[Osmf-talk] Candidacy: OSMF Board

Pete Masters pedrito1414 at googlemail.com
Thu Nov 23 13:26:30 UTC 2017


I agree with you, Simon. My viewpoint isn't opposed to Rob's!

Anyone should be able to publicly challenge and question candidates - as
equally we are able to challenge the premise of those same questions. If
Sev truly believes that our leaders should have one or ten or a hundred
thousand changesets to their name, that's fine. I don't have to agree and I
can respond as such.

My point is that the language Sev uses is disrespectful, personal and
hurtful. That's not ok in my book.... Firstly, for Heather - no-one should
have to read that. And secondly, because this hostility *discourages* debate
and divides community.

Cheers,

Pete

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:25 PM, joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 2017-11-23 13:42 GMT+01:00 Rob Nickerson <rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com>:
>
>> It's a difficult one because if you stand for one of these two vacancies
>> then you open your self up to challenge - essential for a functioning
>> democracy. On the other hand challenging via the written medium is hard to
>> get right.
>>
>> Thinking about TV interviews of politicians I can imagine presenters
>> putting these same challenges to the candidate. I.e. they seem like
>> reasonable challenges to have.
>>
>
> Well, I haven't seen TV interviews where a journalist says something like
> "you seem to know nothing about health care, isn't it shameless to offer to
> be minister of health". (but maybe I don't watch TV enough?).
>
> This really sets the tone:
>
> > Seeking to join the board of the OSM Foundation with such a high OSM
> profile is really shameless
>
> I am all for challenging candidates, but shaming them goes a bit further
> than that. I'd hate to think that the best candidates for this election are
> not participating because they prefer not to be publicly shamed in this
> way. Sure, you have the right to say things like this here, but I doubt
> very strongly that this kind of tone is good for the project. Just stating
> the facts as you see them, might have led to a discussion about facts. Now
> we're just going to discuss wether or not this kind of talk is OK or not.
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
> <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
>



-- 
*Pete Masters*

*@pedrito1414* <https://twitter.com/TheMissingMaps>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171123/e982522f/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list