[talk-au] Going separate ways

[Richard Fairhurst]

I think it's reasonably obvious by now that the two sides in this debate 
aren't ever going to be reconciled.


It's not exclusively an .au problem, but it is mostly. If you look at 
any of the analysis done recently, Australia simply hasn't taken to 
ODbL+CT in the way that other countries have. To take the count from 
odbl.de of nodes last edited by users who have accepted (which gives a 
rough summary of recent activity):


Germany 90.1%
Great Britain 89.1%
France 96.8%
North America 96.4%
Russia 97.2%
Australia 48.4%

That's pretty stark.

Steve and Sam might have between them put their finger on why it's 
different 
(http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2011-July/008268.html). I'm 
sure personalities also have something to do with it, as they do with 
any open source project. Regardless, it's unquestionable that it _is_ 
different in .au.


So, I think, we need to get away from this idea that a fork is a bad 
thing. It isn't. There are two divergent communities, and it doesn't do 
either side any good to try and hold them together when they're so opposed.


FOSM appears to be slowly becoming established, both technically and as 
a brand, and that's good. Benefiting from all the OSM code and 
ecosystem, plus the free gov.au data, is a pretty good headstart for a 
new forked project and I'd be amazed if it couldn't succeed given that.


So please, let's stop hitting each other over the head with this. OSM 
can exist with ODbL, FOSM can exist with CC-BY-SA; people will choose 
which one to contribute to (or, indeed, both). OSM people can leave FOSM 
people alone without badgering them to agree; FOSM people can leave OSM 
people alone without criticism of the path they've chosen. OSM people 
needn't invade the FOSM mailing lists and vice versa. Let's concentrate 
on making a success of our own project, not on doing the other one down.


cheers
Richard


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes

[James Andrewartha]

On 8 July 2011 18:08, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
 On Jul 8, 2011, at 2:57, Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au wrote:

 Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:

 We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting
 clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm
 aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'.

 The solution to the problem of We chose a licence and impose terms on
 contributors that's incompatible with most sources of data isn't to go
 to each source of data individually to try to get them to relicence.
 That's as ridiculous as choosing a GPL-incompatible software licence and
 then whining that you can't legally incorporate all those wonderful GPL
 licenced projects into yours.

 I wouldn't say we chose it. We were told by legal that cc didn't work, so we 
 spent a lot of time evolving the odbl (originally started by cc folks) and 
 the CTs. It might look from that side of the planet that it was a hand of god 
 type decision, but that's not the case. It's been multiple years of work 
 around every possible solution.

 Also, your frame of reference is with OSM up and running and having these 
 kinds of relationships. When I started OSM we had no data at all and nobody 
 wanted to give us data under any license, let alone cc. So those of us who 
 climbed the mountain to get those people to give us data see asking people to 
 switch (such as ordnance survey for example) as a far smaller problem.

The difference now is the licensing debate has turned away many of the
most enthusiastic contributors in Australia. It's now no longer just a
technical or legal issue, but also one of community management.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit,_Voice,_and_Loyalty seems quite
relevant as people are choosing to leave the community having seen
their voices ignored. Arguably this is worse than how you started with
organisations not giving you data, since it's people that change
organisations.

James Andrewartha

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes

[James Andrewartha]

On 9 July 2011 02:10, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes because most of the community I'm
 familiar with, which is all of the EU and the US, consider government data a
 nice starting point but mappers on the ground as generally much better. Is
 the perception in Australia that you should just do whatever the government
 says you should do? Or that OSM should just be a host for government data?

No, we also think the mappers on the ground are much better. But we
can't upload the government data ourselves as we don't have the rights
the CTs require. Why should we have to wait for government agencies to
upload the data themselves (if they can even agree to the CTs
themselves) when we could just do it ourselves with the data they
release?

 Well by not being defeatest for a start. What I think I'm trying to get
 across is that we convinced our governments, in fact these days they want to
 be involved with OSM rather than OSM going to them to be involved. So, why
 is it different in australia? Is there a culture of submitting to the
 government (which would be the opposite of the US, but closer to the UK) or
 something? What are the sticking points, and how are they different from the
 sticking points we managed to go through in the EU and US?

