[Osmf-talk] OSMF Articles of Association - Discussion on Revision for 2013 AGM
tom at acrewoods.net
Fri Apr 19 08:22:59 UTC 2013
On 18 April 2013 23:55, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> On 19.04.2013 00:35, Steve Coast wrote:
>> Personally, for privacy reasons I disagree. My belief is that opt outs
>> should exist in some way, for at least some data. For example, employees
>> at major map companies may wish to keep their membership private from
>> their employer.
> That is a valid argument - some people might also want to keep their
> membership private from the dictatorship they live in.
> However I think that we have to weigh and balance goals here. What is more
> important: Everyone's ability to convince themselves that nothing fishy is
> going on (with the potential downside of some people not being able to join
> for privacy reasons) - or everyone's right to join (with the downside of
> much reduced transparency)?
> I think that "if you want to remain anoymous, you can be a mapper but not
> a member" is an acceptable price to pay for transparency.
I quite agree. I can't see how somebody can hope to meaningfully
participate in a membership company anonymously, but I am quite happy for
people to do so as contributors to the database, code, etc. I fully support
the proposal that all members' names and email addresses should be made
available to all other members.
The idea that people might worry if their employer found out they were a
member of OSMF makes me think some countries need better labour laws!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the osmf-talk