[Osmf-talk] Geolibres Local Chapter application for Argentina

Gonzalo Gabriel Pérez zalitoar at gmail.com
Thu May 21 20:47:20 UTC 2020

Hello everyone.
We have talked in the argentine community about your doubts about the
method of joining the Geolibres association.
Here's an explanation we found more complete to give you a better
understanding of how it works.

To be part of the OSM Argentina community, nothing is needed, it is free
and open to all participation.
To be part of Geolibres, which works towards having the legal and financial
elements so that the community can hold events, receive financing, etc. you
must be a member, the members pay a fee (which finances legal and
accounting expenses) and must be approved by the board of directors.
There are two types of members, adherent and active, since the active can
be a member of the directive commission (that is chosen by elections every
three years), the endorsement of another active member is needed to vote
it. This is so a little for the bureaucracy in Argentina and a little to
protect the board of directors, given that it manages the funds of at least
3 communities and we do not want it to be exposed. It is important for the
constitution of the local chapter to understand that on the one hand there
is the community that represents it and on the other the bureaucratic
support so that it can operate.

Taking into account that the OSM community is very informal and that
Geolibres arises in part from members of OSM Argentina, we present the
Civil Association as representative of the Local Chapter so that there are
responsible and structure to which the OSMF can refer in case of need it.

We also see that another question you have is the level of
representativeness of the OSM community in the Geolibres directory. About
this, it is important to say that Geolibres was founded by members of the
three communities, its reason for existing is largely the achievement of
the objectives of the OpenStreetMap community in Argentina, the same
happens with the other two communities of course. The Geolibres board is
currently made up of 4 'OSM' people out of 6, and we are still on the path
to integrate more members of the OSM community.

We understand your concern, but it is the most democratic form we were able
to adopt under local regulations for civil associations. Also, as far as we
know OSMF works in a similar way.

Hoping to have been able to clarify these doubts, we greet you and invite
the members of this conversation to contact us personally to clear any
Our wish is to be able to strengthen the project and to be able to offer a
representation of the OSM Foundation at the local level, which we believe
can be very positive.

Best regards,
Gonzalo Gabriel Perez (Zalitoar

El mar., 5 de may. de 2020 a la(s) 16:14, Simon Poole (simon at poole.ch)

> I'm not aware of any of the existing LCs having any preconditions for
> applying for membership. If there is one, the OSNF board should undertake
> to rectify the situation.
> Nearly all, including the OSMF, require some formal action, or lack of it,
> for the membership to become effective (typically also requiring any
> membership fees to be paid). While that is not totally uncontroversial, see
> the UK LC application, it can be argued that giving the association a last
> ditch, emergency stop facility is a reasonable thing. It is in no way
> comparable to an additional formal discriminatory precondition for
> membership.
> And no, this is not moving the goal posts at all. Before even the current
> LC scheme was enacted It was clear and discussed in depth that it would not
> work for organisations with such membership schemes, in particular HOT.
> Simon
> Am 5. Mai 2020 17:42:04 MESZ schrieb Rory McCann <
> rory.mccann at osmfoundation.org>:
>> On 05/05/2020 16:59, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>>> there is AFAIK none that practically restricts new memberships in a
>>> similar fashion.
>> Are you sure? I looked into this as part of this application. IIRC 7 of
>> the 8 existing LCs have “the board must approve, or may reject, new
>> member applications”. OSMF too.
>> In theory ”An existing member must nominate you” in addition to ”the
>> board must approve you” are different rules. But if all the existing
>> members of an org refuse to support you, then the board will definitely
>> reject you! If a board doesn't like someone, then they can keep them out.
>> In *pratice* does the additionally “one member must approve you” rule
>> really change much, when like most LCs, the board can reject people? If
>> someone would be approved by a board, then surely a board member can
>> approve them? HOT is different because each existing member can only
>> approve 2 applications per year, and 2/3 of existing members must
>> approve you¹
>> I too like mass democratic organisations, but this limitation hasn't
>> been a problem for LCs in the past.
>> It seems quite inefficient to have a public local chapters application
>>> review process without documentation of the review and discussion that
>>> already happened non-publicly within the OSMF being available to the
>>> members.
>> I threw away the piece of paper with the scribbles, listing section
>> numbers of existing LCs. To require everyone to produce detailed written
>> notes of everything will drown me in paperwork, and make everything
>> *much* more inefficient.
> --
> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit Kaiten Mail
> gesendet.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200521/c7911d29/attachment.htm>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list