[Osmf-talk] February OSMF Board Meeting

[Andy Robinson (blackadder)]

Frederik

You raise some valid points but perhaps are prejudging what we wanted to set
up. We know from plenty of anecdotal evidence that the project has a
relatively high barrier to entry, whether it's because of navigation or
editing or whatever is not entirely understood, but there is enough
suggestion and certainly enough perception between some of us that it could
and should be better.

The purpose of setting up a working group in the first instance is to look
at this in more detail, ie define better whether there is a problem and what
areas perhaps should be focused upon. The task on the working group is not
to design a new front page, though that might be one thing in the future
that the working group encourages to happen. We have a number of different
front pages scattered around at the moment on the various country websites
and local focus groups, these offer a different entry to the project and
perhaps some of these are doing a better job than the OSM front page, I
don't know.

I'm also conscious that our user statistics show a continual rise in user
signups but a possible negative trend in contribution (have a look at the
updated graphical stats I uploaded to the wiki last night). Now this may be
just due to the cold European winter but I do wonder why it is that so many
sign up for an account but relatively few do anything with it.

Steve has been set the task of suggesting an initial limited remit which we
can discuss. Then we will be asking for those interested in working on the
remit as part of the working group. Let's give the process a little time and
see what transpires, nothing is about to change or even be proposed to be
changed without strong support.

Cheers

Andy


>-----Original Message-----
>From: osmf-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:osmf-talk-
>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Frederik Ramm
>Sent: 26 February 2010 9:31 AM
>To: Mike Collinson
>Cc: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Osmf-talk] February OSMF Board Meeting
>
>Mike,
>
>Mike Collinson wrote:
>> I've been asked to draw attention to one item. We feel that we should
>> set up a Working Group to somehow help reach a community consensus on
>> how OpenStreetMap's flagship front-page at
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org should be evolved.
>
>Do what you must, but my opinion is that at this time the OSM front page
>should be none of OSMF's business.
>
>Anyone who is unhappy with the main page can create suggestions or work
>with those who maintain the page; as it has always been done in OSM for
>everything.
>
>I could imagine circumstances where OSMF involvement might be called
>for; if for example the main page had been abandoned by the community,
>or hijacked by a few people, shutting out the community and ignoring
>their input. But neither is the case.
>
>By setting up a "working group" you would start introducing the much
>derided "Wiki Fiddlers" situation to other areas of the project. Anyone
>with sufficient coding or design skills can get involved with the front
>page right away and does not need a working group for that. Your working
>group would only serve to collect voices of people who cannot, or will
>not, do something themselves - the "someone (but not me) should do
>something" faction. This is completely contradicting the current OSM
>culture where either you get something done or you leave it alone.
>
>I also fear that whatever the outcome of such a "working group", people
>would tend to respect that too much, leading to stagnation: "Can we
>change this on the front page?" - "Sorry pal, you've got to raise this
>matter with the working group, they spent 5 days discussing about how
>big the donation box should be and we cannot simply change it now...".
>
>I think the issue of "OSM front page needs better graphic layout" should
>never have gotten on the agenda in the first place. Has the OSMF board
>spent any thought on the issues I highlighted above and decided to
>create a working group nevertheless, or have all these implications been
>overlooked/ignored?
>
>It is always easy to say "we need to evolve something". It sounds like
>progress, doesn't it. But make no mistake - by taking the wrong matters
>into your hands you might actually hurt the community more than you help.
>
>You say "we want to support not control", but then you speak of
>"defining a direction that most of us can be happy with". This is new to
>OSM; those who define a direction have, until now, always been those who
>do the work. It seems to me that you want to take this power away from
>them (because otherwise you would just leave things as they are). This
>is likely to disenfranchise them and you'll find yourselves having to
>manage what until now worked without management. You will create more
>work for you, and might even have to enlist paid work.
>
>Are you really sure you want this? Have you thought this through? I
>think you are setting a dangerous precedent.
>
>Bye
>Frederik
>
>_______________________________________________
>osmf-talk mailing list
>osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2710 - Release Date: 02/25/10
>19:57:00