<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>This seems to have been going around in circles for years now,
but again: the LC scheme was conceived for well established, self
sustaining organisations similar in structure to the OSMF, aka
open membership controlled organisations organized mostly around
promoting OSM. <br>
</p>
<p>As these things go the conditions to become an LC were always
extremely relaxed, just go and compare to the hoops you need to
jump through to become similarly associated with the WMF, OSGeo
and so on.</p>
<p>In the mean time however it seems as if the OSMF is so desperate
to get more LCs that there are actually no conditions at all. From
organisations that can't support themselves, to such that don't
actually seem to be operating any kind of real membership scheme.</p>
<p> If the organisation applying for LC status doesn't fulfil the
criteria then there should be no drama around saying no, not to
belittle the group in question but because the OSMF - LC
relationship bestows certain rights and obligations on the LCs
that just don't make sense if they don't and can't fit that
specific model. The OSMF-LC relationship is essentially for life,
particularly after the recent contract changes, and it is likely a
good idea to be a bit picky about ones spouse in such
circumstances.<br>
</p>
<p>On the other hand, from day zero, it was always clear that there
might be less involved relationships with other kinds of groups,
be they less formal ad hoc user groups, thematic of a different
nature and so on, explicitly because it is clear that the world is
a large and diverse place and a one size fit all rule is not going
to work everywhere, in particular not for nascent communities and
third world countries. <br>
</p>
<p>The OSMF hasn't laid out the rules and formalities for such
relationships, but instead of discussing yet another application
that doesn't really fit, maybe it would be a better use of time
for the board to task the LCCWG with coming up with solutions for
the handful of situations that are common. <br>
</p>
<p>Simon<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 05.12.2020 um 16:39 schrieb Heather
Leson:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHjf0TL0TAyqG86KUTQG7-DB_Wceoodv0c9Nb2-8_41-WVKNeQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">Thank you, Mikel.
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I am sure there is a middle way. The team has
been instrumental, as Janet said. Understanding there are
different types of chapters is key. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Heather</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Heather </div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 5 Dec 2020, 13:38
Mikel Maron, <<a href="mailto:mikel.maron@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">mikel.maron@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
Janet, Heather
<div><br>
</div>
<div>No one doubts their personal dedication. Simply, the
structure and communication about map Uganda is unusual
for local chapters. Yes that is related to differences in
different parts of the world, and that’s totally fine. We
are learning. What would help me is some basic details
about governance like minutes, and OSM activities. This
might take a little more time, but not a lot. Willing to
help figure this out.<br>
<br>
We’re all learning as we go, including the osmf. I’ve
already taken away that we should have a few more standard
questions up front to get a clear picture of the chapter,
and should share summary of board deliberation during
community discussion. I’m also happy to see so much energy
in the LCCWG, and interested to see what new models of
chapters and association develop.</div>
<div><br>
Mikel<br>
<p
style="font-size:15px;color:#715ffa;padding-top:15px;margin-top:0">On
Thursday, December 3, 2020, 5:13 AM, Janet Chapman <<a
href="mailto:j.chapman@tanzdevtrust.org"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">j.chapman@tanzdevtrust.org</a>>
wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<div id="m_-8024571936316144612yiv8462052214">
<div>
<div>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Thank
you Heather, I totally agree.. And thank you
for your comments Joost.</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Douglas
and Geoffrey have done so much to build the
OSM community throughout Africa and I don’t
feel they have always been given sufficient
recognition for that by some at OSMF.</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I
also feel that if we want to be a true global
community, we need to ensure we are
sufficiently cognisant of the different
challenges faced in areas outside Europe and
North America..</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Many
other prospective local chapters will be
watching this discussion with interest, and I
fear in some cases, dismay..
