Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Ewen Hill]

Hi all,
  I am really disappointed by the anger and outrage in this thread and
that, to castigate a volunteer in public, no matter what hat they are
wearing or company they work for is just not on. Now we have the LimeSurvey
version, let's promote this and look at the results.

  I hope in future, that if someone objects strongly to a scenario
presented, then they contact the original poster directly first and if they
have no luck, then reply to the group. Sometimes, it's a learning curve and
their best of intentions may be a little wayward. Let's be nice to each
other please

Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
OSM Editor

On Mon, 1 May 2023 at 01:24, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:
> > I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
> > have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
> > does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
> > no use of google forms for some of us).
>
> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed
> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage
> with the community via such a product.
>
> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that
> without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working
> group.
>
> Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or
> your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they
> will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google,
> i.e. the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would
> not be represented.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Yes, I understand the concern and am in the middle of adding clarification
to the introduction to all 23 copies of the survey.

C

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 9:25 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 4:58 PM Courtney 
> wrote:
>
>> Here, too, we gave quite a bit of careful thought to the decision. We
>> felt that if we did not disclose that we were on the CWG, that it might be
>> seen by some as a lapse of transparency.
>>
> It is good that you disclosed your affiliations.  However, you also need
> to make it abundantly clear that this project is not part of your work for
> the CWG (and for those of you employed by TomTom, not part of your
> employment). Otherwise, you are potentially misleading people to believe,
> as I did, that this was an official CWG survey.  I am assuming that you had
> the best of intentions and that you were not trying to mislead anyone.
>
> As Frederick pointed out, members of some other working groups seem to do
> a very good job of making it clear as to whether they are speaking as part
> of a WG or as an individual.
>
> Mike
>
>>
>>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Mike Thompson]

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 4:58 PM Courtney 
wrote:

> Here, too, we gave quite a bit of careful thought to the decision. We felt
> that if we did not disclose that we were on the CWG, that it might be seen
> by some as a lapse of transparency.
>
It is good that you disclosed your affiliations.  However, you also need to
make it abundantly clear that this project is not part of your work for the
CWG (and for those of you employed by TomTom, not part of your employment).
Otherwise, you are potentially misleading people to believe, as I did, that
this was an official CWG survey.  I am assuming that you had the best of
intentions and that you were not trying to mislead anyone.

As Frederick pointed out, members of some other working groups seem to do a
very good job of making it clear as to whether they are speaking as part of
a WG or as an individual.

Mike

>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Here, too, we gave quite a bit of careful thought to the decision. We felt
that if we did not disclose that we were on the CWG, that it might be seen
by some as a lapse of transparency.  Further, I think it's relevant that
we're on the CWG, as it shows why we are interested in this topic, and
indeed suggests that we are going to be able to make sure that it benefits
the whole community.  It is also a credential: there aren't a lot of
communications-focused people in OSM, and I want it to be clear that is
where I, personally, am coming from.  In Marjan's case, it is relevant
because she is doing a good percentage of this work in her capacity as an
OSM volunteer, which she takes very seriously, and not in her capacity as
an employee of TomTom.  Here, again, it would be nice to have the best of
intentions assumed instead of the worst.  I stand by the decision to
disclose our committee affiliation.

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 6:46 PM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Now that we seem to have established that this was not a CWG thing to
> start with, could everyone who was involved in creating this
> announcement please review their communication behaviour, *especially*
> when it comes to signing messages as "so-and-so, OSMF communications
> working group" when you're not writing in an official capacity. This is
> something that other working groups as well as the OSMF board have been
> practicing carefully for ages and I'd hope that it would not be beyond
> members of a communications working group to be precise in their
> communication.
>
> On 4/28/23 15:29, Marjan Van de Kauter wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > We are doing a research project on how OpenStreetMap users interact with
> > each other. Are you willing to help us learn more about communication
> > behaviors in OSM? Take this quick and anonymous survey and tell us if
> > and how you use the OSM community forum, mailing lists, social media and
> > other channels:
> >
> > https://forms.gle/UeAGs3VahuxBN7Ec7  >
> >
> > We will share the results of this survey, along with other data, with
> > the community. This can help users better understand communication
> > habits in OSM, so they can identify the most effective ways to reach
> > other community members. We will be presenting our findings at State of
> > the Map US in Richmond, Virginia and in diary entries. So stay tuned for
> > more and thank you for participating in our survey.
> >
> > Have a great weekend!
> >
> > Marjan Van de Kauter (OSMF Communication Working Group member and TomTom
> > community engager)
> >
> > Courtney Williamson (OSMF Communication Working Group member)
> >
> > Keara Dennehy (TomTom business analyst)
> >
> > L.J. Lambert (TomTom business analyst)
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Frederik Ramm]

