On 17/11/2017 22:52, Clifford Snow wrote:
Frederik,
I think we are all thankful for the newsletter. And believe they are
free to publish to their own standards. However, because they use OSM
resources by publishing on our mailing lists they need respect our
values. I don't think asking a publication to be respectful to
individuals is asking too much.
Clifford,
Being "respectful" is a two-way street. This is a situation that's been
going on for almost exactly a year now. During that time this
individual has shown contempt for the OSM community, including on
occasion telling outright untruths. Conversations with him were very
repectful at first (conducted in changeset discussions rather than on
mailing lists), but it gradually became clear that any statements such
as "I have already stopped changing any objects except" were simply
worthless. At some point you have to call a lie a lie, and I can't
think of a way of doing that without "being disrespectful".
Also, I have to object to the use of "they" and "our" in your comment.
The OSM Weekly is produced by and for people from the OSM community,
exactly the same community that the mailing lists are run by and for.
The use of that sort of divisive language ("they") reminds me of a visit
to South Africa back in the 90s, and not in a good way.
Best Regards,
Andy
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