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">So
I reiterate I strongly support OSM Uganda’s
applications.</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Best
wishes</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Janet
</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Crowd2Map
Tanzania</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
</span></p>
<div
id="m_-8024571936316144612yiv8462052214yqtfd89718">
<p><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> Heather Leson [mailto:<a
href="mailto:heatherleson@gmail.com"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">heatherleson@gmail.com</a>]
<br clear="none">
<b>Sent:</b> 03 December 2020 10:00<br
clear="none">
<b>To:</b> Douglas Ssebaggala <<a
href="mailto:erunayo@gmail.com"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">erunayo@gmail.com</a>><br
clear="none">
<b>Cc:</b> OSMF Talk <<a
href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a>><br
clear="none">
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Osmf-talk] OSM Uganda
Local Chapter application</span></p>
<p> </p>
<div>
<p>Dears </p>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Thank you again for this discussion</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>To the MapUganda and OSM Uganda teams:
keep on answering. You've been trying to
be a local chapter for so long. Navigating
governance in your country and osmf does
take time. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>To Joost : thank you for all this
transparency and effort.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>I appreciate that OSMF is changing. But I
find it so hard to read some of the
underlaying questions. What if OSMF
actually made it easier for local chapters
and communities to participate more
formally in the project? </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>If we want to support a global project,
there is no cookie cutter way. Some of the
questioning could be miscontrued as
considering a local community as
determental to the project. Now I know
none of you mean that. But consider the
approaches.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Imagine trying to engage in osmf with
this whole exercise as an example. Thanks
to those who called Douglas and Geoffrey. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Good luck. I know that there is a middle
ground.someday. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Heather </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Heather </p>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p>On Wed, 2 Dec 2020, 21:21 Douglas
Ssebaggala, <<a rel="nofollow
noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="mailto:erunayo@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">erunayo@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc
1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<p>Hi Joost,</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Am sure there has been useful and
almost enough discussion on this
thread, am totally fine if the
discussion can continue for a few more
days, but i would like to make some
final comments or clarifications.</p>
</div>
<div>
<ol type="1" start="1">
<li>
"Unfortunately, he doesn't provide
the context for us to understand why
it is of such value."</li>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="1">
<ul type="circle">
<li>
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="http://parliamentwatch.ug/question/on-governments-plans-revise-the-minimum-educational-requirement-for-an-mp/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Thank you
for the research</a> into the
value of having a minimum
requirement, i had provided a
rationale for why it was needed,
and did not want to flood the list
so i shared direct links.</li>
<li>
As the Founder of OSM Uganda, i
was involved 90% in drafting the
constitution, so i can provide
context to most of the objectives
to the creation of MapUganda for
example, working with the OSMF
is implicitly mentioned in <a
rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/2/2f/OSM_Uganda-Constitution_2020.pdf"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Article 3
objective 8</a> and is <a
rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Applications/Uganda#Other_information"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
already happening</a> with OSM
Africa, and other partners.</li>
<li>
The current OSM Uganda board has
some of the <a rel="nofollow
noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="http://mapuganda.org/history.html"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
co-founders</a>, and other very
brilliant <a rel="nofollow
noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="http://mapuganda.org/board.html"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
board</a> members who are
steering the organisation, but
it's a learning process (as with
all of us), and guidance might
always be needed, for example on
another change i have just noticed
on <i>ARTICLE 9: Qualification of
members
</i>to have a board member of <i>at
least of 16 years of age </i><b>yet</b>
in Uganda, and most African
countries, the
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority#Age_18"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">age of
maturity</a> is 18 years,
although am a strong advocate for
Youths, this is something that
would be questionable.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="2">
<li>