Now that we seem to have established that this was not a CWG thing to 
start with, could everyone who was involved in creating this 
announcement please review their communication behaviour, *especially* 
when it comes to signing messages as "so-and-so, OSMF communications 
working group" when you're not writing in an official capacity. This is 
something that other working groups as well as the OSMF board have been 
practicing carefully for ages and I'd hope that it would not be beyond 
members of a communications working group to be precise in their 
communication.


On 4/28/23 15:29, Marjan Van de Kauter wrote:

Hi everyone,

We are doing a research project on how OpenStreetMap users interact with 
each other. Are you willing to help us learn more about communication 
behaviors in OSM? Take this quick and anonymous survey and tell us if 
and how you use the OSM community forum, mailing lists, social media and 
other channels:


https://forms.gle/UeAGs3VahuxBN7Ec7 

We will share the results of this survey, along with other data, with 
the community. This can help users better understand communication 
habits in OSM, so they can identify the most effective ways to reach 
other community members. We will be presenting our findings at State of 
the Map US in Richmond, Virginia and in diary entries. So stay tuned for 
more and thank you for participating in our survey.


Have a great weekend!

Marjan Van de Kauter (OSMF Communication Working Group member and TomTom 
community engager)


Courtney Williamson (OSMF Communication Working Group member)

Keara Dennehy (TomTom business analyst)

L.J. Lambert (TomTom business analyst)


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[john whelan]

*I object only to the tone of some of the comments, and to assumptions that
are made about our motivation, decision process re: our approach, and
quality of our skills. I'm not alone in objecting to problems of tone more
broadly, and so I feel comfortable insisting on a higher quality discourse
here on behalf of myself and the many others who share this concern. I
think that good forum etiquette requires that people assume the best and
ask clarifying questions. As well, there are several very commonly used
phrases and rhetorical devices that can be deployed to make 'advice' feel
like advice instead of condemnation or scorn. *

Tone is difficult it is cultural.  For example think about gun
control.  I think
Allen Mustard is one of the very few people on the list who comes anywhere
near a polite tone that is understandable by many.  The American ideas and
UK ideas are very different.  1066 might not mean much to many people but
it has a great deal of meaning to few.

Then you get to big city dwellers and small city dwellers.  Small
city dwellers tend to have longer greetings than big city dwellers.  In
some places it is perfectly acceptable to raise an eyebrow as a form of
greeting although it might seem odd to you.  Surveys on OSM on talk are
interesting, it seems everyone and his dog wants to run a survey about OSM
mappers and why they do it.  There is a concept called respondent burden or
"is this yet another survey?" which might explain the lack of enthusiasm
you may encounter.

There are many people here who don't have English as a first language.
Although some such as Americans think they do.  I live in Canada which is
to a large extent bilingual.  In the office we had a francophone who was
rated exempt for English oral.  I had a coworker who came from the UK not
many miles away from where I was born and one day we spoke using local
slang and she understood about one word in ten. We could even speak using
words she understood but lacked the references for their meaning.

OSM is a place where the importance is placed on the map.  Social skills
are not a job requirement and to be honest some of the most productive or
should I say obsessive mappers can be very black and white but they really
do great mapping and I think that is important.

Finally face to face is usually best for communication which is why I have
been known to persuade someone to go to Europe in person to a state of the
map when I wanted to pull something together but mailing lists serve a
purpose.

