[OSM-talk] Paweł's q: what can be done?

[Robin Paulson]

On 2013-02-04 07:02, Michal Migurski wrote:
>> which concerns me no end. what position of authority does simon 
>> hold? over whom?
>
> Simon is the elected chairman of the OSMF board, and can speak on its
> behalf. He holds a position of authority over the Geocode Inc. issue
> because apparently the foundation received a C&D.
>
>
>> what significance does the osmf board hold? they speak for 
>> themselves, not anyone else.
>
> That's exactly the question at hand in this particular argument.
>
> We seem to have an OSMF that's not effective at communicating, and
> large parts of the community don't see the value they offer. Your
> takeaway is that the board is not representative of the project and
> should not exist at all. My feeling is that a project needs a

no, my takeaway is that any time a small group attempts to represent a 
larger group, necessarily there will be problems, therefore we should 
not have a small group such as the board attempting to represent 30,000 
individuals who map

> political structure to survive. In either case, Geocode Inc. believes

when you say "the project", you imply the people who contribute can be 
fashioned into a unity. i am fundamentally against that, it is flawed 
thinking. we are a multitude [1], not a singular, and thus we cannot be 
represented by anything less than ourselves.

> that the OSMF are the right people to receive a C&D.
>
> Ultimately, someone needs to own the domain name and the API and the
> servers it runs on. That's who the Geocodes of the world are going to

well, if we assume that certain resources are best centralised, and 
thus controlled by a single entity. i don't, again that is flawed as it 
gives power and control to a few. if we move away from that, and there 
is no representation, no centralisation, who do geocde send the notice 
to, all 30,000 who map?

> target. It would be best if that someone was answerable to the larger
> community through a democratic process of some sort, so in my view 
> the
> OSMF is a requirement.
>
> I'm not frustrated that we *have* a board, I'm frustrated that the
> board we've got doesn't seem effective at communicating its purpose 
> or
> much of anything else. They're bad at politics. If they were good at
> politics, you wouldn't be disagreeing with the idea of a board 
> because
> you'd be thankful for the provision of a quality API and the decisive
> resolution of legal threats from trademark trolls.

yes i would still be disagreeing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude

-- 
robin

http://universitywithoutconditions.ac.nz - Auckland's Free University