[OSM-legal-talk] License Cut-over and critical mass

[Kai Krueger]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 
> Secondly, I think Richard Weait found good words for this at SOTM: 
> Nobody in OSMF or the license working group wants to hurt OSM. They are 
> all mappers, they all want the project to prosper. They will not take a 
> decision that is bad for the project. 

No doubt, the people involved are incredibly enthusiastic about OSM and
again no doubt have the best of OSM at hart. I am also fortunate enough to
know at least two of the people involved personally and thus have big trust
in them. However, they are only a few people and thus can't reflect the
broadness of the community and particularly they are only humans. Humans
that are emotionally attached to a positive outcome. (Given they spent a
huge amount of very dedicated time over the last two years working towards
this they must be emotionally attached to the outcome). Not the best
combination to produce unbiased decisions after you know the results. E.g.
what will prevent data loss in  London not to be treated more importantly
than data loss lets say in Lithuania? Putting a strong framework in place
beforehand on the other hand helps reducing these biases, as you don't yet
know the result and thus can't (subconsciously) bias your self. So you have
to "decide" on the basis of facts and and best estimates of the outcome,
which hopefully ends up being a much more rational process and thus in the
better interest of the project. And thus more people feel comfortable with
the process and thus increasing the chances of this important process to go
through successfully.

Kai

-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/License-Cut-over-and-critical-mass-tp5279719p5287057.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.