arruda.k at gmail.com
Mon Oct 27 23:52:33 UTC 2014
I've recently joined OSMF (just two weeks ago) and was absolutely stunned
by the email reflector conversation. The impression it gives of OSMF is
abysmal. In all my years working with standards/consortium bodies, I have
never seen something like this on the general reflector.
OSMF is growing quickly as I understand, so perhaps some thought should be
given to what conversations new members are exposed to without discretion.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Martijn van Exel <m at rtijn.org> wrote:
> I am just so mystified by these personal attacks and disappointed to see
> the conversation spin out of control like this, especially when fuelled by
> folks who have otherwise done great things for this project. If you have a
> personal score to settle with Steve (or anyone for that matter), we all
> would be better off if you would refrain from piggybacking your gripes onto
> what was a pretty civil discussion.
> Get some rest.
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Harry Wood <mail at harrywood.co.uk> wrote:
>> To be fair to Steve, he is a bit less antagonistic when you meet him in
>> person, but who isn't? I agree with Sarah Hoffmann's description of him
>> > Steve has a long history of being impossible to discuss with and of
>> > personally insulting pretty much anybody who disagrees with him.
>> > He has managed to wear out pretty much anybody who is a bit more deeply
>> > involved in the project
>> So to my mind it's very bad news when Steve announces he wants to be more
>> involved again. Simon Poole clearly feels the same. What a shame.
>> When Steve announced "MapClub" and "OSMPlus", my thought was that they're
>> interesting ideas, and if they came from anyone else I would've supported
>> them, but having new parts of OpenStreetMap with Steve at the helm is
>> really the last thing we need.
>> They were also problematic from a "competition" point of view, but I
>> think Kai raises an interesting point, that complaining about this
>> competition is a bit at odds with the "keep OSMF small and lean" viewpoint.
>> I subscribe to that viewpoint. Hiring lots of people and growing OSMF
>> doesn't need to be the goal. But we need to be clear about what that means
>> when it comes to "sister" organisations. It surely means they should be
>> encouraged. It means we should try to solve more OSM problems, build more
>> structure, and move more money around outside of the OSMF. Personally I
>> think we should also have agreements in place which cement OSMF as a
>> relevant central organisation with secure funding. But that's a complicated
>> issue which the board needs to work on.
>> ...and all the while the chairman emeritus of the OSMF will "try new
>> things" when we least expect it.
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> Martijn van Exel
> skype: mvexel
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
arruda.k at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the osmf-talk