[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] A Better Map

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Wed Oct 22 21:04:38 UTC 2014


I want to apologize in case you missed explicit support from me (and the
board), it was likely just a miscommunication given that the person in
question lambasted essentially everybody that he had ever had contact
with and you in discussion suggested that we simply ignore him.


Am 22.10.2014 22:54, schrieb Serge Wroclawski:
> I want to actually apologize for one mis-statement. Michael Collinson
> from the MT actually was very good about this and one-on-one, board
> members who I speak with have been kind/supportive,
> I want to also point out that this is not about me getting recognition
> for my work on OSM, but about the general lack of support that the
> volunteers can get from the board, when just a pat on the back would
> be nice.
> The board is under incredible stress and strain, and they're
> volunteers like the rest of us, but there's a ton of work being done
> by groups like the Operations Team, the License Working Group, the
> Management Team, the Communications Working Group, the Data Working
> Group, etc. All of these folks deserve more support and recognition.
> - Serge
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Kate,
>> Replies in-line.
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>>> I'd say the size of the board to me is not necessarily the issue. I do think
>>> however having a board elected completely just from the OSMF membership
>>> isn't the best approach. Those elected from OSM contributors (I frequently
>>> have seen in the past people post people's OSM edits for board elections)
>>> are not necessarily the best to be on a board. It does not allow the
>>> flexibility to seek out board members with specialized skills. For example
>>> most of the board would not claim to be experts in finance, or legal
>>> matters. I certainly think election from part of the community is not a bad
>>> thing, but perhaps it isn't the only way.
>> I think you're connecting board membership with officer positions and
>> that doesn't need to be connected.
>> It's possible (and often preferable) to have a board of people who
>> oversee the officers but are not one of them. That also gives you
>> flexibility because your board can say "We will nominate so-and-so to
>> be CEO and so-and-so to be CFO, rather than using terms like
>> "President" and "Treasurer". It also means the board positions can be
>> equal, if the board so chooses.
>> I think that this argument of separation of concerns makes a lot of
>> sense, I think that board members should be members, but officers may
>> not need to be.
>>> Yes, I think that paid staff can certainly help with some of the tasks.
>>> Financing this is a different issue however. I used to work as paid staff on
>>> an animal shelter for abused/neglected horses that had many volunteers while
>>> attending uni. When there was 2 feet of snow in the middle of January it was
>>> the paid staff usually out feeding the animals and shoveling the manure.
>>> Volunteers were great for the "fun" tasks such as giving tours, grooming
>>> horses and giving pony rides at fundraisers. We need to seriously look at
>>> what the OSM equivalent is of "shoveling manure" and if it is appropriate
>>> hire people to do it.
>> Yes, and adding on, some recognition would also be nice, even for volunteers.
>> Last month I received an extremely nasty, rude email from someone
>> about actions that I took as part of my DWG duties. That email
>> insulted me, attacked my sexuality, was vaguely threatening to my
>> fiancee, etc. and the board was CCed by the original author. None of
>> the board members or members of management team (who was also CCed)
>> said a word about it.
>> This kind of dismissal for our feelings as individuals as we put work
>> into the project is really disheartening.
>> - Serge
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20141022/819a776f/attachment.sig>

More information about the talk mailing list