I haven't dealt with government agencies myself, but I can't say I've
see any Australian ones wanting to be involved with OSM, as opposed to
just releasing their data under liberal licenses in general. From
their point of view, what does OSM offer them that they can't do with
a PSMA license that they probably already have?

James Andrewartha

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Anthony]

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
 I think it's reasonably obvious by now that the two sides in this debate
 aren't ever going to be reconciled.

[snip]

 So, I think, we need to get away from this idea that a fork is a bad thing.
 It isn't. There are two divergent communities, and it doesn't do either side
 any good to try and hold them together when they're so opposed.

I'd say recognizing that the fork is not a bad thing is part of
reconciling the two sides in the debate.  And by reconciling, I don't
mean that one side is going to give in and exclusively use the license
of the other side.  But I still don't see why FOSM and OSMF can't work
together, despite the license (and governance) disagreement.

 OSM people needn't invade the FOSM mailing lists and vice versa.

Speaking as a moderator of the osm-fork mailing list (but without
having confirmed this with the other moderators), I invite anyone who
is willing to engage in productive discussion to join us, regardless
of their affiliation with any particular project.

And I hope the OSMF is not going to try to exclude FOSM from its OSM
mailing lists.  FOSM is a content fork, out of necessity (phase 4),
but it has no desire to fork the formats, the APIs, the rendering
software, the editing software, etc.  This will only happen if it
proves to be necessary, and with good communication and cooperation,
it shouldn't be.

The osm-fork mailing list is there for discussions which are outside
of the scope of (or otherwise undesired on) other OSM mailing lists.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Henderson]

On 11/07/11 00:02, Richard Fairhurst wrote:


So please, let's stop hitting each other over the head with this.


That's a very unAustralian attitude.

John H

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 00:02, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Germany 90.1%
Great Britain 89.1%
France 96.8%
North America 96.4%
Russia 97.2%
Australia 48.4%

You didn't show Albania which has an even low acceptance rate, nor did
you comment on the fact that several import accounts of large amounts
of data are included in those numbers.

Also the Australia figure is lower than that, the QldProtectedAreas
should never have been imported with an account that had agreed with
the CT.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Richard Fairhurst]

John Smith wrote:

On 11 July 2011 00:02, Richard Fairhurstrich...@systemed.net  wrote:

Germany 90.1%
Great Britain 89.1%
France 96.8%
North America 96.4%
Russia 97.2%
Australia 48.4%


You didn't show Albania which has an even low acceptance rate, nor did
you comment on the fact that several import accounts of large amounts
of data are included in those numbers.


Indeed, I was concentrating on the big guys. Albania isn't a big guy. 
Not sure what your point is about imports but neither GB nor Germany 
have particularly significant numbers of imports - the only major import 
we've ever had in Britain is a few counties' worth of bus-stops!


But this is rather the point, isn't it?

No matter what point I might make, you're going to read the From: line, 
see that it's from one of the ODbL guys, and argue against it. And 
yes, I'm sure some of us are guilty of that too.


The two sides are irreconcilable. There really isn't any need to keep 
sniping back and forth like this. Can we not just agree to differ: you 
go forward with FOSM-CC, we go forward with OSM-ODbL, and people 
contribute to whichever project they prefer?


Richard


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 07:54, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
 Indeed, I was concentrating on the big guys. Albania isn't a big guy. Not
 sure what your point is about imports but neither GB nor Germany have
 particularly significant numbers of imports - the only major import we've
 ever had in Britain is a few counties' worth of bus-stops!

It was my understanding people were importing OS data into GB?

 No matter what point I might make, you're going to read the From: line, see
 that it's from one of the ODbL guys, and argue against it. And yes, I'm
 sure some of us are guilty of that too.

This is one of the points most people have continued to miss time and
time again no matter how often I've said it, it's the methods being
employed to try and get people to change is what I hate the most,
lying by omission is very common, people aren't being given all the
pertinent facts on the matter to make an actual judgment.

