[HOT] knight civic media session

[alyssa wright]

While I'm not sure I agree with all your conclusions -- as I generally
don't believe people are greedy and ignorant because they choose a
different path than I do (Go figure. I'm funny like that) -- you touch upon
good questions of participation.  Who participates in citizen data
collection? Why? Who has access? What are the biases? This actually
dovetails nicely with Jeff's points about framing the questions and
interpreting the data.  Who is the community in a community driven process.
 Who is the "citizen" in citizen data collection.  And why do I always come
back to the same question...

Thanks,
Alyssa.


On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 12:11 PM, alyssa wright <alyssapwright at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> If time or bathroom break permits -- I humbly request your thoughts on
>> what you see as the most
>> significant/interesting/exciting/provoking/scandalous gap in citizen data
>> collection.
>>
>
> Scandalous?  I find it scandalous that some people consume citizen-data
> without also contributing to it.
>
> In the OpenStreetMap context, some people use OpenStreetMap data, consume
> it, yet they don't contribute by mapping their own local neighbourhood.  It
> seems to me that those consumers are, at best, ignorant and, at worst,
> greedy.
>
> They are ignorant, in that they can't possibly have a full understanding
> of the nuanced local-expert-generated data (and the OpenStreetMap tools and
> processes) that they are consuming if they haven't taken the steps to
> contribute as a peer-local-expert.  Their ignorance limits their potential
> to benefit from the data they consume because their understanding is
> limited.
>
> They are greedy if they've made a conscious choice to prevent others from
> benefiting from their local knowledge while at the same time they consume
> the equivalent expertise from the others.
>
> Both groups have presented reasoning behind their actions such as "It's
> too hard" and "I don't have the time" and "my area is already mapped."
>
> You might find this "thought provoking" or "unfortunate" rather than
> "scandalous".
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20130623/c6191e67/attachment.html>