[Osmf-talk] voting fraud
richlv at nakts.net
Tue Feb 5 19:39:15 UTC 2019
On 05.02.19 19:46, Kathleen Lu via osmf-talk wrote:
> We don't know what it was, but this wasn't just supporting the
> foundation or personal development.
> I think you are projecting the actions and motivations of a handful of
> GL managers who have communicated with the board and MWG onto all GL
> employees. Assuming that a GL manager did intend something sinister,
> that doesn't mean they didn't simply tell 100 employees 'oh, we're
> helping register people for this membership, it will look good on your
> resume', and the individual employees said 'oh, ok' and though nothing
> more about it. Perhaps the company intended something wrongful, perhaps
> not. I agree that the company has not been transparent and that is not
> helpful. However, as it's been previously mentioned on this thread,
> there are 100 individual employees who as far as we know did nothing
> other than acquiesce to their employer signing them up for memberships,
> quite possibly with no knowledge of the election at all, and have not
> tried to mislead the board or asked it about voting. I urge everyone to
> not lump suspicions of the manager with other individuals who work at
> the same company and to speak of those individual employees with respect
> regardless of whether you believe the company acted with bad faith and
> whether the memberships should be cancelled due to bad faith on the part
> of the payer (the company).
As far as I recall, nobody has suggested the 100+ individuals have or
had sinister reasons. If somebody is claiming that, let's discuss it
If nobody is claiming that, putting it forward is derailing the discussion.
>From the very beginning the communication seemed crystal clear to me -
the accounts registered were not the personal initiative of the
individuals affected. From the information gathered, I find it much,
much more plausible that they did not even had a choice.
On various pubic and private exchanges I have tried to explain that
sometimes seemingly over-the-top reaction by OSM members towards
reckless or intentional damage to the map is explainable by the sheer
amount of work people have put in the map. The abusers are damaging a
very important asset. People with investments in it react sharply.
Kathleen, while I appreciate attempts to tone the discussion down with
possible less evil explanations, I'm afraid this is diverting from the
Think of a small stone in the middle of a field. Save for other
circumstances, we can most likely conclude that its timing and placement
are not intentional and important.
When that stone goes through our window pane, it is much less likely
that there was no deliberate action.
At that point we can be sympathetic to the particles in the stone, but
it is not the point of the discussion that tries to find out who hurled
As Allan noted, we don't put in the massive amount of work for stealing.
GlobalLogic, don't you try to steal our map. Just don't.
More information about the osmf-talk