On Tuesday 31 January 2017, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > Becoming more transparent would require extra admin work, and given > that our working group members already commit a huge amount of > volunteer hours to the planning of SotM, this is something that we > would need help with.
Well - in my eyes transparency is not something optional that can be added when time permits in case of a working group of the OSMF. Also keep in mind that you are probably depriving yourselves from a lot of valuable support this way. I for example would never participate in such a process from either the bidding side or the evaluation/decision side without at least basic transparency in the decision making process. And the presence of confidential information somewhere is usually a straw man argument in transparency cases. Confidential data is almost never required to make a decision process transparent. But this is just my personal view of course and i am not in a position to impose this on anyone so it is safe to just ignore my opinion here. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