Cheerio John


On Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 17:26 Courtney  wrote:

> Hi, all,
>
> Here, thanks to the generosity of some folks on the OWG and OSMF who
> donated their time to us so that we could have access to an open source
> tool of this quality, is a LimeSurvey version.
>
> https://osmf.limequery.org/751285?lang=en
>
> Please do fill it out and share it widely within the mailing lists. Please
> do not share it in other channels (Twitter, Mastodon,
> community.openstreetmap.org, etc.) as I will be posting unique versions
> in those channels.
>
> Once again, it is OBVIOUSLY our first choice to offer an open source
> survey; we didn't because we initially couldn't. Now, we are able to, and
> I'm glad of it.  I share the concerns that many of you expressed and fully
> understand and value the complexity and importance of the commitment to
> open source software and data.  I also have a good understanding of the
> nuances and complexity of this conversation. Indeed, I celebrate them.
>
> I object only to the tone of some of the comments, and to assumptions that
> are made about our motivation, decision process re: our approach, and
> quality of our skills. I'm not alone in objecting to problems of tone more
> broadly, and so I feel comfortable insisting on a higher quality discourse
> here on behalf of myself and the many others who share this concern. I
> think that good forum etiquette requires that people assume the best and
> ask clarifying questions. As well, there are several very commonly used
> phrases and rhetorical devices that can be deployed to make 'advice' feel
> like advice instead of condemnation or scorn.
>
> C
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 3:56 PM Greg Troxel  wrote:
>
>> Courtney  writes:
>>
>> > Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
>> > more about OSM communication habits?
>>
>> I think you are misinterpreting.  I detected no objection to trying to
>> learn.  I only see objection to proprietary tools and pushing users to
>> surveillance.
>>
>
>
> --
>
> --Courtney Cook Williamson
> survivalbybook.substack.com
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Hi, all,

Here, thanks to the generosity of some folks on the OWG and OSMF who
donated their time to us so that we could have access to an open source
tool of this quality, is a LimeSurvey version.

https://osmf.limequery.org/751285?lang=en

Please do fill it out and share it widely within the mailing lists. Please
do not share it in other channels (Twitter, Mastodon,
community.openstreetmap.org, etc.) as I will be posting unique versions in
those channels.

Once again, it is OBVIOUSLY our first choice to offer an open source
survey; we didn't because we initially couldn't. Now, we are able to, and
I'm glad of it.  I share the concerns that many of you expressed and fully
understand and value the complexity and importance of the commitment to
open source software and data.  I also have a good understanding of the
nuances and complexity of this conversation. Indeed, I celebrate them.

I object only to the tone of some of the comments, and to assumptions that
are made about our motivation, decision process re: our approach, and
quality of our skills. I'm not alone in objecting to problems of tone more
broadly, and so I feel comfortable insisting on a higher quality discourse
here on behalf of myself and the many others who share this concern. I
think that good forum etiquette requires that people assume the best and
ask clarifying questions. As well, there are several very commonly used
phrases and rhetorical devices that can be deployed to make 'advice' feel
like advice instead of condemnation or scorn.

C




On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 3:56 PM Greg Troxel  wrote:

> Courtney  writes:
>
> > Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
> > more about OSM communication habits?
>
> I think you are misinterpreting.  I detected no objection to trying to
> learn.  I only see objection to proprietary tools and pushing users to
> surveillance.
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Greg Troxel]

Courtney  writes:

> Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
> more about OSM communication habits?

I think you are misinterpreting.  I detected no objection to trying to
learn.  I only see objection to proprietary tools and pushing users to
surveillance.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Greg Troxel]

Courtney  writes:

> We also now have a new datapoint for our research. It will be interesting
> to get a sense of how many within the community have principled objections
> to proprietary software compared to members of the community who are
> looking at useability, localization, and/or accessibility as well as open
> sourcing in their choices of software.

Asking about whether people care about accessibilty in this context is a
bit of a red herring.  It's like complaining that someone who objects on
moral grounds to a group going around stealing food from stores to feed
the hungry must not care about people who don't have enough food.

Labeling the current pushback as objection to proprietary software is
missing half the point.  However, that half is certainly valid.

The other half is separate, which is that many people in OSM believe
that they should be able to fully participate -- without being second
class in any way -- without

  having to enter into a contract with any company, or

  having data about them captured and/or handled by a company, except
  perhaps one acting on behalf of OSMF under a non-disclosure agreement.

