Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
Hi all, I suggest people try to a bit more constructive on this thread. It has gone off topic and contains a few breaches of the etiquette guidelines. The process that got us to where we are but if people have a problem with it, it would be more useful to look to the future IMHO. I am not saying everything in the process was fine. This is tacitly acknowledged by the CTs now having a defined mechanism for license change (regardless of if you agree with the CTs, they still are a clarification). If we don't get more constructive, the mailing lists are just full of noise but no "signal", as engineers would call it. TimSC ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
Am 11.06.2011 04:46, schrieb John F. Eldredge: > Dermot McNally wrote: > >> On 11 June 2011 02:13, John F. Eldredge wrote: >> >>> When I signed up in the first place, I was required to say "I accept having >>> my data placed under the CC-by-SA license", but, unlike the new license, I >>> was not required to waive my right to have a say in any future license >>> change. >> >> You are not waiving your right to have a say with the new CT. You are >> waiving your right to have a veto. I can't name a single mapper >> important enough to have one of those. >> >> >>> The OSMF is replacing democracy with oligarchy, so that, in the future, no >>> mappers except the tiny fraction who are members of the OSMF will have a >>> say in any future license change, such as changing over to charging for the >>> use of map data. >> >> No, we've never had democracy prior to CT. What we've had is a >> situation where any one mapper may erect a barrier to whatever >> decision needs to be made. CT replaces this with democracy requiring a >> 2/3 majority of active mappers. Those mappers do not have to be OSMF >> members as your comments above suggest. Have you actually read the CT? >> >> Dermot > > Yes, I have read the Contributor Terms. Have you? The contributor terms > that were publicly announced included having to agree in advance to any > future changes in the licensing, or else have my existing edits removed and > be unable to contribute any further edits. This forced agreeing in advance > means that we won't be given the chance to vote yes or no in the future. > This is democracy only in the sense of the sham elections held in > dictatorships. If you try to troll the list, please do so in a less obvious manner. Thanks. -- Dirk-Lüder "Deelkar" Kreie Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 2011-06-11 01:49, Dermot McNally skrev: > On 11 June 2011 00:15, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Switzerland around the same time held a referendum on whether to ban > the building of Minarets. I expect that many Muslims voted against the > ban. The referendum was carried. No voters _are_ treated differently > after the vote. No, it's not NO voters, I suspest many cristians voted no as well, all i know in that contry votes no and none are muslims. Analogys always fail, in one way or an other. In your the difference is that in the OSM, vote it was vote yes or leave. A such ultimatum does change how people vote. I think the old licence was better, or at least I think it was, but in the end that issue never been important enough to consider not mapping. There are at the moment no alternatives. Had not OSM existed mapping for a company like Waze probably even been good enough. My goal is a good map and I'm pragmatic about the mapping. > Your definition of democracy does not seem to accord with mine. Where > did you get it? The vote yes or leave, don't sound fully democratic to me. It's not a vote but a licence acceptance round. I can accept he new law but would probably votes no on a change, Because I think the change make more troubles that it saves us from. With than i can still accept the new terms to work. Voting and accepting a new licence is two differnt things. Can we get back to mapping now? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3zGugACgkQtbR3SXmySrcTfwCggIgvSEJisRCo9zvb73MfA/BU D+QAnAmWkEzvEGptTkauBn4n1uUGUhGp =SZGY -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 10 Jun 2011, at 23:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > You're still conflating two decisions. To continue with your referendum > analogy, someone may vote no on construction of a new arts center, yet still > patronize it once it's complete. But one cannot 'vote' no on the license > change and then continue to edit once the process continues. You're misunderstanding what's going on – no one is voting to change the license or not. You are accepting a license or not. If you are unwilling to contribute under the terms the project needs your data under the project has no use for your data and asks you not to edit.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Taginfo under new address
