[Osmf-talk] Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team at the OSM Foundation in 2017

nicolas chavent nicolas.chavent at gmail.com
Thu Nov 30 09:10:30 UTC 2017


Frederik and all,

>> (I'll take some time later today to read the rest of your message, I
just wanted to say this upfront.)

Thanks for clarifying upfront on the Trademark discussion (and not dispute)
and allow me to clarify that,

   - I do not want to start any controversy and that I do not see any
   ground there for a controversy nor a symptom of HOT US inc influence over
   the OSMF
   - I use the Trademark as an example from the history of HOT US Inc which
   is indicative of how information flows turned to work as a way to control
   membership rather than fostering membership inclusiveness and make the HOT
   US inc a truly "informed-membership".



>   * OSMF & HOT Us Inc dispute over Trademark'

>> I wouldn't say it was a dispute, I just mentioned it as an example of
bad communications in the past and something that we've hopefully
overcome by establishing better talking channels.

Betrayed by my English there, I meant discussion: I actually do not know
how it developed in details since it was at the Board level.


>       o This Trademark topic was kept at the HOT US Inc Board level only

>> I'm pretty sure that we (at the OSMF board) were able to read something
about this in publicly available HOT minutes, so it cannot have been
*that* secret!

It remained at Board level for sometimes though without notice nor details
given to the Membership, HOT US Inc minutes will have to be scanned to
figure out when this info was released and with what level of details.
More generally, it's hard to capture the richness of discussions in any
minutes document, and the level of information enclosed in publicly
available HOT minutes can be very limited with respect to Board
discussions. On important topics, this is detrimental if not contradictory
with the portray of HOT US Inc membership as an "informed membership" which
shall be the cornerstone on which any democratic and open organization
shall be based.

>> But that's something that happened years ago and I certainly didn't want
to start a controversy over it now - it is not a current issue any more.
It was just meant as an example of how a lack of communications is
detrimental for everyone.

Thanks for clarifying and let me re-insure you that I did not intend to
start a controversy over it as a proof of HOT US Inc influence vs OSMF. I
used the Trademark discussion as an example from the past (you are corret)
about how information flow turn to work for the Board as a mechanism
enforcing control of the membership instead of fostering its inclusion and
making of HOT US Inc membership truly a really-informed membership.

I can not agree more about the fact that lack of information is detrimental
to everyone since it affects HOT US Inc and that I directly with others
suffer from it, not to mention the limits it puts on the ability for the
organization to succeed in its mandate combining impact with internal
democracy.


Thanks for your (first) read and for taking this trademark example upfront
to avoid any further confusion and misunderstanding.,
Best,
Nicolas



On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Nicolas,
>
> On 30.11.2017 02:34, nicolas chavent wrote:
> >   * OSMF & HOT Us Inc dispute over Trademark'
>
> I wouldn't say it was a dispute, I just mentioned it as an example of
> bad communications in the past and something that we've hopefully
> overcome by establishing better talking channels.
>
> >       o This Trademark topic was kept at the HOT US Inc Board level only
>
> I'm pretty sure that we (at the OSMF board) were able to read something
> about this in publicly available HOT minutes, so it cannot have been
> *that* secret!
>
> But that's something that happened years ago and I certainly didn't want
> to start a controversy over it now - it is not a current issue any more.
> It was just meant as an example of how a lack of communications is
> detrimental for everyone.
>
> (I'll take some time later today to read the rest of your message, I
> just wanted to say this upfront.)
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>



-- 
Nicolas Chavent
Les Libres Géographes
Projet OpenStreetMap (OSM)
Projet Espace OSM Francophone (EOF)
Projet GeOrchestra
Mobile (FR): +33 (0)6 52 40 78 20
Mobile (Bénin): +22962 55 85 91
Email: nicolas.chavent at gmail.com
Skype: c_nicolas
Twitter: nicolas_chavent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171130/3048b63a/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list