[Osmf-talk] Membership applications
oliver.kuehn at skobbler.com
Thu Aug 25 11:29:27 UTC 2011
there are few statements going around that I really don't like.
Misused voting power and hostile takeovers as described in the recent
mail by Alessandro needs to be avoided. This is why Henk a co are
leading the initiative to adjust the Article of Association. Everybody
seems to need to make statements here but there are just three people
working on a regular basis meeting to improve the AoA.
Dear members, stop commenting and giving advice that will vanish in the
air. Go and become an active working group member to improve things on a
Large organizations are not evil per se! There are large organizations
out there that are admired by many, many people while other large
organization are just known for the misuse of power or bureaucracy.
Dear members, stop making generalisations such as large is evil. Go and
apply for a board seat or become an active member of a working group and
make the OpenStreetMap Foundation an organization that you are proud of!
Lead the discussions to make the trade-offs that are appropriate for the
specifics of the OpenStreetMap Foundation.
Dear members, if you have the impression that you know better than then
please become active yourself and stop complaining as an outsider!
I am looking forward to see many of you talented guys on the candidates
list for the open board vacancies or as new members of the working groups.
Am 25.08.2011 09:52, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
> On 08/25/11 02:00, SteveC wrote:
>> On 8/24/2011 4:17 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>> At least here in Germany, the Wikimedia Foundation does not have a
>>> reputation of good governance, and does not enjoy a lot of trust.
>> Why is that, and how can we avoid it?
> I'm not a Wikimedia insider myself and only know stuff that was widely
> reported. In 2010, the German foundation created a special working group
> (the "AG Verantwortungsstruktur" dealing with things somewhere in
> between our Strategic and AoA working groups) which went on to install a
> second legal body (a so-called gGmbH in addition to the existing
> so-called e.V.) under a shroud of secrecy which caused a lot of bad
> press and made some high-ranking people resign in protest. Only last
> month, a board member quit Wikimedia claiming she could not do her job
> because the treasurer (another board member) was holding back important
> information. The chairman of the board was publicly attacked for spying
> on a working group tasked with distributing a EUR 200k project budget,
> leading the the resignation in protest of the chairwoman of that working
> group and a legal investigation into whether he was breaching data
> protection law.
> And this is only what transpired publicly (sources, in German, e.g.
> http://www.kanzleikompa.de/2011/07/19/rucktritte-bei-wikimedia-e-v/, but
> reports have also been in the mainstream media e.g. Der Spiegel; since
> the general public does not distinguish between Wikipedia-the-project
> and Wikimedia-the-foundation this of course reflected badly on Wikipedia
> even though 99.9% of Wikipedians are totally uninterested).
> What can we do to avoid it?
> Call me a cynic, but from my (limited) experience with other
> not-for-profits and I tend to thinkg that the amount of fear, hate,
> mistrust, and general bad karma is proportional to the size and budget
> of the organisation.
> If we manage to keep OSMF small and relatively unimportant, then we'll
> avoid problems like those. If we aim at 10k members, a yearly budget in
> the six figures, and full-time staff, then we *will* have these problems
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the osmf-talk