I've spoken to one person since they've agreed and gave some of the
cons and they were upset that they weren't informed better about the
situation, they felt some what cheated how they were corralled into
accepting, others have made similar comments in the last few days
about their own experiences.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Richard Fairhurst]

John Smith wrote:

On 11 July 2011 07:54, Richard Fairhurstrich...@systemed.net  wrote:

Indeed, I was concentrating on the big guys. Albania isn't a big guy. Not
sure what your point is about imports but neither GB nor Germany have
particularly significant numbers of imports - the only major import we've
ever had in Britain is a few counties' worth of bus-stops!


It was my understanding people were importing OS data into GB?


Not importing as such, no. Tracing, generally, which means there aren't 
any single big import accounts. The UK is by and large sufficiently 
well-mapped that imports of roads are impractical: you'd have to do so 
much correlation with existing data that it's easier to work manually 
from the off. A few people have played around with small-scale imports 
of streams/rivers but it's pretty piecemeal - I've not seen a single 
import in the areas where I map, other than the NaPTAN bus stops.



No matter what point I might make, you're going to read the From: line, see
that it's from one of the ODbL guys, and argue against it. And yes, I'm
sure some of us are guilty of that too.


This is one of the points most people have continued to miss time and
time again no matter how often I've said it, it's the methods being
employed to try and get people to change is what I hate the most,
lying by omission is very common, people aren't being given all the
pertinent facts on the matter to make an actual judgment.

I've spoken to one person since they've agreed and gave some of the
cons and they were upset that they weren't informed better about the
situation, they felt some what cheated how they were corralled into
accepting, others have made similar comments in the last few days
about their own experiences.


Ok. That's your opinion, and you are of course perfectly entitled to it; 
others will have a different opinion and will argue vehemently that 
they're not lying by omission; and so on.


But do you not see that this isn't getting us anywhere, but merely 
poisoning the well?


If FOSM succeeds then it won't be by denigrating OSM. Likewise, OSM 
won't succeed by pretending FOSM doesn't exist.


I seriously think that the particular circumstances of Australia mean 
that you have a chance to make a CC fork _the_ dominant open map of the 
continent, if it's done right. But as several people (with no particular 
affiliation to either side of the argument) have posted, the endless 
arguing is just putting people off mapping, full stop. FOSM's prospects 
- and those of OSM, CommonMap and any other projects - are not best 
served by these arguments. For every one mapper attracted because you 
convince them OSM cheated them, five are put off because of the 
acrimony. (And, of course, the arguing takes up your and my and others' 
time that would be better spent on coding, evangelising and mapping!)


Can we not - both sides - agree to work on building up our own projects, 
and making them as attractive as possible to users old and new, rather 
than knocking the other one?


Richard


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 08:16, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
 Can we not - both sides - agree to work on building up our own projects, and
 making them as attractive as possible to users old and new, rather than
 knocking the other one?

But my comment before sets the scene for how OSM-F will look to future
users, they will be seen as devious in the methods employed, rather
than being seen as sticking to their moral guns.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Richard Fairhurst]

John Smith wrote:

On 11 July 2011 08:16, Richard Fairhurstrich...@systemed.net  wrote:

Can we not - both sides - agree to work on building up our own projects, and
making them as attractive as possible to users old and new, rather than
knocking the other one?


But my comment before sets the scene for how OSM-F will look to future
users, they will be seen as devious in the methods employed, rather
than being seen as sticking to their moral guns.


I guess that's a no then. :( :(

Richard


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Anthony]

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
 John Smith wrote:

 On 11 July 2011 08:16, Richard Fairhurstrich...@systemed.net  wrote:

 Can we not - both sides - agree to work on building up our own projects,
 and
 making them as attractive as possible to users old and new, rather than
 knocking the other one?

 But my comment before sets the scene for how OSM-F will look to future
 users, they will be seen as devious in the methods employed, rather
 than being seen as sticking to their moral guns.

 I guess that's a no then. :( :(

Well, eventually one of you two is going to stop responding to the other.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[David Murn]

On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 15:02 +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
 I think it's reasonably obvious by now that the two sides in this debate 
 aren't ever going to be reconciled.

I guess that depends on your definition of reconciled.

