Hi,
On 03/03/2015 10:26 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> I think requiring mapping is in fact a poor idea: that impinges on
> issues of academic freedom.
Well we wouldn't take away their freedom to do research; we just
wouldn't participate in research carried out by people who are not
willing to spend
On 3 March 2015 at 08:51, Ed Loach wrote:
> Gianfranco asked:
>
> > What if we ask not only to publish as open access the resulting work but
> also to give back to the community all raw material?
>
> Is this another survey?
>
> Was my question above?
>
> Ed
>
> +1
we have now a new survey with tw
Hi Gianfranco,
2015-03-03 8:55 GMT+01:00 gianfranco gliozzo :
> What if we ask not only to publish as open access the resulting work but
> also to give back to the community all raw material?
> We can create a section of the wiki to support researchers with a list of
> all old publications and sur
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> I agree that some well defined process which might include an oversight
> rule for the OSMF would be good. Muki's code which Richard Weait has
> linked to is excellent (requiring, among other things, that the
> researcher does some mapping
Gianfranco asked:
> What if we ask not only to publish as open access the resulting work but also
> to give back to the community all raw material?
Is this another survey?
Was my question above?
Ed
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https
Hi,
What if we ask not only to publish as open access the resulting work but
also to give back to the community all raw material?
We can create a section of the wiki to support researchers with a list of
all old publications and surveys.
Once they got involved in OSM we can unlock all previous sur
Hi,
On 03/03/15 07:43, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> +1 for process /and/ a limit (e.g. 6 per year).
>
> An osm community process could also help improve the survey questions:
> often the ones out the gate have horrid flaws.
Yes, too often researchers are unwilling to engage with their "subject"
direc
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Tom MacWright wrote:
>
> Surveys can be annoying. Maybe we want to have a protocol for them,
> instead of implicitly allowing them as we currently do
> Let's figure that out instead of joking about ruining some PhD candidate's
> research.
>
+1 for process *and* a
It's fun to be flippant amongst ourselves, where our sense of sarcasm is
precisely tuned.
But this screed isn't the message we should send to the outside world, to a
person wondering what's up with the OpenStreetMap community.
Surveys can be annoying. Maybe we want to have a protocol for them, in
Hi,
2015-03-03 0:38 GMT+01:00 Richard Weait :
> I'm no fan researchers sending messages to OpenStreetMap users via the
> messaging system. I consider them an intrusion. And I've complained
> about them here, before. There is another one making the rounds.
> Seems like there are more of these ev
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
> I'm no fan researchers sending messages to OpenStreetMap users via the
> messaging system. I consider them an intrusion. And I've complained
> about them here, before. There is another one making the rounds.
> Seems like there are more of
I'm no fan researchers sending messages to OpenStreetMap users via the
messaging system. I consider them an intrusion. And I've complained
about them here, before. There is another one making the rounds.
Seems like there are more of these every time I turn around.
I'd like to recommend that you
12 matches
Mail list logo
