Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Toby Murray-2 wrote: It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html Did I miss something or does the graph have a problem? I just see the web page, but no images. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/License-graph-tp6278593p6291462.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like my internet at home died this morning so wget replaced the images with zero byte files. I'll have to kick the modem. Turns out it was my router. Until a few months ago it had never crashed but lately it has been acting up every once in a while. Guess it's time to look for a new router that can run one of the wrt based firmwares... Anyway, the graphs are back but unfortunately they have a 4 hour long flat line in them now :( Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 19 Apr 2011, at 01:15, David Murn wrote: On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 11:53 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: ...which is ignoring the 70% or so of all of those people who never edited and can be switched over without incident. That sounds like the thinking of the parties in a real vote, 'if everyone who didnt vote, voted for us, we would have wiped the floor' Changing that 70% doesnt have any 'incident' but they can hardly be counted has casting their vote either way. This means that if 30% are active users, 3.8% means just over 12% of people have voted. The thing you're not understanding is that this isn't a vote. It's an agreement to distribute your work under a new license. That 70% *have* agreed to distribute their work under the new license. It is entirely valid for the camp that wants to move to the ODbL sooner rather than later to count the 70% in their stats, because accepting the new license is all that matters, not some imaginary war between yes and no. Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Tom, (Bob?), On 04/19/11 09:09, Thomas Davie wrote: That 70% *have* agreed to distribute their work under the new license. It is entirely valid for the camp that wants to move to the ODbL sooner rather than later to count the 70% in their stats, because accepting the new license is all that matters, not some imaginary war between yes and no. You're entirely right of course and frankly I have no idea what all this fuss is about. It's just a graph. It isn't even intended to influence anybody. This is documenting what happens, not trying to talk people into doing something. Anyone who is looking for numbers of people agreeing/disagreeing since it became mandatory (not counting anybody before that) will find a snapshot here: fred.dev.openstreetmap.org (currently 88% vs 12%) - but of course these numbers are biased in favour of the naysayers since most people who wanted to agree have done so long ago, whereas every single person who wants to disagree is counted in the 12%. One small plea: Could you refrain from saying the camp that wants to move to the ODbL. It sounds like it's a small bunch of people when indeed it is the overwhelming majority. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:51:06 +0200 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: One small plea: Could you refrain from saying the camp that wants to move to the ODbL. It sounds like it's a small bunch of people when indeed it is the overwhelming majority. well that's just meadowdust. The ODbL camp did not even get a majority of the OSMF members to vote in favour of the method of changeover. To make your majority you add in X thousand who joined late and didn't get a vote, and subtract Y thousand who haven't yet made an edit. The reason Australians are better at detecting this form of deceit, is that Australia is the modern home of the gerrymander, and we are very familiar with how politicians arrange things to stay in power. Of course, those who can remember a bit further back, recall that Frederick Ramm is in favour of Public Domain, and not ODbL. Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought it would make more entertaining reading that your recent posts. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 22:14 +1000, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought this is not acceptable on an open mailing list - or on *any* mailing list. -- regards KG http://lawgon.livejournal.com Coimbatore LUG rox http://ilugcbe.techstud.org/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Hi, On 04/19/11 14:14, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Of course, those who can remember a bit further back, recall that Frederick Ramm is in favour of Public Domain, and not ODbL. Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought it would make more entertaining reading that your recent posts. SteveC said he'd let me pilot his private jet if I say yes. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 19 April 2011 13:14, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:51:06 +0200 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: One small plea: Could you refrain from saying the camp that wants to move to the ODbL. It sounds like it's a small bunch of people when indeed it is the overwhelming majority. well that's just meadowdust. The ODbL camp did not even get a majority of the OSMF members to vote in favour of the method of changeover. To make your majority you add in X thousand who joined late and didn't get a vote, and subtract Y thousand who haven't yet made an edit. In addition to lacking skills of politeness it seems you cannot count either. Since the artificially-fixed epoch of last Sunday - prior to which over 10,000 users agreed to the change, explicitly, not automatically - the stats of yes versus no decisions, excluding those existing yeses, are, as I type this mail: Yes: 708 (88%) No: 95 (12%) Fred describes this as an overwhelming majority. You disagree. based on some hand-wavy logic and a