On Tuesday 04 August 2020, Dorothea Kazazi wrote: > > The OSMF board just published a proposal for a software > dispute resolution panel: > https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2020/08/04/proposal-for-software-dispu >te-resolution-panel/
I guess i am asking too much if i envision the board creating a panel it does not control itself... For context - the DWG, which is the traditional and broadly respected entity to resolve conflicts in mapping, is not controlled in composition by the board, it decides on accepting new members themselves. See also: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group/DWG_Membership_Policy https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group/DWG_Conflict_of_Interest_Policy Significant parts of the authority the DWG has among mappers derive from the fact that it is not composed of political appointees. Interesting also that the composition of the panel is supposed to reflect "all interests of the OSM community" but competence of the panel members on the subject, experience with and knowledge of mapping and tagging in OSM or in other words: The competence to assess evidence on the cases they deal with and to deliberate on the matters in a qualified and knowledgable way, is not a criterion. Neither is impartiality on prominent special interests like those of corporate data users. Transparency is limited to the ultimate decisions being made public (indeed important, would be interesting how this would function otherwise). I guess that means both the nominations and selection of panel members as well as the deliberation and consulting of the panel on cases is going to happen behind closed doors. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
