Hi all, This is not the first time I ask the creation of an OSM list (I think I initiated 4 or 5), but certainly the first time it generates such debates. Actually I found this thread very interesting in the way it shows there are clearly different visions about what HOT is (or maybe are) and actually a good opportunity to discuss about them. I see many emails arriving on the thread while I am writing, considering I am certainly slower than Native speakers to write in English. One of the advantages when you write in your Native language! :)
First I think it is worth to remember that hot@openstreetmap.org is* de facto* the OSM mailing list about humanitarian and development topics related to OSM. There is no other one. And almost everything that is discussed is about the voluntary work done by the HOT community, as we can see eg during the last month: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/2014-June/subject.html. Only the email about the Board minutes and the one inviting to join urban CoP & webinar on mapping are related to HOT as an incorporated organization. And the latter one starts with [info-hotosm] to illustrate it comes from hotosm.org that is the domain name for HOT the incorporated NGO, Actually, the discussion regarding the organisation are done through the members...@hotosm.org (HOT members are listed in the OSM wiki <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team/Members>) or bo...@hotosm.org, not hot@openstreetmap.org. Moreover, I do not see any other existing OSM list that would be run by an organization. Being a non-profit does not change anything IMHO, basically what comes under openstreetmap.org is communautary and does not have to be approved or discussed by any upper list or organization board. I guess it would be weird, to say the least, if a geo...@openstreetmap.org would gain the right to decide or should at least been consulted to state what dev list could be created. So, if ever HOT the organization could decide what openstreetmap.org list can (or not) be created with the hot- prefix, this would lead to create a new prefix regarding humanitarian and development, cause basically, why a specific organization would have the right to state who can create a list on a specific topic related to OSM? I personally would not encourage that (unless legal and liability concerns would demand it): I think we can easily distinguish between HOT as a worldwide OSM community involved in humanitarian and development topics and HOT an incorporated organization that is able, through its status, to get funds to make tools improving the community response or deploying in the field and interacting with the worldwide community. Maybe there should be a kind of HOT Foundation dealing with humanitarian and development topics. I formulated this a few weeks ago here <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/sev_hotosm/diary/21846> as a HOT Project combining a HOT Charter and HOT commons (please read it, it is fully readable in good English, thanks to Charlotte Wolter!), though actually more in the sense of empowering the OSM capacities and spreading out good practices rather than organizing the community itself. But if it occurs, I would not like to see this Foundation to control everything, but to have a similar role than OSMF, as Mike Collinson said, "support-but-not-control mission", fitting with the "OSM Just Do It ethos". Hope these points can make their contributions to this very interesting debate. Sincerely, Severin On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Fran Boon <francisb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 July 2014 12:01, Michael Collinson <m...@ayeltd.biz> wrote: > > support-but-not-control mission of the OSMF > > This is exactly what comes to my mind observing this discussion...I > would much prefer to see the HOT board being supportive rather than > trying to be controlling. > > > 1) We (OpenStreetMap) do draw a firm distinction between OSM and OSMF, > i.e. > > a broad community with fuzzy membership and a, well, bureaucratic > > organisation with with specific finite membership. In line with that, our > > osmf-* lists are only generated after broader discussion and may involve > > board sanction. Should HOT reflect that distinction in some way? > > I think this is the real nub of many of our community's current problems! > > Is HOT primarily: > (A) HOT Inc (like OSMF) > (B) Community (like OSM) > > Many here see HOT as primarily B with HOT Inc being present to provide > Support. > > It would be nice if HOT Inc were the 'HOT Foundation' which would > phrase it nicely & allow the distinction to be drawn more > easily....and drawing a parallel with the parent OSM... > > Best Wishes to all, > Fran. > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > HOT@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list HOT@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