 It's not exclusively an .au problem, but it is mostly. If you look at 
 any of the analysis done recently, Australia simply hasn't taken to 
 ODbL+CT in the way that other countries have.
 ... [ODbL figures] ...
 That's pretty stark.
 
 Steve and Sam might have between them put their finger on why it's 
 different 
 (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2011-July/008268.html). I'm 
 sure personalities also have something to do with it, as they do with 
 any open source project. Regardless, it's unquestionable that it _is_ 
 different in .au.

I think the biggest problem people in .au had was that there were some
issues which were specific to the Australian usage of OSM (imports of
gov data, etc).  Those who sought to change the licence claimed to be
listening to people, but when Australian mappers raised issues, we were
simply told 'bad luck youre only a tiny percentage of the data'.

Part of the problem that has arisen is that our data would be affected
more than most by the removal of CCBYSA imported data.  Some people
looked at this as simply a data loss in a remote part of the world, the
same way most of us wouldnt care if a big import from Africa was due to
be removed for the same reason.

The OSMF has always accepted that some users wont accept the licence
(whether on principle or because of the sources they wish use) and this
loss of mappers will be acceptable for the future progression of OSM.
From the OSMF perspective, they feel this is a required step to move on.
From the Aussie perspective, it feels like its acceptable to lose our
contributions, or at least easier to remove them than to work to resolve
any minor attribution issues that we ('we' meaning a few users
knowledgable about the licence) have raised.

 So, I think, we need to get away from this idea that a fork is a bad 
 thing. It isn't. There are two divergent communities, and it doesn't do 
 either side any good to try and hold them together when they're so opposed.

It doesnt do either side any good to cut ties and drift our separate
ways either.  Just because you dont get along with someone on a desert
island, it doesnt mean you isolate yourself on the other side, your
strength together will be much more than your individual strength.

 FOSM appears to be slowly becoming established, both technically and as 
 a brand, and that's good. Benefiting from all the OSM code and 
 ecosystem, plus the free gov.au data, is a pretty good headstart for a 
 new forked project and I'd be amazed if it couldn't succeed given that.

The problem for OSM will be when all the incompatible CCBYSA data is
removed, and that 'headstart' is more like fosm being a late starter in
the race while the other runner is contemplating cutting his foot off at
around the time the two racers are level.

 So please, let's stop hitting each other over the head with this. OSM 
 can exist with ODbL, FOSM can exist with CC-BY-SA; people will choose 
 which one to contribute to (or, indeed, both).

You are covering one point of the equation, the contributors.  What
about the map users?  Sure, its great to have a massive network of
contributors, but if the data being contributed isnt being used or isnt
complete enough to be used, then you'll lose the masses.  The masses
dont want to add nodes and new roads, they want to replace garmin maps
with OSM maps, so they can drive for their job or their holiday.  They
dont care about what licence is on the maps, they just want the most
complete maps they can get.  If that means a choice of OSM or OSM - 52%
who in their right mind would choose the smaller dataset?

The fact that you might lose 100 mappers, might not really affect the
project, the fact of losing a whole country of consumers, might.

David


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Steve Coast]

On Jul 10, 2011, at 6:22 PM, David Murn wrote:
 I think the biggest problem people in .au had was that there were some
 issues which were specific to the Australian usage of OSM (imports of
 gov data, etc).  Those who sought to change the licence claimed to be
 listening to people, but when Australian mappers raised issues, we were
 simply told 'bad luck youre only a tiny percentage of the data'.

Can you point to that in any minutes or mailing list posts?

We looked around for all the people claiming that we've been ignoring them and 
can't actually find any posts by them on the legal lists or to the LWG for many 
of the people involved. Of course, with so many fake names being used it's hard 
to be sure they weren't raised under a different pseudonym. From what I've 
seen, the LWG took all of the concerns very seriously and spent an awful lot of 
time, on an individual basis, trying to resolve them. Nearmap of course being a 
good example.

 So, I think, we need to get away from this idea that a fork is a bad 
 thing. It isn't. There are two divergent communities, and it doesn't do 
 either side any good to try and hold them together when they're so opposed.
 
 It doesnt do either side any good to cut ties and drift our separate
 ways either.  Just because you dont get along with someone on a desert
 island, it doesnt mean you isolate yourself on the other side, your
 strength together will be much more than your individual strength.

