[OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Graham Jones]

>
>
> Is the process for deciding whether or not to delete a node set in stone?
> I am fairly sure that I have moved the majority of those nodes from where
> they were originally (I am fairly sure because there was originally only 1
> path on OSM going up the hill when there are 2 different paths on the
> ground), so surely if I moved them from their original position they can't
> be deleted just because the specific node id in the database was originated
> by someone else?? that's crazy - what's the logic behind that decision -
> shouldn't the check ensure that they are at least in the same place as the
> originator positioned them? Otherwise I can see a lot of senseless
> destruction and that makes me really quite sad.
>
> I agree, it sounds mad, and I find it hard to believe that 'we' would do
this.   Surely we need to apply a bit of pragmatism to  this and think
about 'reasonableness'?

I can see that it is reasonable to delete the contributions from someone
who has explicitly said that they do not agree to the new terms - that is a
shame, but it is their choice.

>From the discussion on this list (and I have not looked into it properly -
I gave up on thinking about licences when the 'debate' all got out of hand
earlier in the year), it sounds as though if someone who has neither
accepted nor declined the terms has touched an object, that object will be
deleted - is this really the intention of those looking after this licence
change?

I see there are three potential reasons for someone neither accepting nor
declining the terms:

   - They really do not agree with them, but for some reason that I can not
   think of they decide not to click the 'decline' button - These are an
   awkward case, but it is up to them to make their intentions clear.
   - They left the project having made their contribution and are now not
   contactable (changed email address etc.), or so un-interested that they do
   not respond.
   - They could be really keen OSM contributors who have since died, so are
   not answering their emails.

In my opinion, it would be reasonable to assume that the last two have the
best interests of the project at heart and do not want to have their
contributions deleted, so they should be retained.  If at some point they
contact us to say that they object to their contributions being in the
database, then yes, delete them, but leave them there until they do.

A pragmatic approach along these lines would seem quite reasonable to me,
and would save a lot of un-necessary re-work - deleting contributions of
people that we can not make contact with just seems excessive, and is
probably not what the non-contactable contributors wanted anyway.

Graham.


-- 
Graham Jones
Hartlepool, UK.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20111213/bf0a8879/attachment-0001.html>