Hi, when I write something on a mailing list, it is clear that I am the author and that I have to take responsibility for what I write. If I write bullshit, people will rightly point out my mistakes. If I offend someone, it is clear who the offending party is.
This document that you have published here "on behalf of the signatories" contains a number of accusations against me, but unlike on a mailing list I am not told who has been making these accusations, and I am not able to represent myself in the same forum where the accusations are made. I would like to dispute the claim that I was using "dehumanizing language", but I fear that you have already spread your claim to the world without giving me that opportunity. I assume that the moral legitimacy for such an action comes from the assumption that I am somehow higher up some pecking order, and that it is always ok to attack those who are somehow "above", even with unfair means, because them being higher up means that the playing field is not fair to begin with. In order to bolster that claim, I am being made into more than just an average human being: I am "past board member of OSMF" (true), "administrator on four mailing lists" (unsure), and "member of many working groups" (false, it is only one). I might be an administrator on some mailing lists. I remember recently writing to a co-admin of osmf-talk because I had lost the password. This is not a job that in OSM's reality carries actual responsibility, or power. I cannot remember a single instance where I have used special powers of a mailing list moderator. This is a job that, in OSM, is passed around to whoever doesn't run away fast enough. At most it involves logging in to the web interface and debugging someone's complaint why their emails don't get through. It is literally not worth mentioning. Why am I going on about this? I have never used this mailing list "power" for good or bad, nor is it advertised anywhere to embiggen my status. Why, therefore, do the authors of the document choose to make a big deal out of that? It does sound grand to an outsider, right? Administrator of four mailing lists, by golly, that must be an influential person, right? But we all know that it has zero meaning. So either that particular "fact" has been introduced into the document by someone who is not at all familiar with how things run around here - someone who lacks the cultural closeness to the medium to judge what is happening there - OR it has been written by someone who knows precisely that being a mailing list administrator counts for nothing, but has included that fact anyway, deliberately misleading an outside audience. Same with the "member of many working groups". I am saddened by the hate that I read in your document, but I am even more saddened by the fact that whoever hates me so didn't even care to get these facts right. I think that some of the suggestions you make have merit, and I find it very unfortunate that you're basically asking people to sign off on your list of good suggestions with a small aside of "BTW this Frederik Ramm guy has sent a dehumanizing message". Supporters of your document don't even get the option of saying "agree on your plan, but don't agree on the moral judgement you're passing on this one named person." You might be right about some of the systemic issues you list in your document, but making me the only named bad person in your document and therefore, by implication, an example of all that is wrong in OSM, has a sour taste. It is not an instrument that you would wish other people use against you. You shouldn't, therefore, use it against me. The unnamed authors of the document should have the dignity to separate the quarrel they have with me from the quarrel they have with systemic issues in OSM. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
