<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 02.02.2021 um 20:50 schrieb Pete
Masters:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABetw9dHWVqbu5+HKB+ePXZjSXhEpjcjx9kAK4oVEjgZ3gE71w@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">Hi Simon, do you mind clarifying the PS? I'm not
sure what it refers to....
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Assume that for the a project I submit an application that says
something like</p>
<p>... doing X will require 40 hours of my time that I'll charge
that at the bargain rate of $50/hour or whatever. <br>
</p>
<p>Project gets accepted and I can do with the money whatever I
want, for example purchase the new computer that I need to get the
work done and keep it after that.</p>
<p>or I submit for the same project an application that says <br>
</p>
<p>... doing X will require computer hardware that will cost
~$2'000, time is volunteered.<br>
</p>
<p>Project gets accepted and I purchase the computer, but I don't
get to keep it once the project is completed.</p>
<p>The rule that hardware purchased via the grant scheme needs to
handed over to the community was surely made with the best
intentions, but it creates an imho an untenable difference in how
the projects are treated. <br>
</p>
<p>Simon<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABetw9dHWVqbu5+HKB+ePXZjSXhEpjcjx9kAK4oVEjgZ3gE71w@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Cheers,</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Pete</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 2 Feb 2021, 16:02
Simon Poole, <<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch"
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 02.02.2021 um 16:24 schrieb Rory McCann:<br>
> On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 15:44, Simon Poole <<a
href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" target="_blank"
rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">simon@poole.ch</a>>
wrote:<br>
>> Well better late than never, but naturally the damage
has already been<br>
>> done given that it wasn't exactly secret that grants
had gone to groups<br>
>> with close ties to the board.<br>
> Huh? how do you mean “close ties”? OSM is small in some
ways. It wasn't obvious to me at the time of the vote that
there were CoI issues.<br>
<br>
Well to some it was glaringly obvious.<br>
<br>
>> The amazing thing though, is not that there are
people seeking grants<br>
>> which would cause CoIs with board members, but that
such requests were,<br>
>> and continue to be, permitted applications. They
should have never been,<br>
>> I will share the blame in not noticing that
appropriate rules were<br>
>> missing way back, allowed in the first place.<br>
> We're going to require that applicants do the work of
telling us of potentional CoIs with the board so we don't have
to do the work.<br>
> <br>
> Surely if full CoI rules were followed it shouldn't
matter if someone close applies, because no-one close will
vote. right? In theory it would be the same as if the relevant
board member wasn't on the board.<br>
<br>
I would agree if we are talking about normal contracts etc.,
however the <br>
micro-grants scheme is a competitive bidding process in which
the <br>
applicants are competing with each other and clearly stricter
rules, <br>
providing a level playing field, should apply. As everywhere
else that I <br>
know of for similar competitions.<br>
<br>
So, no close relatives in the micro-grant committee, OSMF
"contractors" <br>
and board, and no involvement of individuals of those three
groups in <br>
the applicants project. We are not just talking about direct
CoIs here, <br>
close links to all three groups will have the potential to
influence the <br>
decisions, if not actually, so definitely in appearance.<br>
<br>
Simon<br>
<br>
PS: if the rules get changed and if there is a next time:
could the the <br>
ridiculous unequal treatment of people that sold their time
and got to <br>
keep the funds vs. those that didn't charge for their time be
addressed?<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
osmf-talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"
rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>