On 6/21/2011 12:49 AM, SteveC wrote:
I only said +1 for a start,
Which means I agree with the quoted post.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On 6/18/2011 12:54 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Erik Johansson writes:
The Troll word is used so often around in this community that it's
hard to speak about courtesy.
That's because SteveC uses it on people who don't agree with him.
Can you point to an example where I call someone a
Just a comment using the term Troll appears as if it is intended to provoke
an emotional response.
Surely we should be able to stick to issues and resolve them rather than
descend into emotions?
Cheerio John
On 20 June 2011 11:56, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
On 6/18/2011 12:54 PM,
Steve Coast wrote:
On 6/18/2011 12:54 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Erik Johansson writes:
The Troll word is used so often around in this community that it's
hard to speak about courtesy.
That's because SteveC uses it on people who don't agree with him.
Can you point to an example
I only said +1 for a start, and that was in a thread where you managed to annoy
Richard Weait. That's quite a feat.
Steve
stevecoast.com
On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:43, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Steve Coast wrote:
On 6/18/2011 12:54 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Erik Johansson
Dermot McNally writes:
In a democracy, a majority decides which way a decision should
fall.
It's still not a democracy.
In our vote
It's still not a vote, and calling it a vote instead of a vote
doesn't help matters.
Not my intention - everybody is free to explain what they meant by
Erik Johansson writes:
The Troll word is used so often around in this community that it's
hard to speak about courtesy.
That's because SteveC uses it on people who don't agree with him. It's
a form of brow-beating. Other people follow his lead.
Trolling is posting positions just to get a
Replying to myself ... I know ... But I was thinking while I was out
mowing the lawn. It's NOT necessary for OSM or the OSMF to be a
democracy. It's simply necessary to provide an environment where
people can contribute to the map and share their contributions with
other people. If accomplishing
Hello Russ,
It is very seldom that a democracy will make the best decisions.
Winston Churchill said The best argument against democracy is a
five-minute conversation with the average voter.
But democracy has real motivational benefits in an information
society. In our case, users will be more
That is why OSM is, and will remain, a do-ocracy.
My crash course to the issues with different government systems:
a) anarchy. Problem: not well fit to a collaborative project
b) dictatorship/monarchy. Someone with enough power decides how it
works. AFAIK SteveC has empowered OSMF this way.
On Tuesday 14 June 2011 19:28:52 Pieren wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Just as a factual point:
The Contributor Terms were posted to the mailing lists in September 2009
as far as I can see:
-
Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest)
P Before printing, think about the environment.
Van: Henk Hoff [mailto:toffeh...@gmail.com]
Verzonden: Monday, June 13, 2011 11:55 PM
Aan: Nathan Edgars II
CC: talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF
On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 23:54 +0200, Henk Hoff wrote:
During the time of the OSMF-membership vote, there was also a vote
initiated by the community, which can be seen here:
http://doodle.com/feqszqirqqxi4r7w
Outcome: 75% would accept the new license, 11% undecided, 14% not (at
that time)
You
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:37 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
In general i know Henk as a reasonable man,
Thank you
and I know he is in politics in the Netherlands
Not anymore
so she should knew better then referencing to this
On 14 June 2011 05:18, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Nathan was being gracious. You ARE trolling. Stop it.
I like to assume good faith on the lists. I have never for a moment
doubted the sincerity of your position on the licence change, and I
demand the same courtesy from you. It's
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Dermot McNally [mailto:derm...@gmail.com]
Verzonden: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 2:13 PM
Aan: Russ Nelson
CC: Nathan Edgars II; talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 14 June 2011 05:18, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Nathan
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:37 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen
Read it and you will understand why is some “democratic” countries
revolutions
started. This Is what I call blackmail democracy.
(the Poll does not even mention the CT)
FYI, the poll was opened the Dec 6, 2009
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Henk Hoff toffeh...@gmail.com wrote:
Outcome: 75% would accept the new license, 11% undecided, 14% not (at that
time)
There has been similar polls by the community during that time with similar
results.
Both (the vote and the poll) show a large majority in
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Both on the confidential legal-talk list ... This is a perfect example of a
process that never involved the average contributors.