suggestion of deceit involving new signups when it is abundantly clear that such new signups do not form part of the claim you hope to dispute. Stick to the facts. Learn to add and subtract. Learn some basic human courtesy. Stop the accusations of deceit when you are the one presenting the false information. Dermot -- -- Igaühel on siin oma laul ja ma oma ei leiagi üles ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Am 19.04.2011 14:14, schrieb Elizabeth Dodd: ... To make your majority you add in X thousand who joined late and didn't get a vote, and subtract Y thousand who haven't yet made an edit. Elizabeth, please show us just one tally that shows anything but a tiny fraction of mappers that have actually contributed data to the project opposing the change. And no, nothing that is going to happen is going to unearth 10'000s of mappers that share your views. In a couple of weeks the short term available reservoir of mappers that haven't declined or accepted will be exhausted, giving us say a couple of thousands of additional agreers and a couple of hundred decliners. -if- this was a vote, the opposing parties would have conceded defeat a long time ago. The reason Australians are better at detecting this form of deceit, is I strongly object to being lumped in together with a bunch of people that made a couple of really bad decisions and are trying to blackmail the OSM community in to giving in to them, instead of trying to fix the problems they created. Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves law...@thenilgiris.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 22:14 +1000, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought this is not acceptable on an open mailing list - or on *any* mailing list. Relax, everybody. Consider the source; this is nothing new, or even serious from Dr Liz. She's just being polite. See her mission statement from 14 August 2010. Dr. Liz Quote I will continue to be somewhat disruptive on the lists and remain polite while doing so. https://groups.google.com/group/osm-fork/msg/a1dd135f3f643679?hl=endmode=source ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
It's true. On Apr 19, 2011, at 5:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 04/19/11 14:14, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Of course, those who can remember a bit further back, recall that Frederick Ramm is in favour of Public Domain, and not ODbL. Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought it would make more entertaining reading that your recent posts. SteveC said he'd let me pilot his private jet if I say yes. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Argh, apparently I gave in too early when you promised that Hurricane would give me a smile at the next SoTM!! Maybe I should've asked for a private dinner... Op 19-04-11 21:18, SteveC schreef: It's true. On Apr 19, 2011, at 5:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 04/19/11 14:14, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Of course, those who can remember a bit further back, recall that Frederick Ramm is in favour of Public Domain, and not ODbL. Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought it would make more entertaining reading that your recent posts. SteveC said he'd let me pilot his private jet if I say yes. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
I don't think Steve, it's a good idea to admit that in public. I remember that some osm user publicly confessed to have used Google while mapping OSM data and he was very badly treated... ;) or ;(( Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: SteveC [mailto:st...@asklater.com] Verzonden: dinsdag 19 april 2011 21:18 Aan: Frederik Ramm CC: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] License graph It's true. On Apr 19, 2011, at 5:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 04/19/11 14:14, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Of course, those who can remember a bit further back, recall that Frederick Ramm is in favour of Public Domain, and not ODbL. Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought it would make more entertaining reading that your recent posts. SteveC said he'd let me pilot his private jet if I say yes. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
You know I don't have a private jet, right? But if I did, Fred could pilot it. On Apr 19, 2011, at 12:45 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: I don't think Steve, it's a good idea to admit that in public. I remember that some osm user publicly confessed to have used Google while mapping OSM data and he was very badly treated... ;) or ;(( Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: SteveC [mailto:st...@asklater.com] Verzonden: dinsdag 19 april 2011 21:18 Aan: Frederik Ramm CC: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] License graph It's true. On Apr 19, 2011, at 5:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 04/19/11 14:14, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Of course, those who can remember a bit further back, recall that Frederick Ramm is in favour of Public Domain, and not ODbL. Perhaps if you explain just how your support was bought it would make more entertaining reading that your recent posts. SteveC said he'd let me pilot his private jet if I say yes. