[Osmf-talk] Timing of candidate's views? (Was: Board decision on Crimea complaint)

Gregory sotm at livingwithdragons.com
Sat Dec 15 12:47:44 UTC 2018


Making an attempt to split the thread so I can answer only about whether we
can/should/would ask questions of the candidates.

Please remember that our wonderful OSMF board are board members after the
elections.Their personal views on a matter shouldn't exclusively dictate
what they do and argue for on board matters, but it can be helpful for us
to know where they are coming form. Therefore, we can contact the board
even after an election to suggest they consider our views/thoughts. However
if we knew their views on the same/similar matter (such as looking at a
record of election Q&A, even the latter ones), so that we know how much we
have to explain and (respectively) argue our case with them.

For General Elections in the UK, I actually care more about whether a
candidate is likely to listen and understand communications from me should
I care about a campaign for/against a legal bill. They have a legal duty to
read my message and then to represent their constituency(includes me)
regardless of political party affiliation. I think this is very similar to
the OSMF board, except they each have a constituency that is the whole OSMF

As for UK local councillors, they usually have lots more time and small
pots of money to use on what they think is best. That's not the OSMF, but I
think it might be closer to how OSM France works. It might be how people
see OSM UK directors, which is sad as we're not set up like that.

>From the unitary authority of Durham County Council,
Gregory (LivingWithDragons)

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 11:16, joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>

> Well this is a great catch22. It is unfair to us candidates to be put into
> this position. It is unfair to those who have voted already to voice our
> opinion. It is unfair to those who have not voted yet *not* to voice an
> opinion. And we don't know exactly what to voice an opinion on, because
> it's just the decision, no context.
> So I decided to refrain from directly commenting on the decision, but I
> can refer to this previous statement on the issue:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-November/081694.html
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20181215/9b6b63e3/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list