[OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] In what direction should OSM go?

[Nic Roets]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Peter Körner <osm-lists at mazdermind.de> wrote:
> Am 29.09.2010 11:50, schrieb Elizabeth Dodd:
>>
>> This belongs back on talk
>> with a new header.
>> OSM states that it is a free map, free to edit and free to use
>> Whether the database should contain imported stuff, traced stuff, or
>> only personally surveyed stuff is a very big issue and any intent now
>> to alter the basic rules of inputting should be back on Talk.
>
> Imported data is dead data - there's no one that feels responsible for it.
> Imports can kill community and give "newcomers" the feeling that there's
> nothing more to be done. Imports *can* help osm but they can also *hurt*
> osm, because osm is about people, not data.

Obviously there are many exceptions to your rule, like the TIGER import.

To get back to what OSM should be. I think the words "Open" and
"StreetMap" create certain expectations among the general public and
we should close attention to that. When we reach them, we get only a
few minutes of their time, and if their expectations aren't met they
loose interest.

Many of the issues have been identified by the uservoice survey. But I
also think the paralysis and endless arguments over tagging standards
and the license are causing a lot of people to leave.