[OSM-talk] Poll on Governance, what constitutes news, wiki front page

[Richard Fairhurst]

TimSC wrote:
> Richard, can't we just live and let live? You're profile has the wise
> words to avoid "endless discussions" and go do stuff. I think it is
> possible since we recently dropped a discussion that was going nowhere,
> at your suggestion [5]. I respected your request - live and let live. I
> am not asking you to do much - I am just asking for you to lay off, please.

I will happily withdraw when you decouple your threat to damage the map 
of Great Britain, by withdrawing your contributions, from the separate 
issue of OSM governance.

There is certainly a debate to be had about OSM governance. It is 
something that I've discussed with numerous people for many months. I 
have several times gone on the record as saying that there are aspects 
of OSMF's behaviour that I have found perplexing at best and 
irresponsible at worst.

This is a big debate, and needs to be approached carefully, not rushed. 
Yet Phase 4 of the relicensing starts next week. The governance debate 
will clearly not be concluded by then. Your fellow British mappers need 
clarity about whether to start remapping the areas where you have 
contributed.

You have stated that you support a public domain licence:
 
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-April/003273.html
["We would be better serviced in our project goals by a simpler license 
i.e. a public domain-like license... legal problems are almost 
inevitable with any share-alike license"]

I also support public domain. I have placed my edits in the public 
domain, and therefore cannot disagree with these Contributor Terms or 
indeed any non-exclusive terms. I would presume you, as a PD supporter, 
would do the same.

You have not yet done so. Instead, you have linked your acceptance of 
ODbL+CT to issues of OSM governance.

You are the only one in the 30 most active contributors to Britain not 
to have accepted or declined ODbL+CT, and one of just three in the 100 
most active. If you really want a debate about OSMF governance untainted 
by other considerations, please accept or decline the Contributor Terms.

Richard