Nonsense. The separate list for legal discussions was created because
legal discussions were
Hi,
Pieren wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net
mailto:rich...@systemed.net wrote:
The Contributor Terms were posted to the mailing lists in September
2009 as
far as I can see:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
2011-06-14 19:46, Frederik Ramm skrev:
It is therefore safe to assume that someone reading talk and interested
in license discussions should have subscribed to legal-talk.
It's safe to assume most people will miss anything important until they
been
On 14 June 2011 14:40, Anders Arnholm and...@arnholm.se wrote:
Telling there is a legal list and then assuming people interested in
license stuff subscribes and finds out about it. Don't work, and all the
time you keep sending this is for legal list, obviously shows.
Most of the people
My silence previously to legal discussions doesn't mean that I like them being
on the main mailing list. I also subscribe to the legal list and read it as
well. I'm not sure why it is difficult to subscribe to different mailing
lists, mine are all filtered into different folders where I can
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.net wrote:
I don't know why some people call it a vote at all. It is a question
whether or not *you* agree to a contract (the CT) and allow *your*
contributions to be distributed under ODbL. Your answer is not binding
to
On 13.06.2011 13:30, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.net wrote:
A question for a real vote could be Do you think OSM should switch to
ODbL?
That vote took place three times. It was done first by the OSMF
members, then the community
On 13/06/11 12:30, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
That vote took place three times. It was done first by the OSMF
members, then the community at large, and then separately by the
community by a different community member who had concerned over the
first poll. Check the archives, you'll find references
Serge Wroclawski-2 wrote:
Next, about a year later, a vote amongst OSMF membership was
taken.This isn't the board, but the entire membership. Since it was a
decision that was to effect the direction of the OSMF, this makes
sense to me..
This was before my time, but from what I understand
Thats a kind of odd set of statements given... the random polls you're showing
around...?
Steve
stevecoast.com
On Jun 13, 2011, at 13:53, TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
On 13/06/11 12:30, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
That vote took place three times. It was done first by the
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
Serge Wroclawski-2 wrote:
Next, about a year later, a vote amongst OSMF membership was
taken.This isn't the board, but the entire membership. Since it was a
decision that was to effect the direction of the OSMF,
On 6/13/2011 5:54 PM, Henk Hoff wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
mailto:nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Serge Wroclawski-2 wrote:
Next, about a year later, a vote amongst OSMF membership was
taken.This isn't the board, but the entire
Dermot McNally writes:
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal. In particular, in direct
democracy such as a referendum, small groups always design the
question that will be put to the electorate, tuning it as required
Dermot McNally writes:
On 11 June 2011 00:15, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you're being deliberately obtuse
Nathan was being gracious. You ARE trolling. Stop it.
That's amusing coming from somebody who thinks he can inhibit the use
of data he has declared as PD,
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au wrote:
On 11/06/2011 10:02 AM, Nic Roets wrote:
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal.
Dermot,
I would quite like to take my data and start my
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm much more worried about the effects of a fork. If we spend time
updating a number of forks, it will detract from time that we could
have spent mapping.
It's much better if we a democratic process and settle the license
On 12 June 2011 19:29, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm much more worried about the effects of a fork. If we spend time
updating a number of forks, it will detract from time that we could
have spent mapping.
I was in that frame of thinking 3-6 months ago, but unless something
radical
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Mike Dupont
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
The code is the law,
http://www.lessig.org/content/standard/0,1902,4165,00.html and we need to
change the code so that these discussions about licensing and all that are
less important.
If it was easy,
I am not saying it is easy.
But if you keep most imports as thier own layers and only merge when
trusted, look at how git manages many branches, you pull only from trusted
branches. In my module TIGER would be its own layer that would not be
merged at all, it would be kept separate. You would
Hi all,
I suggest people try to a bit more constructive on this thread. It has
gone off topic and contains a few breaches of the etiquette guidelines.
