[Osmf-talk] should OSMF AGM include time for discussion debate?
richard at systemeD.net
Tue Sep 13 09:59:06 UTC 2011
Kai Krueger wrote:
> Before thinking about hiring staff, it seems you would first need to
> identify where exactly the problems are, what an ideal solution to those
> problems would look like and if paid staff could actually provide such a
Hiring staff is not something you do for the sake of it. It's something
that you do only if you've identified a need that isn't being fulfilled.
This discussion is entirely back-to-front: no-one's yet said what it is
we're doing (or should be doing) that we need hired staff for.
Generally we would hire staff for day-to-day work which is essential to
the functioning of OSM and which is outwith what volunteers want to do.
But no-one has yet demonstrated that there is enough work for, say, an
office administrator; nor that we have the capability to line manage them;
nor that we could fund them.
The one area where it could, in theory, be relevant in the next x months
is a, possibly part-time, paid sysadmin - call it the "hire Grant" option
;) . Keeping the OSM servers going despite the pressures of a growing
userbase, and increasingly aggressive scrapers, is the most demanding job
in OSM today.
But before considering that we would need a recommendation from OWG that
they would consider it helpful (which they very well might not); and a
policy decision by the Board as to the current elephant in the room, which
is the extent to which OSMF is prepared to cater for third-party services
on its servers.
More information about the osmf-talk