[Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Feb 4 13:17:46 UTC 2019


Am Mo., 28. Jan. 2019 um 18:33 Uhr schrieb Heather Leson <
heather at osmfoundation.org>:

> Dear Martin and Colleagues,
>
> Since December, the Board has attempted to draft a public response. We are
> still discussing.  I provided an update in the board meeting of January 17,
> 2019 - https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2019-01-17
>
> Since that time, I have tried again to get agreement from the Board on the
> full details. We have a new board and there is much discussion about the
> text.
>
> I will try again tomorrow night to rewrite it and ask for permission to
> share from the Board. Also, a quick note about the comments in Weekly OSM.
> I am obliged to issue statements on discussions when the Board agrees to
> the content of the statements.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Heather
>


Dear Heather, dear Board,

thank you for the update. I understand you are all volunteers and there are
also other pressing issues at the moment. Still it is now a lot of time
that has passed since Nov. 17 / Dec. 10, 2018, and we are in a kind of
limbo, because the board, in apparent conflict with its own
disputed-territories policy [1], reversed the Data Working Group decision
just a few days before the 2018 board elections, but so far did not provide
any kind of explanation or new policy to replace the former one.

While it already felt quite strange on Dec. 10 that you just proclaimed the
annulation of the well-founded DWG decision without providing any kind of
explanations or motivations, it is now alarming that there are still no
explanations. While we do not have many general rules with regard to
mapping, the on-the-ground rule was certainly for many years the guiding
principle and foundation of every "OpenStreetMapping", and assured us peace
in problem areas, so deviating from it would seem such a major change of
direction, that I could not believe my eyes when I read it and no
explanation was provided along.

Frankly, the way it was done, just before the upcoming elections of a new
board, and without actually bringing it to an end, would probably be
considered terrible political style, in the regions I am familiar with.

My suggestion to the board would be to set yourself a deadline, until which
you will try to reach consensus within the new Board, and if you cannot
come to a common statement which supports the decision of the old Board,
you should reenact the DWG decision so we can get back to normal operations.


Cheers,
Martin




[1]
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20190204/ed8b7d19/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list