Taginfo is now available under the new address taginfo.openstreetmap.org that better reflects that it contains data for the whole planet. (The old address taginfo.openstreetmap.de will redirect to the new address for the time being.) If you haven't tried Taginfo yet: Taginfo gives you statistics and other info about tags used in OSM. Try it at http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/ In addition to the main taginfo instance that contains data for the whole world, there are currently three public Taginfo instances for Ireland, Switzerland, and Italy. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taginfo/Sites for the addresses. If you want to help developing Taginfo, use its API, or run your own Taginfo instance, there is some documentation on the wiki and you can also join the new taginfo-dev mailing list: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/taginfo-dev Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 6/11/2011 4:43 AM, Thomas Davie wrote: On 10 Jun 2011, at 23:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote: You're still conflating two decisions. To continue with your referendum analogy, someone may vote no on construction of a new arts center, yet still patronize it once it's complete. But one cannot 'vote' no on the license change and then continue to edit once the process continues. You're misunderstanding what's going on – no one is voting to change the license or not. You are accepting a license or not. If you are unwilling to contribute under the terms the project needs your data under the project has no use for your data and asks you not to edit. There have been claims that the high percentage of users agreeing to the change represents a vote to change. This is what I am refudiating. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
Dermot McNally wrote: > On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC wrote: > > I think you are confusing "support the relicense" with "accept the > > relicense" and that difference is significant. > > Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between > grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal. In particular, in direct > democracy such as a referendum, small groups always design the > question that will be put to the electorate, tuning it as required so > it will command the support of a sufficient majority while still > achieving the goal. OK, so the thread went into a different direction along the way, but above is what my question originally was: what gave OSMF the power to be this small group in the first place? The OSMF only had the purpose to support OSM and suddenly it's now making the decisions? If the OSMF really wants to be the governing power, and the OSM communitity agrees to give them this power (by vote...), then fine, but please state so beforehand so we could actually have participated in it if we wanted to. But since the OSMF had (and still has) no mandate at all, they have just as much power to make decisions on OSM as any other mapper. Ben ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ben Laenen wrote: > Dermot McNally wrote: >> On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC wrote: >> > I think you are confusing "support the relicense" with "accept the >> > relicense" and that difference is significant. >> >> Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between >> grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal. In particular, in direct >> democracy such as a referendum, small groups always design the >> question that will be put to the electorate, tuning it as required so >> it will command the support of a sufficient majority while still >> achieving the goal. > > OK, so the thread went into a different direction along the way, but above is > what my question originally was: what gave OSMF the power to be this small > group in the first place? Isn't this like asking "What gave the FSF the 'power' over software?" or "What gave Wikipedia the 'power' over an information?". The OSMF is the steward of the OSM data. That's its core mandate. And thus when the CC-BY-SA license was found to have some concerning implications, the organization charged with stewardship investigated and took action. > The OSMF only had the purpose to support OSM and suddenly it's now making the > decisions? By decision, you mean took, in my 2 year recollection, at least 4 separate polls and votes, right? By decision, you mean asked the the community for their view not once, but once by OSMF, once by the community at large, twice in informal polls, and then in the current vote. They must be mad with power to ask for the community to vote again, and again, and again! > If the OSMF really wants to be the governing power, and the OSM communitity > agrees to give them this power (by vote...), then fine, but please state so > beforehand so we could actually have participated in it if we wanted to. Look at the votes. There's not been a widespread vote that showed anything >20% for those against the license. There's about 20-30% of people who support it, and then a large group who don't care, who just want to get back to mapping. I know all too well what not winning your election in a democracy means. I've lived in the US all my life, and I can tell you that not once has the candidate I voted for ever won presidential office. If you search the archives, I've argued the details of the license and CT at length. I'm done with that now- now I just want the people who didn't agree to take a hard look at the project, and the people involved, and ask themselves if they feel stronger about the politics than they do about the project. If they don't; if they love OSM, then they will just have to accept this decision, even if they don't agree with it. On the other hand, if they feel they can't accept it, they can't move on, then I think they should work with one of the OSM competitors. There are several to choose from. We welcome everyone, but no one is holding a gun to your head to stay. But right now a tiny, tiny fraction of the community is making this list and other communication intolerable through so much noise. I just want a community whose focus is getting back to basics and working on the map. When can I go on the mailing lists and not have to read complaints from the .02% of OSMers who reject like the license? > But since the OSMF had (and still has) no mandate at all, they have just as > much power to make decisions on OSM as any other mapper. All power is given. So when people agree to sign up to the project, or agree to the CT, they're giving to OSMF this power. I for one am glad that we have an organization in a stewardship role. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Kothic JS - a full-featured JavaScript map rendering engine using HTML5 Canvas
