[Osmf-talk] Fwd: Candidacy: OSMF Board

John Crowley bostoncello at gmail.com
Fri Nov 24 19:34:29 UTC 2017


In English, we have a saying: when you have dug yourself into a hole, stop digging.

When I went to my first SotM in Girona in 2010, we lamented the misogyny and antagonism on this mailing list. Perhaps there has been some marginal improvement, but we were still discussing the misogyny and antagonism on this list just last month at SotMUS in Boulder.

If new voices lead to more civil discourse that includes members beyond the EU and US, why would that be so bad?


> On Nov 24, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On Friday 24 November 2017, Kate Chapman wrote:
>> I can't speak for everyone involved in HOT, but I think it is
>> possible that many people long involved in HOT have more global
>> experience, which certainly changes methods and view. [...]
> That is an interesting hypothesis but i do not observe a correlation 
> between the style of communication, problem solving methods etc. of 
> non-HOT people with a vast amount of international experience and 
> people involved in HOT.  It could be (but i have no data supporting 
> that) that for most HOT members their work on HOT (or related 
> humanitarian work for other organizations) is the only or at least the 
> dominating international experience they have which then gives them a 
> fairly specific perspective on international diversity compared to 
> those with international insights with a different background.
>> Who is to say what the native culture is? Since I've "only" been
>> involved in OSM for 9 years at this point am I not part of that
>> culture?
> I am not judging here - i just observe a distinct OSM culture, in 
> particular regarding the style of communication and problem solving 
> approaches that transcends the boundaries between local communities and 
> languages and that i perceive to be distinctly different from what 
> seems to be common in HOT - mostly based on occasionally reading the 
> HOT mailing list and when HOT members participate in discussion on the 
> OSM mailing lists (mostly here and on osm-talk/imports).
> This is probably a bit biased because while i have a fair amount of 
> insight into OSM communications in other languages my insight into the 
> HOT communication style is almost exclusively based on English language 
> communication.
> I think the unifying element of the OSM communication culture is 
> ultimately mapping - and the related process of establishing tagging 
> conventions.  This is also probably what unifies and develops the 
> culture across the language barriers.  You do some mapping at the other 
> side of the world or in a neighboring country or observe someone else's 
> mapping there, have some bumpy communication (due to language barriers) 
> with the local people about tagging and this way create a cultural 
> connection.
> That there is no central authority in that is one of the defining 
> elements of this.  The authority is always the local community and they 
> decide in how far they adjust to the other local communities and this 
> way create a more or less uniform global OSM culture.
>>> If i am right about this you resigning from HOT membership would
>>> indeed not change anything - even if it would be a visible
>>> statement of course.  I don't think many people would brand you as
>>> a 'HOT-gal' forever if they see you engage with the local and
>>> global OSM community as one of them.
>> What does it mean to interact with the global OSM community as a
>> 'HOT-person'? I have attended and organized SotM-US, met with and 
>> spoken about OSM on 5 continents (Americas, Europe, Asia, Africa and
>> Australia in case people are wondering). I'm part of the local
>> community in Portland, Oregon. Though I get the feeling it doesn't
>> matter, besides nobody should have to justify that they are in the
>> 'in crowd'. Does being in the 'in crowd' mean that I send tons of
>> emails on the mailing list? That is the only thing I can really see
>> that would differentiate me. Frankly I find it an ineffective way to
>> communicate.
> I am not sure if i communicated my point well here.  What i wanted to 
> say is that if you feel you are being treated differently because of 
> your history with HOT that for most people is not a permanent 
> unchangeable status.  People doing that will likely change their view 
> of you if they routinely interact with you for some time and realize 
> you are just like any other OSM community member (including the 
> personal quirks everyone has obviously).
> Personally i do not primarily view you as a 'HOT-person' but as an OSMF 
> board member because i rarely observe you in OSM outside the OSMF 
> context and because as you observed i did not really experience you 
> when you were active in HOT.  I do not recall reading any changeset 
> discussions where you wrote something, no diary entry other than OSMF 
> business, no tagging discussions on the OSM wiki or on the tagging 
> mailing list or any activity from you on OSM related software or map 
> design projects i observe.  This does not mean you are not active in 
> any of these - the world of OSM is vast and i see only a small part of 
> it.  And if i was an Oregon local i would probably have interacted with 
> you in the local community.
>> I think of membership by invitation differently. I wonder how many
>> more people would join the OSMF if they were personally invited to
>> join. What if someone came and said "you really care about OSM, we'd
>> love for you to join the OSMF?" I think there are advantages to that
>> method and it allows recruiting people that might never think "oh
>> they meant me!"
> Personally approaching active mappers to join the OSMF would probably be 
> a good idea and could be fairly successful i presume.  But making 
> membership depend on such an invitation would IMO not be.
> Note the big principal difference between the OSMF and HOT is that the 
> OSMF's purpose is to represent the whole OSM community.  Morally all 
> mappers in OSM have the right to be considered by the OSMF in its 
> decisions and if the OSMF stops representing significant parts of the 
> OSM community it would loose its raison d'etre.  To ensure this does 
> not happen a proportional representation of the OSM community in the 
> members would be very important.
> HOT on the other hand does not have such a claim of universality.  They 
> want to support and organize humanitarian mapping but they do not 
> require themselves to represent all humanitarian mapping in OSM.  
> -- 
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list