For example, if OSMF hired the same kind of company that does employee
satisfaction surveys for large employers, under NDA, then the
"proprietary software" objection would still (almost certainly) be on
the table, but the "user is asked to sign a contract with an invasive
advertising company and have their data handled by an invasive
advertising company under terms other than NDA" would be mostly avoided.


As for the ideology of open source: it's probably more helpful to talk
about Free Software, which is the original concept for freedoms for the
user, as "open source" is a term with a softer tone that amounts to the
same thing.  Free Software respects the freedom of users

  to run the software,
  to study and modify the software,
  to redistribute unmodified copies, and
  to redistribute modified versions.

OSM is not strictly a free software project, but it is an open data
project (which is not "Free Data" but that would be the same thing),
with "data" instead of "software".

It can't be strictly concluded that Free Software will be respectful of
users, in that the software when run will act in the user's interest
rather than the interests of the authors.  However, it's mostly true in
practice.  It also can't be concluded that proprietary software will
misbehave (acting for the authors and against the users), but the track
record of most zero-cost proprietary software is quite dreadful.

Overall, you are both running into a principled objection that
proprietary software is not ok to use, and a belief that asking people
to volunteer to be surveilled as a condition of community participation
is not ok.  A number of us see the second part as a moral bright line,
not a detail.

I see it as inconsistent to support open data without having at least
some significant bias against using proprietary software (for the open
data project).  I also see it as inconsistent not to object to asking
users to sign contracts with surveillance companies.  We wouldn't for
instance, be ok with "you have to agree to google's terms to get OSM
data" or "you have to report your name and location every minute while
routing using OSM data" -- which while sounding bizare is basically the
google maps experience for most.

I view it as regrettable that more of the community does not understand
and agree with these objections.




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Sören Reinecke via talk]

> Why is the main "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why 
> is it the only one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the 
> principle of using only open source software adopted across the community?

It is not just "Talk". It is a phenomenon of all English speaking OSM mailing 
lists and forums.

The principle of using only open source software is a very poor ideology. 
Ignore people embracing it as I do. Makes live much simpler to ignore people 
not being capable of seeing all sites. In this case open source and closed 
source. Closed source has its reasons to exist.

Apr 30, 2023 19:00:09 Courtney :

> 
> We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the 
> survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language 
> and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language. We 
> have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well. 
> 
> We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said in 
> my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger, long-term 
> study that relies on publically available data from OSM communication 
> channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings within the 
> context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate reference to 
> everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting a free survey 
> across a global community, to the short amount of time that we have to do the 
> survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to deliver the one true, 
> definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication behaviors to rule them 
> all. We are attempting to uncover some directional behaviors, and see if we 
> can foster a better conversation within the community. 
> 
> This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main 
> "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only 
> one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of 
> using only open source software adopted across the community? We already had 
> a question to this effect within the survey, but we will now be able to learn 
> more by adding the limesurvey. None of this is going to be definitive. All of 
> it is going to be interesting and help raise new questions that hopefully can 
> be studied.
> 
> Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit more 
> about OSM communication habits? I understand the impulse to give advice--this 
> is welcome even when the advice is predicated on the idea that we lack any 
> kind of insight or experience--there is always more to learn. But, I don't 
> understand the degree of ire and frankly, incredulity that is being levied 
> here.  Should we wait until there is a university study that is fully funded 
> and staffed, and with a perfect approach, with a year's worth of pre-testing, 
> to ask these questions? Is that the standard here? Wait for perfection or do 
> nothing?  Is that how OSM itself was built? I don't understand the tone or 
> the defensiveness of these comments. If the goal is to advance the OSM 
> project, is it better to gate keep all inquiries to a suffocating degree? Or 
> to try to learn and grow? 
> 
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:45 AM John Whelan  wrote:
>> Just a comment on Fredrick's input.  Selecting the sample is one of the most 
>> difficult parts of a survey to get right.  The self selection part of this 
>> survey makes it open to bias, as Frederick has commented this is compounded 
>> by the platform. I'm not making a comment about if the platform is 
>> appropriate or not just that if it affects your response then it begins to 
>> cast doubt on your results.
>> 
>> The second is knowing enough about your target audience so they will 
>> understand your questions.  Perhaps have someone non technical with an 
>> English Language background, a librarian, for example check it for jargon.   
>> One technique is to run a trial survey against a true random sample.  I 
>> don't think this was done here.
>> 
>> If they don't understand what you're asking then you aren't going to get a 
>> reliable answers and to be honest I didn't.
>> 
>> I'm not sure if this particular survey is trying to justify a particular 
>> stance or get accurate information. 
>> 
>> Cheerio John
>> 
>> Frederik Ramm wrote on 4/30/2023 11:18 AM:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:
 I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
 have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
 does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
 no use of google forms for some of us).
>>> 
>>> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed 
>>> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage 
>>> with the community via such a product.
>>> 
>>> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that without 
>>> a 

