[OSM-talk] Analysing the OSM community

[john whelan]

Speaking as someone with a background in science I think I agree with
Elizabeth's interpretation.

I get the impression the study is much more subjective than solid, the
sample size far too small to get any meaningful results other than this
needs more research dollars to further define etc etc.

I've just been reading a study on licensing by a consultant.  Take out the
jargon and it says the more liberal the license the more likely it is that
people will use your "Open data".  Well yes but did we really need a study
to discover that?

I like jargon when it is used as a short hand way of expressing something to
a group of people working in a field but not when it is used to add
"respectability" to a report.

Cheerio John


On 28 March 2011 19:05, Robin Paulson <robin.paulson at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 29 March 2011 10:09, Elizabeth Dodd <edodd at billiau.net> wrote:
> > I didn't find the abstract meaningful as it was full of politically
> > correct speak.
>
> well done, an entire scientific study dismissed with a meaningless
> piece of jargon. perhaps a more in-depth analysis would be more
> useful?
>
> --
> robin
>
> http://tangleball.org.nz/ - Auckland's Creative Space
> http://openstreetmap.org.nz/ - Open Street Map New Zealand
> http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20110328/67bd58da/attachment.html>