[OSM-talk] "local chapter" DWG

Richard Weait richard at weait.com
Tue Apr 15 10:56:37 UTC 2014

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:57 AM, maning sambale
<emmanuel.sambale at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear everyone,
> This is a thorny issue bit will ask anyway. ;)
> Not very often, but we do encounter questionable contributions.
> Normally, local mappers would contact the specific contributor  to
> explain and provide guidance.  But in some cases, these messages were
> ignored and the contributor continues to do questionable edits.
> There is a DWG [0] to resolve such issue.  We do understand that DWG
> members are volunteers like most of us and local issues might not get
> attention immediately.  I would like to discuss the possibility for
> our local chapter/community to form our own sort of DWG where we can
> address local concerns/disputes.
> We have a few active and trusted volunteers who can discuss and
> resolve such issues.  But in rare occasions we think we should have
> the rights to do "temporary blocks" within our local areas.

Dear Maning,

I wrote a post on talk-us@ that addressed some of the issues you
mention.  It was posted in November 2013, and the link in the archives
is https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2013-November/012171.html

It seems that you are doing the right things.  You suggest in your
email as I suggested in my post, and as others have elsewhere, that
local mappers reach out to each other to discuss challenging behaviour
and come to understanding and consensus where possible.  Where and
when that effort falls short, reach out to the DWG for further

Do follow up with data at osmfoundation.org, if you haven't done so
already.  From Serge's recent post, it seems that they aren't
deliberately ignoring you.  :-)

I suggest that you consider volunteering for the DWG, and have one or
more of your trusted local mappers do the same.  it doesn't make sense
to me, to have a Local DWG.  There is no Local Database, only the one
global database.  Unnecessary duplication of effort by creating a
second and subservient dwg seems a poor option compared to
participating in an existing dwg.

Volunteers acting in their role as DWG members will strive to do so
while maintaining a careful balance in many ways.  One form of balance
they must seek is to apply sufficient local knowledge, and
understanding of local cultural and other contexts, but not to be so
entwined in local context as to be inappropriately biased.  They must
strive to seek solutions that consider the global and local context,
each in appropriate measure, as Simon indicated in his post.

best regards and happy mapping,


More information about the talk mailing list