[Osmf-talk] What's all this stuff about HOT, and how is it relevant for OSMF.

martin at noblecourt.eu martin at noblecourt.eu
Mon Dec 4 10:03:11 UTC 2017


I think having a comprehensive description of your side of the story 
would indeed be very useful. Séverin made the effort to describe his 
point of view, it would be fair that yours would be developed publicly 
since you were nominally criticized there.
I understand it must be tiresome for parties involved to relive again 
and again the same conflict, however I'm thinking of the many OSMF 
members that weren't HOT voting members when this all happened 
(including me) on for whom all we get is secondary explanations. This 
would also as you mentioned help settle this debate that seem to restart 
here and there regularly and disturb various OSM communities.
Let's not forget a majority (I have no numbers but I would expect it is 
a rather large majority) wasn't directly involved in this conflict and 
has no will to see it deter the quality of the interactions in the 
broader OSM ecosystem.

Best regards.


On 04/12/2017 04:21, Mikel Maron wrote:
> Hey everybody
> A few notes, on all this discussion of HOT, and what’s actually
> relevant from that for the OSMF.
> I understand that this recent flurry of emails about HOT are pretty
> confusing. We all had the same audacious dream to bring OpenStreetMap
> to the humanitarian world, but we believed in different ways to
> accomplish it. Whenever there has been a HOT election over the past
> four years, we’ve had these arguments within HOT. It’s impossible
> for me to discuss adequately without providing a tremendous amount of
> missing context in years of history in HOT -- going all the way back
> to when I first started developing the idea of OSM for disaster
> response in 2005 (http://brainoff.com/weblog/2005/12/22/16 [1]). For
> those that are interested, and to hopefully head off repeating these
> discussions again in the future, I am working on writing up a full
> public history.
> For now, sufficient to say, Nicolas and Severin are upset that HOT did
> not take the direction they wanted. Both of them were employed by HOT
> and served on the Board. As an organization with partnerships and
> contracts with humanitarian organizations, and that works closely with
> responders amidst disaster activations, I felt and still strongly feel
> HOT required clear lines of accountability for some key roles and
> responsibilities within the bigger open community. This is standard
> for any organization operating in the humanitarian field at anything
> beyond small scale, and really most any organization anywhere in the
> world.
> This is settled within HOT. I think it is unfortunate that the largely
> irrelevant fight continues in OSMF. There is no one standing in the
> way of their efforts with Projet EOF, which has had good results, and
> they can operate however they see fit. There is no monopoly of working
> with OSM in disasters and preparedness, and Nicolas and Severin would
> find support for their work from the broader community -- including
> from me. HOT is just one of many interrelated organizations and
> initiatives working to better the world within the OSM community.
> So what about this is relevant for OSMF?
> The main point of bringing up HOT seems to imply that the HOT Code of
> Conduct led to silencing over disagreements, and that the same is a
> risk for OSMF. However, HOT developed its code after the OSMF, and the
> starting point as we developed that policy was the OSMF very own
> etiquette and moderation rules. Etiquette rules have not been used
> unfairly in OSMF. And neither have they in HOT. A few are
> understandably upset about that HOT was not shaped in their vision,
> but that’s a separate issue from the Code of Conduct.
> The OSM Foundation serves a much different purpose and is very
> different kind of organization than HOT. OSMF is the supporting legal
> entity at the nexus of the complex and multifaceted OSM community.
> There are hundreds of individual members, tens of thousands of mappers
> and organizers, local groups in various states of organization to very
> informal meetups to formal Local Chapters in their own right,
> developers companies and institutions working within OSM some of which
> are Corporate Members. In short, OSMF helps hold the enabling
> environment for an incredibly diverse array of interests to work
> together in the map. It’s pretty unprecedented, and very different
> from HOT.
> -Mikel
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://brainoff.com/weblog/2005/12/22/16
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list