Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Sam Couter]

Steve Bennett  wrote:
> Now, a) is a done deal. c) is scheduled, and will almost certainly
> take place. Therefore, the only people who can stop data destruction
> are the "decliners", who must share responsibility for allowing it to
> happen.

If you don't respect the people's decision to determine the licences
under which their work is made available, you can't expect anybody to
respect ODbL, or any other licence. It's fundamental to what OSM does,
it's the main point behind the whole licence change, and you really need
to understand this.
-- 
Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Steve Bennett]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:45 PM, John Smith  wrote:
> Perhaps you and others complaining loudly about people being selfish
> should blame those responsible, OSM-F, they chose to change licenses
> even though many pointed out how much would have to be tossed out, and
> even after all the tossing is finished I doubt the data set will be
> clean enough to change licenses.

Of course I blame OSMF for the very destructive decision taken, and
the way the process was handled. And I blame every "decliner" for
their part in that destruction. (It's ok to blame at multiple levels,
just the same as in a fundraising drive, we credit both the
fundraiser, and the individual donors).

> But for what end is all this work being tossed out? What is going to
> be really gained in the long run?

I completely agree. But the work only gets "tossed out" if:
a) The decision to switch licences is taken; AND
b) Contributors such as yourself decline the new CTs; AND
c) Someone actually deletes the data from the main OSM database.

Now, a) is a done deal. c) is scheduled, and will almost certainly
take place. Therefore, the only people who can stop data destruction
are the "decliners", who must share responsibility for allowing it to
happen.

> And no it's not selfish, you are welcome to continue using my data
> like you always have,

Your data is only a tiny fraction as useful if it's not in the main
OSM database.

> YOU and people just like you that don't have a
> spine to stand up to OSM-F and say no this is not the best thing to be
> doing so we can have a great map are the ones being selfish and
> choosing to opt out of better maps.

The debate was had. Many dozens, even hundreds of people "stood up"
and complained. But the debate is over, and further resistance is
futile.

> You can stop with all the bullish language about being selfish, YOU by
> going along with everything and agreeing to such a disruptive change
> for little or no benefit are purely to blame for the state of afairs
> and you have no one else to blame but yourself.

The disruption has happened. It's over, man.

> You say you want a great map, I say bullshit, you had one and you
> can't get rid of it quick enough.

No idea who that was directed at - clearly not me.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Ian Sergeant]

On 11 January 2012 09:03, Glen Cunningham  wrote:

> On Tuesday 10 January 2012 23:20:50 Sam Couter wrote:
> 
> >
> > Is it selfish of Google or Nearmap to not allow use of their data
> > under the ODbL and CTs?
>
> Surely, a better question is why did Google and Nearmap make that
> decision?
>


I've nothing but respect for the way nearmap have played.  They have
commercial interests to consider, but have invested their money and time
(more money) to ensure that OSM was not obliged by them to remove any of
their derived data.  I think they are an example of best behaviour in this
circumstance - if project moves in a different direction, by all means
dissent, or even disengage, but don't take your bat & ball etc..

As to why Google don't allow use of their data?  I'd guess because they are
a commercial company trying to make money out of selling access to that
data, and they don't want someone else giving it away for nothing?

OSM is a hobby for most of us, and we have the intention of generating free
content.  Quite different to the motivation of most commercial enterprises
I would think.

Ian.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Glen Cunningham]

On Tuesday 10 January 2012 23:20:50 Sam Couter wrote:

>
> Is it selfish of Google or Nearmap to not allow use of their data
> under the ODbL and CTs?

Surely, a better question is why did Google and Nearmap make that 
decision?

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[John Henderson]

On 10/01/12 17:37, Steve Bennett wrote:


What's more important - the ideological dispute with OSMF, or
building an awesome map database?


The latter, of course.

Nevertheless, many hard-working long-term contributors NEED to have
their say about the state of affairs before they move on to regard the
the new OSM positively.