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 18/04/2011 18:50, Thomas Davie wrote: Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. I have declined the CTs, but for me it is by no means a 'no' vote. I declined because that was the nearest thing to an 'Ask me later' option: I had read that declines can be reversed, but acceptances cannot. I didn't want to decline, precisely because it would look like I was answering 'no', but I had to because (as I've mentioned elsewhere) I was locked out of all OSM activity (making diary entries, commenting on someone else's diary entry, replying to a PM someone had sent me) until I chose one option or the other. IMO I should only have been locked out of activity that involved editing the map while I made up my mind, but that's not the way it was implemented. -- Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:33:36 +0200 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: SteveC said he'd let me pilot his private jet if I say yes. As you are going to be waiting a long time to collect, could you actually explain why you have gone from being a Public Domain activist to an ODbL activist. I'm quite sure the PD club were asked to make a new mailing list to take Public Domain discussions off legal-talk, and that you were part of that PD club. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Hi, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: As you are going to be waiting a long time to collect, could you actually explain why you have gone from being a Public Domain activist to an ODbL activist. I'm quite sure the PD club were asked to make a new mailing list to take Public Domain discussions off legal-talk, and that you were part of that PD club. That's correct. But I'm surprised about your interest in the matter, because of all the problems you see with the current license change, only very few would be different with a PD license. All Nearmap-derived imagery would have to be deleted, as would have anything released CC-BY from the Australian government. This is not what you want, so I assume you would oppose a PD move even more resolutely than you oppose the current change. The reason why I decided to support CT+ODbL is that I'm pragmatic; it is certainly better than what we have, and it is achievable, whereas while I might personally like PD better, that is not achievable. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 12:51 -0700, SteveC wrote: You know I don't have a private jet, right? But if I did, Fred could pilot it. even if he said no? -- regards KG http://lawgon.livejournal.com Coimbatore LUG rox http://ilugcbe.techstud.org/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Hi Toby, Good job! Thanks. I wanna use it for japanese osm mappers. Hiroshi OSM Foundation Japan On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Could you create a graph that shows the graph since you started collecting data in addition to or instead of just the last 48 hours? :-) This graph is very informative. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Is a really good piece of work :) I think it'll be very useful ;). The only thing I would add, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea, is a line for the people that still have to accept or decline it ( 286581 - agreed - disagreed). I'm only concerned about the scale that could be screwed, but I think this is a useful information, at least in Phase 3, where the goal is to pushing people to press accept or decline. Thanks for your awesome work :) Fabio A Locati On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Hiroshi Miura miur...@osmf.jp wrote: Hi Toby, Good job! Thanks. I wanna use it for japanese osm mappers. Hiroshi OSM Foundation Japan On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Could you create a graph that shows the graph since you started collecting data in addition to or instead of just the last 48 hours? :-) This graph is very informative. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Fabio Alessandro Locati Home: Segrate, Milan, Italy (GMT +1) Phone: +39-328-3799681 MSN/Jabber/E-Mail: fabioloc...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: 5525 8555 213C 19EB 25F2 A047 2AD2 BE67 0F01 CA61 Involved in: KDE, OpenStreetMap, Ubuntu, Wikimedia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Ive noticed a few discrepancies with the graph.. How come on the 2-day graph, the scale for decline goes 10300 to 10800 while on 5-day graph the range is 10200 to 10800. The accept scale is 0-100 on 2-day but 0-120 on 5-day. The upshot is that the 'accepted' value is 99.8% of the full range, while the 'declined' value is either 62% of the full range (or 75% in the case of 2-day graph). This has the affect of showing the accepted numbers looking higher, while infact, visual inspection of the graph shows the graphs working the other way. The top 2-day graph, shows the decline scale starting above the accept line for about the first 24hrs of the graph, but in the bottom graph indicates that the acceptance rate is much higher with a significant diversion in the lines, even though the numbers being represented are equal. If you want to represent these important figures in statistics, can you at least use a common scale to avoid distorting peoples views of the figures? Using deceptive graphing methods was a trick we were taught back in school as a child. It doesnt make your figures look any better, it just makes those educated enough to pick your graphs faults, not value any of it at all. David On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 00:06 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: I was actually thinking about doing that but went to bed last night after getting the first one up. At that point the point I believe the start point for the data was just barely off of the first graph. But I just added a 5 day graph. I will extend it as I get more data to show the long term trend. Toby On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Could you create a graph that shows the graph since you started collecting data in addition to or instead of just the last 48 hours? :-) This graph is very informative. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html Enjoy, Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
