Frederik
It was something I was going to do. We haven't discussed it, yet, at
the LWG calls and will at the next meeting. I strongly agree with you.
Best
Steve
On 27 Mar 2009, at 08:39, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
I am of the opinion that there absolutely needs to be a
presentation
I don't see a clear explanation as to why there is ambiguity if you
don't do turn restrictions at the end of ways on the wiki. There is
some stuff in the talk page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:restriction
Anyone care to provide an explanation?
The reason I ask is
Has there been any discussion on what people here feel 'substantial'
means in the context of the definitions of the ODbL? I've banged
around the wiki looking but might might have missed it. Here's the
first important bit relevant to this in the ODbL:
Extraction – Means the permanent or temporary
On 23 Apr 2009, at 12:17, Teemu Koskinen wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:34:05 +0300, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I don't see a clear explanation as to why there is ambiguity if you
don't do turn restrictions at the end of ways on the wiki. There is
some stuff in the talk page
On 23 Apr 2009, at 12:32, Teemu Koskinen wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:25:36 +0300, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On 23 Apr 2009, at 12:17, Teemu Koskinen wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:34:05 +0300, SteveC st...@asklater.com
wrote:
I don't see a clear explanation as to why
On 23 Apr 2009, at 12:34, Tobias Knerr wrote:
SteveC wrote:
On 23 Apr 2009, at 12:17, Teemu Koskinen wrote:
If both from and to ways continue after the via point and neither is
one-way, there's two possible ways to interpret it: the restriction
could apply when coming from either
Is there anyone here from the CPH area that can be a contact for
organising an OSM event? We've been offered some space to do something
near a conference, reboot 11. Please drop me a line.
PS the Denmark wiki page needs love, doesn't even link to the DK
mailing list. Well, now it does.
On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
Remember: Steve is the head of the OSMF, so this is the OSMF Chairman's
position about other peoples opinions when they don't share his own opinion.
I'm not allowed to have opinions?
Is this the organization you want to hand over the license of
On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:38 PM, Liz wrote:
SteveC marked the NO page as in dispute. No, he didn't mark the YES page as
in
dispute.
If there was no dispute there would be no need for a vote.
I answered this on osmf-talk, why're you bringing it up over here?
There was a dispute, I marked
On Dec 5, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009, SteveC wrote:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:38 PM, Liz wrote:
SteveC marked the NO page as in dispute. No, he didn't mark the YES page
as in dispute.
If there was no dispute there would be no need for a vote.
I answered
On Dec 5, 2009, at 18:17, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com
wrote:
SteveC schrieb:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 3:44 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
With a gun at their head: Refuse: After the migration (currently
26th February 2010), your contributions will not be included in
ODbL licensed
On Dec 5, 2009, at 17:17, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009, you wrote:
Don't you mean rather than admit I was wrong or talk about it
where I
brought it up, much better to try and stir the pot on another list?
i have not made personal comments about any one
i
Yours c.
Steve
On Dec 5, 2009, at 18:43, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/12/6 SteveC st...@asklater.com:
Are you also living on planet Frederik? Out of all the crazy claims
this has to be the most crazy. Where have you been the past year of
consultations?
How
Yours c.
Steve
On Dec 5, 2009, at 18:55, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com
wrote:
SteveC schrieb:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 18:17, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com
wrote:
SteveC schrieb:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 3:44 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
With a gun at their head: Refuse: After
On Dec 5, 2009, at 19:40, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/12/6 SteveC st...@asklater.com:
By letting them know FUD and BS will be shot down.
And you are coming off just as unrational as you are claiming they are
being and not helping fence sitters one bit.
Read
wrongly is better
than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria
-Original Message-
From: SteveC st...@asklater.com
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:35:13
To: Ulf Lampingulf.lamp...@googlemail.com
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.orgtalk@openstreetmap.org; Tom
Hughest...@compton.nu
Subject: Re
Yours c.
Steve
On Dec 5, 2009, at 20:25, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:41 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
Remember: Steve is the head of the OSMF, so this is the OSMF
Chairman's
position about other peoples
On Dec 5, 2009, at 20:51, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Steve,
SteveC wrote:
How is insulting people going to help things?