The maps are beautiful; really outstanding, gorgeous, but a bit slow to retrieve. Is the server being hammered? The time to get a map is on the order of 5-8 minutes for me... Is there anything I can do or you can do? - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 11/06/11 12:09, Ben Laenen wrote: OK, so the thread went into a different direction along the way, but above is what my question originally was: what gave OSMF the power to be this small group in the first place? The OSMF only had the purpose to support OSM and suddenly it's now making the decisions? If the OSMF really wants to be the governing power, and the OSM communitity agrees to give them this power (by vote...), then fine, but please state so beforehand so we could actually have participated in it if we wanted to. But since the OSMF had (and still has) no mandate at all, they have just as much power to make decisions on OSM as any other mapper. Ben I agree but saying this on the mailing list will make no difference at all. We need to discuss HOW we bring about change, and what that change might be. Suggestions: 1) Petition and poll to gather consensus. I create a doodle poll here: http://doodle.com/s2zg64vyaup72dcw Please publicize and vote. 2) Go to the OSMF open session tomorrow. 3) Contact OSMF directly though the committees but preferably not electronically (otherwise you might get ignored). They are actually quite a friendly bunch! 4) Join the OSMF as a member (people keep suggesting this but I don't actually agree!) Regards, TimSC ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
I don't think things are black and white, you speak of rejecting the new license which seems a little strong. I think there are some issues to deal with and some implications. If we are talking about making the basic OSM map based on direction observation, and I think we are, then I think the sooner we remove any imports the better. Otherwise with the new CT saying Oh and we reserve the right to change the license in the future you can't line up the licenses. How useful is OSM without imports, well in the UK if you don't catch buses its probably not too bad. If you do then the imported bus stops are useful. The OSM toolset is very rich as is the community's knowledge. One wonders if the answer is two databases with different licenses? one directly mapped and one that is more geared towards imports. Technically not that difficult to do and it would accommodate rather than 'split' the community. Cheerio John > If you search the archives, I've argued the details of the license and > CT at length. I'm done with that now- now I just want the people who > didn't agree to take a hard look at the project, and the people > involved, and ask themselves if they feel stronger about the politics > than they do about the project. If they don't; if they love OSM, then > they will just have to accept this decision, even if they don't agree > with it. > > On the other hand, if they feel they can't accept it, they can't move > on, then I think they should work with one of the OSM competitors. > There are several to choose from. > > We welcome everyone, but no one is holding a gun to your head to stay. > But right now a tiny, tiny fraction of the community is making this > list and other communication intolerable through so much noise. I just > want a community whose focus is getting back to basics and working on > the map. When can I go on the mailing lists and not have to read > complaints from the .02% of OSMers who reject like the license? > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 11 June 2011 13:21, TimSC wrote: > 4) Join the OSMF as a member (people keep suggesting this but I don't > actually agree!) This might be a good point for you to outline how you think important stuff should be organised - how to ensure servers are bought and stay up, how to watch over issues of licence and how decisions should be taken. A difficulty with any status quo is that dissenting opinions tend to be expressed in terms relative to that status quo, which can seem negative. What's the better way? Dermot -- -- Igaühel on siin oma laul ja ma oma ei leiagi üles ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Gift Ideas
El día Saturday 11 June 2011 02:16:12, Ken Guest dijo: > If you were really close I'd suggest a "mapkin" or blanket. > Bit pricey though. Let's do a mapnik mapkin! -- Iván Sánchez Ortega Un ordenador no es una televisión ni un microondas: es una herramienta compleja. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
