[OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Christoph
I see that my message wasn't received as intended. My hope is not to amplify disagreements, but to help set a constructive and friendly tone. Let's take the discussion of how we're communicating "offline" -- I'll connect with you, and I hope set up a time to talk directly.
In any case, I don't feel I'm deflecting. As I said, "I think there are some very reasonable ideas and discussion on this thread, about how to describe the tasking manager, OSM, HOT, etc", and appreciate your work to help frame the complexities of OSM appropriately. 
I also think we should have better guidance on the handling of trademark policy, the appropriate ways and places to raise issues, and how the OSM Foundation and LWG handle these issues. Will bring this up.
Thanks-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

    On Monday, October 23, 2017, 10:23:14 AM MDT, Christoph Hormann <osm at imagico.de> wrote:  
 
 On Monday 23 October 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
> [...] However ... I hope we can
> also agree that it is counter productive to start off such
> discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust
> in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do".

This has nothing to do with trust, i looked at the website and describe 
my observations here.  The term "misrepresentation" is from the 
trademark policy:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#5.3._Misrepresentation

If you think it is inappropriate to use such a term w.r.t. OSM 
trademarks this is probably something you need to discuss with the LWG.

> It's emotionally draining for me to read things 
> like this, and I don't think I'm alone.

Have you considered that it might be "emotionally draining" for OSM 
contributors to see the name of the project being used on a website 
like this without any links to OSM and mentioning of the fact that OSM 
is all about collaborative global mapping even without HOT or the 
tasking manager?

FWIW - i do not feel emotionally drained about this, but i feel rather 
offended by your, Ian's and Clifford's reactions deflecting a 
matter-of-factly critique of that website and the resulting discussion 
about this and possible ways to improve it (and i welcome the 
constructive suggestions so far) into a discussion about what words may 
be used in discussion here.

I would also like to remind you that one of the most important guiding 
principle in communication in OSM is to "assume good faith".  I 
followed this principle here by describing my observations of the 
tasking manager without any interpretation as for why it is designed 
this way - although this is of course a question i did contemplate.

It would be nice to see you doing me the same courtesy by arguing the 
topic at hand without insinuating "an argumentative 
pose", "distrust", "Combative questions" or a lack of respect.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20171023/983a389e/attachment.html>