As Mikel mentions, he has done
tremendous support to OSM
communities in the (East African)
region for the last 10 years. It
would be good for OSM Uganda to
scale from a small NGO, rather than
being degraded to a small NGO</li>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="2">
<ul type="circle">
<li>
The other operational questions
will be answered by the OSM Uganda
board (in an organised way, as
they had already done): Good
enough Joost has set up a meeting
about this with the OSM Uganda
Board (i had to jump in to clarify
Foundational principles for why
OSM Uganda was created).</li>
<li>
From 2019, I have been mainly a
volunteer on Wikimedia projects,
but also occasionally following
OSM activities, and this
discussion will be good at a point
when OSM Uganda is drafting
possible collaboration with the
Wikimedia Community Usergroup in
Uganda (<a rel="nofollow
noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Uganda/Partnership_with_OpenStreetMap_Uganda"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Comments
welcome</a> on the meta/wiki
page).</li>
<li>
Am sharing this because I know
there might be some people on or
off this list involved with these
two communities e.g in Italy, or
in the
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Transition/Global_Conversations"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
upcoming conversations</a> (feel
free to check out the link) on how
such communities can coordinate
similar efforts in the future.</li>
<li>
There was already a similar talk
about this at <a rel="nofollow
noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="https://wikimedia.se/2019/11/26/humanitarian-openstreetmap-crowdsourcad-oppna-data-ger-underlag-for-battre-beslut/#english"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
Wikimania</a> last year.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="3">
<li>
Since these are my final comments, I
am available if anyone would like to
reach out directly, thank you for
listening, and all the reviews to
this thread. </li>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="3">
<ul type="circle">
<li>
Apologies to anyone who might have
been offended by any of the
comments in the process, and I
hope the discussion has been
insightful. </li>
</ul>
</ol>
<p>A great week, and new year to
everyone, keep safe, and wishing you
good health amidst the COVID-19
pandemic.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Regards, </p>
</div>
<p><br clear="all">
</p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><b><i><span
style="font-size:7.5pt"><a rel="nofollow noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Uganda"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Wikimedian in Uganda</a></span></i></b></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><b><i><span
style="font-size:7.5pt">Ssebaggala Douglas | Skype: douglo.m | Twitter<span
style="color:#888888">:</span></span></i></b><b><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;color:#888888"> </span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:#1155cc"><a
rel="nofollow
noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="https://twitter.com/douglaseru"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><b><span style="color:#1155cc">@douglaseru</span></b></a><b> </b></span>|
<b><i><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">Mob
- Uganda: <a
dir="ltr"
href="tel:+256%20772%20422524"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">+256 772 422524</a></span></i></b></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p>On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 2:56 PM Joost
Schouppe <<a rel="nofollow
noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="mailto:joost@osmfoundation.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">joost@osmfoundation.org</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<p>Hi,<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
One of the key questions that comes
up seems to be: "Is OSM Uganda a
money-making endeavour using
OpenStreetMap, or an OpenStreetMap
endeavour that has found a business
model fit for purpose?"<br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
Craig points in the direction of the
first, which Frederik turns into: <br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
"You see no issues with granting
local chapter status to a commercial
organisation with the main chartered
purpose of providing paid
services?".
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
I think that's a bit of an
overstatement, as the quotes Craig
posted are "merely" about sources of
income, whereas the "main chartered
purposes" are in Article 3 and
especially Article 4, and tell a
story that must sound much more
familiar to Frederik's ears. Article
4 has the mission statement of:
"To have a vibrant OpenStreetMap
community in Uganda, which is
united, organised and growing to
assist, and get involved in National
and global development goals.". I
would say that means you have to
read everything in Article 3 in the
context of that mission, and
everything in article 19 FINANCIAL
PROVISIONS as in support of that
mission.<br clear="none">
Geoffrey himself says they "have
been a community since 2011, and we
got registered in 2017 as a local
non-profit organization in Uganda,
run by the OpenStreetMap community
in Uganda."<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
I intend to have a call with OSM
Uganda about some of these issues.
