<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1251">
</head>
<body>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Well, we're working on
expanding membership, too. We (the Board) accepted the MWG's
recommendation of 42 days of editing with precisely that in
mind. Any other ideas you have on how to expand membership are
welcome. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">I don't think we could
or would expel members based on statistical inference, but if
statistical probability were high that some sort of hostile
takeover were intended, it would be probable cause for an
investigation that could lead to expulsion. Statistical
inference by itself would not stand up in court, most likely.</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">apm</font></p>
On 10/11/2020 3:06 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CADAoPLp+227Z473qujGy1HPFfMVOASQG40qoZTd0SMKRkriQ5A@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1251">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 8:02
AM Allan Mustard <<a href="mailto:allan@mustard.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">allan@mustard.net</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>It's called takeover protection, with a particular eye
on any attempted hostile takeover. OSM community
includes a lot of very intelligent people, including
some with good statistical backgrounds, who can
certainly draw statistical inferences if a high
percentage of employees of company X is correlated with
a number of votes for a particular resolution or
candidate. The essence is as you describe, but the
point is not to disenfranchise, per se, but rather to
dissuade employers from seeking to influence how the
community votes in an organized manner. This would
not, incidentally, require an amendment to the AoA, but
rather adoption of a policy by the OSMF membership. The
Board already has the authority under the AoA to expel
members. If you have better ideas for takeover
protection, now would be a good time to propose them.<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>The suggestion that we might disenfranchise voters
because of a statistical inference is not something that I
would ever vote for. A group of employees might vote for a
candidate because they know and respect the person running
for office. That we would even suggest their votes not count
doesn't conform to our Mission Statement. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>My suggestion is to continue to expand the OSMF
membership. The members will protect OSM from a takeover.
The recent decision that allows people to join with just 42
edits is a good first step. Right now our membership is
still small compared to the number of active mappers. I
would encourage the Board to find ways to
significantly improve that percentage. A good start would be
to see a goal for 2021.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div>Clifford</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>@osm_washington<br>
</div>
<div><a href="https://www.snowandsnow.us"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.snowandsnow.us</a></div>
<div>OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
-------<br>
<i>Allan Mustard, Chairperson</i><br>
<i>Board of Directors</i><br>
<i>OpenStreetMap Foundation</i></div>
</body>
</html>