You're absolutely right, however the volunteers and democratically elected 
people who've tried to have rational discussions with most of the people here 
get shot down. Therefore Richard I think is expressing the view that we tried 
hard, we then tried to reconcile, we're still not getting anywhere, so what's 
the next step? Going our own ways in a suboptimal but available step.

I urge you to contrast and compare that with other countries/communities who 
also have derived from CC data or have imports that need relicensing and so on. 
Most of them have worked it out. What we're scratching our heads about is how 
-au is different. I think we've been thinking pretty hard and not come up with 
anything other than trolls taking over the sentiment of the community.

 The fact that you might lose 100 mappers, might not really affect the
 project, the fact of losing a whole country of consumers, might.

Agreed.

The question is, if you were a volunteer (and we all are) who's been working on 
this what would you do?

We could work on this imported data issue. Well, we have. We've asked multiple 
times for outlines of where the data is, who imported it and so on. To the best 
of my knowledge nobody has raised this substantially with the LWG, please 
correct me if I'm wrong. I don't attend every single meeting.

We could work on making the LWG meetings more accessible to people in the -au 
timezone. Well, we have. Several times we've shifted the meeting hours (for 
example to speak with nearmap) and tried other ways to engage.

We could spend time meeting in person. Well, we've tried a bit there though of 
course it's expensive and hard. The threat of violence hasn't made me want to 
come to -au despite having the means to do so, and we've made attempts to get 
people to come to SOTM.

We could work on making the mailing lists a better place to be. Well, we have. 
In fact we've approached people about moderating this list but one of them 
won't do it because - get this - the person fears for his job. They're worried 
that if they moderate this list the trolls will start phoning their employer. 
That's quite something. Clearly, things are very unhealthy. If you'd like to 
help moderate, please get in touch. We don't think an outsider should do it, or 
anyone who operates under a pseudonym or has been moderated off another list.

Of course we're not perfect. But I think we can say we're trying, even with 
people who traditionally we no longer have time for or who have been moderated 
off the main lists. You can jump in and say what we should have done in 2009 or 
something, and I'm sure we made mistakes. But without being personal, and 
understanding that everyone is a volunteer, what would you do in my position 
that's reasonable to change things? I'm sure if it was rational we'd attempt it.

Steve
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 11:55, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 We looked around for all the people claiming that we've been ignoring them 
 and can't actually find any posts by them on the legal lists or to the LWG 
 for many of the people involved. Of course, with so many fake names being 
 used it's hard to be sure they weren't raised under a different pseudonym. 
 From what I've seen, the LWG took all of the concerns very seriously and 
 spent an awful lot of time, on an individual basis, trying to resolve them. 
 Nearmap of course being a good example.

Nearmap is about the only example I can think of that was actually
even attempted to be addressed, everyone else just got told to pester
what ever government department to relicense under odbl, but even if
we had that wouldn't have been compatible with the CTs.

What difference does it make who the concerns come from if they are
valid, this is your posts the other day all over again, you find
something difficult to answer so you try to find ways to weasel out of
answering them, which pretty much sums up most of the other concerns
you've dismissed out of hand.

 I urge you to contrast and compare that with other countries/communities who 
 also have derived from CC data or have imports that need relicensing and so 
 on. Most of them have worked it out. What we're scratching our heads about is 
 how -au is different. I think we've been thinking pretty hard and not come up 
 with anything other than trolls taking over the sentiment of the community.

You mean most of them have ended up agreeing to the changes regardless
if they were able to or not, there is several imports that people went
ahead with in good faith, such as QldProtectedAreas, that were given
the impression that it was ok, however without major changes to the
CTs this data isn't allowed to be imported unless you are planning to
stay under a CC-by or CC-by-SA license.

 We could work on this imported data issue. Well, we have. We've asked 
 multiple times for outlines of where the data is, who imported it and so on. 
 To the best of my knowledge nobody has raised this substantially with the 
 LWG, please correct me if I'm wrong. I don't attend every single meeting.

