[OSM-talk] Import guidelines & OSMF/DWG governance

[Eric Marsden]

>>>>> "fr" == Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> writes:

  fr> I welcome a discussion about rules - which ones we need, who makes
  fr> them, who executes them. It is clear that we need *some* rules,
  fr> but until now there's no formal community process to create or
  fr> amend such rules.
  fr> 
  fr> I'm happy to hear any suggestions that people might have. How can
  fr> the will of the community be caputured and distilled into a rule -
  fr> and where should we work without any rules? In what areas do we
  fr> have to have rules that govern all of OSM, and in what areas can
  fr> we afford to defer to local communities?

  Thank you for addressing this issue in a constructive manner.

  Rather than (or before) discussing rules, it seems to me that it would
  be useful to start by establishing some basic principles which could
  guide OSMF activities. Below are a few principles which are widely
  accepted as foundations for good governance of community-based
  endeavours.


    - Openness/transparency. OSMF working groups are notoriously opaque,
      though some have improved over the last year by posting open
      minutes of meetings (which requires significant effort and which I
      applaud). Some of the technical measures implemented by OSMF
      are well designed in this regard; for example, it is possible for
      everyone to see the message posted by an admin justifying an
      account block. But historical information such as the number of
      blocks imposed per week are missing AFAICT (allows people to
      monitor for admin abuse). 
      

    - Subsidiarity. OSMF and its working groups should only perform
      those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more
      immediate or local level. Discussions with contributors who seem
      to need assistance should be delegated to the local community
      (OSMF should endeavor to establish a network of formal
      correspondants per country/region, and use country-wide osm
      mailing lists otherwise). OSMF could assist local communities by
      giving them access to tools designed to detect vandalism or large
      numbers of errors.
      
      
    - Consultation and dialogue. OSMF and its working groups should
      always seek input from contributors and other interested parties
      before making decisions.
     
      
    - Proportionality. Any sanctions imposed by OSMF representatives
      (such as account blocks) should be proportional to the damage
      incurred or intended. [This is one principle which OSMF seems to
      respect.]

      
    - Accountability. OSMF representatives who are given special
      privileges (such as the ability to block contributor accounts)
      must be accountable for their actions. 
      

    - Respect for contributors' privacy. This seems easy to understand,
      and I am happy with OSMF's performance in this area. 


-- 
Eric Marsden