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

John,

This is all very insightful and I agree with all of it. One reason we
posted the survey in 12 different channels was because we have all worked
within OSM for a long time and we are familiar with the different cultures
within the different channels.

You wrote, "So are you interested in a sample of OpenStreetMap mappers or a
sample of online forum mappers who are happy with Google forms as your
sample? There is a difference and as long as you don't say our survey says
everyone in OSM thinks this about online forums I'm happy and content."

We want the former, but there are limits to our reach and resources, so we
will have to be content with something less than that, but hopefully not as
limited as the latter. It reassures me that what you are looking for is for
us to give appropriate context and framing, because I can absolutely
promise that we will do that.  Thank you for this thoughtful response. :)

C

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:46 PM john whelan  wrote:

> My background was working with surveys and my comments simply came from
> that background and the steps taken to obtain accurate results.  Nothing
> else.
>
> Typically a university run survey isn't done to high standards.
>
> Your comment on questions from talk I think relates to the users.
> OpenStreetMap roots are in open data and a desire to avoid proprietary
> systems.  The old fogies, if you will, tend to use mailing lists, they do a
> lot of editting and background work to make it run smoothly
> disproportionately so.  Often they don't use the flavour of the month
> online forum.
>
> So if you ask in an online forum are on line forums great you'll get a
> positive answer.  Those who don't think they are great won't use them.
>
> If you ask in the talk mailing list you get a different set of respondents.
>
> As I said before the selection of the sample is critical.  There is a
> story told of an interviewer who surveyed passengers at a railway station
> about gambling.  100% were in favour.  It was only later it was spotted
> she'd interviewed people who were there to catch a special train to a race
> course.
>
> So what exactly are you trying to measure?  Are you weighting the replies
> against the number of edits the person has made?  Does a HOT mapper who has
> made three edits count.  Remember that they will almost certainly have been
> recruited through social media.
>
> Then you get people who map quite happily by themselves or in a very small
> group of two communicating one on one via email.  Not everyone feels the
> need to group hug in an online forum.  The mapper I'm thinking of is exHOT
> and prefers to quietly map parts of Africa that are basically unmapped.  We
> do work together and communicate via email to decide which bit to map
> next.  Remember HOT is very much working together and for some mappers this
> doesn't work well.
>
> So are you interested in a sample of OpenStreetMap mappers or a sample of
> online forum mappers who are happy with Google forms as your sample?
>
> There is a difference and as long as you don't say our survey says
> everyone in OSM thinks this about online forums I'm happy and content.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 13:06 Courtney 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the
>> survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language
>> and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language.
>> We have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well.
>>
>> We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said
>> in my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger,
>> long-term study that relies on publically available data from OSM
>> communication channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings
>> within the context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate
>> reference to everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting
>> a free survey across a global community, to the short amount of time that
>> we have to do the survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to
>> deliver the one true, definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication
>> behaviors to rule them all. We are attempting to uncover some
>> directional behaviors, and see if we can foster
>> a better conversation within the community.
>>
>> This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main
>> "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only
>> one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of
>> using only open source software adopted across the community? We already
>> had a question to this effect within the survey, but we will now be able to
>> learn more by adding the limesurvey. None of this is going to be
>> definitive. All of it is going to be interesting and help raise new
>> questions that hopefully can be studied.
>>
>> Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us 

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[john whelan]

My background was working with surveys and my comments simply came from
that background and the steps taken to obtain accurate results.  Nothing
else.