I've done that, and have been actively contributing to untangling the
mess for some time.

Some others will never return.  What's not constructive is for them to
remain on the lists as perpetual grumblers.

John


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Sam Couter]

Steve Bennett  wrote:
> That's the point. I'm not surprised, I'm not offended. I believe the
> disgruntled have made their point, and I definitely supported them
> while the debate was active. Now that it's over, and a done deal, I
> think it would be much better for them to now (begrudingly,
> reluctantly, ...) tick the damn box and move on.

As I said before, it's just not that simple.

> But to put in thousands of hours of
> work to create free map data that can be used by anyone, and then to
> finish up having contributed nothing strikes me as a spectacularly
> selfish act of self-immolation.

Is it selfish of Google or Nearmap to not allow use of their data under
the ODbL and CTs?
-- 
Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Richard Fairhurst]

Sam Couter wrote:
> There's really no point in either side whinging
> because I don't think anything is going to change.

Absolutely. So let's get on with our respective projects, and stop squatting
on each others' mailing lists whingeing about the other project. Life is too
short.

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Mass-revert-now-tp7155336p7171636.html
Sent from the Australia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Steve Bennett]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Sam Couter  wrote:
> This is a false dichotomy. There is at least one more perspective: "you"
> (meaning OSMF and OSM contributors) suck it up and deal with the
> consequences of your actions. What's happening now was predicted way
> back, and I know "I told you so" doesn't actually help anybody, but it
> does mean it's unreasonable for you to act all surprised and offended
> about what's going on.

That's the point. I'm not surprised, I'm not offended. I believe the
disgruntled have made their point, and I definitely supported them
while the debate was active. Now that it's over, and a done deal, I
think it would be much better for them to now (begrudingly,
reluctantly, ...) tick the damn box and move on. I wouldn't even be
surprised or particularly offended if they also chose to have nothing
further to do with this community. But to put in thousands of hours of
work to create free map data that can be used by anyone, and then to
finish up having contributed nothing strikes me as a spectacularly
selfish act of self-immolation.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Sam Couter]

Steve Bennett  wrote:
> Yep, there's no question whatsoever that "I" (meaning OSMF) have
> behaved like a complete dick. Now, do we continue this game of "well,
> you behaved like a dick, so I'm going to behave like a dick", or do we
> take the higher moral ground of "well, you behaved like a dick, but I
> joined this project for the good of the greater community, and I'm not
> going to let my hurt feelings get in the way of that".

This is a false dichotomy. There is at least one more perspective: "you"
(meaning OSMF and OSM contributors) suck it up and deal with the
consequences of your actions. What's happening now was predicted way
back, and I know "I told you so" doesn't actually help anybody, but it
does mean it's unreasonable for you to act all surprised and offended
about what's going on. There's really no point in either side whinging
because I don't think anything is going to change.

> What's more important - the ideological dispute with OSMF, or building
> an awesome map database?

I don't think it's that simple. If it were I'd contribute corrections
and such to Google's maps.
-- 
Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Steve Bennett]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Sam Couter  wrote:
> The community has rejected the contributions. They were made, in
> good faith, under the licence that had been agreed to at the time.

Look, I don't think there's anyone on this list that particularly
likes the way the license change was handled. Certainly not me. But
sometimes shit happens, and we can either move forward, or keep
banging our heads against the wall complaining about wretchedly unfair
it all is. Refusing to accept the CTs will not change the CTs and it
won't change the licence used by OSM. All it does is cause that data
to be deleted.

> Really, you told him his car's not worth shit and you don't want it
> unless he also joins Family First. Even though yesterday you said you'd
> like it and he should get it for you at considerable personal effort.

Yep, there's no question whatsoever that "I" (meaning OSMF) have
behaved like a complete dick. Now, do we continue this game of "well,
you behaved like a dick, so I'm going to behave like a dick", or do we
take the higher moral ground of "well, you behaved like a dick, but I
joined this project for the good of the greater community, and I'm not
going to let my hurt feelings get in the way of that".

What's more important - the ideological dispute with OSMF, or building
an awesome map database?

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Jim Croft]

lol again... you've gotta love argument by analogy... :)

jim

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Sam Couter  wrote:

> Really, you told him his car's not worth shit and you don't want it
> unless he also joins Family First. Even though yesterday you said you'd
> like it and he should get it for you at considerable personal effort.
>

_
Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of
doubtful sanity.'
 - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963)

Please send URLs, not attachments:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Christoph Donges]

I agree. I ticked the box but it was blackmail by osm.

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Sam Couter  wrote:

> Steve Bennett  wrote:
>  > Refusing to accept the outcome (or rather, persisting vainly with the
> > idea that maybe it will change), and refusing to accept the CTs
> > amounts to blackmail at this point.
>
> I think you've got the blackmail finger pointed in the wrong direction.
> --
> Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
> OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>


-- 
bitcoin : 1HHKwJdd8vmdZg25tWhUqHhdgQQS7dgxq5
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Sam Couter]

Steve Bennett  wrote:
> This is the OSM community here. We're on an OSM mailing list. From the
> perspective of this community, John Smith's contributions are not
> usable. Certainly, he's made a valuable contribution to other
> communities elsewhere - but not this one. The complaint was that this
> community was unappreciative of his contribution - to which the
> response is that there is no contribution to this community.

The community has rejected the contributions. They were made, in
good faith, under the licence that had been agreed to at the time.

> Let's extend it further. John Smith shows up at my birthday party
> driving a new Mercedes which is his present to me. Then in
> conversation I let slip that I'm a Family First supporter. He says "if
> you don't change your mind, you can't have the car".

Holy crap, you really don't understand what's happened here at all.

Really, you told him his car's not worth shit and you don't want it
unless he also joins Family First. Even though yesterday you said you'd
like it and he should get it for you at considerable personal effort.

Have we stretched this analogy past breaking yet?

> Refusing to accept the outcome (or rather, persisting vainly with the
> idea that maybe it will change), and refusing to accept the CTs
> amounts to blackmail at this point.

I think you've got the blackmail finger pointed in the wrong direction.
-- 
Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Steve Bennett]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:32 PM, John Smith  wrote:
> That's a pretty lame example. It'd be more like if I dropped off said
> car, you decide the block off the lane way behind your house and then
> complain you can't use the car because I should supply a crane to move
> it after the road rules were changed...

Well, I guess that's the heart of the matter. I don't see much
comparison between "please tick this box" and "supplying a crane". The
point is you're still fighting a battle which is well and truly
finished, and your options are to either tick the box, or to in effect
erase all the hard work you've put in. To take the latter course of
action is both throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and cutting
off your nose to spite your face - since we're being metaphorical and
all that.

Steve
(Yes, you may argue that it's not you doing the erasing, it's OSMF,
but the effect is identical.)

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Jim Croft]

not big on socratic logic, but best OSM ROFL analogy so far this year... :)

jim

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> Let's extend it further. John Smith shows up at my birthday party
> driving a new Mercedes which is his present to me. Then in
> conversation I let slip that I'm a Family First supporter. He says "if
> you don't change your mind, you can't have the car". Well, I can't,
> and won't, so he refuses to hand me the keys. Although he leaves it
> parked on the lawn for a few months and kills the grass. It's his
> decision, and I can live with the dead grass, but to complain about
> ingratitude on my part is simply unfair.
>
-- 
_
Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of
doubtful sanity.'
 - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963)

Please send URLs, not attachments:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Steve Bennett]

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> He isn't taking anything away. Those contributions were may under the
> CC-BY-SA license. You are free to continue using them under the
> CC-BY-SA license.
>
> OSM wants more rights than that. JohnSmith doesn't agree, and is
> within his rights not too. That isn't the same as taking back the
> original CC-BY-SA grant.

