[Osmf-talk] [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

Sat Dec 12 11:32:38 UTC 2020

I didn’t expect this to be the year in which I would break my vow of 
silence as far as this list is concerned, but here I am. It’s not a very 
happy situation, to be paying membership of the foundation and yet not 
feeling the slightest motivation to participate in the debates taking 
place here. I take my own share of the responsibility, I can be lazy and 
also I can easily find other things to do when confronted with a full 
inbox, mapping included. But the main reason is the often terrible 
atmosphere on this list.

Too many contributions suffer from what I would call techlistitis, the 
belief that if your opinion is correct you are exempted from any 
obligation to treat people with different opinions with even minimal 
respect. I only speak for myself, but I do wonder about how many other 
people are watching this with a feeling of dismay and occasional dread 
as another reply comes in?

Despite the silence here, I have voted in board elections for several 
years now. My policy until now has always been to vote for a broad range 
of candidates, not necessarily just those I would feel most in tune 
with. I want the board to have different shades of opinion represented. 
However this year, and after reading some of the contributions this 
week, I have decided to modify my policy - I’m not voting for candidates 
who don’t take seriously the issue of diversity and inclusion, or who 
might block action being taken.

The problem exists, like it or not, and the ‘if you can’t stand the heat 
then find something else to do’ atmosphere that surfaces too often on 
this list is a reflection of that problem. It’s as if we have a shop 
with a “We’re open!” sign in the window, but no handle on the door for 
people to come in. I want a board that represents the community, but I 
also want one that will work to build a community that resembles the 
world that we are trying to map. Ultimately our best defence against the 
worries of corporate influence and sectorial interests is to have a 
larger community where there are no obstacles to participation.

The code of conduct is not in itself a solution, but it is part of the 
solution. This is not over-sensitive snowflakery, it’s about mutual 
respect and making this work for everyone. I welcome the board taking 
action. This has been an awful year, horrific for many, and maybe these 
things don’t seem so important with everything else that is going on. 
But if in 2021 we can make participation in this list and other forums a 
pleasant and useful experience for people like me, and for people not 
like me, then I would consider that to be a significant win.

Best regards,

Graeme

On 11/12/20 13:30, Allan Mustard wrote:
> I apologize if this is a duplicate, but I received notices from Google 
> Mail that the message below sent to both osmf-talk and talk was not 
> delivered "because the address couldn't be found, or is unable to 
> receive mail."  I am therefore retransmitting the message using my 
> home email address.  apm
>
>     To the OSM and OSMF communities:
>
>     I convey the following information on behalf of the Board of
>     Directors of the OpenStreetMap Foundation.
>
>     An outcome of the current controversy on the osmf-talk mailing
>     list over misogynistic language is a decision by the Board as follows:
>
>>     The Board will find partners to help instate a moderator team for
>>     the OSMF-talk and talk mailing lists. These moderators need to
>>     have the trust of the community subject to the moderation
>>     (consent of the governed) by some kind of approval mechanism.
>>     This moderator team will start to work on enforcing the current
>>     Etiquette guidelines as soon as possible. We will also start work
>>     on updating/replacing our Etiquette rules, which must focus on
>>     balancing all participants' interests.
>
>     We have asked the Local Chapters and Communities Working Group
>     (LCCWG ) to take the lead on this and to work with signatories of
>     the open letter to the Board [1] as well as members of the
>     Diversity and Inclusion Special Committee to produce proposals for
>     the Board to consider at its January meeting.  The LCCWG has
>     accepted this task.  This issue will be on the agenda of the
>     January meeting of the Board of Directors, exact time and date yet
>     to be determined, though as is customary it will be posted to the
>     Foundation's website well in advance.
>
>     Members of the OSM community are, as always, welcome to share
>     their opinions and any relevant information on this matter, either
>     publicly via osmf-talk, or privately in direct communications to
>     the LCCWG.  I feel compelled to remind all members of the
>     community that a Code of Etiquette [2] has existed since June 2011
>     and shall be observed by all community members.
>
>     Very best regards to all,
>     apm
>
>     [1]
>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?ts=5fd11436#heading=h.ccgtgjykcfgh
>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?ts=5fd11436#heading=h.ccgtgjykcfgh>
>     [2] https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette
>     <https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Etiquette>
>
>     -------
>     /Allan Mustard, Chairperson/
>     /Board of Directors/
>     /OpenStreetMap Foundation/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201212/84522e57/attachment.htm>