By letting them know FUD and BS will be shot down.
I understand that most statements you are responding to seem stupid,
unnecessary or inappropriate
On Dec 5, 2009, at 21:03, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Richard Weait schrieb:
I think the LWG has done a good job on a difficult task. A task that
we, as a community, asked them to do for us because we couldn't
implement a license change as a group of 20,000 (at the time)
On Dec 5, 2009, at 21:15, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com
wrote:
SteveC schrieb:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 19:40, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/12/6 SteveC st...@asklater.com:
By letting them know FUD and BS will be shot down.
And you are coming off just
Of course they said that, they only support PD-like licenses *as a
policy*.
It's pretty stupid but that's their policy. It's like the RIAA have a
closed policy and the consensus is viral in OSM.
Yours c.
Steve
On Dec 5, 2009, at 21:36, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009
On Dec 5, 2009, at 21:52, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
Of course they said that, they only support PD-like licenses *as a
policy*.
What a non-sense, every academic works with attribution of past work.
Including
On Dec 5, 2009, at 21:53, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:42 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Of course they said that, they only support PD-like licenses *as a
policy*.
PD-like licenses? You mean for databases of facts? Or am I
misinterpreting PD-like
On Dec 7, 2009, at 5:48 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Lambertus schreef:
I'm just curious... why?
You misunderstand: Google would get my data for free and keep it closed.
You'd only be able to use it the way Google intends it to be used:
On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:16 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Nick, Oleg,
thank you for answering.
I'm quite surprised that you are working directly from the API. Nick writes:
The server is actually quite responsive for POIs - maybe its because
node queries are faster than way queries and
On Dec 6, 2009, at 1:48 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Well, you may think Creative Commons is stupid, but I hope others will
give them a chance and listen to what they have to say. I think they will,
considering that Creative
On Dec 6, 2009, at 2:03 AM, 80n wrote:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
Matt Amos schreef:
we're talking about moving to another
license with very similar requirements, but a
On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:06 AM, Michael Barabanov wrote:
I wonder how easy it is in fact to usefully take the OSM data without giving
things back, even with the current license. Seems to me, not so easy. OSM
data is not perfect. To create a value-add, a commercial entity would have to
On Dec 5, 2009, at 8:25 PM, 80n wrote:
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:41 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
Remember: Steve is the head of the OSMF, so this is the OSMF Chairman's
position about other peoples opinions when they don't share his
On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
You cannot see the process how Cloudmade, Geofabrik and others
process their data.
Well the huge difference is that OSM is under a reciprocal license,
What
On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:30 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
I have no idea what that means.
I had no idea about reciprocal license either.
Ask Google. It might have something to do with the fact that they
want to own all
On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:40 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
I think that developing their own tools, infrastructure, branding,
product management... for MapMaker might give away what they think
about that.
I think you
On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Ed Avis wrote:
SteveC steve at asklater.com writes:
With a gun at their head: Refuse: After the migration (currently 26th
February 2010), your contributions will not be included in ODbL licensed
downloads and you will not be able to continue contributing
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Sebastian Hohmann wrote:
I don't know about that legal stuff in detail, but I agree that CC0
would probably be the best licence. If OSM won't go and really try to
sue people, why protect the data? And why protect the data at all?
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:22 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Sebastian Hohmann wrote:
I don't know about that legal stuff in detail, but I agree that CC0
would probably be the best licence. If OSM won't go
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
doesn't apply to Geodata.
Because...?
Factual data. What you are attempting to enforce is the viral effect,
which directly is what you also try to overcome...
So I
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:43 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:22 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Sebastian Hohmann wrote:
I don't know
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:54 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
doesn't apply to Geodata.
Because...?
Factual
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:03 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
So I can't license data because it's factual?
You cannot /copyright/ the data because it is factual. A license for
what you couldn't /copyright/ in the first place
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:04 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Anthony wrote:
There's no reason to license data if it's factual.
You're jumping from your pseudo-legal argument to your moral argument. It
would
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:17 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
SteveC schreef:
So I can't license data because it's factual?
