<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
I'm going to add something flippant to Richards nice mail:<br>
<br>
Vast resources are spent on saving the elephant and mapping Timbuktu
for the UN Fund for Trees.<br>
<br>
That's nice, it has some value, but we have tons of key people who
only care about these related causes. Consider that the OSMFUS has
essentially done nothing. Nothing, apart from help Jakarta. Or
Haiti. Or anywhere _but_ the USA. The signals this sends out to
thousands of people who want to get involved is very distorted -
"Hey I'm in Ohio and I want to make my map great" "Fuck you, map
Haiti."<br>
<br>
I'm being deliberately shitty here to make the point. I'm perfectly
aware the Haiti stuff was a triumph, that all sorts of good has come
out of all this.<br>
<br>
Those resources and time if spent on OSM... If people turned up to
their board meetings...<br>
<br>
It just feels like the government centric humanitarian agenda is
perverting OSMs core mission. I don't think we want that any more
than cycling maps to take over, or any other subset.<br>
<br>
Steve<br>
<br>
<br>
On 4/27/2011 4:23 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:B36FFDD8-FF47-44A6-AB98-E9977B1423F9@systemeD.net"
type="cite">
<div>Mikel wrote (quoting Muki):<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;
font-size: 12pt;">
<div style="font-family: times new roman,new
york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">
<div style="font-family: times new roman,new
york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">Google made map
maker very easy to use - in few clicks you can start
adding data. OpenStreetMap - despite being aware of
their usability problems since at least 2007, have made
relatively little progress - Where is the Google Map
Maker interface equivalence? Where is the ability of
anyone to start mapping within 2 minutes from wanting to
do so? Where is the deep concern within the community
about the very high number of people who manage to
register to OSM but do not enter any data? Where is the
concern about the aggressive exchanges in forums that
are exclusionary by their very nature? Where is the
discussion about the gender bias? <br>
<br>
Just like with Linux, OSM have an ambivalent culture
which at the same time want people to join while feeling
very proud that it is 'not for everyone' and a certain
level of mastery is required to join in. The lack of a
major sustained effort to make it as easy as Google Map
Maker - especially when there is such an obvious example
out there - lead to the conclusion that within the
'do'-ocracy that OSM is, not enough people think that
it's a top priority. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Certainly I think it's an enormous priority, can sketch out
_exactly_ what I'd like to see, and would love to do something
about it if I had the time.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I can't; because Potlatch takes up all my time. The number of
people actually contributing code that is useful to new editing
users (other than geeks who can take JOSM and run with it) is
vanishingly small: basically, those of us working on P2 and
those working on the main site. That's probably a cabal of five
people or so. In contrast, ask yourself how many people are
working on QA alone for GMM.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A couple of years ago I was sitting next to a well-known
OSMer at a geo event. We were listening to a presentation about
"we've started this great initiative to hear, encourage and help
develop your ideas". He muttered to me that this is entirely the
wrong problem. There's no shortage of great ideas: the shortage
is of people to do them.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It wasn't an OSM-specific presentation, but it's very true of
OSM. About the only thing we do to encourage new developers is,
ironically enough, Google Summer of Code, and that never works.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On a related issue: our community is fucked. It always used
to be what we were proudest of in OSM. For one reason or
another, and I guess a lot of us are culpable, large parts of it
have gone to shit.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>When Muki says "OSM... feels very proud that it is 'not for
everyone'," I count myself out. If someone can tell us that
we're missing a POI or that a road is wrongly named, I want
their contribution. I am personally cross that I haven't had the
time to make the site inviting enough for this.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>_But_ the do-ocracy should still hold true. We welcome your
contribution. Thanks. We welcome your feedback for how to
improve the site. Thanks too. We'll do something about it, if we
think it's a good idea (it probably is) and if we have enough
resources (the current issue). <span class="Apple-style-span"
style="">But you are still just a user.</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style=""><br>
</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="">Somehow (and Muki
touches on this) we have evolved a bizarre culture where every
conspiracy theorist, wacko libertarian nutjob, and
semi-literate moron can post on the mailing lists and expect
to be listened to - and answered. "You own the copyright in
your contributions" has evolved into "...and therefore you run
the entire project". It's crazy. We have eroded the distance
between users and project leaders.</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style=""><br>
</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="">It's not a do-ocracy
if "those who don't" are on the same level as "those who do".</span><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="">I find it difficult
to believe that, on the the mailing lists for Linux kernel or
Drupal or Apache (or whatever), anyone can turn up and expect
the right to unlimited debate with the brains behind the
project. I find it difficult to believe that Linux's
equivalents of, say, Grant or Frederik are expected to endure
the abuse that the nutjobs hurl at these two on the lists.</span> <span
class="Apple-style-span" style="">When "those who do" aren't
valued, fewer people volunteer to "do".</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style=""><br>
</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="">The other side of
this is when "development" (in its widest sense) takes place
without the structure of a do-ocracy. The classic example is
OSM's documentation - aka "welcome! Here's how you contribute
to this map" - which is ghastly. When anyone can contribute on
an equal level, and there's no "maintainer", it becomes
shapeless and unhelpful. Documentation is essential: Wikipedia
has the advantage that everyone's used a word-processor; very
few people have ever used a vector drawing program. Yet we
continue to hobble ourselves.</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>More and more, I wonder if, to fix the website, we have to
first fix the community.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="">cheers</span><br>
</div>
<div>Richard</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
Strategic mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Strategic@openstreetmap.org">Strategic@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/strategic">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/strategic</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>