[HOT] [Osmf-talk] [hotosm-membership] Re: Code of Conduct Reminder

Dale Kunce dale.kunce at gmail.com
Fri Dec 15 19:41:27 UTC 2017

Saying things like "x is childish" is not in keeping with good manners.

I think the larger point is that this space is not "gentle." We clearly
need a CoC or at the very least to enforce the rules we (OSM) already have
in place. OSM is not so special from every other internet community. Most
software projects, data projects, and even media companies have open CoC
and expectations for how you behave in there space. OSM is not unique, we
need to set clear expectations about how to act in this space.

Is it so hard for people to be nice to one another? I think it behoves
everyone in this community to make the affirmation of being nice to one
another the same way we all made the commitment to the ODBL. I think it
behoves us all to call out bad behavior when we see it. Keep others honest
and on topic not through enforcing a CoC but through the accepting the
rules outlined in the CoC or etiquette guidelines.

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Rafael Avila Coya <ravilacoya at gmail.com>

> Hi, Pete:
> Yes, I forgot to say my opinion about the user who said he was
> unsubscribing.
> In my opinion, it's childish to quit an open forum, where anyone can
> subscribe, just because somebody says something you don't like. Specially
> when you see already some people telling you that no one can control what
> others have to say.
> If it was me, I would say it politely, like "I think not having a tool to
> create squared buildings in iD is a pity, because if we had, more squared
> buildings would be mapped". But what I, you or Dale think about politeness
> is something that depend on many factors, the most important of them
> cultural. Believe me when I tell you that I didn't find it unpolite, and it
> passed unadverted to me.
> We, the overall OSM community, are very gentle and pacific in general, so
> we can govern ourselves without the need of any CoC. All this thread tells
> me very clear how negative a CoC in OSM lists would be.
> Are we confortable with that? We can tell him things similar to those that
> others said already to him, in the way "what one person says, whether you
> don't like it, is what one person says, but not what the rest thinks. And
> maybe he wasn't meaning that he hates you, but he hates that you iD devs
> don't have a building tool like JOSM". There are ways to say the same
> better and more clear. But what I am clearly against is to put him under
> the foot of a CoC. Only the name, CoC, scares me a lot.
> I hope I make me more clear now.
> Cheers,
> Rafael.
> On 15/12/17 19:39, Pete Masters wrote:
>> Hi Rafael, I see your point about the CoC and ownership of the list. But
>> that was only the third paragraph of Dale's email.
>> The fact remains that a person was told they are one of a hated group of
>> people and left the list. It's a loss. Are we comfortable with that? Is it
>> just the way it is and everyone has to live with it?
>> Personally, I am not comfortable with it and welcome further discussion.
>> Cheers,
>> Pete
>> On 15 Dec 2017 18:24, "Rafael Avila Coya" <ravilacoya at gmail.com <mailto:
>> ravilacoya at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     Hi, Dan:
>>     The thing here is that hot at openstreetmap.org
>>     <mailto:hot at openstreetmap.org> is, as far as I know, an OSM mailing
>>     list, not HOT US inc.'s. I would find it weard that another OSM
>>     mailing list was governed by the Red Cross, and that talk-es was
>>     governed by the Spanish Government, for example.
>>     Cheers,
>>     Rafael.
>>     On 15/12/17 19:11, Dan S wrote:
>>         Hi
>>         It does seem to me that more clarity would be good here, i.e.
>>         slightly
>>         disentangling the lines of accountability regarding the hot@
>> mailing
>>         list.
>>         Mikel's response has logical sense, but it's probably not clear
>>         to the
>>         average participant in the hot@ mailing list whether they are
>>         automatically made a part of the HOT community. Whether the best
>>         clarification is to have two mailing lists, or for the info page
>>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>> to make clear
>>         whether
>>         it is in general governed by HOT's rules, I don't know.
>>         Best
>>         Dan
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     HOT mailing list
>>     HOT at openstreetmap.org <mailto:HOT at openstreetmap.org>
>>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>     <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

sent from my mobile device

Dale Kunce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20171215/f90820db/attachment.html>

More information about the HOT mailing list