Typically a university run survey isn't done to high standards.

Your comment on questions from talk I think relates to the users.
OpenStreetMap roots are in open data and a desire to avoid proprietary
systems.  The old fogies, if you will, tend to use mailing lists, they do a
lot of editting and background work to make it run smoothly
disproportionately so.  Often they don't use the flavour of the month
online forum.

So if you ask in an online forum are on line forums great you'll get a
positive answer.  Those who don't think they are great won't use them.

If you ask in the talk mailing list you get a different set of respondents.

As I said before the selection of the sample is critical.  There is a story
told of an interviewer who surveyed passengers at a railway station about
gambling.  100% were in favour.  It was only later it was spotted she'd
interviewed people who were there to catch a special train to a race course.

So what exactly are you trying to measure?  Are you weighting the replies
against the number of edits the person has made?  Does a HOT mapper who has
made three edits count.  Remember that they will almost certainly have been
recruited through social media.

Then you get people who map quite happily by themselves or in a very small
group of two communicating one on one via email.  Not everyone feels the
need to group hug in an online forum.  The mapper I'm thinking of is exHOT
and prefers to quietly map parts of Africa that are basically unmapped.  We
do work together and communicate via email to decide which bit to map
next.  Remember HOT is very much working together and for some mappers this
doesn't work well.

So are you interested in a sample of OpenStreetMap mappers or a sample of
online forum mappers who are happy with Google forms as your sample?

There is a difference and as long as you don't say our survey says everyone
in OSM thinks this about online forums I'm happy and content.

Cheerio John

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 13:06 Courtney  wrote:

>
> We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the
> survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language
> and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language.
> We have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well.
>
> We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said
> in my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger,
> long-term study that relies on publically available data from OSM
> communication channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings
> within the context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate
> reference to everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting
> a free survey across a global community, to the short amount of time that
> we have to do the survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to
> deliver the one true, definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication
> behaviors to rule them all. We are attempting to uncover some
> directional behaviors, and see if we can foster
> a better conversation within the community.
>
> This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main
> "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only
> one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of
> using only open source software adopted across the community? We already
> had a question to this effect within the survey, but we will now be able to
> learn more by adding the limesurvey. None of this is going to be
> definitive. All of it is going to be interesting and help raise new
> questions that hopefully can be studied.
>
> Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
> more about OSM communication habits? I understand the impulse to give
> advice--this is welcome even when the advice is predicated on the idea that
> we lack any kind of insight or experience--there is always more to learn.
> But, I don't understand the degree of ire and frankly, incredulity that is
> being levied here.  Should we wait until there is a university study that
> is fully funded and staffed, and with a perfect approach, with a year's
> worth of pre-testing, to ask these questions? Is that the standard here?
> Wait for perfection or do nothing?  Is that how OSM itself was built? I
> don't understand the tone or the defensiveness of these comments. If the
> goal is to advance the OSM project, is it better to gate keep all inquiries
> to a suffocating degree? Or to try to learn and grow?
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:45 AM John Whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> Just a comment on Fredrick's input.  Selecting the sample is one of the
>> most difficult parts of a survey to get right.  The self selection part of
>> this survey makes it open to bias, as 

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:06 PM Courtney 
wrote:

> This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main
> "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only
> one that is producing such a negative tone?
>


> I don't understand the degree of ire and frankly, incredulity that is
> being levied here.
>


> Is that the standard here? Wait for perfection or do nothing?  Is that how
> OSM itself was built? I don't understand the tone or the defensiveness of
> these comments. If the goal is to advance the OSM project, is it better to
> gate keep all inquiries to a suffocating degree?
>

I'd say you've succinctly captured the nature and character of this
particular communication channel and illuminated one reason why so little
chatter happens here compared to elsewhere.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Yes, it is not one or the other. That's my point exactly. So what is the
harm in doing our best to get a feel for what people prefer, how they
balance these concerns, and how the different choices affect them?

