[OSM-talk] "local chapter" DWG

[Simon Poole]

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.

Simon



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
> motherland.
> http://www.s1expeditions.com
> 
> 
> 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 [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
>     assistance.
> 
>     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,
> 
>     Richard
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     talk mailing list
>     talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 553 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20140415/596fa2ee/attachment.pgp>