[Osmf-talk] Losing faith

Steve Coast steve at asklater.com
Wed Jan 16 19:44:51 UTC 2013

On Jan 16, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Rich <richlv at nakts.net> wrote:

> On 2013-01-16 17:13, Steve Coast wrote:
>> That is not it, Fred. I'm not asking for a new authority or access, I've been asking to be reinstated for access which was taken away. Access three months ago you didn't object to when asked.
> if we are talking about not keeping project as one found it, building their own reality, why not join cwg ?
> okok, that's much harder now psychologically and all that... but, as far as i understand, cwg isn't a single person, and all communication is discussed beforehand.
> so is there a list of persons who should get direct access to communication channels even if they do not want to participate in cwg ?

Hi Rich

Sure, that might be a reasonable approach. But it didn't quite happen that way.

The CWG on the whole has been doing a great job with low resources. Your assumption is something like this: Someone emailed me and said "hey steve you can have access if you come help out CWG", which didn't happen. I guess that might be implicit in the *very recent* decision for CWG to own it. But then, I owned opengeodata.org (literally owned it) for a long time while CWG members were posting there. And, of course, I gave up that domain too.

All the reasons I've seen about access to twitter, like this one, are all fairly reasonable. Policy, clear messaging, CWG ownership, all the rest… are all reasonable and good. But that's not the point, the point is all of these were brought up *after* the access was taken away to explain it. As far as I know, the fact is that Ivan made a tweet. That's the ultimate reason that I haven't had access for three months.

Again, compare and contrast the ease with which I give something to OSMF (like opengeodata.org) with how hard it is to do something I was already doing (tweeting). It's this difference in standards that confuses me, but maybe I misunderstand something.

Happily I think this might all be resolved at some point soon with some kind of group twitter abstraction web service, or something, but I don't know that for a fact yet.


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list