As well as Craig's comments, I think
Christoph also has a few points that
need clarification:
<br clear="none">
- confusion between OpenStreetMap
Uganda and MapUganda, and how they
presenta themselves at the mapuganda
website<br clear="none">
- lack of data about "pure OSM
activities" (also asked by Mikel)<br
clear="none">
- membership fee (also requested by
Mikel): I can already say that they
mentioned in a chat that they are
considering running a sort of
"active contributor membership"
program themselves. Should be
carefully done though, as their
bylaws have quite high quorum rules<br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
More interesting questions from
Mikel:<br clear="none">
* How many members are there of OSM
Uganda?<br clear="none">
That's an easy one, that info should
always be on our wiki: Member count
189 as of November 2020 (102 male
and 87 female)
<br clear="none">
* Is there some allowance for people
who can't afford the membership fee?<br
clear="none">
* Are there any public minutes of
the Board?<br clear="none">
* Are there any public minutes of
any meetings of the members? What
have they decided on?<br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
I do have some thoughts on this
discussion. Maybe I am overstating
things, but it feels like some
people would like Local Chapters to
be almost a carbon copy of the OSMF.
I personally think OSMF should
reflect the norms of the various
communities around the world, and
should make space for people with
other norms. In that process, both
the local groups and the OSMF itself
can and should change. I think some
of Craig's suggestions should
definitely be considered by OSM
Uganda, while others seem like
unneccesary meddling to me (if
people like their titles, who are we
to judge - why should an LC have to
assume zero paid employees?). I
don't think we should meddle too
much in this, but -if- the OSMF
wants to regulate how exactly the
Local Chapters can provide
themselves with income, then that
should be part of an explicit
policy.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
On the education requierement: this
does sound weird to most of us here,
I suppose. It smells like exclusion:
"you need to be of background X to
matter". But stuff like this should
raise questions, not lead to
conclusions. A quick websearch
turned up both a Ugandan blog post
arguing against the idea, as well as
this bit from the "Commission of
Inquiry to review the provisions of
the 1995 Constitution":<br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
"the commission reported that the
majority of Ugandans supported a
minimum academic qualification, the
reasons being: a representative at
this level must be able to
communicate in the official
language, which is english; a member
of parliament is qualified to be a
minister; she/he should be
reasonably educated to represent the
country in international fora; there
are many Ugandans with university
degrees from which the electorate
can choose; a ‘level secondary
education is a reasonable minimum
because many who have achieved it
can reasonably express themselves.
The majority view was that a’ level
should be maintained as the minimum
academic qualification."<br
clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="http://parliamentwatch.ug/question/on-governments-plans-revise-the-minimum-educational-requirement-for-an-mp/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://parliamentwatch.ug/question/on-governments-plans-revise-the-minimum-educational-requirement-for-an-mp/</a><br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
While this just scratches the
surface (I did not dig deep enough
to be able to value this source) and
is certainly not meant as an
endorsement, it does go to show that
it's a common idea. When chatting
with Geoffrey about this, I didn't
leave with the impression that this
wording was "accidental" in the same
way that Rory has. At most perhaps
"default thinking". We made it clear
that while we understand some of the
reasoning behind the idea, it is too
much of a potential conflict with
our ideas about equal opportunity to
remain. From his e-mail's it is
clear that Douglas Ssebaggala still
supports the scrapped policy.
Unfortunately, he doesn't provide
the context for us to understand why
it is of such value. While I don't
think the discussion here is very
productive, I think it's a good sign
that the group made a majority
decision but that someone from the
minotiy does speak out about the
topic.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
On process: <br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
I think the whole process does need
an overhaul. In my year as
Secretary, I have focused more on
clearing the backlog, than on
process. The good thing is that the
next Secretary will now have the
luxury to think process matters
through more fully. The whole matter
of who to consult when, and what
stage comes before what keeps coming
back. For me, the part before the
consultations start, is about data
collection and spotting any obvious
issues. If we can address them, we
do. Since the OSMF-talk mailing list
can feel like a pack of wolves to
the un-iniciated, I also see it as a
chance to help avoid some of the
turmoil that can occur here. Alas,
imperfect human, imperfect results.
Should we share embarrasing mistakes
with this list? In light of
transparency, sure. I personally
think not all mistakes should be
public - I want local groups to
-want- to be a Local Chapter, and
not be afraid of this part of the
process. We did give it a try to do
OSMF consultation through the wiki,
by putting the application on the
main wiki and inviting comments
there. But that didn't really seem
to work.<br clear="none">
Who should do "the legal review"?
