[Osmf-talk] Paying Board/WG was: Standing for board election

Heather Leson heatherleson at gmail.com
Sun Nov 26 16:40:35 UTC 2017


Simon - we work on open principles. Yes, it is true that I draw on my
experience and respect for open source networks. Really I just want us to
research and have a strategy instead of going back/forth on emails. Tell
you what - meet me half way in Switzerland for coffee, we can record the
answers/discussion to all your questions. No disrespect but between you,
Christoph and others - I have spent hours answering them because I am
trying to meet you half way. If not open source, then at least 'open'

Yves, you are absolutely correct. I have a background in community
management so I do lean towards seeing that as a potential solution. But, I
stand corrected- strategy first, then paying etc. It is clear that if we
spent half the time on a productive document planning rather than going
back/forth on emails, we might be further head.


Heather Leson
heatherleson at gmail.com
Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
Blog: textontechs.com

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Yves <yvecai at gmail.com> wrote:

> If you "hire someone who can consult and work with the global community"
> you have at least already decided to pay a community manager :)
> Yves
> Le 26 novembre 2017 16:56:22 GMT+01:00, Heather Leson <
> heatherleson at gmail.com> a écrit :
>> Dear Colleagues, I answered this question on the wiki.
>> Paying staff for core needs of OSMF is a priority over a paid board.
>> First, we need the research and structures to support that pathway. It will
>> take time, but the risk of not investigating is the current state. If I had
>> my dithers, I would beg for us to invest in community managers but without
>> fundraisers or product leads, we would need to plan first. We are not the
>> first OS community to ask these questions. Thus, I recommend that we do our
>> homework, write a plan, hire someone who can consult and work with the
>> global community to negotiate and implement the next steps.
>> heather
>> Heather Leson
>> heatherleson at gmail.com
>> Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
>> Blog: textontechs.com
>> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de>
>> wrote:
>>> On Sunday 26 November 2017, Simon Poole wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I don't think that it is a particular mystery, essentially the
>>> > mainstay of OSM are people that actually like improving the map
>>> > (likely around 60'000-70'000 these days) plus some developers that
>>> > like working on OSM-associated projects (very small number maximum in
>>> > the low 100s, mostly a subset of the first group).
>>> >
>>> > Given that most people don't have unlimited time budgets for their
>>> > hobbies, volunteering for the working groups or any other
>>> > non-mapping/non-software related activities simply  takes time away
>>> > from activities which were the reason you got involved in the first
>>> > place. Not to forget that lots of the active contributors are already
>>> > doing similar things at the national/local level.
>>> Sure - and another important reason is probably that a lot of people
>>> volunteer for mapping and development in OSM because they consider it
>>> useful and rewarding work they can do in an independent and self
>>> dependent way - which for many presents a healthy contrast to their day
>>> job.  OSMF work likely for many appears much more like a normal job
>>> which is exactly what they do not want to do in their spare time.
>>> Maybe a way to acknowledge that and get more volunteer help under these
>>> circumstances is to recruit volunteers more often for smaller
>>> individual tasks independently rather than for general participation in
>>> a working group.  I could imagine this for multiple items on the
>>> current and past agenda of the board.  Even for things like DWG work
>>> (think of a pool of independent mediators the DWG could hand over
>>> issues to investigate and to attemt mediating them).
>>> You might think: Where is the difference? - That is how we work anyway
>>> but this is also to a significant extent about perception.  The
>>> perception of OSMF work for the average mapper is not generally that
>>> inviting in that regard.  Showing people they can contribute on their
>>> own terms without having to spend hours on comittee meetings to get
>>> involved would probably go a long way.
>>> --
>>> Christoph Hormann
>>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> osmf-talk mailing list
>>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171126/2af75eda/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list