[OSM-talk] Defining critical mass...

Ulf Lamping ulf.lamping at googlemail.com
Wed Jul 14 08:59:24 BST 2010


Am 14.07.2010 01:26, schrieb John Smith:
> There has been a slightly disturbing thread on the legal-talk list
> about defining critical mass, so far things aren't any closer to being
> defined and statistics are being abused to suit positions:
>
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-July/003453.html
>
> At this stage I'll not be agreeing to ODBL, not because I disagree
> with the license, but because I disagree with the process being used.
> Without some better criteria being employed to make the process less
> subjective and prone to personal bias it will be as 80n put it, a
> simple wait game until things go their way, I don't think this is the
> right thing to do, it's a kind of sleazy politicking tactic to achieve
> an unfavourable result desired by a minority...

A lot of the points in this thread was already discussed by others and 
me around 2009. The whole license (change) discussion in 2009 (to my 
understanding) boiled down to: Become member of the OSMF or shut up and 
follow our judgement.


See what our (IMHO not so) respectful OSMF chairman and project founder 
Steve C had to say about license (working group) critics in December 2009:

http://fakestevec.blogspot.com/2009/12/fable.html


I had hoped that after the dust settled a bit the OSMF learned from 
these discussions, but reading the above legal talk thread I still see 
the same elitist behaviour from the "inner circle" as before - very sad 
to see :-(

Regards, ULFL




More information about the talk mailing list