<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div>No, forbidding to post critical information or hold official discussions *solely* on Facebook<br></div><div>is not limiting our ability to be a truly inclusive equitable global community.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Note that this is not proposing ban on use of proprietary communication channels.<br></div><div><br></div><div>You only need to use them in addition to open one.<br></div><div><br></div><div>"Essential communications will
always be accessible through an open, preferably self-hosted platform.
They may be published on proprietary channels as well, but only in
addition to an open channel."<br></div><div><br></div><div>Why it would limit our ability to be a truly inclusive equitable global community?<br></div><div><br></div><div>Aug 17, 2020, 19:25 by heatherleson@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="auto"><div>Great. I guess I ask because the people responding are long time OSM members. I value you, truly. Honest.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But here we are- a small circle talking on this mailing list. Maybe open is not just the platform but the ways we work to collaborate and communicate across gender, region and power.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Again, I get the open platform focus. In an ideal world where we all engage with the same interent access and communications methods, this works. However, I am asking "does this limit our ability to be a truly inclusive equitable global community"? Not an easy question, but I guess I would like to hear from other community voices. <br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thank you,<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Heather <br></div></div><div><br></div><div class=""><div class="" dir="ltr">On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, 19:14 Martin Koppenhoefer, <<a href="mailto:dieterdreist@gmail.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">dieterdreist@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex" class=""><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>sent from a phone<br></div><div> <br></div><div> > On 17. Aug 2020, at 18:39, Andy Townsend <<a rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com">ajt1047@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><div> > <br></div><div> > That's pretty much how I've been interpreting it - things that people "really ought to be able to read" will be written somewhere that's public, rather than a private channel from which content might disappear at any time (like Facebook, etc.).<br></div><div> <br></div><div> <br></div><div> or services which some might prefer to not use because they don’t want their accesses traced, like google documents.<br></div><div> <br></div><div> Cheers Martin <br></div><div> _______________________________________________<br></div><div> osmf-talk mailing list<br></div><div> <a rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br></div><div> <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br></div></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div> </body>
</html>