[Osmf-talk] 3→4% figure source? | Re: Commitment to open communication channels

[Kathleen Lu]

It seems to me that OSMF should conduct its own survey. It may not be
representative of OSM contributors or users entirely, but would likely be
representative of OSMF membership, which is who directly elects the Board.

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 8:26 AM Rory McCann <rory at technomancy.org> wrote:

> The 3 sources are:
>
> [3] Haklay, M. and Budhathoki, N. (2010), OpenStreetMap – Overview and
> Motivational Factors, Horizon Infrastructure Challenge Theme Day, The
> University of Nottingham.
>
> A presentation (not paper?) (
>
> https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/16461/Horizon%20March%202010%20(Haklay%20and%20Budhahtoki).pdf
> ), using data from April (or July?) 2009. It doesn't say how they
> collected the data, I think a survey of 426 people, of which 3% were
> female (Pg. 30).
>
> [4] Lechner, M. (2011), Nutzungspotentiale crowdsourceerhobener Geodaten
> auf verschiedenen Skalen, Dissertation, Freiburg.
>
>
> https://freidok.uni-freiburg.de/fedora/objects/freidok:8181/datastreams/FILE1/content
> (⚠ 180 page PDF ⚠)
>
> It looks like that was an online survey in December 2010 of 225
> responses (Pg. 78) advertised on the German language mailing lists (I
> think this is it
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-de/2010-October/078162.html
> etc ). 1.8% of respondents were female.
>
> [5] Stark, H.J. (2011), Empirische Untersuchung der Motivation von
> Teilnehmenden bei der freiwilligen Erfassung von Geodaten,
> Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz, Präsentation
>
> I can't find this source online. Do you have a link? It's from 2011, so
> it might not be very informative for today.
>
>
> “10 years ago ~200→400 OSMers were selected somehow and surveyed” isn't
> really a smoking gun, and not very useful for making predictions about
> things *today*
>
>
> --
>
> (PS. replying from the right email account this time)
>
> On 19/08/2020 10:04, Simon Poole wrote:
> > http://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/PubDat_218905.pdf references three
> > papers as justification for a 2-5% number. More recent publications tend
> > to indicate slightly higher numbers.
> >
> > Simon
> >
> > Am 19.08.2020 um 09:14 schrieb Rory McCann:
> >> Where's your evidence/What's your source for this 3→4% figure?
> >>
> >> On 19/08/2020 00:56, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> sent from a phone
> >>>
> >>>> On 18. Aug 2020, at 18:21, Michael Reichert <osm-ml at michreichert.de>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Did you confuse this year with last year? There have been two women on
> >>>> the board until December. However, currently no woman is on the
> >>>> board of
> >>>> directors.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I am aware of this, my comment was meant for the whole of
> >>> OpenStreetMap-Foundation history, i.e. all women on all boards
> >>> through all the years as well as for the last years.
> >>> I’ve looked if up and it seems in total we have had 91 board member
> >>> terms of which 10 were served by women (11%) and since 2015 it were
> >>> 35 terms with 6 served by women (17%) compared to an estimated
> >>> participation of women in the project of 3-4%. It may sound cynical,
> >>> but these are the numbers I have found. For me there is no doubt that
> >>> more participation of female mappers, both in mapping and in tag
> >>> development, would be beneficial to the project, but not having them
> >>> adequately represented in the board is apparently not the root of the
> >>> problem.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers Martin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> osmf-talk mailing list
> >>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> osmf-talk mailing list
> >> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osmf-talk mailing list
> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://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/20200819/cad748f1/attachment.htm>