Great post Dair! On 5 Mar 2009, at 02:04, Dair Grant wrote:
> Nop wrote: > >>> I want to correct something here, there is this view of 100,000 >>> users >>> needing consent. The number is in fact far smaller for people who >>> ever >>> made an edit (about 30% of the users). It's vastly smaller still for >>> anyone who has edited anything significant. It's an easier problem >>> than >>> you might think, is what I'm saying. Far easier than convincing >>> you I >>> don't have a satanic portal in my basement. >> >> You know what you're saying? You don't care about 100000 people who >> are >> interested or want to contribute, you just care about the data of the >> 8000 (?) who have substantially contributed? > > That's not what he is saying at all. > > Nobody is planning to ditch contributions below some threshold for > the sake > of it, however things should not stall simply because one person who's > contributed one post-box two years ago can't be contacted any more. > > All he's saying is that although we might have 100K registered > users, only > 30K of them have made an edits whatsoever. > > Looking at the stats page, only about 8K are making edits each month > (a > different 8K each month, sure). > > This paper (http://tinyurl.com/5p2w65) looked at contributors in the > UK, and > found that of the 1100 users in their sample some 92 of them had > contributed > 80% of the data (or 0.08% - about 8K again, a nice coincidence). > > >> This is a community. This is about people. At least it should be. >> >> Can't you understand why people do not trust you and suspect you are >> just out to grab their work when you argue like this? > > Nobody is trying to grab anyone's work. Doing so would take far less > effort. > > But a licence change is effectively like an (internal) fork, and we > may find > that some people disagree so strongly that their contributions can't > be > carried forward. > > Or simply that we decide to be very cautious, and feel we can't take > forward > data we can't be 100% sure about. > > It's sensible to understand just what impact that would have, since > we are > going to lose some data no matter what (some contributors are now > dead; > we're not going to contact their relatives, so we either > unilaterally put > their data under a new licence or we remove it). > > >> Even though I am in favour of the licence itself, this way of >> thinking >> is unacceptable to me. > > So what are you doing to help? > > > -dair > ___________________________________________________ > d...@refnum.com http://www.refnum.com/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > Best Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
