[Osmf-talk] Possible vote on membership prerequisites

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Wed Nov 4 12:41:06 UTC 2020




Nov 3, 2020, 09:29 by osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org:

> Hello,
>
> first of all, I would like to thank the MWG and board to bring the
> subject to the attention of the OSMF at large.
>
>> Presuming that there is a delta between the fraudsters and the innocent
>> OSM community members who don't meet the board's requirements,
>>
>
> No, there is not. The Global Logic incident had been detected by
> statistical analysis of the MWG, otherwise it has been totally
> unobstrusive. So had been another event many years earlier.
>
> To continue with something unpopular: I do not even believe that the
> managers at Global Logic acted in bad faith. If you are at a large
> organization then it is enough if you confuse some aims of your
> organization with some aims of the OSMF to distort the latter.
>
+1, it was not some 
"and now we will be able to destroy OpenStreetMap *Insert Villainous Laughter*"

It was rather "and we will be able to help this misguided people that have no
perspective and lack ability to see things clear to us, Important Managers
of Big Business".

>
> Thus, whenver there is a conflict between mapper's comfort and
> consumer's comfort, it is mission critical to side with the mappers.
>
+1 (it also applies to comfort of developers making
OpenStreetMap related software, such as editors and so on)
> Of course, there is no reason to make data consumer's life uneccessary
> hard. They are just strictly second priority. This is difficult to
> understand, and it is even more diffcult to apply to all the often
> highly intricate decisions in technology choices, policies, legal texts
> and so on.
>
> And this is just one obvious example. There are more, e.g. criteria for
> wheelchair mapping may clash with those for driving directions (when
> lane mapping finally destroys sidewalk's geometry), railway mapping for
> operators differs from those for passengers, and so on. Greetings to the
> guardians of birds and caves,
>
For the record, I think that refraining from mapping of nesting locations
of rare birds is actually a good idea.

>  and to the endless field of database
> rights, share alike, and other legal species.
>
> No one, not me, not any director on the board, any corporate member, any
> poster to this list, or you, dear reader, have exactly the same goals as
> the OSMF. Thus it is a mere policy decision where we draw the line.
>
> To close with something constructive, we could set the policy by rather
> simple criteria:
> * the person must control an OSM account, i.e is able to answer messages
> on that account, that exists for at least three years
>
Three years seems a bit too much, two years would be likely more
than enough and reduce risk of turning away of people that we would want
(maybe even lower)

> * the person must answer a short questionnaire to ensure that the
> cultural values of OpenStreetMap are read and understood
>
It may be a bit tricky with language barrier and
so on. Though I am quite interested what would be in such test.

Also, note that this specific barrier is extremely unlikely to be
a serious obstacle - anything similar to Global Logic would likely
provide answers together with other instructions to their employees
(or maybe I am overestimating capability of such oponnents?)

> I'm confident that the MWG will come up with something similar or
> something better.
>
+1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20201104/1f3895c4/attachment.htm>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list