I welcome all the pushback and have already learned a very great deal--this
is one of the things I love about OSM--it is a space for nearly unlimited
learning, which I relish and seek. I am dismayed by what I consider to be
the negative tone, as well as comments that are based on speculation or
assumptions about our intentions, skills, or the overall approach. At a
minimum, kindly worded questions could be asked instead of opinions levied
that are based on assumptions.  We did know that some would not like a
Google form. We had to make a tough choice.  Why is it assumed that we just
ignored the question of open or closed source entirely. What level of fool
would do that for a survey in OSM? We are not that level of fools.  Of
course we didn't ignore them. But we do not have unlimited powers and
resources and we had to make the choice that could move our work forward.

In my experience it is a common critique of this forum that it is negative
and even mean-spirited. Perhaps some of the commenters here could take that
feedback with the same enthusiasm that they are giving feedback to me.
Then, we can all be learners.

C

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:16 PM Marc_marc  wrote:

> Le 30.04.23 à 18:29, Courtney a écrit :
> > It will be interesting to get a sense of how many within the community
> > have principled objections to proprietary software compared to members
> > of the community who are looking at useability, localization, and/or
> > accessibility as well as open sourcing in their choices of software.
>
> wtf, with such biased questions, I wonder what point there
> is in answering, the only thing that is proven is your lack
> of sensitivity in this point
>
> it is not one or the other
> it's useability with no respect for privacy
> or useability with privacy
> or useability without any knowledge that you are offering
> your personal data to the company hosting the service
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Marc_marc]

Le 30.04.23 à 18:29, Courtney a écrit :
It will be interesting to get a sense of how many within the community 
have principled objections to proprietary software compared to members 
of the community who are looking at useability, localization, and/or 
accessibility as well as open sourcing in their choices of software.


wtf, with such biased questions, I wonder what point there
is in answering, the only thing that is proven is your lack
of sensitivity in this point

it is not one or the other
it's useability with no respect for privacy
or useability with privacy
or useability without any knowledge that you are offering
your personal data to the company hosting the service



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Mike Thompson]

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:03 AM Courtney 
wrote:

> Why is the main "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback?
> Why is it the only one that is producing such a negative tone?
>
I don't sense a "negative tone" in this conversation.  Some people disagree
with some things you are doing, some agree with things you are doing, we
are having a discussion.  We learn and get better by being open to ideas
from those that do not agree with us.

Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the
survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language
and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language.
We have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well.

We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said in
my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger, long-term
study that relies on publically available data from OSM communication
channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings within the
context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate reference to
everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting a free
survey across a global community, to the short amount of time that we have
to do the survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to deliver the
one true, definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication behaviors
to rule them all. We are attempting to uncover some directional behaviors,
and see if we can foster a better conversation within the community.

This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main
"Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only
one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of
using only open source software adopted across the community? We already
had a question to this effect within the survey, but we will now be able to
learn more by adding the limesurvey. None of this is going to be
definitive. All of it is going to be interesting and help raise new
questions that hopefully can be studied.

Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
more about OSM communication habits? I understand the impulse to give
advice--this is welcome even when the advice is predicated on the idea that
we lack any kind of insight or experience--there is always more to learn.
But, I don't understand the degree of ire and frankly, incredulity that is
being levied here.  Should we wait until there is a university study that
is fully funded and staffed, and with a perfect approach, with a year's
worth of pre-testing, to ask these questions? Is that the standard here?
Wait for perfection or do nothing?  Is that how OSM itself was built? I
don't understand the tone or the defensiveness of these comments. If the
goal is to advance the OSM project, is it better to gate keep all inquiries
to a suffocating degree? Or to try to learn and grow?

