[Osmf-talk] a tired narrative

Richard Weait richard at weait.com
Sat Sep 8 20:50:52 UTC 2012

On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Frederik recently wrote
> (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2012-August/001725.html)
> "We are not doing the license change for the glory of the OSMF board."
> I've been offline since this frankly poisonous post, and I still want to
> respond.

I've re-read Frederik's post and I don't see poison.  I see concern
and I see the reason for concern specified clearly.  You quoted above,
a sentence potentially critical of the board, if you believe that the
board took an unwarranted decision in the face of strong technical
counter arguments.

I have no doubt that the board has been the target of unwarranted,
poisonous critique.  There was a lot of bile flung at the LWG by the
"pseudonym psyndicate", as well.  I don't see a similarity between
those, and Frederik's post.  If Frederik's criticism of the board at
the time is poisonous, is your criticism of Frederik also?  I don't
think so.  :-)

> Before I unpack this, I'll acknowledge that it's a moot point.
> ODbL planet has been accounced,
> http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2012/09/06/your-first-odbl-planet/

I don't think that the announcement made at SotM is the same
announcement about which Frederik expressed his concern.  Hard to say,
of course, because many of those involved have been busy at SotM.  I'm
sure we'll learn more of the details in time.

You'll notice in other threads that there is some confusion in the
press and community as to the exact meaning of the announcement made
at SotM.

> And a new Board has been announced for 2012-2013.

Yes.  Mikel, you've served on every board the OSMF has had, if I
remember correctly.  And you even ran again last year when you had
another year in your mandate[1].  Thank you for your service to the
OSMF and community.

> But what I hope for most of all is a functional OSMF, and that's why I'm
> addressing this head on.

I also look forward to an improved OSMF and OSMF board.  I don't think
that previous boards have been non-functional, I do think that
striving for improvement is worthwhile.

Best regards,

[1] There was a question about how many serving board members had to
vacate seats before their three year terms expired, in order to meet
the expectation that 1/3 of the board would be up for election each

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list