[Osmf-talk] DWG survey on organized editing

[Joseph Reeves]

>I can explain why this question is leading - it's because DWG has been
>tasked by the OSMF board to work on a corporate editing policy, and not
>to find out if people want one. You could of course say we shouldn't
>have added the "I don't think we need a policy at all" point then. The
>OSMF board is convinced that some form of organised editing policy would
>be beneficial.

This is a bad thing, and obviously the source of the bias that was so well
communicated previously.

The survey aims to lead people's responses so they fit the decision taken
by the Board, which arguably invalidates the entire exercise.

The choices are effectively presented as "no policy" or "a policy to
curtail organised editing". There is no option to propose a policy that
encourages and enables organised mapping.

I tried to hint in my earlier email that organised mapping is at the core
of OSM, and has been for a very long time. Without organised mapping, would
we have the Isle of Wight?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Isle_of_Wight_workshop_2006

Cheers, Joseph


On 3 October 2017 at 01:05, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 02.10.2017 20:34, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> > Question 1:
> >
> >     1) What types of mapping activities should be covered by a policy?
> >     Choose one of the following answers
> >
> >       o A policy should only apply to paid editing.
> >       o A policy should apply to paid editing as well as other organised
> >         editing.
> >       o I don't think we need a policy at all.
> >       o No answer
> >
> > Why is this question leading?
>
> I can explain why this question is leading - it's because DWG has been
> tasked by the OSMF board to work on a corporate editing policy, and not
> to find out if people want one. You could of course say we shouldn't
> have added the "I don't think we need a policy at all" point then. The
> OSMF board is convinced that some form of organised editing policy would
> be beneficial.
>
> The reason for this is that there have been a number of occurrences in
> the recent past of "under-the-radar" corporate editing of OSM, some of
> them detrimental. Occasionally these things arise from actively hostile
> behaviour on the part of the people doing the edits, but the
> overwhelming amount of corporate editing is well-intended. The board
> does not wish to stop corporate editing, but to give clear guidelines to
> ensure that corporate editing is done in a community-compatible way.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171003/383ba00e/attachment.html>