[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Should OSMF adopt a policy about State of the Map conference in places that are LGBTQ*/etc unsafe?

[Yves]

Hello,
That is certainly a topic to be considered. 
I'm not sure it is better to close the debate beforehand by such a rule instead of having the debate when considering a particular venue. 
The later may give more room to discuss about diversity in the future, also when a place is in a grey area. Of course, we can have this discussion now. 

Regards, 
Yves 


Le 6 octobre 2021 23:09:02 GMT+02:00, Amanda McCann <amanda.mccann at osmfoundation.org> a écrit :
>Hello OSM friends,
>
>So here's an idea... I've previously complained when an organisation holds an event in a place where it's “illegal to be gay” and claim that the event is a “safe space”. Since I'm on the OSMF Board, I would be wrong for me to continue to complain about other organisations and not try to suggest such a policy for the OSMF.
>
>The OSMF grants a trademark licence (for the “State of the Map” trademark which the OSMF legally owns) to regional event conferences, and legally, the OSMF runs the annual State of the Map conference.
>
>There are several different wordings of this policy possible. My initial idea of a policy is: “you can't have a SotM for [REGION] in a venue if same-sex sexual activity is illegal (& that's being enforced) there, *and* there is a place in [REGION] where that is legal (or illegal & not enforced)”. This covers bi/pan/queer/etc people.
>
>I can't easily think of a simple rule for trans/gender identity issues that's as clear cut for the very basic level (e.g. many countries have required gender segregated toilets for a long time and the laws requiring ”birth sex” are new and uncommon, legal gender recognition might not be so relevant for a visitor, etc) so I'll stick to this for now. I am OK with “State of the Map [COUNTRY]” happening in a country where it's illegal everywhere. My goal is to prevent anyone having a *legal downgrade* with “State of the Map”.
>
>Many in OSM have spent a long time improving things for minoritized groups, and maybe this is just another step in that process. I am only mentioning “illegal to be gay” because it's a simple, clear standard. I think it could be benefitial to include other standards too (e.g. I believe some countries forbid women from driving). I am focussing on LGBTQ+ issues because that affects me personally, and I know a lot about it. I encourage other minoritized people to speak up if they want.
>
>So what do yous, the wider OSM(F) community think about the OSMF adopting this policy (or something like it, or not adopting anything new policy)?
>
>-- 
>(P.S.: I recently changed my name)
>
>A. McCann
>Secretary
>OpenStreetMap Foundation
>
>Name & Registered Office:
>OpenStreetMap Foundation
>St John’s Innovation Centre
>Cowley Road
>Cambridge
>CB4 0WS
>United Kingdom
>A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales
>Registration No. 05912761
>
>_______________________________________________
>osmf-talk mailing list
>osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20211007/a729f9f6/attachment.htm>