[Osmf-talk] DWG survey on organized editing

Andrew Johnson andrew at gaiagps.com
Mon Oct 2 18:34:11 UTC 2017

I don't have a side on this issue, but I think the questions are
constructed in a leading way, which calls into question how useful the
survey is for formulating policy.

Question 1:

1) What types of mapping activities should be covered by a policy? Choose
one of the following answers

   - A policy should only apply to paid editing.
      - A policy should apply to paid editing as well as other organised
      - I don't think we need a policy at all.
      - No answer

Why is this question leading?

   - There are two affirmative answers, 1 negative answer.
   - It assumes there should be a policy in the question phrasing, even if
   the 3rd answer walks that back a bit.

Less leading version:

1) Should there be an organized editing policy?

   - Yes
   - No
   - No Answer

2) Should an organized editing policy cover paid activities?

   - Yes
   - No
   - No Answer

3) Should an organized editing policy cover unpaid activities?

   - Yes
   - No
   - No Answer

The second question is also leading:

2) In OpenStreetMap, anyone can map and we don't expect newbies to attend
training first. The community will fix problems and help new mappers learn
the trade. Should this also apply to paid or organised groups?

Why is this question leading?

   - The question is constructing an argument, not asking a question. The
   argument goes like: "Casual newbies don't get training, and the community
   happily helps them out. Paid organizations are different, so we should have
   different rules." It feels like a subtle argument that paid mappers are
   different, which shouldn't be a given considering the survey. The survey
   shouldn't be prepping the witness - it should just ask questions.

Less leading questions:

1) Should organized mappers be required to attend training?

   - Yes
   - No
   - No Answer

The third question is also leading:

3) Should paid/organised mappers seek community buy-in for their projects?

Why is this question leading?

   - Everyone needs community buy-in in OSM. Or your stuff gets
   - It unnecessarily uses the word 'paid' again.

Less leading question

   - Delete it. It's pretty clear you need "buy-in" on some level for any

The fourth question is also leading:

   - How should paid/organized mappers document their group?

Why is this question leading?

   - It assumes they should document their group.

Less leading version:

   - Should organized mapping groups have to document their members?

And so on...


On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de>

> On Monday 02 October 2017, Stefan Keller wrote:
> >
> > Frederik asked to express what I meant by bias. But since the survey
> > is closed (for me) it's difficult to cite the questions. So let me
> > try to exemplify like this: An unbiased survey about the pros and
> > cons of something (organized mapping in this case) would be like this
> > +1, 0, -1, therefore having an affirmative, a neutral and a declining
> > statement. A biased survey would ask questions like this 0, -1, -2.
> I think all questions are completely neutral in that regard, most
> allowed you to answer somewhere between 'completely agree'
> and 'completely disagree' *and* 'no answer'.
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171002/b21ea48a/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list