[OSM-talk] advertising

Ulf Lamping ulf.lamping at web.de
Sun Jul 1 21:17:07 BST 2007


Nick Black schrieb:
> On 7/1/07, Ray Booysen <raybooysen at rjb.za.net> wrote:
>   
>> On 7/1/07, Steve Coast <steve at asklater.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> On 30 Jun 2007, at 14:25, David Earl wrote:
>>>
>>> At the moment it looks like a fault. But if these things proliferate all
>>> over the Europe home page, then what a first time viewer will see is a
>>> map full of adverts, not a map of collaborative effort. I think this is
>>> a shame and devalues the project.
>>>
>>>
>>> Look, these things aren't going to proliferate all over Europe or fill up
>>>       
>> the map. That's just gratuitous FUD.
>>     
Unfortunately, I exactly have:

Fear
Uncertainty
Doubt

about the attitude of the "openness" of the OSM project, but see below.
>> How would we know?
>>     
>
> Beacuse this is an open project, and the adverts were that terrible
> and taking up the entire screen, you could set up your own, ad-free
> slippy map.
>   
And how do we now that will be possible in the future? Reading the mails 
I exactly have FUD about that.
> If one year ago I had said that we would have ads on themap I would have been dismissed saying thats just FUD
>>>
>>> I hear you all about wanting the map to be Free and pure. Really, I do. On
>>>       
>> the other hand I note that only two of you are foundation members.
>>
>> Umm, what?   I don't understand how this plays a part in the conversation?
>>     
>
> Only Foundation members can vote in elections for officers.  No
> Foundation membership, no vote.  The Foundation officers that were
> available, were consulted about the adverts before they were
> integrated.  If people don't want to join the Foundation and
> participate in its democratic processes, they can't really complain
> when the Foundation makes a descision they disagree with.
>   
So the community consist only of the foundation members, any other one 
has to shut up when the foundation has made a decision?!?

This sounds to me like: "Oh, you're not a foundation member, shut up and 
go mapping". Come on, this can't be the way to handle things.
>>>
>>> And that we didn't see all this time and effort when we were looking for
>>>       
>> people to help organise the conference. So, instead of talking about
>> deleting all your data or how bad it is, why don't you volunteer to organise
>> fundraising? It's really easy to send angry negative emails to the list and
>> it's much harder to volunteer and make things happen.
>>
>> It seems its easier to work on and commit geolocated adverts than emailing
>> the list and checking on ideas or comments regarding adverts on the map.
>> I've been contributing to the project for just shy of a year and this is the
>> first time I've seen what looks like a "dictatorial" use of power in OSM.
>>     
> Strong words.  Please remember that the Foudnation officers were
> elected by the Foundation membership with their own mandate.  They
> don't *have to* and aren't *supposed* to report every decision they
> make to talk.
>   
You might admit that this is a *very* sensitive question, showing the 
reactions on this thread.

My point is not the adverts per se (ok, I don't like them for several 
reasons already mentioned by others), it's the way things are done:

- no information that the foundation decided it or even what the 
foundation is doing - AT ALL
- no explanation why ads are required at all (is implementing mappam 
ad's Steve C's hobby? ;-)
- it looks like a bug in the map and it's just ugly
- ...

BTW: Why would I become a member of a foundation where I don't even know 
what there really doing?!? Until I saw it on the SOTM registration 
formular (sorry, can't attend), I didn't even know that it existed!
>> We all would like to help out but on occasion it is not possible.  Simply
>> placing adverts which you would have to admit is a contentious issue without
>> as much as an email before doing so (the email 30 minutes before deployment
>> to the foundation members doesn't count) shows very little consideration to
>> the other members' feelings on the issue.
>>
>> We seem to vote or converse on all other issues regarding OSM, so why is
>> this any different?  I work on developing maps, spend time creating GPX
>> files, nodes, ways and segments and this somehow means I can't complain
>> because I don't also work in other areas?
>>
>> Its hard to be cynical of OSM when this is the way the system is treated.
>>     
Ack

<cynical>What came into my mind when I first read the mappam mail was: 
Steve C thinks it's good for us to have ads on the map, so it won't make 
any difference to send a mail and tell him that I think it's not such a 
good idea - and this mail thread seemed to prove me right.</cynical>


Could this project please be a bit more "open" than it currently is? I 
know that it can be pretty annoying to find a decision on a public 
mailing list, but I guess there could be a better handling than the 
current "closed group" decision.

The way things are currently handled leaves a bad taste in my mouth (and 
it seems not only in mine) ...

Regards, ULFL





More information about the talk mailing list