[Osmf-talk] Membership fee waiver

Rob Nickerson rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com
Wed Nov 14 22:53:27 UTC 2018

Any idea if that has happened yet Simon?

Thank you,

On Wed, 14 Nov 2018, 22:20 Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch wrote:

> Forgetting all about making it easy and so on, there is currently IMHO no
> reason a potential member couldn't apply for a waiver, it would simply need
> to be decided on a case by case base.
> Simon
> Am 14.11.2018 um 23:08 schrieb joost schouppe:
> Hi Rob,
> I can't give an account for the first three years, but I can share my
> perspective about the last. I specifically joined the MWG a year ago to
> help push forward the waiver fee program.
> Over the last year, most of the volunteer time has gone to keeping the
> engine running. There were deep problems with the management software for
> membership (civicrm), which made it easy to lose members. There was a weird
> problem with reminders about lapsing membership. Since we do not have a
> self service area, people depend on these reminders. It was a hard problem
> to fix, which involved a lot of cooperation between people, as well as a
> lot if discussion about whether or not to hire consultancy to fix it; or
> even to make sure they could actually work if hired.
> At all the meetings I attended, I brought up the waiver fee. There always
> seemed to be new barriers to just start with it. A form, a procedure,
> default lettres, membership classes. Since the meetings were rather spread
> out, you also lose time with bringing back to mind all the details. Since a
> lot of the work required knowledge about the inner workings of the
> software, there wasn't a lot of work I could do as a not so technical
> newbie. When there were things I could do myself, my own time constraints
> came in the way - as well as recently finding out a lot of thinking work we
> did together was lost because we used an exotic open source tool that
> disappeared from the internet.
> So my analysis if the last year would be: too little volunteers to do the
> actual work, and a lack of efficient workflows.
> IIRC we did get several board checkups on the waiver fee and the
> occasional call to think bigger.
> I don't think there is anyone to blame, except maybe if you start looking
> for the root causes of our lack of volunteers. Since I don't want to turn
> this into my position statement for the Board elections, I'll hold that
> thought for now. I will say that this experience is what led me to try and
> revive the local chapters group as a community building group. This group
> would try to work in and with the other working groups to support and push
> relevant projects forward. Unfortunately that try has not really resulted
> in much just yet.
> All the best,
> Joost
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing listosmf-talk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20181114/b809281b/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list