[Osmf-talk] Draft New Corporate Membership Tiers

Mikel Maron mikel.maron at gmail.com
Fri Apr 29 19:18:17 UTC 2016

> This discussion is probably...
As a Board Member, I've found this discussion helpful. Good job of exploring the topics, gathering perspectives and clarifying what we really mean. I still think a lot of us are talking past each other, and that is frustrating but natural ... and we're getting closer. So all good. > ... concrete positive suggestions what to do instead.  On the other hand at  least for me it feels like the board is ...
Seems like overall, you're saying that the process and intention of this discussion is unclear. The whole thread started off with a request for feedback, and I'm sure this will have an impact on the ideas. There's been a good amount of clarifying things which are not clear in the draft, and I'm sure that will help with updates.

If there are better ways for OSMF to work on things beyond mailing lists, I'd sure love to discuss that in good faith another time and any other process ideas.
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

    On Friday, April 29, 2016 7:47 AM, Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de> wrote:

 On Friday 29 April 2016, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Is it therefore careless to share such a draft early? Would you
> rather have us flesh out everything in detail and share when we have
> lined up a lawyer to contract and we're ready to take a vote?

On the contrary - IMO this should have been discussed publicly from the 

This discussion is probably somewhat frustrating for the board members 
since there have been a lot of critical remarks but relatively little 
concrete positive suggestions what to do instead.  On the other hand at 
least for me it feels like the board is trying hard to defend the 
current draft in its current form and does not really participate in an 
open discussion on how to design a better corporate membership program.

Or in other words: the question is if this is a discussion on developing 
a new corporate membership program or if this serves primarily for 
explaining the program and your motivation to design it this way to the 
membership.  I assume most of the members who spoke up here assumed the 
former although in principle the latter is of course an equaly valid 

Christoph Hormann

osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20160429/364ab728/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list