2011/4/18 David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au: If you want to represent these important figures in statistics, can you at least use a common scale to avoid distorting peoples views of the figures? Using deceptive graphing methods was a trick we were taught back in school as a child. It doesnt make your figures look any better, It makes them readable. If you used the same scale you won't see the handful of no-votes against the 1 yes-votes. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 17:25 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: It makes them readable. If you used the same scale you won't see the handful of no-votes against the 1 yes-votes. It appears the scales have changed, and the readability hasnt changed. If anything the 2 lines are now more distinct from each other than before. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:25 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/4/18 David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au: If you want to represent these important figures in statistics, can you at least use a common scale to avoid distorting peoples views of the figures? Using deceptive graphing methods was a trick we were taught back in school as a child. It doesnt make your figures look any better, It makes them readable. If you used the same scale you won't see the handful of no-votes against the 1 yes-votes. Yes, this is why I used a different axis for both values. Otherwise the accept would be a straight line across the top and the decline would be a straight line across the bottom of the graph. Not very useful. I am using zabbix to make the graphs. Like I said, it is targeted at system monitoring, not statistical analysis. Hence, the scales change based on the available data to maximize the viewability of the data. If someone wants, I might be able to produce a data dump so you can make your own graphs. Zabbix stores it as a timestamp and a value in a mysql database. Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
2011/4/18 Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com: While I agree that there is a problem with the no votes disapearing if you show the whole graph, it would be useful to show the same *range* on each scale. I.e., as we are currently showing 10300 - 10900 on the yes scale, show 0 to 600 on the no scale. This will give a much clearer indication of the trend. no. Why? I will still be much less readable then it is now. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 18 Apr 2011, at 18:45, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2011/4/18 Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com: While I agree that there is a problem with the no votes disapearing if you show the whole graph, it would be useful to show the same *range* on each scale. I.e., as we are currently showing 10300 - 10900 on the yes scale, show 0 to 600 on the no scale. This will give a much clearer indication of the trend. no. Why? I will still be much less readable then it is now. Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Thomas Davie wrote: Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. If you want it to be a true representation of a vote, you need to look at only older users, not new users with their ballots already filled in. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/License-graph-tp6278593p6284587.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
2011/4/18 Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com: Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. until today they were indeed growing at the same rate, while since a few hours yes has become quicker. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. This is just a simple graph. It is also important to see, how much data the single accounts have uploaded for instance. Graphs never are to bee viewed with a quick glance ;-) I think you should be more confident about the other mappers who look at this statistics (this is not a graph to show at the prime time news in tv). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 18 Apr 2011, at 19:03, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Thomas Davie wrote: Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. If you want it to be a true representation of a vote, you need to look at only older users, not new users with their ballots already filled in. I believe this graph is already looking at exactly that. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. This is just a simple graph. It is also important to see, how much data the single accounts have uploaded for instance. Graphs never are to bee viewed with a quick glance ;-) On the contrary – the entire purpose of a graph is to make data understandable quickly. I think you should be more confident about the other mappers who look at this statistics (this is not a graph to show at the prime time news in tv). That doesn't mean that it should be a graph that deliberately doesn't clarify the data it's meant to clarify. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Nathan Edgars II wrote: Thomas Davie wrote: Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. If you want it to be a true representation of a vote, you need to look at only older users, not new users with their ballots already filled in. And to really get a true representation look at the amount of data these users represent. Etc... But use the correct graph and you can prove everything you want. As a side question: how many users still need to either accept or decline? Ben ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
