I have objections to the use of Slack in particular, and to the use of real-time communication tools in general (not just Slack but other tools like IRC, HipChat, Rocket.Chat etc.).
My objections to Slack in particular primarily come down to the fact that using it puts too much control in the hands of a commercial entity. IANAL and I haven't read the terms of service but I'd certainly be more comfortable using open source software running on OSM servers. My objection to real-time communication tools in general that it limits visibility of and participation in discussions from less dedicated members of the community. First, the real-time nature of the communication means that noise tends to overwhelm the signal. I don't keep Slack or other tools open at work - it's just too distracting. When I get home in the evenings I'm not going to wade through the past 24+ hours of discussion looking for fragments of discussions I might be interested in. Some tools (like Slack) have attempted to re-invent threaded conversations but I haven't seen them widely used yet. Second, most of the tools are only searchable from within themselves. External search indexes like Google and Bing can't or won't index the content. On some platforms (IRC in particular) there are a lot of people that expect all discussions to be ephemeral and not archived at all. That said, I'm not totally against the use of such real-time communication tools. For things where real-time interaction is essential (Is X up? How do I Y? Am I doing Z right?) it's great. For social chit-chat it's great. For anything else I'm not so sure. On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Clifford Snow <cliff...@snowandsnow.us> wrote: > SteveA wrote: > > At least once, Clifford invited me to join Slack as well. However, after > reading Slack's Terms of Service Agreement (a contract of adhesion, > really), I could not and do not abide with the ways which Slack (and other > proprietary, not-open-source/open-data communication platforms) divide our > community into "those who Slack" and "those who don't." Even as Clifford > has acknowledged this issue in these posts, I feel compelled to speak up > about this again whenever I see this invitation to Slack again and again. > > I don't wish to throw rocks at the good process and results which happen > because some of us collaborate on Slack. I do wish to urge OSM volunteers > to seriously (re-?)consider that there are well-established, perfectly > useful communication methods (email, wiki, talk-us, face-to-face, > meetups/Mapping Parties...) which do not require "shiny apps laden with > hidden, commercial code" that ask us to cloak our communication into the > private realm of a for-profit company. As an open-source/open-data > project, I remain puzzled why OSM volunteers do this. > > Perhaps what I'm suggesting (again? I seem to recall it has been brought > up before) is that if OSM uses a "live-collaboration communication app" > that we either develop our own or choose some open-source version of one > without onerous License Terms that MANY (not just me) find offensive. > > Is that possible? > > Thanks for reading. I mean this in the best interests of OSM longer-term. > > SteveA > California > OSM Volunteer since 2009 > > Steve, > I must admit I like Slack better than some other forms of communications. > For example, I don't participate on any OSM forums. IRC is nice, but the > Slack, as a version of IRC, is just better. Since Slack was introduced to > the community I've notice the talk-us mailing list traffic has slowed and > even more so is the #osm-us IRC channel which for all practical purposes is > dead. > > Communications within the community is one of the most important aspects > of what makes our community thrive. We need tools that allow people to be > engaged in discussions and process to be successful. Tools that people want > to use. To me, seeing the number of people that use Slack compared to other > forms of communications, means the community has chosen. > > I'm also part of a open source community that uses IRC and mailing lists > to communicate. When Slack was introduced, just like OSM, traffic drop to > nothing on IRC and mainly announcements on the mailing list. Part of that > maybe because people use Slack in their day job. > > I don't wouldn't have any objections to another platform with more > agreeable terms of service. But what specifically to Slack's terms is > objectionable? > > I'm also interested in how others feel about Slack. Is it good for the > community or should we look elsewhere? > > Best, > Clifford > -- > @osm_seattle > osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us > OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > -- Jeff Ollie The majestik møøse is one of the mäni interesting furry animals in Sweden.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