 We could work on making the LWG meetings more accessible to people in the -au 
 timezone. Well, we have. Several times we've shifted the meeting hours (for 
 example to speak with nearmap) and tried other ways to engage.

or you could do better at dealing with them, rather than saying you
will do something and hope people go away so you can quietly drop them
later.

 We could spend time meeting in person. Well, we've tried a bit there though 
 of course it's expensive and hard. The threat of violence hasn't made me want 
 to come to -au despite having the means to do so, and we've made attempts to 
 get people to come to SOTM.

I must have missed the threats to you or anyone else involved, because
the only previous mention was you expression concern over your safety,
what changed in the last 3 days?

 We could work on making the mailing lists a better place to be. Well, we 
 have. In fact we've approached people about moderating this list but one of 
 them won't do it because - get this - the person fears for his job. They're 
 worried that if they moderate this list the trolls will start phoning their 
 employer. That's quite something. Clearly, things are very unhealthy. If 
 you'd like to help moderate, please get in touch. We don't think an outsider 
 should do it, or anyone who operates under a pseudonym or has been moderated 
 off another list.

Perhaps you should have better rules for everyone, because I have been
threated to be dobbed into my employer to the point that I actually
brought him up to speed on all the nonsense going on, and he turned
round and asked me if I thought it was worth airing to newspapers but
I felt it was a matter to be dealt with internally. Frankly Steve you
really need to try harder on implying pen names mean something
nefarious is going on other than openly outing your BS.

 Of course we're not perfect. But I think we can say we're trying, even with 
 people who traditionally we no longer have time for or who have been 
 moderated off the main lists. You can jump in and say what we should have 
 done in 2009 or something, and I'm sure we made mistakes. But without being 
 personal, and understanding that everyone is a volunteer, what would you do 
 in my position that's reasonable to change things? I'm sure if it was 
 rational we'd attempt it.

You keep making the same mistakes, and of course nothing is being
resolved because you stick your head in the sand and try and pretend
it will just magically take care of itself, all you are achieving
lately is showing how arrogant you can be and how poorly you can spin
things.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Steve Coast]

On Jul 10, 2011, at 7:22 PM, John Smith wrote:
 You keep making the same mistakes, and of course nothing is being
 resolved because you stick your head in the sand and try and pretend
 it will just magically take care of itself, all you are achieving
 lately is showing how arrogant you can be and how poorly you can spin
 things.

John

It's not worth my time responding to messages like this.

I wrote a completely rational, neutral and open email outlining the things 
we've tried and asking for ideas of how to make it better.

If you write back that I'm just arrogant and put my head in the sand, even if 
you're right, all you're doing is making an ad hominem attack that's not worth 
responding to.

I'm very glad Anthony and I have been having reasonable conversations back and 
forth recently. If you were able to take a step back, assume good faith and 
reply again then I'm sure I would look in detail at the points you make[*].

Steve

[*] - With the caveat that because there are so many pseudonyms being used, it 
would both be helpful, pragmatic and a sign of respect if you guys would start 
to identify yourselves. Unfortunately it's become known that some are puppet 
accounts and we don't know which is which and who's just doing this for fun.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 12:30, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 It's not worth my time responding to messages like this.

 I wrote a completely rational, neutral and open email outlining the things 
 we've tried and asking for ideas of how to make it better.

Yes and didn't respond to a single query, but of course politicans do
the same thing, they change the question into something they can
answer.

 If you write back that I'm just arrogant and put my head in the sand, even if 
 you're right, all you're doing is making an ad hominem attack that's not 
 worth responding to.

Commenting on your perceived lack of action isn't an attack on you
personally or your mother etc, no matter how much you'd like it to be,
and you just confirmed my observations.

 [*] - With the caveat that because there are so many pseudonyms being used, 
 it would both be helpful, pragmatic and a sign of respect if you guys would 
 start to identify yourselves. Unfortunately it's become known that some are 
 puppet accounts and we don't know which is which and who's just doing this 
 for fun.

For all you know every person on this list is using a pen name, it
doesn't mean there is a person posting under multiple names although
you wish someone ways so you could use it.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 12:42, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:

 On Jul 10, 2011, at 7:34 PM, John Smith wrote:

 On 11 July 2011 12:30, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 It's not worth my time responding to messages like this.

