[Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
me at chrisfleming.org
Wed Aug 24 12:24:11 UTC 2011
On 24/08/2011 11:51, Milo van der Linden wrote:
> At OSGEO, they have some sort of membership pyramid
> It is my opinion that the "flow"
> participant -> member -> charter member -> board
> prevents hostile take overs and provides a perfectly fit
> infrastructure to keep everyone on board and happy.
> Dear board, please read the members area at OSGEO and use it as
> reference for the OSMF.
I don't think the current subscription based model is by any means
perfect, but I can see problems with almost any membership model...
There is a danger here that if the "invited" model is used then there
could be the accusation (and perhaps danger) of OSMF becoming an elite
We have talked about a more contribution based membership model; but
this could be gamed, it's hard to tie edits to real people or easily
stop someone gaining multiple memberships.
I don't know much about OSGeo, but I suspect that the total number of
contributors follows a very different model from that of OSMF?
> 2011/8/24, Frederik Ramm<frederik at remote.org>:
>> On 08/24/2011 08:51 AM, Steve Coast wrote:
>>> I think you have to look at this in the context of the last time a
>>> company paid for its employees to become members. It was not received
>> I remember vaguely.
>> As I said previously, there's nothing in the current rules that forbids
>> this kind of mass joining but at the same time there is a provision that
>> the board has to accept membership applications so they are within their
>> right if they don't; one could even say: If the current rules say that
>> membership applications have to be accepted by the board then that
>> implies that they must act with a certain diligence - otherwise, why
>> would the rules involve the board at all?
>> To all those who strongly criticize the current board action - try to
>> put yourself into their situation. If they had simply rubber-stamped the
>> membership applications and someone dug that out later, after the
>> election - would that not have caused an equal number of complaints?
>> I think we should use this as an example to help us shape the new AoA so
>> that they explicitly say what is ok and what isn't. - Maybe that was the
>> intention in the first place ;)
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
e: me at chrisfleming.org
More information about the osmf-talk