The last few mails on this thread have highlighted a few good points to me. I think that OSM has a problem in that it has no processes for making decisions - we have wiki votes, mailing list 'discussions', IRC, Forums, OSMF committees, OSMF board meetings, plus some 'do whatever you want' views. This leads to endless 'discussions' which go around in circles for a long time but fizzle out rather than reaching a conclusion. The ideal outcome would be that we could have these discussions and reach a consensus that everyone accepts (even if they are not particularly happy with it). In my experience, getting a lot of different people with different views to reach a consensus is very difficult, and it takes leadership - it does not happen by itself. In my day job I look after quite a few decision making processes to help our organisation make difficult decisions. I always say that I will have failed if at the end of the day we have to resort to a vote to decide what to do - I aim for a consensus where I can go around the room and everyone says 'yes' to the proposed solution. This would not happen if you just locked 30 people in a room for a day and waited for them to agree an outcome - we do it by letting everyone have their say, then summarising the pros and cons of each option and looking to agree where the balance between the pros and cons lies to help us choose the correct way forwards. Sometimes we see that the balance is not obvious and we have to go away and do some more work to understand some of the issues, then try again. Mailing list debates do the first part of the process - everyone can have their sayand many do, over and over again What we seem to lack are people prepared to take the lead to bring the discussion to a consensus, by summarising the discussion and taking on the opinions expressed. Probably because some of our 'discussions' get so heated. This is one area where I can see OSMF providing a valuable contribution - to set down the processes by which the community makes decisions - not necessarily making the decision, but helping to manage the process. I would hope that that would reduce the amount of repetitive discussions, and the accusations that OSMF are in some way dictating things to the community. You can imagine different processes for decisions of varying significance to the community (something simple for agreeing how to tag widget XXX, to something more involved for more significant issues where you have a discussion by mailing list, and summarise it with pros and cons on a wiki page etc.). I was hoping to make it to London tomorrow to discuss this, but will not be able to get there unfortunately. Regards Graham. On 11 June 2011 13:52, Dermot McNally wrote: > On 11 June 2011 13:21, TimSC wrote: > > > 4) Join the OSMF as a member (people keep suggesting this but I don't > > actually agree!) > > This might be a good point for you to outline how you think important > stuff should be organised - how to ensure servers are bought and stay > up, how to watch over issues of licence and how decisions should be > taken. A difficulty with any status quo is that dissenting opinions > tend to be expressed in terms relative to that status quo, which can > seem negative. > > What's the better way? > > Dermot > > -- > -- > Igaühel on siin oma laul > ja ma oma ei leiagi üles > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
Hi, Graham Jones wrote: In my day job I look after quite a few decision making processes to help our organisation make difficult decisions. I always say that I will have failed if at the end of the day we have to resort to a vote to decide what to do That's good. But also remember that in your day job, it is very likely that the people who have to live with a decision in half a year will be more or less the same who have made the discussion, give and take a bit. Whereas in OSM, even if you find an excellent consensus today, you will have to find that consensus again, or at least be ready to re-evaluate, in half a year's time since things have changed so much. This is one area where I can see OSMF providing a valuable contribution - to set down the processes by which the community makes decisions - not necessarily making the decision, but helping to manage the process. Yes. OSMF is not the body that should make decisions for OSM; but OSMF could try and "facilitate" decision making (or consensus-finding) in the OSM community. Of course, a possible result is that the OSM community is actually happy with what we have now. It has downsides but so has any established decision-making process. You can imagine different processes for decisions of varying significance to the community (something simple for agreeing how to tag widget XXX, Be warned that tagging is a field where consensus has usually not been reached, or sought, in discussions and decision-making processes, and we have often hailed that as a strength of OSM. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