For the period that I was involved
in Board work, the entire process
was always lead by the Secretary.
The community consulations are used
because the Board are few humans,
and these other groups are many
humans. Time and time again, it
turns out that that helps spot
mistakes and improve proposals.<br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
I also notice a pattern where some
ideas are presented as obvious, but
are not outlined in policy. In this
thread for example: "only
well-established groups should
apply". I guess this was part of the
discussion when the Local Chapters
were first envisioned, but I'm not
aware of a rule on this. Such a
rule, if needed, should be quite
lenient, IMHO. I know at least two
groups where half of the motivation
to form an official group was that
they could then become an offficial
Local Chapter. Telling people "sure,
you make a formal organization that
fits the OSMF is great; but you'll
still have to wait several years to
get the seal of approval" would take
the wind out of the sails of people
working on formalizing things. Or is
about year between official founding
and formal recognition enough to be
"well-established"?<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
Finally, a bit directed at Simon.<br
clear="none">
> quote:<br clear="none">
<i>In the past the community review
period was directed at the -local-<br
clear="none">
community so that it could be
gauged if they were happy with
being<br clear="none">
represented by the group running
the proposed LC, not an ersatz
legal<br clear="none">
review and LC criteria check
(naturally that should be done by
the<br clear="none">
LCCWG instead of providing the
board with more opportunity to
moan<br clear="none">
about too much work, but that
particular non-starter has already
been<br clear="none">
discussed).</i><br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
As I said just above, the OSMF
consultation does prove useful in
this way. I suppose Simon knows
this, but for those still reading:
there is always a local as well as
an OSMF consultation. In most cases
these run at the same time, though
for OsGeo Oceania we did a more
extensive and active outreach over a
slightly longer period.<br
clear="none">
<br clear="none">
Why is it "naturally" the LCCWG? If
it were a strictly legal matter (it
is not IMHO, since the policy is so
vague, couldn't it just as well be
LWG? Can't working groups decide on
their own remit? I thought we made
it clear that we did ask them
before, and they said no. It's not
that the Board wants to keep this
job, so as to have an excuse to moan
about workload. I find the first
statement rather arrogant, and the
second quite disrespectful. If your
intent is to demotivate volunteers,
keep it up!</p>
<div>
<p>Yes, being on the Board brings
about a workload that can be
pretty exhausting (though for most
of us not so much because of the
amount of actual work, but rather
the energy required). And of
course, we could just sit back and
only do the bare minimum. We've
chosen to do what we think is
necessary, which will hopefully
pay off in a more vibrant
community taking a load of our
shoulders. For the time being
though, things can be tough. For
one thing, I do hope the Board can
keep being the friendly place it
has become in the last year. There
are still very fundamental
disagreements, that are making
this harder recently. But it is
only by being a place that is nice
to work in, that you can attract
more help. In the LCCWG, we did
see this happen: we've been
building momentum over the past
year, working on a limited number
of projects. The Local Chapters
Congress attracted people from
around the world - around this
time, we attracted five new
members. So we must be doing
something right. One thing we
actively avoided is meeting any
new idea with snarky sarcasm. I
think that does help.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Best,</p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Joost</p>
</div>
<div>
<p>OSMF Board secretary</p>
</div>
</div>
<p>_______________________________________________<br
clear="none">
osmf-talk mailing list<br clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br
clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer"
shape="rect"
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p>_______________________________________________<br
clear="none">
osmf-talk mailing list<br clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br
clear="none">
<a rel="nofollow noreferrer" shape="rect"
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_-8024571936316144612yiv8462052214yqtfd62654">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_-8024571936316144612yqtfd53835">_______________________________________________<br
clear="none">
osmf-talk mailing list<br clear="none">
<a shape="rect"
href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br
clear="none">
<a shape="rect"
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br
clear="none">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>