[Osmf-talk] DWG survey on organized editing
frederik at remote.org
Wed Oct 18 09:50:45 UTC 2017
On 18.10.2017 11:06, Heather Leson wrote:
> I recommend that we have a subsequent and more inclusive plan for any
> policy discussion. It is very disturbing to see such a low contribution
> from Asia and Africa
I think the survey participation largely matches (a) the distribution of
OSMF membership and (b) the distribution of OSM mappers. This is well
known (and not the only diversity issue we have). "Disturbing" is maybe
a little bit strong - it's simply a consequence of where and how the
project was started and how things radiate from there. This takes time.
A couple years ago you would have seen the same imbalance between Europe
and North America that you see between Europe and Asia today.
(The actual distribution of *data* in OSM is not as skewed, because data
in Asia and Africa is often created by mappers from Europe and North
America. Which is a whole different problem again!)
We all agree that we should take steps to remove hurdles and make
participation easier for people who want to participate.
This is however something that affects the whole project and the
organisation, and not something that can be remedied in the course of
creating one particular policy or making one particular decision.
I have high hopes for the local chapters; once we have local chapters in
more than just a few countries, we could have policy input from local
chapters instead of individuals. This will keep the process slim (we can
expect to find one person in each local chapter with whom matters can be
discussed in English instead of building an UN-like apparatus) and can
at the same time afford a little more weight to under-represented
groups. Which of course also carries some risks (think FIFA where
chapters are "bought" by wealthy interests) but we can deal with that
when we come to it.
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
More information about the osmf-talk