[Osmf-talk] logo update
frederik at remote.org
Mon Dec 19 13:39:10 UTC 2011
On 12/19/2011 01:57 PM, SteveCoast wrote:
> Yes, and they do. Id prefer them to use osm. I'm not sure what your point is.
My point is that you're in the process of belittling and discounting
everything that *I* hold dear about OSM. To me, the important bits about
OSM is that we are not "just maps", we are a community of equals who
together make something that is free and open, data everyone can use,
open source software that everyone can simply install and use - THESE
are the points that I find important about OSM.
What you are doing here - with "you" I mean yourself and, from reading
the minutes of the last OSMF F2F meeting, at least some similar-minded
OSMF board members - is, you start out with the premise that you outline
above: "I'd prefer that [the masses] use OSM." - From this follows
automatically that we have to become like a big mass market map
provider, we have to pour resources into ease of use, we have to make
sure we have a well-armed communication team and if at all possible an
army of drones on Twitter & Co who make sure we are "seen".
Mailing lists are ugly cupboards of times long gone, where ugly
dissenting community members can spray their poison. The fact that our
data comes under a free and open license - somthing that all of us are
spending a terrible amount of blood sweat & tears with right now -
should best not be mentioned in the first two paragraphs of anything
about OpenStreetMap because, hey, the masses would just be confused by
that, right? And anyway, Open Source is overrated (and a member of SWG
has only recently said that maybe "our software is open source" should
not be among OSM's core principles because who knows what the future holds).
By trying to be a whore to the mass market, you are at the same time
pissing on what I perceive to be the core strengths and values of the
project. All that I hold dear about OSM is suddenly something that
should not be mentioned upfront because it might confuse the casual
Google user whom we want to win over. Everything that I find important
about OSM is discounted by you as something that would only appeal to a
few nerdy "ultra techinical map geeks".
This is not something that manifests itself in a logo - we all know it
is near impossible to illustrate a concept like "open data" in a logo.
But the words you choose, your attitude seems to be "let's do whatever
it takes to make people use OSM" and this is just not something that I
If someone is perfectly happy with Google, then let them continue to use
Google. We don't have to compete with Google on their level. There are
things that are *unique* to OSM and it is those that make us
interesting. Those who are not interested in the points that make us
special, but who are looking for "just a map" - they may use OSM if they
want, but we shouldn't go out of our way to cater for them.
But this is exactly what you (=Steve+OSMF board) are doing - trying to
somehow make OSM into "just a map" for the mass market. I understand
what your point is, but I don't understand why.
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
More information about the osmf-talk