 I wrote a completely rational, neutral and open email outlining the things 
 we've tried and asking for ideas of how to make it better.

 Yes and didn't respond to a single query, but of course politicans do
 the same thing, they change the question into something they can
 answer.

 I didn't, you are correct. I said I would however, if it was an email 
 assuming good faith and free of personal attacks. This is common is western 
 societies. Or at least polite societies :-)


So you decide to make radical changes to the OSM community and then
refuse to answer questions cause it upsets your delicate nature?

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Steve Coast]

On Jul 10, 2011, at 7:45 PM, John Smith wrote:

 On 11 July 2011 12:42, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 
 On Jul 10, 2011, at 7:34 PM, John Smith wrote:
 
 On 11 July 2011 12:30, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 It's not worth my time responding to messages like this.
 
 I wrote a completely rational, neutral and open email outlining the things 
 we've tried and asking for ideas of how to make it better.
 
 Yes and didn't respond to a single query, but of course politicans do
 the same thing, they change the question into something they can
 answer.
 
 I didn't, you are correct. I said I would however, if it was an email 
 assuming good faith and free of personal attacks. This is common is western 
 societies. Or at least polite societies :-)
 
 So you decide to make radical changes to the OSM community and then
 refuse to answer questions cause it upsets your delicate nature?

Not at all, I've been having delicate and difficult conversations for many 
years. Of course, I loose my temper sometimes like any human being but in 
general it's precisely because I can have those conversations (and the 
technical talent and community building) that I'm where I am today.

Another point of order is that it wasn't somehow my exclusive decision.

As I say, if at any point you want to ask me those questions again in an email 
that assumes good faith and is free of personal attack (I'll even allow you the 
implied personal attack above) then I will be happy to answer them.

Steve
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[rran...@ihug.com.au]

 

I have only rarely made contributions to this list and never to the legal or LWG lists because I prefer to do things rather than talk about it. I have been contributing to OSM for over 5 years and, last I looked, I was about 800th in number of nodes and ways edited world wide. These contributions have been a result of surveys, fixing validation errors (often with the aid of Nearmap) and tracing ways from Nearmap. None of my work was due to data import.

Despite this my opinion on the license change was never asked for and it was only on 6 Feb 2011 that anyone from OSM bothered to inform me of the change and ask why I had not accepted the CT. Of course I had seen mostly second hand information on the talk-au list.

What has spurred me into this e-mail is the comment that resolving the issue with Nearmap was a good example of OSM-F addressing AU concerns. The resulting resolution with Nearmap is, in fact, why I am no longer contributing to OSM. I do not trust BING from a license and location accuracy prospective, and it does not have the resolution to do some of the things I could do with Nearmap such as picking up speed zones and traffic lights. Also it was about the same time that OSM-F stopped edits from those who had not agreed to the new CT that Nearmap announced the Nearmap users could agree to the CT but could no longer map with it.

Perhaps I have been spoiled by Nearmap, but I do not want to have a second best mapping experience without it, along with the provision to change licensing in the CT that, it is with deep regret, that I have stopped contributing to OSM_F. I plan to contribute to FOSM instead, but with a lost enthusiasm. 

I hope I am wrong, but I see the splits caused by the license and CT change as a huge setback to both the building and use of open mapping. 

Regards,
Roy Rankin
 

On Mon Jul 11 11:55 , Steve Coast  sent:





We looked around for all the people claiming that we've been ignoring them and can't actually find any posts by them on the legal lists or to the LWG for many of the people involved. Of course, with so many fake names being used it's hard to be sure they weren't raised under a different pseudonym. From what I've seen, the LWG took all of the concerns very seriously and spent an awful lot of time, on an individual basis, trying to resolve them. Nearmap of course being a good example.








___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Sam Couter]

Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
 I didn't, you are correct. I said I would however, if it was an email 
 assuming good faith and free of personal attacks. This is common is western 
 societies. Or at least polite societies :-)

Calling people trolls and puppets doesn't demonstrate an assumption of
good faith. In fact, it's the opposite.
-- 
Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[Mike Dupont]

[SNIP] Flames [/SNIP]

Hi, Sorry to get involved in this discussion. But it has been filling up my
inbox again.

