[OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

<trolling ON>
Stop harassing the poor guys of the LWG.
They are just volonteers carrying out orders of the OSMF.
And after all:  99.99 % of our community
was not addressed. 
And  those who were addressed ...i tiny minority... who cares...
they won't bother us no more.... 
<trolling off>

Gert

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: TimSC [mailto:mappinglists at sheerman-chase.org.uk] 
Verzonden: maandag 20 juni 2011 18:47
Aan: talk at openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual

On 20/06/11 16:33, Steve Coast wrote:
> I think the LWG is more than well aware that they are imperfect human 
> beings volunteering in a horrible environment to make things better.
So, can you point to where LWG itself has explicitly asked for help? Or 
recognised it's difficulties with communication in writing? Perhaps we 
need a request for help page on the wiki? It would be good to have them 
ask for specific types of help because people with those skills can step

forward.

>
> I'd take a long look at how you have sucked up the LWGs time, Tim, 
> before you make these kinds of statements.
Steve, can you stop changing the subject on to me? It's ad hominem and a

violation of etiquette. And it is off topic and doesn't assume good 
faith. Do you understand what I am asking, as you keep doing it even 
when I ask you to stop?

Everything I have done, I have done in good faith. I shouldn't have to 
defend myself on every thread. (And Steve, if you want to talk about 
this seriously, try constructively responding to my email to the LWG on 
15th June first. Continued discussion on this probably should be off the

mailing list.)

On 20/06/11 16:39, Chris Hill wrote:
> Maybe part of the reason that these volunteers are working too hard is

> because some people demand individual attention. Imagine if everyone 
> made their own demands of the LWG ...
>
Are you seriously saying that a handful of people directly talking to 
the LWG is a significant factor in LWG having communication 
difficulties? Or is this just another ad hominem? Is there a 
constructive solution to this? or are you telling me to shut up?

It seems to me the same issues come up again and again, but never 
concluded, so it is not necessarily the fault of the person asking the 
question (or even of the LWG). I suggest that people directly trying to 
communicate with the LWG is a symptom and not a cause of the 
communication problem.

Of course the LWG has a tough job, because legal issues are very hard to

resolve and I have never denied that. But the solution is not to blame 
me or LWG but to actually try to solve the problems. So stop pointing 
fingers, please.

Perhaps if we can reduce the barriers to people helping OSM it would 
help. We obviously do this in mapping with friendlier tools. But I am 
told we talk people that can do sys admin tasks and get involved with 
the LWG (and probably many other things I don't know about). This might 
be due to the selection of pretty obscure prerequisites to get involved:

ruby on rails in development (I have never met a RoR developer in 
person, at least knowingly), and being familiar with the background of 
ODbL (which most normal legal professionals can't understand, unless 
they are specialists). I suggest as many tasks as possible be moved into

domains were people actually have the skills to help out. (This might be

a lame idea but at least I am trying to be constructive.)

Regards,

TimSC


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk