On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Do you expect any positive outcome from this, or is it for moral reasons
that you choose this course of action? There are regions in OSM where a
visible no vote will lead to your data being re-surveyed and replaced by
other contributors rather quickly. I can only hope that this is not the case
in your area because otherwise what you plan to do will yield the worst
possible outcome - others duplicating the efforts you have put in (instead
of using their time for something more productive), and you being miffed
because your contributions have been removed before you had the chance to
redecide.
I hope to delay the process as long as possible in the interest of another
plan being implemented. My two hopes are (1) remaining with the current
license until CC4 fixes things. (2) an ODbL fork instead of a CC one. My
data won't be resurveyed, but that doesn't change my view anyway. Please
note I ultimately plan to stay with the project under the new terms!
There are regions in OSM where a visible no vote will lead to your data
being re-surveyed and replaced by other contributors rather quickly. I can
only hope that this is not the case in your area because otherwise what you
plan to do will yield the worst possible outcome - others duplicating the
efforts you have put in (instead of using their time for something more
productive), and you being miffed because your contributions have been
removed before you had the chance to redecide.
My contributions aren't as numerous as his http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?NE2,
but if removed they would set my area back a half-decade.
How so, if it has only taken you three years ;)?
It's much more lossy to go backwards, since my edits are intertwined with
others. You know as well as I do that reverting is a messy process, and
will lose more than I originally put in. I said a half-decade because I was
thinking TIGER started in 2006, so I stand corrected on that.
If NEII's (and others) are removed, we can add the United States to
Australia as 'countries the OSMF is willing to sacrifice.'
It's a hard language to use.
Avoiding saying difficult things doesn't mean they're not happening.
Actions speak too.
We don't want to lose any contributors, and we don't want to lose any data
either. I don't want to compare OSM to a hill of mindless ants each of whom
just execute their genetic programming; I believe that OSM works precisely
because we're all individuals and contribute our own ideas, our style, our
quirks. Every contributor is uniqe and (with very, very little exceptions)
every contributor adds something valuable to OSM. Still, in the grand scheme
of things, no single contributor is irreplaceable. Rip something out (and
shed a couple tears about the love that went into it and is now lost to OSM)
- it will grow back in time, and bring with it new people, a new community
rallied to the cause.
You are perfectly correct here overall, but I see one caveat. The
*magnitude* of the time it will take OSM to 'grow back' is rather
significant in my case. (i.e. the US). The community here has just barely
gotten off the ground, and I fear the damage caused by mass deletion will be
enough to kill it. I see a rather strong parallel to the US nuclear
industry: it had just about recovered from TMI but is now set back further
decades because of Fukushima.
We're not sacrificing countries. We saw that we have built our project on
(legal) sand, and we're moving to rectify the situation. The patient may
lose some tissue about this but he will live, and after the wounds have
healed, will be healthier than before.
I'm talking all flowery because this is the talk list. If you want hard
facts, go to legal-talk.
I read legal-talk occasionally, and have not been convinced that the
illness is more dangerous than the medicine.
Regards,
Alex
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
