On 16 April 2011 00:07, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for asking me (if this were a vote my answer would be "No", but in > the interest of moving on from this nonsense and keeping data flowing I'll > eventually say "Yes"), but the important part of my question was everyone > else -- the community of OpenStreetMap. When were *they* asked?
FWIW I would have favoured earlier specific requests for a vote, but it's basically been an impossible position for the LWG from what I can see as an outsider. On the one hand, everybody wants to feel consulted about the change. On the other, plenty of people have complained throughout the process about being offered a half-baked solution. Turns out this stuff is complicated. I'm not the first person to say so on the lists, but it seems to bear repeating - the process has not been a secret, the key details of what problem the change attempts to solve have been documented for a long time now and absolutely anybody with a thirst for knowledge on the matter has had many resources at his or her disposal. When I first became aware of the documentation and read it, I certainly felt consulted, and very soon after it became possible to indicate approval, it was clear to me both that the promoters of the change wished me to do so (at that point I felt "asked") and how I might go about doing so. As of Sunday, we are now aware, those not yet to vote yes are to "asked" to vote yes or no. It remains unclear whether an OSMF message is to be a part of this asking - I would tend to feel this would be a good thing, as some mappers just wanna have fun^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H map, and may well not know about this process at all. Many mappers have had concerns and actual difficulties with some of the consequences of the changes. Some of them have engaged positively in the process to try and find an accommodation. Many... quite frankly haven't. I started mapping with OSM in good faith and expecting good faith from other mappers. So far I have only been disappointed by those mappers who willfully vandalised the map or undermined it through tainted data. This licence change now gives every mapper the means of undermining the map through withholding of their own data, once freely given and now very likely a foundation of data created by other mappers, also in good faith. I understand that many mappers feel they _can't_ relicense some or all of their work, and that's a really tough situation. But mappers who just plain _won't_ agree to leave their data in, even though there is no legal obstacle to it, should strongly consider whether they are being true to the community they claim to be a part of. Dermot -- -------------------------------------- Igaühel on siin oma laul ja ma oma ei leiagi üles _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
