[Osmf-talk] Updated membership prerequisites plan

[Heather Leson]

Hi Guillaume,

Thank you for your response.

There are no tools/processes to measure/track contributions to OSM besides
data on the map. Since you decided to cite my contributions in the example
response, it might be helpful to have more information. Last year I joined
the LCCWG subcommittee on Etiquette & Moderation and spent much more than
15 days contributing with an amazing team of volunteers. This was tracked
on wiki pages and in events such as SOTM. Your response made me ask whether
others' contributions are in the same position.  This process is flawed if
this is the decision point:

*"You haven’t mapped since May 2019, so you wouldn’t be counted as an
active contributor for a decision on a licence change or for a membership
fee waiver."*

I want to thank fellow LCCWG Subcommittee members for all their
contributions. It seems to me that the board announcement missed the credit
of the subcommittee for engagement and efforts. Which brings the question -
if we are only counting 'quantitative data' rather than consider the
quality/quantity of other contributions why?

While I suspect you are making a data-driven point, you likely did not
intend to minimize any personal contributions in your examples.  I've made
multiple diary entries about how we define contributions. The board
decisions should reflect the full types of contributions.


Thank you

Heather

Heather Leson
heatherleson at gmail.com
Twitter: HeatherLeson <https://twitter.com/HeatherLeson>
Linked In <https://www.linkedin.com/in/heatherleson/>


On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:10 PM Guillaume Rischard <
guillaume.rischard at osmfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hi Heather,
>
> It would be mapping any amount on at least 15 different calendar days, in
> UTC because that’s where the OSM servers run.
>
> HDYC has a convenient counter that shows total mapping days, and also
> whether a person can be counted as an active contributor for different
> purposes. For example https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?Heather%20Leson : you’ve
> mapped on 18 days in your life, so you would be qualified to join if you
> were a new member. You haven’t mapped since May 2019, so you wouldn’t be
> counted as an active contributor for a decision on a licence change or for
> a membership fee waiver.
>
> The reasoning is that 15 days is a low enough bar for anyone to jump over,
> and that if you’re a member you should have at least some idea about
> mapping. Some very active people in the OSM community hardly ever map, but
> all of them have mapped at least a bit.
>
> Guillaume
>
> On 7 Jun 2022, at 10:57, Heather Leson <heatherleson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Guillaume and colleagues.
>
> How do you measure other contributions to the OSMF and OSM network?
> Meaning - if someone does not map often, but contributes to the community
> (Legal, software, events, community engagement, translation, storytelling,
> and advocacy) how is this taken into account?
>
> Also, is it 15 full days of mapping or mapping 15 times. Meaning - hours
> that amount to 15 full days or 15 days adding things to the map?
>
> thank you
>
> Heather
>
> Heather Leson
> heatherleson at gmail.com
> Twitter: HeatherLeson <https://twitter.com/HeatherLeson>
> Linked In <https://www.linkedin.com/in/heatherleson/>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 12:23 AM Guillaume Rischard <
> guillaume.rischard at osmfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thank you all for your feedback to the consultation on membership
>> prerequisites. Based on your responses and discussion at the board’s
>> virtual face-to-face meeting, we have decided not to call an extraordinary
>> general meeting to change membership rules. We intend instead to implement
>> measures on new memberships through a board decision at the next OSMF board
>> meeting (if we’re happy with your feedback here). We will limit new
>> memberships to people who have at least registered three months ago and
>> mapped 15 days. Later, we will use a survey to gather additional feedback
>> and confirm the membership’s support for the change. We also evolved our
>> thinking on the criteria. More on both points below.
>>
>> Point 1: The implementation.
>>
>> The plan so far was to implement membership prerequisites through a
>> general meeting. Because the next AGM in December is still a long time off,
>> moving forward with this now would require an additional meeting to be
>> scheduled specifically for this topic. Calling a meeting of all foundation
>> members, and doing the same for any future tweaks to the requirements,
>> seems cumbersome.
>>
>> To avoid this, we want to install requirements on new memberships through
>> a simple board decision (which we’re allowed to do by the Articles of
>> Association). We’re not casting anything in stone, and a future board can
>> adjust the requirements.
>>
>> Later this year, we will formally survey of the membership. Compared to a
>> general meeting, a survey is more flexible in the types of questions we can
>> ask. We will not be limited to simple yes-no votes, but can specifically
>> ask about details such as the number of days, the types of contributions,
>> and other aspects of the proposed requirements. Based on your response to
>> the survey, we would decide whether further, less or different measures are
>> necessary.
>>
>> Point 2: The requirements.
>>
>> We’re hearing a lot of discussion about how to validate
>> non-mapping contributions. We also hear workload concerns from our working
>> group volunteers. That’s why we’re now considering to count only mapping
>> days, but set the barrier so it isn’t too high for people who mostly
>> contribute in non-mapping ways.
>>
>> Pending membership feedback, the Board therefore intends to accept new
>> normal and associate memberships applications only from persons who have
>> mapped over 15 days, and have registered at least three months ago. The
>> Board will ask the Membership Working Group to implement these restrictions.
>>
>> Please let us know your thoughts on our plan.
>>
>> Guillaume
>>
>>
>> --
>> Guillaume Rischard
>> Director and chairman of the board
>> OpenStreetMap Foundation
>>
>> St. John’s Innovation Centre
>> Cowley Road
>> Cambridge
>> CB4 0WS
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales.
>> Registration Number 05912761.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20220610/b2c199c0/attachment.htm>