Frederik Ramm wrote: > Graham Jones wrote: >> In my day job I look after quite a few decision >> making processes to help our organisation make difficult >> decisions. I always say that I will have failed if at the end >> of the day we have to resort to a vote to decide what to do > That's good. But also remember that in your day job, it is very > likely that the people who have to live with a decision in half a > year will be more or less the same who have made the discussion, > give and take a bit. Indeed. Remember, too, that in your day job, the people who have to _carry_out_ the decision will do so because they're paid to. We don't do that. We can have all the processes we like, but they make no difference if we don't actually have skilled volunteers who are both able and willing to implement the decisions. That is why OSM is, and will remain, a do-ocracy. I'll let you into a secret. The real power in OSM _isn't_ Steve's secret portal in his basement. Nor even Fake Steve's. It's here: http://svn.openstreetmap.org/ [1] cheers Richard [1] well, ok, git too these days ;) -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Join-the-OSMF-tp6461437p6465328.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 11 June 2011 19:40, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > I'll let you into a secret. The real power in OSM _isn't_ Steve's secret > portal in his basement. Nor even Fake Steve's. It's here: > http://svn.openstreetmap.org/ [1] Good one :) Regards, Pavithran ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
Richard, Frederik, Thank you for your replies. I will pick up on a couple of points. You are right that in my day job, the people involved are more constant, and yes, those implementing the decisions do get paid for it. This does not mean that you have to adopt a different approach though - we recognise that things may change that means we have to review the decision. In OSM terms this could be a significant contributor leaving the project, or feedback from users that it is not working as expected, so we would re-visit the decision made. Also a lot of potential modifications that we consider need us to use very specialised personnel. The diversion of such 'critical resource' onto a particular project rather than other work is a significant part of the decision making process. The equivalent in OSM would be if there is a good idea, but no-one prepared to implement it, it would significantly affect the balance of pros and cons for that decision! On a more positive way of thinking, the fact that others think something is a good idea might encourage people to step up to implement it? Whether OSM needs processes for making decisions or should be a 'do-ocracy' is interesting. Certainly a 'do-ocracy' is the way it is bound to go for purely technical thingsbecause those who are willing and able to implement the technical aspects are bound to have a very significant say in any technical decisions. However, softer things like tagging and (dare I say it) licence changes are not technical issues so a different approach is necessary. Whether to import data from other sources, or go out and survey is a one where 'do-ocracy' approach gets difficult - a technically capable person could write the programme to do the import, and just do itbut we know that could upset a lot of people, so a different way of deciding what to do is appropriate. [I know the tagging one is contentious - I don't want to start the debate here, but deciding whether to have a process for agreeing tags or not is probably a good candidate for any decision making process we adopt]. Thank you for the very civil replies! Regards Graham. On 11 June 2011 15:10, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Graham Jones wrote: > >> In my day job I look after quite a few decision > >> making processes to help our organisation make difficult > >> decisions. I always say that I will have failed if at the end > >> of the day we have to resort to a vote to decide what to do > > That's good. But also remember that in your day job, it is very > > likely that the people who have to live with a decision in half a > > year will be more or less the same who have made the discussion, > > give and take a bit. > > Indeed. > > Remember, too, that in your day job, the people who have to _carry_out_ the > decision will do so because they're paid to. We don't do that. We can have > all the processes we like, but they make no difference if we don't actually > have skilled volunteers who are both able and willing to implement the > decisions. > > That is why OSM is, and will remain, a do-ocracy. > > I'll let you into a secret. The real power in OSM _isn't_ Steve's secret > portal in his basement. Nor even Fake Steve's. It's here: > http://svn.openstreetmap.org/ [1] > > cheers > Richard > > [1] well, ok, git too these days ;) > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Join-the-OSMF-tp6461437p6465328.html > Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Airspace & Co.
[sorry, just noticed this one] Lennard wrote: >> the editor can hide all nodes with a certain tag > Potlatch doesn't do it, but it seems it's a feature just waiting for a > developer. Potlatch can do it fairly trivially; just give it a MapCSS stylesheet that doesn't render said tag. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Airspace-Co-tp6448447p6466017.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF ! + PD / CC0 projects
On 11/06/2011 10:02 AM, Nic Roets wrote: Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal. Dermot, I would quite like to take my data and start my own PD / CC0 project. Nic, Before you go doing that, please consider the fine choices already in play. For example I am setting up CommonMap which is CC By and CC0 friendly. Have a look at http://commonmap.org/faq - if you like what you see, please contribute in the customary manner (cash, developer time, advocacy, import processing, etc). If that is not your style, enter "OSM-Fork" into your favourite search engine and you'll come across some other systems in play. Thanks, Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