The process that got us to where we are but if people have a problem
with it, it would be more useful to look to the future IMHO. I am not
Am 11.06.2011 04:46, schrieb John F. Eldredge:
Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 June 2011 02:13, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
When I signed up in the first place, I was required to say I accept having
my data placed under the CC-by-SA license, but, unlike the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
2011-06-11 01:49, Dermot McNally skrev:
On 11 June 2011 00:15, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Switzerland around the same time held a referendum on whether to ban
the building of Minarets. I expect that many Muslims voted against the
On 10 Jun 2011, at 23:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
You're still conflating two decisions. To continue with your referendum
analogy, someone may vote no on construction of a new arts center, yet still
patronize it once it's complete. But one cannot 'vote' no on the license
change and then
On 6/11/2011 4:43 AM, Thomas Davie wrote:
On 10 Jun 2011, at 23:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
You're still conflating two decisions. To continue with your referendum
analogy, someone may vote no on construction of a new arts center, yet
still
patronize it once it's complete. But one cannot
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I think you are confusing support the relicense with accept the
relicense and that difference is significant.
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com wrote:
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I think you are confusing support the relicense with accept the
relicense and that difference is significant.
Not at all - I
On 11/06/11 12:09, Ben Laenen wrote:
OK, so the thread went into a different direction along the way, but above is
what my question originally was: what gave OSMF the power to be this small
group in the first place? The OSMF only had the purpose to support OSM and
suddenly it's now making the
I don't think things are black and white, you speak of rejecting the new
license which seems a little strong.
I think there are some issues to deal with and some implications.
If we are talking about making the basic OSM map based on direction
observation, and I think we are, then I think the
On 11 June 2011 13:21, TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
4) Join the OSMF as a member (people keep suggesting this but I don't
actually agree!)
This might be a good point for you to outline how you think important
stuff should be organised - how to ensure servers are bought and
The last few mails on this thread have highlighted a few good points to me.
I think that OSM has a problem in that it has no processes for making
decisions - we have wiki votes, mailing list 'discussions', IRC, Forums,
OSMF committees, OSMF board meetings, plus some 'do whatever you want'
views.
Hi,
Graham Jones wrote:
In my day job I look after quite a few
decision making processes to help our organisation make difficult
decisions. I always say that I will have failed if at the end of the
day we have to resort to a vote to decide what to do
That's good. But also remember that
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Graham Jones wrote:
In my day job I look after quite a few decision
making processes to help our organisation make difficult
decisions. I always say that I will have failed if at the end
of the day we have to resort to a vote to decide what to do
That's good. But
On 11 June 2011 19:40, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I'll let you into a secret. The real power in OSM _isn't_ Steve's secret
portal in his basement. Nor even Fake Steve's. It's here:
http://svn.openstreetmap.org/ [1]
Good one :)
Regards,
Pavithran
Richard, Frederik,
Thank you for your replies. I will pick up on a couple of points.
You are right that in my day job, the people involved are more constant, and
yes, those implementing the decisions do get paid for it. This does not
mean that you have to adopt a different approach though - we
On 11/06/2011 10:02 AM, Nic Roets wrote:
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal.
Dermot,
I would quite like to take my data and start my own PD / CC0 project.
Nic,
Before you go doing that, please consider the
To all active members of OSM !
I found that only 250 or so OSM contributors out of 250.000
are actually members of OSMF.
That is about 0.1 %.
Nevertheless it's that 0.1 % that actually decides what will
happen with OSM in the close future.
The current OSMF members are all very
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
To all active members of OSM !
I found that only 250 or so OSM contributors out of 250.000
are actually members of OSMF.
That is about 0.1 %.
Nevertheless it's that 0.1 % that actually decides what will
happen with OSM in the close
On Friday, 10 June 2011, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com wrote:
then why is it making all the decisions on the new license? Or am I then
misunderstanding how the whole process is taking place?
I suggest that you are. We the mappers are making the decisions based
on a proposal drawn up at great
On 10/06/11 19:18, Ben Laenen wrote:
then why is it making all the decisions on the new license? Or am I then
misunderstanding how the whole process is taking place?
Greetings
Ben
I was talking to Henk and Oliver of OSMF today* and I think we agree
that what ever OSMFs role is, it would be
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com wrote:
The OpenStreetMap Foundation is an international not-for-profit organization
supporting, but not controlling, the OpenStreetMap Project.
