[OSM-talk] Defining critical mass...

Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net
Wed Jul 14 12:07:10 BST 2010


Ulf Lamping wrote:
> For example remember positions like Richard Fairhursts in the thread 
> (I know that it's not an "official" OSMF/LWG position)

Of course it isn't. I'm not on the OSMF board let alone LWG; indeed, I
actively told OSMF earlier this year that I did not intend to assist it in
any way because of my discontent at how the project blog and Twitter feed
were being managed.

There is no more reason why I should speak for OSMF than for the Venezuelan
government, and I have no idea whether or not either OSMF or the Venezuelan
government shares any of my views. (I suspect I'm probably closer to the
Venezuelans on most issues...)

> I have choosen "to get involved in the running of the project" by 
> mapping a lot of stuff, organising a local regular mapping group, 
> helping in several german OSM activities and whatnot. Now telling 
> me to shut up about decisions when I'm not a member of the OSMF 
> is, well, disgusting IMHO.

Hey. Please don't put words into my mouth. I have not used the phrase "shut
up". I am simply saying that if you wanted to get involved in the decision
whether or not to ask users how they would licence their contributions,
there was a really simple way to do so: by joining OSMF.

Over at Wikipedia they have a phrase: "Assume good faith". It's a good
phrase. Please remember it.

Richard
-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Defining-critical-mass-tp5290276p5292002.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




More information about the talk mailing list