[OSM-talk] Summary of the irc meeting.
openstreetmap-L at gj0.net
Fri Apr 7 12:46:55 BST 2006
Are we trying to create a membership that is inclusive or one that is elitist?
The only way this is going to be a great project is to have a very
inclusive membership. We need as many members as possible. Requiring
passports, GPG signatures, or any other kind of awkwardness will just
deter members. There are plenty of other projects out there competing
for volunteers time.
The only criteria that works for me is to use some kind of measure of
the amount that a person contributes to the project. If you have
contributed then you have a right to some say in the project.
If a person can be bothered to create 10 identities and then
contributes 10x more then they probably deserve 10 votes. We need
people that do 10x more work.
How workable would some thresholds like these be, for example?
Any one of the following entitles a user to be a member (for 1 year):
- Committing 100 lines of useful code to cvs
- Upload 100,000 gps track points
- Creating 1,000 new nodes, segments or ways
- Donating $100
- Making 200 useful edits on the Wiki
On 4/7/06, Jim Ley <jim at jibbering.com> wrote:
> "Immanuel Scholz" <immanuel.scholz at gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:60036.80.246.32.40.1144408982.squirrel at www.eigenheimstrasse.de...
> > So your conclusion is, that the security by using signed GPG-ids as a
> > requirement to become member of OSMF is too easy to bypass and the
> > problems we get with ensuring it at all aren't worth the effort?
> No, my conclusion is it would unreasonably preclude people who could not get
> signed GPG-ids and those people unwilling to have signed GPG-ids.
> The other stuff was just to illustrate that it doesn't prevent duplicate
> people so if that's a design constraint it's not really meeting it. Of
> course there's very little that does other than only in person voting...
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
(Forgot to reply to the list again)
More information about the talk