Besides all the flames and smoke, what are the real issues here? I think
that we dont need to continue this endless discussion. Lets just stop the
fighting and do something more productive.

Can we make a list of real issues to be resolved and stick with them. There
are some issues that wont be resolved, such as hurt feelings and lost trust.
But we dont need to have a fight to the death over them.

I find that now we have the fosm going, there should be less reasons to
fight, everyone has basically what they need. Of course it could be better.

mike
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 14:53, Mike  Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Can we make a list of real issues to be resolved and stick with them. There
 are some issues that wont be resolved, such as hurt feelings and lost trust.
 But we dont need to have a fight to the death over them.

I'd like to know if OSM-F are planning to take the moral high ground
or not, that is will they respect the wishes of content authors or
not.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Going separate ways

[Nick Hocking]

Mark wrote

Out of interest - the greatest contributor to Australia-Oceania
according to http://odbl.de/australia-oceania.html is the accound used
for the suburb boundary / postcode boundary import. Once this is
excluded, does the figure for Australia improve a lot or only
marginally? (Is there even an easy way to find out?)

Hi Mark,

Yes if we were to revert out the non compliant imports, the bot that just
added the maxspeed tag on a HUGE number of ways,
and also the maxspeed:source tag, and also revert out the bot that modified
that last tag to be source:maxspeed, then
the numbers may be completly different.

cheers
Nick
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 15:09, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
 Mark wrote

 Out of interest - the greatest contributor to Australia-Oceania
 according to http://odbl.de/australia-oceania.html is the accound used
 for the suburb boundary / postcode boundary import. Once this is
 excluded, does the figure for Australia improve a lot or only
 marginally? (Is there even an easy way to find out?)

 Hi Mark,

 Yes if we were to revert out the non compliant imports, the bot that just
 added the maxspeed tag on a HUGE number of ways,
 and also the maxspeed:source tag, and also revert out the bot that modified
 that last tag to be source:maxspeed, then
 the numbers may be completly different.

That takes care of ways, but what about the 1.7million nodes attributed to me?

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[David Murn]

On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 06:53 +0200, Mike Dupont wrote:

 Besides all the flames and smoke, what are the real issues here? I
 think that we dont need to continue this endless discussion. Lets just
 stop the fighting and do something more productive. 

I think a main issue here, comes down to what services do we need to
fork away from the ODbL OSM but still retain the community that exists.

Both groups can utilise the same community (mailing lists, IRC, even
mapping parties) for discussions regarding tagging or international
mapping variances, infact I think they are some of the most interesting
discussions here.

Both groups can pretty much share the same toolsets. ie just because you
favour fosm over osmf or vice versa, that doesn't mean you should stop
using and contributing to things like mapnik, osmosis and mkgmap.

I think there needs to be a clear statement made by one of the
'democratically elected' members that despite any forks in the licence,
the project and community share a common goal and can share some
resources, even if we're unable to share data.

I also think that a lot of the arguers on these lists need to understand
this too.

 I find that now we have the fosm going, there should be less reasons
 to fight, everyone has basically what they need. Of course it could be
 better.

I only hope with time that feelings will ease and each branch of the
fork will become successful on its own strength.  I think both projects
serve their own market of users and will continue to build on their
individual strengths.

David


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[David Murn]

Hi Nick,

Just a quick note that my understanding is those figures are generated
based on v1 history, none of the bot edits would have been v1 unless
they created a new entity, not just a new/modified tag.

David

On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 15:09 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote:
  
 Hi Mark,
  
 Yes if we were to revert out the non compliant imports, the bot that
 just added the maxspeed tag on a HUGE number of ways,
 and also the maxspeed:source tag, and also revert out the bot that
 modified that last tag to be source:maxspeed, then
 the numbers may be completly different.
  
 cheers
 Nick
 
 
 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways

[John Smith]

On 11 July 2011 15:19, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
 That takes care of ways, but what about the 1.7million nodes attributed to me?

Sorry, that was total objects, only a pitiful 437k nodes.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au