[OSM-talk] "local chapter" DWG
simon at poole.ch
Tue Apr 15 11:31:12 UTC 2014
As Richard pointed out in his post, there is already an "in place"
practice of handling issues locally and only a small number of things
get escalated to the level of the DWG.
Naturally how good this works depends on the strength of the local
community, but I would wager a bet that if you can't do it informally,
you are going to have a large problem trying to put a working formal
organisation in place.
What would help is more support, for the cases that percolate up to the
DWG, to overcome language and cultural boundaries.
Am 15.04.2014 13:11, schrieb Ervin Malicdem:
> Assigning local DWGs gets the job done faster in a local level as they
> can easily find out if the edits are vandalized due to first-hand
> knowledge of the data; and immediate lock out of the account can help
> control additional vandalized edits. And this can be performed faster
> as the local DWG is on the same time zone.
> And having a global DWG as an escalation point would make a "final"
> decision in case there is a need for it. If there is a need for
> arbitration, this setup would be beneficial and would foster transparency.
> Though most of the time, these vandals would never insist for their
> edits as most of the time they are just trolling around and escalation
> would most likely never happen.
> Local DWGs, IMHO are beneficial for faster response.
> Ervin M.
> *Schadow1 Expeditions* - A Filipino must not be a stranger to his own
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com
> <mailto:richard at weait.com>> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:57 AM, maning sambale
> <emmanuel.sambale at gmail.com <mailto: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  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
> 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
> <mailto: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,
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk at openstreetmap.org>
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 553 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the talk