Hi Richard,<br><br>There are a couple of hundred thousand registered members of OSM, and much effort has gone into contacting those who are genuinely out of touch. There are around 25 Australian contributors who have declined, and all of them are fairly significant contributors. They went to the same site to decline which had links to the information that the people who accepted had. I genuinely would have believed that those 25 people had access to all the information that was available, and therefore thought extra direct communication on this subject wasn't wanted by them. I apologise if that wasn't the case with you.<br>
<br>I'd be last to say that OSMF board and LWG has done everything right as part of this licence change. Even with making decisions over the past couple of weeks to do with the changeover, I wouldn't say they have learned too many lessons. But these guys are volunteer mappers, hackers, etc, not necessarily PR experts or communications specialists. They have day jobs, and maybe even real lives. Dealing with remote communities and disparate opinions is hard. Even full time PR departments for large corporations stuff this up on a regular basis. There is no doubt in my mind that ultimately their main motivation is having a cool map that people can use in cool ways. Just like me.<br>
<br>I accept a person of principle can decline. I can see the reasons for doing it.<br><br>However, it is also an option for them to now say that the point is now made.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Ian.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On 31 March 2012 13:59, Richard Colless <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:firefly@ar.com.au" target="_blank">firefly@ar.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I did decline the new terms. And I was contacted, as I said, just
once, by someone trying to persuade me to change my mind. My point
was that OSM never contacted me to say that a licence change was
being considered. That is hardly the right way to go about making a
major change to the system.<br>
<br>
I also take issue with this statement:<br>
<pre>Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build
data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our
projects.
</pre>
Don't try blaming decliners for the hurt to other mappers. If anyone
built up on my edits, and their work gets deleted as a result, blame
OSM, not the members who declined.<span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Richard</font></span><div><div><br>
<br>
<br>
On 31/03/2012 12:36 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">Hi Richard,<br>
<br>
Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been
pursued, sure. But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried
to keep the knowledge of the licence change quiet. I think a fair
few people have been trying to get in touch with as many people as
possible.<br>
<br>
I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors
individually who haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't
edited for a while. These are the people who may not be engaged
with the community any longer, and who actually may not know about
the licence change. Did you decline the licence change? Because
if you did, I'd have assumed that you knew about it and were aware
of the discussion, and therefore didn't need to be contacted.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Ian.<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:firefly@ar.com.au" target="_blank">firefly@ar.com.au</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.<br>
<br>
Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received
ONE communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me
to reconsider. If not for the discussion of the forum, I would
not have even known about the licence change. AI think that
shows how much OSM cares about keeping contributors informed
about changes.<br>
<br>
Richard<br>
<br>
On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant Slater<<a href="mailto:openstreetmap@firefishy.com" target="_blank">openstreetmap@firefishy.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Australian Decliners,<br>
<br>
As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's
sysadmin team I<br>
kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status.
Time is<br>
about to run out.<br>
</blockquote>
You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as
we were<br>
insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you
come begging<br>
for us to reconsider.<br>
<br>
Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered,
after all you<br>
are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you
are<br>
choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to
call the<br>
whole thing off.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>