You cannot /copyright/ the data because it is factual. A license
for what you couldn't /copyright
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:20 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
The point is that *morally* you want the data to be PD and *morally* I want
it to be SA.
Morally, I want my data to be SA. CC-BY-SA, to be specific.
Well that doesn't work
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
The point is that *morally* you want the data to be PD and *morally*
I want it to be SA. The legal points you make are just supporting
cases that you're cherry picking to help you.
I don't *morally* want PD, I *morally* want
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:35 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:20 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
The point is that *morally* you want the data to be PD and *morally* I
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:47 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:44 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:35 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:53 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:50 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
You asked why it doesn't work, and there is a wealth of information on the
list and the wiki...
There are a lot of claims on the list and the wiki that CC-BY-SA doesn't
work
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:57 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Trevor, let me guess that you feel people with actual law degrees like the
two that helped the LWG are wrong and you are right based on your 6th sense?
Who's Trevor?
My pet troll
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:08 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:57 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Trevor, let me guess that you feel people with actual law degrees like the
two that helped the LWG are wrong and you
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:07 PM, Liz wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, SteveC wrote:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:20 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
The point is that *morally* you want the data to be PD and *morally* I
want it to be SA.
Morally, I want
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Anthony wrote:
I never said someone with a law degree would never make such a statement. I
said they are no more qualified to make such a statement than anyone else.
So let me get this straight, lawyers are not more qualified to make legal
arguments than anyone
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Liz wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, SteveC wrote:
Well that doesn't work,
Why doesn't it work?
See legal-talk ad nauseum.
I've read the whole lot, over an 18 month period of time, and there is no
proof that CC-by-SA doesn't work
I've not seen anything proving
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:33 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
It is however quite stupid to think that only 265 people care enough about
their data to be worth a vote
The vote isn't
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
You're really advocating switching license without asking anyone?
Isn't he merely stating that if you truly believe CC-BY-SA doesn't
protect the data, you don't have
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:51 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
You're really advocating switching license without
On Dec 8, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
You're really advocating switching license without asking anyone?
Isn't he merely stating that if you truly believe CC-BY-SA doesn't
protect the data, you don't have to ask
On Dec 8, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
SteveC schreef:
You're really advocating switching license without asking anyone?
Isn't he merely stating that if you truly believe CC-BY-SA doesn't
protect the data, you don't have to ask anyone to do so?
to do what, relicense
On Dec 8, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Peteris Krisjanis pec...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, you can call him a troll, but I agree I so far haven't heard
sound arguments why CC-BY-SA doesn't work and what work actually
means. Doesn't work for Cloudmade?
I
On Dec 8, 2009, at 2:18 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC schreef:
Why don't you do it then, try and fork to CC0 or PD with planet.osm ?
Because I'm not convinced that CC-BY-SA won't hold ;)
So if IP lawyers cannot convince you, who
On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:24 AM, Dave F. wrote:
I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone
get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected?
It's like Encyclopedia Britannica looking to move to Wikipedia in 2004 or
something, printing out a lot of books and getting
On Feb 3, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Dave F. wrote:
This won't happen if none of the map creators are taking the data
because they think it's crap.
Saying 'none' is exceptional hyperbole.
Yours c.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
Hi
Thought I'd try to put this together:
--
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week
Every week, OSMers everywhere are invited to help in this weeks project. This
is inspired by the huge amount of effort that went in to mapping Haiti by
people all over the world.
--
So please
-
Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens SteveC
Verzonden: dinsdag 9 februari 2010 19:42
Aan: Talk Openstreetmap
Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] Project of the week
Hi
Thought I'd try to put this together:
--
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki
On Feb 9, 2010, at 5:43 PM, Dave F. wrote:
SteveC wrote:
Hi
Thought I'd try to put this together:
--
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week
Every week, OSMers everywhere are invited to help in this weeks project.
This is inspired by the huge amount of effort
Anyone in or near Budapest please give Gabor a shout to speak at a conf about
OSM...
