[Osmf-talk] voting fraud

Rihards richlv at nakts.net
Thu Jan 31 17:46:31 UTC 2019

On 31.01.19 19:41, Andrew Hain wrote:
> The most obvious benefit of the added membership would be to vote in one
> or more GL-friendly candidates to the board. As the deadline for
> candidates was two days later and the mass registration was very
> last-minute they might not have got to the ballots.

Mostly correct, please see the MWG report.

> --
> Andrew
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Rihards <richlv at nakts.net>
> *Sent:* 31 January 2019 17:17:41
> *To:* <osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* [Osmf-talk] voting fraud
> Perceived conflicts of interest can cause more damage than actual
> conflicts of interest.
> Similarly, perceived participation in voting fraud can cause more damage
> than actual participation. I'll list facts and suspicions that have been
> voiced on various channels in the hope that all former and existing
> board members and candidates will publicly denounce the GlobalLogic
> actions and strongly deny any possible connection or prior knowledge of
> the fraudulent activities.
> The suspicions listed below are not mine - all of the information is
> already floating around in various discussion channels/forums. Not
> dispersing those suspicions causes harm for the potentially involved
> individuals and OSM community in general.
> Please do not cherrypick individual items - I'll stress again that it
> does not matter what one might think of each of the individual items.
> These suspicions and accusations do damage all together.
> * GlobalLogic (GL) employees have clashed with individual mappers, DWG
> and other OSM entities regarding their map changes (when Grab-contracted
> or otherwise).
> * GL employees have worked with HOT and have similarly relaxed attitude
> towards the quality of map data.
> * Organised editing policy has been disliked by corporate-related
> mappers and board members.
> * Organised editing policy was affected by the board's take on it.
> * Several board members and candidates are HOT related.
> There are dangerous suspicions[1] that a growing number of community
> members are expressing:
> * GL is unlikely to waste 1500+ GBP (2000 USD; just the membership fees)
> without certain confidence that this expense will pay back.
> * It is unlikely that none of the board members or candidates had not
> the slightest clue this was happening.
> * It is likely that some had a role in organising this.
> * Various dismissals (contrasting GL employee influx with population of
> India) and delays regarding the MWG report make all the suspicions more
> valid.
> Is there a way out?
> It might be same as with the child-molesting priests. Lack of strong
> denouncement shifts the public perception against the accused.
> [1] They are more dangerous if they are incorrect.
> -- 
>  Rihards-- 

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list