[Strategic] Meta-SWG
Steven Feldman
shfeldman at gmail.com
Fri Jan 21 15:39:03 GMT 2011
I would like to be more active in the strategic WG but I find that I am often only getting notice of meetings at a day's notice which makes it difficult to schedule time when travelling.
Could be plan less frequent calls/meetings and publish times further in advance?
steven
_____________________
Steven Feldman
_____________________
KnowWhere Consulting
m: +44 (0) 7958 924 101
w: knowwhere
t: @StevenFeldman
On 21 Jan 2011, at 12:00, strategic-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:
> Send Strategic mailing list submissions to
> strategic at openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/strategic
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> strategic-request at openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> strategic-owner at openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Strategic digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Meeting tomorrow January 20, 3pm GMT (Richard Weait)
> 2. Re: Meeting tomorrow January 20, 3pm GMT (Chris Fleming)
> 3. Re: Meeting tomorrow January 20, 3pm GMT (Grant Slater)
> 4. Meta-SWG (Richard Weait)
> 5. Re: Meta-SWG (Mikel Maron)
> 6. Re: Meta-SWG (Milo van der Linden)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:03:49 -0500
> From: Richard Weait <richard at weait.com>
> To: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
> Cc: strategic at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Strategic] Meeting tomorrow January 20, 3pm GMT
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTingpnvYKx4A90NVuTTpU+YAmr-VQyTmsX=CFZmw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hey
>>
>> We're due to meet tomorrow on IRC, #osm-strategic
>
> You mean, right now.
>
> Anybody else going to join in today?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:05:26 +0000
> From: Chris Fleming <me at chrisfleming.org>
> To: Richard Weait <richard at weait.com>
> Cc: strategic at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Strategic] Meeting tomorrow January 20, 3pm GMT
> Message-ID: <4D384F36.3000901 at chrisfleming.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 20/01/11 15:03, Richard Weait wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Mikel Maron<mikel_maron at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hey
>>>
>>> We're due to meet tomorrow on IRC, #osm-strategic
>> You mean, right now.
>>
>> Anybody else going to join in today?
>>
> Trying to get on but don't seem to be able to connect, anyone know of a
> web irc gateway?
>
> Cheers
> Chris
>
> --
> e: me at chrisfleming.org
> w: www.chrisfleming.org
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:08:11 +0000
> From: Grant Slater <openstreetmap at firefishy.com>
> To: Chris Fleming <me at chrisfleming.org>
> Cc: strategic at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Strategic] Meeting tomorrow January 20, 3pm GMT
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTinHwNgtvY8jB+nxtbvSTvp=dW7X7+hZr_KmWV1c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 20 January 2011 15:05, Chris Fleming <me at chrisfleming.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Anybody else going to join in today?
>>>
>> Trying to get on but don't seem to be able to connect, anyone know of a web
>> irc gateway?
>>
>
> http://irc.openstreetmap.org/
>
> Regards
> Grant
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:28:13 -0500
> From: Richard Weait <richard at weait.com>
> To: strategic at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Strategic] Meta-SWG
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTimY4en-peELSdPo_gGUi3LthaUB3C_4sv7X4CtU at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> We've been casual about organization of SWG to this point and I think
> that this is a good time to get a little more formal. After all, if
> we are going to provide resources for the OSMF, surely we should go
> about that in a way that assures OSMF and other WGs that they can rely
> upon us.
>
> Things that we can improve:
>
> 1) SWG has only one formal member.
> 2) Two of our four most recent meetings have made no progress on agenda items.
> 3) Deliverables from recent meetings have gone unaddressed during
> subsequent meetings.
>
> Suggestions for discussion:
>
> a) Formalize membership, provide guidelines for attendance
> expectations and for notice when attendance is not possible. Perhaps
> two unexcused absences should lead to removal from SWG membership?
>
> b) Provide guidelines for how many and which members should be in
> attendance for a meeting. Must the chair be in attendance? Must a
> board member be in attendance? How many members / what percentage of
> the membership?
>
> c) What policy should we adopt regarding deliverables? It should
> recognize that SWG want to be reliable to OSMF, other WGs and
> ultimately the OSM community, but it should also recognize that SWG
> members are volunteers. Do deliverables have deadlines? How do we
> back each other up and continue to serve the community when "Real Life
> Stuff" gets in the way for one member or another?
>
> d) What would make SWG more effective?