This is the OSM community here. We're on an OSM mailing list. From the
perspective of this community, John Smith's contributions are not
usable. Certainly, he's made a valuable contribution to other
communities elsewhere - but not this one. The complaint was that this
community was unappreciative of his contribution - to which the
response is that there is no contribution to this community.

> To correct your analogy, JohnSmith gave you an amazing birthday
> present which you asked for, but now you decide you don't want it
> anymore and you don't know how to dispose of it so you are blaming the
> person who gave it to you.

Let's extend it further. John Smith shows up at my birthday party
driving a new Mercedes which is his present to me. Then in
conversation I let slip that I'm a Family First supporter. He says "if
you don't change your mind, you can't have the car". Well, I can't,
and won't, so he refuses to hand me the keys. Although he leaves it
parked on the lawn for a few months and kills the grass. It's his
decision, and I can live with the dead grass, but to complain about
ingratitude on my part is simply unfair.

We've had the debate about the switch to ODbL. I wasn't a big fan
either, but the debate has been had, and the matter is settled.
Refusing to accept the outcome (or rather, persisting vainly with the
idea that maybe it will change), and refusing to accept the CTs
amounts to blackmail at this point.

> The maxspeed change kept in tack the full history of the original
> object. All you have to do is roll back your objects to the last CT
> clean version, and work forwards from there.

"All you have to do" - yes. As several messages have pointed out, it's
actually a bit of work, and quite complex.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Andrew Harvey]

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Steve Bennett  wrote:
> Let's recap:
> 1) You did lots of hard work creating content
> 2) You applied the maxspeed change
> 3) You refused to accept the contributor terms
>
> Now, 3) totally negates the benefit of 1). It's actually worse than if
> you had never contributed anything at all, because the net effect for
> us is a lot of wasted effort in trying to work around your
> contributions. And 2) makes all this much worse again.
>
> So, regardless of how much time and effort you've actually put in, as
> far as I see your overall contribution to OSM, it's negative. You have
> harmed this project more than you have helped it. Sorry, but it's
> true. Buying someone the most amazing birthday present counts for
> nothing if you take it away from them again.

He isn't taking anything away. Those contributions were may under the
CC-BY-SA license. You are free to continue using them under the
CC-BY-SA license.

OSM wants more rights than that. JohnSmith doesn't agree, and is
within his rights not too. That isn't the same as taking back the
original CC-BY-SA grant.

To correct your analogy, JohnSmith gave you an amazing birthday
present which you asked for, but now you decide you don't want it
anymore and you don't know how to dispose of it so you are blaming the
person who gave it to you.

The maxspeed change kept in tack the full history of the original
object. All you have to do is roll back your objects to the last CT
clean version, and work forwards from there.

> So, John, if you'd like to tick that little box that indicates
> acceptance of the CTs, then I'd be happy to shower you with admiration
> and gratitude. If not, it's hard to see what we have to be grateful
> for: your contribution to the OSM database will be precisely zero.
>

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??

[Steve Bennett]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 5:24 PM, John Smith  wrote:
> I just love the admiration people give out for those that spent a lot
> of time and effort trying to make OSM the best map possible, only to
> throw away all the hard work and throw insults in the faces of people.

Let's recap:
1) You did lots of hard work creating content
2) You applied the maxspeed change
3) You refused to accept the contributor terms

Now, 3) totally negates the benefit of 1). It's actually worse than if
you had never contributed anything at all, because the net effect for
us is a lot of wasted effort in trying to work around your
contributions. And 2) makes all this much worse again.

So, regardless of how much time and effort you've actually put in, as
far as I see your overall contribution to OSM, it's negative. You have
harmed this project more than you have helped it. Sorry, but it's
true. Buying someone the most amazing birthday present counts for
nothing if you take it away from them again.

So, John, if you'd like to tick that little box that indicates
acceptance of the CTs, then I'd be happy to shower you with admiration
and gratitude. If not, it's hard to see what we have to be grateful
for: your contribution to the OSM database will be precisely zero.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au