[Osmf-talk] Directed Editing Policy
clifford at snowandsnow.us
Tue Nov 21 17:06:18 UTC 2017
Frederik and the OSMF Board,
This policy seems to be trying to fix a communication problem. "In order to
maintain good communications between, and a level playing field for,
individual community members and organised editing groups, the OSM
Foundation has created the following guidelines." Can you explain how it
was determined that we have a communication problem? Is there documentation
of this problem and what other attempts have been made to solve this issue
before the Board decided to draft a policy statement?
Reading down in the proposed policy statement is the requirement for either
training or having trained individuals to review the work.
4. You must ensure that the people you are directing have the training they
need to successfully perform their work in compliance with the rules laid
out below - either through providing that training to them yourself, or by
selecting only participants that already have the necessary skills. You
must tell the people you are directing that the "Duties of the Directee"
(as laid out in the next section) apply to them.
5. If you are running an activity that introduces new mappers to OSM, you
should allocate resources for a "post-event clean up" in which you direct
experienced people to repair any damage that might have been caused.
Note: "Resources" here can mean a time allocation for experienced staff, or
perhaps a commitment of the local community to help; this just means you
cannot let 100 students loose on a city without any plan about what to do
if things go wrong.
How does training in OSM editing help the communications problem this
policy is attempting to address?
Further the policy seems to adding requirements on group mapping that isn't
required of other mappers. One example - responding concerns raised in
changeset comments. Shouldn't we expect responding to be a norm for all
mappers? Shouldn't responding to communications be documented on the wiki
and encouraged to the users when they sign up?
More generally this policy seems to have an ill-defined problem that it is
attempting to regulate. I think the Board needs to start over with defining
the problem and then proceed to problem solving.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:48 AM, Melanie Eckle <melanie.eckle at hotosm.org>
> Dear Frederik and all,
> Thank you for sharing the policy and the discussion.
> We will discuss the policy in the HOT board including Dale´s concerns. We
> are for sure happy to provide our feedback and to join OSMF for further
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
>> Am 21.11.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Helge Fahrnberger:
>> This policy most likely will be ignored by SEO mappers (what else would
>> they do).
>> They may or may not, however currently (sans policy) they are not doing
>> anything that we clearly spell out as not allowed. Further not all SEO
>> companies are fly by night operations and those that are not will not have
>> an issue with following the rules.
>> Yet it could discourage the plethora of constructive and valuable
>> mapping. Activities that we should encourage instead.
>> As Frederik has already pointed out your typical small scale mapping
>> party is unlikely to be effected, for anything larger, creating a wiki page
>> is not going to be a significant burden.
>> osmf-talk mailing listosmf-talk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the osmf-talk