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:45 AM John Whelan  wrote:

> Just a comment on Fredrick's input.  Selecting the sample is one of the
> most difficult parts of a survey to get right.  The self selection part of
> this survey makes it open to bias, as Frederick has commented this is
> compounded by the platform. I'm not making a comment about if the platform
> is appropriate or not just that if it affects your response then it begins
> to cast doubt on your results.
>
> The second is knowing enough about your target audience so they will
> understand your questions.  Perhaps have someone non technical with an
> English Language background, a librarian, for example check it for jargon.
>   One technique is to run a trial survey against a true random sample.  I
> don't think this was done here.
>
> If they don't understand what you're asking then you aren't going to get a
> reliable answers and to be honest I didn't.
>
> I'm not sure if this particular survey is trying to justify a particular
> stance or get accurate information.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> Frederik Ramm wrote on 4/30/2023 11:18 AM:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:
>
> I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
> have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
> no use of google forms for some of us).
>
>
> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed
> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage
> with the community via such a product.
>
> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that
> without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working
> group.
>
> Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or
> your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they
> will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google, i.e.
> the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would not be
> represented.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
>
> --
> Sent from Postbox 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

We are working on setting up a limesurvey for those who don't wish to use a
Google form. I'll post it as soon as I have time to create and distribute
it.

We also now have a new datapoint for our research. It will be interesting
to get a sense of how many within the community have principled objections
to proprietary software compared to members of the community who are
looking at useability, localization, and/or accessibility as well as open
sourcing in their choices of software.

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:24 AM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:
> > I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
> > have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
> > does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
> > no use of google forms for some of us).
>
> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed
> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage
> with the community via such a product.
>
> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that
> without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working
> group.
>
> Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or
> your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they
> will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google,
> i.e. the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would
> not be represented.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[John Whelan]

Just a comment on Fredrick's input. Selecting the sample is one of the 
most difficult parts of a survey to get right.  The self selection part 
of this survey makes it open to bias, as Frederick has commented this is 
compounded by the platform. I'm not making a comment about if the 
platform is appropriate or not just that if it affects your response 
then it begins to cast doubt on your results.


The second is knowing enough about your target audience so they will 
understand your questions.  Perhaps have someone non technical with an 
English Language background, a librarian, for example check it for 
jargon.   One technique is to run a trial survey against a true random 
sample.  I don't think this was done here.


If they don't understand what you're asking then you aren't going to get 
a reliable answers and to be honest I didn't.


I'm not sure if this particular survey is trying to justify a particular 
stance or get accurate information.


Cheerio John

Frederik Ramm wrote on 4/30/2023 11:18 AM:

Hi,

On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:

I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
no use of google forms for some of us).


Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed 
source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to 
engage with the community via such a product.


I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that 
without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working 
group.


Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, 
or your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because 
they will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with 
Google, i.e. the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of 
people would not be represented.


Bye
Frederik



--
Sent from Postbox 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:

I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
no use of google forms for some of us).


Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed 
source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage 
with the community via such a product.


I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that 
without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working 
group.


Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or 
your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they 
will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google, 
i.e. the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would 
not be represented.


Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk-fr] hebdoOSM Nº 666 18/04/2023-24/04/2023

[weeklyteam]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 666 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/16457/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
https://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

hebdoOSM ? 
Qui : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où : 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #666 18/04/2023-24/04/2023

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 666,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/16457

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
https://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[talk-ph] weeklyOSM #666 18/04/2023-24/04/2023

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 666,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/16457

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
https://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[Talk-pe] Peru: Nuevo desafío MapRoulette en Lima

[Salim Baidoun]

Hola Comunidad de OSM Peru!

Continuando con nustra conversación sobre como TomTom puede ayudar a la 
comunidad, me complace anunciar un nuevo desafío 
MapRoulette en Lima. El 
desafío consiste en corregir intersecciones entre edificios y carreteras. Los 
potenciales errores se generaron en base a una comparación espacial de 
carreteras y edificios disponibles en los datos d OSM. Puedes identificar y 
corregir los errores de ser necesario de las vías con etiqueta Higway=* que 
cruzan un edificio. En este reto añadimos 219 tareas.

Recuerda que pedes consultar nuestra página de GitHub 
Peru y la 
descripción de MapRoulette. No dudes en ponerte en contacto conmigo para 
cualquier pregunta o consulta.
Que tengas un buen fin de semana y disfruta de la Edición!

Salim A. Baidoun / Community & Partnerships - Global / Community Engagement



___
Talk-pe mailing list
Talk-pe@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe