[OSM-talk] OSM Licence vote

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Stubbs" <osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk>
To: "David Groom" <reviews at pacific-rim.net>
Cc: "talk openstreetmap.org" <talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Licence vote


>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 9:19 PM, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net> 
> wrote:
>> Sorry to be pedantic but the wording of the OSMF member vote is:
>>
>> Do you approve the process of moving OpenStreetMap to the ODbL?
>> Yes, I approve.
>> No, I do not approve.
>>
>> Unfortunately this sentence on which we are asked to vote has at least 
>> two
>> meanings
>>
>> 1) Do you approve of the process? [as in the procedural method used]
>>
>> 2) Do you approve of the change.
>>
>> I presume the intention is it to mean (2), but the wording is much closer 
>> to
>> (1).
>
>
> I'm actually fairly sure it means (1) & (2). The LWG have put forward
> a proposal of how OSM to move on wrt licensing, it's that proposal
> we're voting on. That proposal includes what is to change (CC BY-SA ->
> ODbL + Contrib Terms), as well as timetable and mechanism, including
> basic wording of the question contributors will be required to agree
> to.
>
>>
>> Ironically simply by definition of the poor wording it is unlikely I 
>> could
>> agree to the process, irrespective of my actual views on CC-BY-SA v ODbL.
>
> They are intimately linked. Saying we want ODbL without how we intend
> to get there isn't so useful, and a lot of people wouldn't agree to
> changing unless they knew how that change was to be implemented.
> What it is about the process you don't want to agree to?

That the wording of the vote is ambiguous.

You start your response "I'm fairly sure", implying that you don't know for 
certain what it is you are being asked to vote on.

If we are being asked to vote on a issue of such fundamental importance to 
the future of OSM there should be no room for people saying "I don't know 
what the vote means" , or, even worse, after the vote saying "I didn't think 
that was what I was voting for".

David

>
> Dave