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

[Mikel Maron]

> I think having a comprehensive description of your side of the story
would indeed be very useful.

Thanks. It's going to take some work! To start, I do put together a history
from 2005 to the start of the Haiti response in 2010

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZyLZpz5XBA
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team/History

Next would be to look at 2010 - 2013, when HOT registered an organization
and formalized, and began to engage with the requirements to run field
operations.

-Mikel

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 5:03 AM, <martin at noblecourt.eu> wrote:

> Mikel,
>
> 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.
>
> Martin
>
> 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
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171204/c9558d2f/attachment.html>