This statement is really wishful thinking on the part of the OSMF. By
virtue of the
On 10 June 2011 21:38, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
2. How do they know that there is overwhelming support from the
community ? (I don't believe the license change passed this test) and
Close to 99% of mappers who actively voted supported the change.
3. And waiting for the community to
On 10/06/11 21:50, Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 21:38, Nic Roetsnro...@gmail.com wrote:
2. How do they know that there is overwhelming support from the
community ? (I don't believe the license change passed this test) and
Close to 99% of mappers who actively voted supported the
Thanks. I finally did.
--
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I think you are confusing support the relicense with accept the
relicense and that difference is significant.
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal.
I'd like to save Nic the trouble of taking issue with my claim below -
I've since realised that he reversed his no vote, something that
changes very much the character of the point he was making.
Sorry Nic,
Dermot
On 10 June 2011 21:50, Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 June 2011
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC lt;mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.ukgt;
wrote:
I think you are confusing support the relicense with accept the
relicense and that difference is significant.
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
On 10/06/2011 22:51, Dermot McNally wrote:
We attack the principles of democracy at our peril - most of the tried
alternatives are quite nasty.
The (sole?) exception being market forces.
--
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On 10/06/11 22:51, Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSCmappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I think you are confusing support the relicense with accept the
relicense and that difference is significant.
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
On 10 June 2011 23:01, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I cannot think of any democratic process where only the 'yes' voters are
allowed to participate in the results. Can you?
About a year ago, Bavaria held a referendum to ban smoking in just
about all indoor public places including
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 23:01, Nathan Edgars II lt;nerou...@gmail.comgt; wrote:
I cannot think of any democratic process where only the 'yes' voters are
allowed to participate in the results. Can you?
About a year ago, Bavaria held a referendum to ban smoking in just
On 10 June 2011 23:35, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
It's a flawed analogy, since there were two decisions for smokers: whether
to vote yes or no on the referendum, and (after it passed) whether to
patronize these places. With OSM there is only one decision; someone who
'votes'
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 23:35, Nathan Edgars II lt;nerou...@gmail.comgt; wrote:
It's a flawed analogy, since there were two decisions for smokers:
whether
to vote yes or no on the referendum, and (after it passed) whether to
patronize these places. With OSM there is only
On 11 June 2011 00:15, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you're being deliberately obtuse
That's amusing coming from somebody who thinks he can inhibit the use
of data he has declared as PD, but let's carry on...
, but I'll continue to assume
otherwise. In a democracy, there
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal.
Dermot,
I would quite like to take my data and start my own PD / CC0 project.
So by simply matching my new license to the conditions set by the
OSMF, I would be voting yes in your
On 6/10/2011 7:49 PM, Dermot McNally wrote:
On 11 June 2011 00:15, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you're being deliberately obtuse
That's amusing coming from somebody who thinks he can inhibit the use
of data he has declared as PD, but let's carry on...
Eh? I don't
On Jun 11, 2011, at 1:02, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal.
Dermot,
I would quite like to take my data and start my own PD / CC0 project.
What is stopping you?
So by
TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
On 10/06/11 21:50, Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 21:38, Nic Roetsnro...@gmail.com wrote:
2. How do they know that there is overwhelming support from the
community ? (I don't believe the license change passed this test)
and
Close
On 11 June 2011 01:02, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
I would quite like to take my data and start my own PD / CC0 project.
So by simply matching my new license to the conditions set by the
OSMF, I would be voting yes in your referendum.
Of course, you are free to do that. So we need to
On 11 June 2011 00:53, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
True. I clicked the button to accept the license, since this was necessary
in order to continue editing, but I don't much care for the license. In
particular, I disliked the fact that you had to agree in advance, sight
Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 June 2011 00:53, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
True. I clicked the button to accept the license, since this was
necessary in order to continue editing, but I don't much care for the
license. In particular, I disliked the fact
On 11 June 2011 02:13, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
When I signed up in the first place, I was required to say I accept having
my data placed under the CC-by-SA license, but, unlike the new license, I
was not required to waive my right to have a say in any future license
Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 June 2011 02:13, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
When I signed up in the first place, I was required to say I accept
having my data placed under the CC-by-SA license, but, unlike the new
license, I was not required to waive my right
80 matches
Mail list logo