>
> Best regards,
> Richard
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:52:52 -0800 (PST)
> From: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
> To: Richard Weait <richard at weait.com>, strategic at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Strategic] Meta-SWG
> Message-ID: <68691.37259.qm at web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Agreed, this is a good time to solidify how we work. And sorry for my absence
> today, just plain blankness of mind, no excuse.
>
>
>> Suggestions for discussion:
>>
>> a) Formalize membership, provide guidelines for attendance
>> expectations and for notice when attendance is not possible. Perhaps
>> two unexcused absences should lead to removal from SWG membership?
>
> Thoughts:
> - we need current informal members to state they want to be formal members.
> - joining the group has criteria of foundation membership? anything else? is
> there an optimal size? honestly, i think we can keep this simple as possible,
> and just use best judgement
> - we'll need a secretary role to record absences and excuses.
> - that removal policy keeps it simple. we should also allow people back if they
> recommit
>
>> b) Provide guidelines for how many and which members should be in
>> attendance for a meeting. Must the chair be in attendance? Must a
>> board member be in attendance? How many members / what percentage of
>> the membership?
>
> So far from the Board, Henk and myself have been involved. I do think someone
> from the Board should be in attendance.
>
>> c) What policy should we adopt regarding deliverables? It should
>> recognize that SWG want to be reliable to OSMF, other WGs and
>> ultimately the OSM community, but it should also recognize that SWG
>> members are volunteers. Do deliverables have deadlines? How do we
>> back each other up and continue to serve the community when "Real Life
>> Stuff" gets in the way for one member or another?
>
> Deliverables have had deadlines so far. If deadlines aren't met, it happens with
> volunteers,
> the group needs to quickly respond and reassign tasks if necessary.
>
>> d) What would make SWG more effective?
>
> Thanks for pushing this Richard.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/strategic/attachments/20110120/e096ca4f/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 23:28:16 +0100
> From: Milo van der Linden <milo at dogodigi.net>
> To: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
> Cc: strategic at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Strategic] Meta-SWG
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTikpOxTF+FReEh909znFYrV_Lxap2Udo_tbQDObc at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Another sorry here, I too wish I could have made it.
>
> I hereby state that I want to formally join. Mikel, I assume you will serve
> as chair?
>
> I also strongly suggest other working groups to also publish a clear chair
> on the working group webpage as stated during earlier conversations, it is
> good to know who to talk to if you need a statement of whatever kind from
> one of the working groups.
>
> 2011/1/20 Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
>
>> Agreed, this is a good time to solidify how we work. And sorry for my
>> absence today, just plain blankness of mind, no excuse.
>>
>>> Suggestions for discussion:
>>>
>>> a) Formalize membership, provide guidelines for attendance
>>> expectations and for notice when attendance is not possible. Perhaps
>>> two unexcused absences should lead to removal from SWG membership?
>>
>> Thoughts:
>> - we need current informal members to state they want to be formal members.
>> - joining the group has criteria of foundation membership? anything else?
>> is there an optimal size? honestly, i think we can keep this simple as
>> possible, and just use best judgement
>> - we'll need a secretary role to record absences and excuses.
>> - that removal policy keeps it simple. we should also allow people back if
>> they recommit
>>
>>
>>> b) Provide guidelines for how many and which members should be in
>>> attendance for a meeting. Must the chair be in attendance? Must a
>>> board member be in attendance? How many members / what percentage of
>>> the membership?
>>
>> So far from the Board, Henk and myself have been involved. I do think
>> someone from the Board should be in attendance.
>>
>>
>>> c) What policy should we adopt regarding deliverables? It should
>>> recognize that SWG want to be reliable to OSMF, other WGs and
>>> ultimately the OSM community, but it should also recognize that SWG
>>> members are volunteers. Do deliverables have deadlines? How do we
>>> back each other up and continue to serve the community when "Real Life
>>> Stuff" gets in the way for one member or another?
>>
>> Deliverables have had deadlines so far. If deadlines aren't met, it happens
>> with volunteers,
>> the group needs to quickly respond and reassign tasks if necessary.
>>
>>
>>> d) What would make SWG more effective?
>>
>> Thanks for pushing this Richard.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Strategic mailing list
>> Strategic at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/strategic
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/strategic/attachments/20110120/a59e60ce/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Strategic mailing list
> Strategic at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/strategic
>
>
> End of Strategic Digest, Vol 8, Issue 7
> ***************************************
More information about the Strategic
mailing list