As a side question: how many users still need to either accept or decline? A lot. If you look at the two files that I am using to pull data from, you will see the users_agreed.txt file has a header in it explaining that there are 286,582 users that signed up before the new CT was put into place for new users last year. Just under 11,000 have voted. So 3.8% of those who can vote have voted. Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: ...which is ignoring the 70% or so of all of those people who never edited and can be switched over without incident. and the people that accepted during the registration -- Fabio Alessandro Locati Home: Segrate, Milan, Italy (GMT +1) Phone: +39-328-3799681 MSN/Jabber/E-Mail: fabioloc...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: 5525 8555 213C 19EB 25F2 A047 2AD2 BE67 0F01 CA61 Involved in: KDE, OpenStreetMap, Ubuntu, Wikimedia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:49:19 -0500 Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: As a side question: how many users still need to either accept or decline? A lot. If you look at the two files that I am using to pull data from, you will see the users_agreed.txt file has a header in it explaining that there are 286,582 users that signed up before the new CT was put into place for new users last year. Just under 11,000 have voted. So 3.8% of those who can vote have voted. Toby So no data yet can be said to reach statistical significance. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 18:35 +0100, Thomas Davie wrote: While I agree that there is a problem with the no votes disapearing if you show the whole graph, it would be useful to show the same *range* on each scale. I actually meant that the 2 graphs had different scales. When youre showing numbers upto 80, fair enough use a scale of 0-100, but dont use 0-100 on one and 0-120 on the other, and call it an even comparison. Skewing graphs is a 5th-grade maths lesson. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 19 April 2011 00:08, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I actually meant that the 2 graphs had different scales. When youre showing numbers upto 80, fair enough use a scale of 0-100, but dont use 0-100 on one and 0-120 on the other, and call it an even comparison. Skewing graphs is a 5th-grade maths lesson. I didn't see anybody call it an even comparison. The graphing tool use is, as far as I know, choosing its own scale for each line more or less as a consequence of its core purpose of graphing server stats. Those are not comparison graphs, just two graphs that happen to sit on the same axes. We have to do our own mental processing. But even with different scales, the wedge shape that's opening up between the lines tells us all we need to know. We could play with the scale to see how quickly it's happening, but that's about all. Dermot -- -- Igaühel on siin oma laul ja ma oma ei leiagi üles ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 11:53 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: ...which is ignoring the 70% or so of all of those people who never edited and can be switched over without incident. That sounds like the thinking of the parties in a real vote, 'if everyone who didnt vote, voted for us, we would have wiped the floor' Changing that 70% doesnt have any 'incident' but they can hardly be counted has casting their vote either way. This means that if 30% are active users, 3.8% means just over 12% of people have voted. David On 4/18/2011 11:49 AM, Toby Murray wrote: As a side question: how many users still need to either accept or decline? A lot. If you look at the two files that I am using to pull data from, you will see the users_agreed.txt file has a header in it explaining that there are 286,582 users that signed up before the new CT was put into place for new users last year. Just under 11,000 have voted. So 3.8% of those who can vote have voted. Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
http://rweait.dev.openstreetmap.org/changeusersstacked-year.png ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] License graph
Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html Enjoy, Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
nice j -Original Message- From: Toby Murray [mailto:toby.mur...@gmail.com] Sent: 16 April 2011 10:01 To: OSM Talk Subject: [OSM-talk] License graph Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html Enjoy, Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Could you create a graph that shows the graph since you started collecting data in addition to or instead of just the last 48 hours? :-) This graph is very informative. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html Enjoy, Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
Thanks! It would be interesting to observe how the response goes once Phase 3 kicks in. On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: I was actually thinking about doing that but went to bed last night after getting the first one up. At that point the point I believe the start point for the data was just barely off of the first graph. But I just added a 5 day graph. I will extend it as I get more data to show the long term trend. Toby On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Could you create a graph that shows the graph since you started collecting data in addition to or instead of just the last 48 hours? :-) This graph is very informative. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure if anyone else is already doing this but two days ago I thought it would be fun (maybe even useful) to graph the number of users who have accepted/declined the new license/CT in anticipation of the next phase going into effect on Sunday. I hacked together a quick dirty script to use as a data source in the Zabbix instance I have set up at home. Zabbix is geared towards system monitoring so it is a little odd to graph something completely unrelated but it was available and easy to do and at the end of the day, a graph is a graph. Anyway, I didn't feel like sending out the URL to my private zabbix instance at home to the mailing list so I set up a cron job to periodically refresh a static image on a more legitimate server. It can be seen here: http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/license_count.html Enjoy, Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
