div dir="ltr">On Sun, Dec 16, 2018, 10:18 AM
                            Simon Poole <<a
                              href="mailto:simon@poole.ch"
                              rel="noreferrer noreferrer"
                              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">simon@poole.ch</a>
                            wrote:<br>
                          </div>
                          <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                            style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
                            #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
                            Am 16.12.2018 um 18:43 schrieb Frederik
                            Ramm:<br>
                            > Hi,<br>
                            ><br>
                            > On 12/16/18 18:13, Simon Poole wrote:<br>
                            >> If one tries to piece together the
                            history of HOT, at least from an OSMF<br>
                            >> point of view*, it is very clear
                            that HOT was sold to the board by Mikel<br>
                            >> at the time as ""our department"
                            for humanitarian work". <br>
                            > Well - it is quite possible that, at
                            the time, everyone was happy not to<br>
                            > have to deal with humanitarian issues
                            and that, at the time, it *was* a<br>
                            > good idea to simply let folks run with
                            it. <br>
                            <br>
                            Well that was the selling part, I believe it
                            is fair to say that the<br>
                            board members at the time had been convinced
                            that this separate<br>
                            organisation was a really good idea. But ...<br>
                            <br>
                            > Considering how big HOT has<br>
                            > become, I'm quite happy that they're
                            not an OSMF working group, or else<br>
                            > we'd have a constant case of the tail
                            wagging the dog ;)<br>
                            <br>
                            ... there is this small question of money.<br>
                            <br>
                            I know of at least one occasion during the
                            time we are discussing in<br>
                            which, being nice here, funding
                            opportunities were diverted to HOT and<br>
                            multiple later on in which interested donors
                            were pointed to HOT,<br>
                            without the OSMF receiving a single cent.
                            Any reasonable agreement on<br>
                            the establishment of HOT would have, a) laid
                            down the rules on how the<br>
                            name can be used, and b) required that a
                            suitable percentage, likely<br>
                            something between 10-20% of the funds
                            received  would go to the OSMF as<br>
                            partial support for the infrastructure HOT
                            was building its not<br>
                            unsuccessful business on.<br>
                            <br>
                            Now we do actually have the tail wagging the
                            dog in that the<br>
                            organisation that was built with money that
                            rightfully should have at<br>
                            least partially gone to the OSMF is trying
                            to outstrip the OSMF in every<br>
                            aspect.<br>
                            <br>
                            Simon<br>
                            <br>
                            <br>
                            ><br>
                            > I don't envision the OSMF running huge
                            aid projects. But it could<br>
                            > probably work to reclaim the "general
                            interest in humanitarian mapping"<br>
                            > as a core OSM(F) activity, while
                            leaving the concrete execution of<br>
                            > projects to bodies like HOT. It all
                            depends on people willing to do it.<br>
                            ><br>
                            >> * I've done that mode than once,
                            and always end up wondering what the<br>
                            >> board was smoking at the time.<br>
                            > I can say with confidence that no
                            smoking of anything has happened<br>
                            > during the in-person board meetings
                            that I was part of. (At least not<br>
                            > while we were in session.)<br>
                            ><br>
                            > Bye<br>
                            > Frederik<br>
                            ><br>
                            <br>
_______________________________________________<br>
                            osmf-talk mailing list<br>
                            <a href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org"
                              rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
                            <a
                              href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk"
                              rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer
                              noreferrer" target="_blank"
                              moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br>
                          </blockquote>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                        <div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 16, 2018 10:18
                          AM, "Simon Poole" <<a
                            href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" target="_blank"
                            rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">simon@poole.ch</a>>
                          wrote:<br type="attribution">
                          <blockquote class="m_5858047920185003090quote"
                            style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
                            #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
                            <div
                              class="m_5858047920185003090quoted-text"><br>
                              Am 16.12.2018 um 18:43 schrieb Frederik
                              Ramm:<br>
                              > Hi,<br>
                              ><br>
                              > On 12/16/18 18:13, Simon Poole wrote:<br>
                              >> If one tries to piece together
                              the history of HOT, at least from an OSMF<br>
                              >> point of view*, it is very clear
                              that HOT was sold to the board by Mikel<br>
                              >> at the time as ""our department"
                              for humanitarian work". <br>
                              > Well - it is quite possible that, at
                              the time, everyone was happy not to<br>
                              > have to deal with humanitarian issues
                              and that, at the time, it *was* a<br>
                              > good idea to simply let folks run
                              with it. <br>
                              <br>
                            </div>
                            Well that was the selling part, I believe it
                            is fair to say that the<br>
                            board members at the time had been convinced
                            that this separate<br>
                            organisation was a really good idea. But ...
                            <div
                              class="m_5858047920185003090quoted-text"><br>
                              <br>
                              > Considering how big HOT has<br>
                              > become, I'm quite happy that they're
                              not an OSMF working group, or else<br>
                              > we'd have a constant case of the tail
                              wagging the dog ;)<br>
                              <br>
                            </div>
                            ... there is this small question of money.<br>
                            <br>
                            I know of at least one occasion during the
                            time we are discussing in<br>
                            which, being nice here, funding
                            opportunities were diverted to HOT and<br>
                            multiple later on in which interested donors
                            were pointed to HOT,<br>
                            without the OSMF receiving a single cent.
                            Any reasonable agreement on<br>
                            the establishment of HOT would have, a) laid
                            down the rules on how the<br>
                            name can be used, and b) required that a
                            suitable percentage, likely<br>
                            something between 10-20% of the funds
                            received  would go to the OSMF as<br>
                            partial support for the infrastructure HOT
                            was building its not<br>
                            unsuccessful business on.<br>
                            <br>
                            Now we do actually have the tail wagging the
                            dog in that the<br>
                            organisation that was built with money that
                            rightfully should have at<br>
                            least partially gone to the OSMF is trying
                            to outstrip the OSMF in every<br>
                            aspect.
                            <div
                              class="m_5858047920185003090signature-text"><br>
                              <br>
                              Simon</div>
                            <div
                              class="m_5858047920185003090quoted-text"><br>
                              <br>
                              <br>
                              ><br>
                              > I don't envision the OSMF running
                              huge aid projects. But it could<br>
                              > probably work to reclaim the "general
                              interest in humanitarian mapping"<br>
                              > as a core OSM(F) activity, while
                              leaving the concrete execution of<br>
                              > projects to bodies like HOT. It all
                              depends on people willing to do it.<br>
                              ><br>
                              >> * I've done that mode than once,
                              and always end up wondering what the<br>
                              >> board was smoking at the time.<br>
                              > I can say with confidence that no
                              smoking of anything has happened<br>
                              > during the in-person board meetings
                              that I was part of. (At least not<br>
                              > while we were in session.)<br>
                              ><br>
                              > Bye<br>
                              > Frederik<br>
                              ><br>
                              <br>
                            </div>
                            <div
                              class="m_5858047920185003090elided-text">
_______________________________________________<br>
                              osmf-talk mailing list<br>
                              <a
                                href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org"
                                rel="noreferrer noreferrer"
                                target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
                              <a
                                href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk"
                                rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
                                target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br>
                            </div>
                          </blockquote>
                        </div>
                        <br>
                      </div>
                    </blockquote>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </blockquote>
            </div>
            <br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>