Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

The wiki is bubble-gummy enough to gin up a rough working skeleton of a project, but that's a bit geeky. Our wiki doesn't necessarily foment dialog, conversation, multiple threads, sophisticated Facebook-automatic translation technology, (magic, as far as I know) like an old-fashioned tree-str

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Steve Friedl writes: There is no single solution that will please or attract everybody; speaking for myself, if the only way to participate is to join yet another forum, I'm pretty sure I would not bother, and in practice these side forums often fail to develop a critical mass sufficient to ma

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

There is no single solution that will please or attract everybody; speaking for myself, if the only way to participate is to join yet another forum, I'm pretty sure I would not bother, and in practice these side forums often fail to develop a critical mass sufficient to make it thrive. I do und

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Agree with everything you said about *why* groups are important, except that: now that it's 2015, Facebook groups is really a better place for this. No, Facebook is not a better place. Vast billions of people do not (will not, refuse to) use Facebook. Onerous Terms of Service, the feeling t

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Just a data point, if OSM is anything like Wikimedia: anywhere outside of the US and Western Europe, mapper conversations are likely already happening *primarily* (and possibly even *exclusively*) on Facebook. And in the US and Western Europe, mapper conversations among people who joined in the pas

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Bryan Housel writes: > Relax, I am not saying “contributors must have a Facebook account”, > rather I am saying “People with a Facebook account should be able to > join a local interest mapping group”. > > This is about increasing the number of casual mappers interested in > OSM. For example, Ma

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

On 15/10/2015 14:28, Bryan Housel wrote: Agree with everything you said about *why* groups are important, except that: now that it's 2015, Facebook groups is really a better place for this. Yeah... but no. Every time this comes up, someone suggests "use my favoured platform". Which might be F

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Relax, I am not saying “contributors must have a Facebook account”, rather I am saying “People with a Facebook account should be able to join a local interest mapping group”. This is about increasing the number of casual mappers interested in OSM. For example, Maptime is an organization that ru

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Bryan Housel writes: > Agree with everything you said about *why* groups are important, > except that: now that it's 2015, Facebook groups is really a better > place for this. Except that osm is part of the Free Sofware / Open Data world, and it isn't reasonable to expect contributors to have a

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Agree with everything you said about *why* groups are important, except that: now that it's 2015, Facebook groups is really a better place for this. > On Oct 15, 2015, at 3:43 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Paul Norman wrote: >> The problem is that if you make a discussion group too small, i

Re: [Talk-us] Self Storage Places

I have used landuse=garages since coming across the following in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgarages . It does make sense. Storage units are in effect remote (outsourced?) garages/basements/attics. Ed Hillsm

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Many people don't use mailing lists. What about an recent edits around me feature? What if we could comment or vote (like) directly on a changeset/node/line? What if the discussion could be directly a part of the editing process. Community could form more naturally. So you could subscribe to a di

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Paul Norman wrote: > The problem is that if you make a discussion group too small, it > doesn't have enough activity to sustain interest in it. > > Larger regions might work, but even a statewide group abandons > the might meet for a geobeer idea where it takes 6 hours to drive > across the sta

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: > Martijn's recent diary post "How can we double the number of active > mappers in the US in a year?" > "Bigger tent" by "adding rooms". Make it easier for specialist communities to find the map, and bring mappers. ___