Yours c.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
I've posted a design concept with description and invitation for feedback here:
http://opengeodata.org/new-design-concept-for-openstreetmaporg
Yours c.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Feb 20, 2010, at 3:50 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Hi all,
I received the following inquiry from Thomas Hallauer of TheWhereBusiness:
- Is Egnos being used by the community? it's live, it's free but I am trying
to find out how available it is (and if it helps)?
yes and yes and yes
On Feb 20, 2010, at 11:13 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
SteveC wrote:
http://opengeodata.org/new-design-concept-for-openstreetmaporg
Whatever merits the (external, commercial) uservoice.com service might have,
I am extremely sceptical about using it for openstreetmap.org. Join
On Feb 20, 2010, at 11:20 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
SteveC wrote:
Wrong. Map bugs. Did you read my post Fred ? :-)
So you meant to integrate uservoice.com instead of integrating
openstreetbugs? But can their system tie notes to map locations?
Well I'll go further.
openstreetbugs
On Feb 21, 2010, at 12:55 AM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
openstreetbugs is basically there but has a crappy UI. It needs to be
1) click 'feedback' or 'problem'
2) enter problem
3) click ok
ok and then? who will pick it up and fix it?
I will.
look at openstreetbugs and most could
On Feb 21, 2010, at 1:05 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 21/02/10 07:16, SteveC wrote:
On Feb 20, 2010, at 11:13 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
SteveC wrote:
http://opengeodata.org/new-design-concept-for-openstreetmaporg
Whatever merits the (external, commercial) uservoice.com service might
have
On Feb 21, 2010, at 1:08 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 21/02/10 07:38, SteveC wrote:
On Feb 20, 2010, at 11:20 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
SteveC wrote:
Wrong. Map bugs. Did you read my post Fred ? :-)
So you meant to integrate uservoice.com instead of integrating
openstreetbugs? But can
On Feb 21, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Kai Krueger wrote:
the extra step of clicking where the problem is should not happen, we should
get that from the bbox or center point plus zoom. So with some changes I
think we can integrate OSB and expose it front and center to help fix up the
bugs.
Are
On Feb 21, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Robert Funnell wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, SteveC wrote:
... It's very clear that nobody can convince Richard to actually write
something any muggle would really want to use, you can scream at him to
finish the mythical Potlatch 2 all you want, but he doesn't
On Feb 21, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Dave F. wrote:
How is zooming all the way in repeatedly panning around to centre up,
quicker than one click to _accurately_ locate the problem?
Hi, you've never done a UI review.
http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/UX_and_Usability_Study
Money quote:
Every
On Feb 21, 2010, at 3:49 AM, Chris Hill wrote:
SteveC wrote:
2) We have to be very clear that the openstreetmap.org website is _awful_.
Horrendous. A total PITA. We're all here because we're persistent with it.
But the wonderful thing is - we don't have to make the tools and site easy
On Feb 21, 2010, at 9:23 AM, Dave F. wrote:
Hi, you've never done a UI review.
http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/UX_and_Usability_Study
Money quote:
Every user in this study struggled to get a basic grasp of the editing
interface. Despite users’ overall excitement about
On Feb 21, 2010, at 9:38 AM, Dave F. wrote:
SteveC wrote:
Oh, please...
...Yawn.
That kind of sums you up.
/me prods the troll
Yours c.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Feb 21, 2010, at 9:56 AM, Dave F. wrote:
SteveC wrote:
On Feb 21, 2010, at 9:38 AM, Dave F. wrote:
SteveC wrote:
Oh, please...
...Yawn.
That kind of sums you up.
/me prods the troll
I'm a troll because I disagree with you?
No, because you live under a bridge with your
On Feb 21, 2010, at 11:49 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 16:36, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
... It's very clear that nobody can convince Richard to actually write
something any muggle would really want to use, you can scream at him to
finish the mythical
The problem with your analysis is pretty simple - maybe those people left
because the site was crap, not because they inherently don't like adding more
than 10 things. Maybe if we make it better, they will add a lot more.
On Feb 21, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
Instead of
On Feb 21, 2010, at 18:57, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/21 SteveC st...@asklater.com:
Sure. In Germany you have this amazing community where there's a
stamptish around every corner. But out here it's much harder and we
need these easier tools to build
I really liked something I read in The New New thing (
http://www.amazon.com/New-Thing-Silicon-Valley-Story/dp/0140296468/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_7
) about Jim Clark ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_H._Clark ) when the
author Michael Lewis would ask about the past of his companies and stuff he'd
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:27 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 24 February 2010 06:17, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
In the middle we have a bunch of thought on how the site should or shouldn't
be. Legitimate questions about putting the map or help up front, or using
OSB or uservoice, or some new
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:07 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:17 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I know matt takes it personally that the logo is anything other than perfect,
and richard takes it personally that potlatch is crap for newbies... but
that's just fact
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 23/02/10 21:35, SteveC wrote:
oh sure - if you have any specific ones that annoy you I can try and explain
why I was short. I think mainly it was just very annoying how TomH pissed
all over it straight away which is actually pretty unlike
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:33 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 24 February 2010 07:30, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
For the 3 millionth time, I'm not proposing uservoice for map bugs! :-)
Well the same question goes for any proposal, but you keep mentioning
them, but the question is still valid
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 23/02/10 21:46, SteveC wrote:
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
Did you read the long blog post I wrote the next morning where I attempted
to be more constructive?
No, sorry Tom, where was that?
http://compton.nu/2010
it all in that tab too)...
I dunno how we'd realistically answer the question of a total new start over
design - pretty hard.
On Feb 23, 2010, at 3:12 PM, SteveC wrote:
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 23/02/10 21:46, SteveC wrote:
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Tom
Thanks Dermot, you put it better than I did.
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:05 PM, Dermot McNally wrote:
On 23 February 2010 20:17, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
An excellent and though-provoking post. It's rare to read something of
that length on such touchy subjects and agree with so much
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:07 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:17 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I know matt takes it personally that the logo is anything other than perfect,
and richard takes it personally that potlatch is crap for newbies... but
that's just fact
, and we're just ignoring the ideas because we don't like them? That's a
hard one to call.
Yours c.
Steve
On Feb 23, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 23/02/10 22:12, SteveC wrote:
As you can see from uservoice, things you highlight like routing are very
important to people out there. You
.
Steve
On Feb 23, 2010, at 4:29 PM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:17 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I know matt takes it personally that the logo is anything other than
perfect, and richard takes it personally that potlatch is crap for
newbies... but that's just fact
On Feb 23, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Steve,
it would be easier for me if you could fragment your ideas more and then
propose them in digestible 20-line blocks or so. And then distribute this
over a few weeks instead of creating a flurry every half year. Do you have an
On Feb 23, 2010, at 4:37 PM, Steve Doerr wrote:
On 23/02/2010 20:17, SteveC wrote:
[snip]
What's uservoice? What's trac? What's PL1?
:-)
UserVoice is a neat feedback-as-a-service website which lets anyone put a
feedback tab on their site and collect user views on what should be fixed
On Feb 23, 2010, at 5:01 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 24 February 2010 09:42, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
You don't seem to make any realistic suggestions for moving forward and
just, instead, suggest potlatch is fine as is the front page. That doesn't
seem to be in touch with the reality
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:27 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:42 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Thanks for your thoughtful comments...
And I hope you've taken some of them on board.
You don't seem to make any realistic suggestions for moving forward and
just, instead
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:37 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:07 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
* Freeze PL1 (TomH enforces no more updated on the server) and work on PL2
Wow. You'd really try to prevent any improvements that have been coded
from being deployed? That's
Chris
On Feb 24, 2010, at 6:16 AM, Chris Hill wrote:
SteveC wrote:
[snip]
Right up front we have the school of thought that everything is perfect the
way it is. That uservoice is some kind of inherently crappy system (see the
uservoice ideas page at http://osm.uservoice.com/ ). That we
On Feb 24, 2010, at 7:28 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:08 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:37 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:07 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
* Freeze PL1 (TomH enforces no more updated on the server
On Feb 24, 2010, at 7:35 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:06 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:27 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:42 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Sure, you don't like the way I communicate sometimes
Hmm
201 - 300 of 730 matches
Mail list logo
