[Osmf-talk] logo update

Frederik Ramm 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 
agree with.

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 mailing list