[talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Ian Sergeant]

Hi Richard,

There are a couple of hundred thousand registered members of OSM, and much
effort has gone into contacting those who are genuinely out of touch.
There are around 25 Australian contributors who have declined, and all of
them are fairly significant contributors.  They went to the same site to
decline which had links to the information that the people who accepted
had.  I genuinely would have believed that those 25 people had access to
all the information that was available, and therefore thought extra direct
communication on this subject wasn't wanted by them.   I apologise if that
wasn't the case with you.

I'd be last to say that OSMF board and LWG has done everything right as
part of this licence change.  Even with making decisions over the past
couple of weeks to do with the changeover, I wouldn't say they have learned
too many lessons.  But these guys are volunteer mappers, hackers, etc,  not
necessarily PR experts or  communications specialists.   They have day
jobs, and maybe even real lives.  Dealing with remote communities and
disparate opinions is hard.   Even full time PR departments for large
corporations stuff this up on a regular basis.  There is no doubt in my
mind that ultimately their main motivation is having a cool map that people
can use in cool ways.  Just like me.

I accept a person of principle can decline.  I can see the reasons for
doing it.

However, it is also an option for them to now say that the point is now
made.

Thanks,
Ian.

On 31 March 2012 13:59, Richard Colless <firefly at ar.com.au> wrote:

>  I did decline the new terms. And I was contacted, as I said, just once,
> by someone trying to persuade me to change my mind. My point was that OSM
> never  contacted me to say that a licence change was being considered. That
> is hardly the right way to go about making a major change to the system.
>
> I also take issue with this statement:
>
> Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build
> data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our
> projects.
>
> Don't try blaming decliners for the hurt to other mappers. If anyone built
> up on my edits, and their work gets deleted as a result, blame OSM, not the
> members who declined.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> On 31/03/2012 12:36 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been pursued,
> sure.  But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried to keep the
> knowledge of the licence change quiet.  I think a fair few people have been
> trying to get in touch with as many people as possible.
>
> I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors individually who
> haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't edited for a while.  These
> are the people who may not be engaged with the community any longer, and
> who actually may not know about the licence change.  Did you decline the
> licence change?  Because if you did, I'd have assumed that you knew about
> it and were aware of the discussion, and therefore didn't need to be
> contacted.
>
> Thanks,
> Ian.
>
> On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless <firefly at ar.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.
>>
>> Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE
>> communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to reconsider. If
>> not for the discussion of the forum, I would not have even known about the
>> licence change. AI think that shows how much OSM cares about keeping
>> contributors informed about changes.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:
>>
>>> On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant Slater<openstreetmap at firefishy.com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Australian Decliners,
>>>>
>>>> As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's sysadmin team I
>>>> kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status. Time is
>>>> about to run out.
>>>>
>>> You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as we were
>>> insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you come begging
>>> for us to reconsider.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered, after all you
>>> are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
>>> choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to call the
>>> whole thing off.
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20120331/b7da9f49/attachment.html>