On Feb 4, 2013, at 11:53 PM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Am 05.02.2013 08:15, schrieb Clifford Snow:
Third parties bring unique value to OSM. However, is it inconceivable that
we might be able to offer something more than just a database?
For example funded Software development has been done
On 2013-02-05 19:36, Bryce Cogswell wrote:
Indeed. I suppose if one joins a project on the assumption that there
is no direction and no goals, at least you'll never be disappointed
in
how it turns out.
that's not what i said at all, or what i was implying. and your point
is a straw man
On 2013-02-05 20:15, Clifford Snow wrote:
Yet Google gets the press that thanks to them, North Korea has now
been mapped. In an ideal world, the local
community should be the lead communicator. But having a PR staff for
OSM is just smart. Good press is going to
help us raise money for new
Below.
On 04/02/2013 10:13 PM, Robin Paulson wrote:
...
when you say the project, you imply the people who contribute can be
fashioned into a unity. i am fundamentally against that, it is flawed
thinking. we are a multitude [1], not a singular, and thus we cannot be
represented by anything
On 02/03/2013 10:51 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I don't know exactly what git log you mean. OSM is a whole universe
of software; a part of that is visible on
https://github.com/openstreetmap/. The bit that is on
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website is but a tiny
fragment of it.
Paweł Paprota wrote:
Just a last word - I am not proclaiming doom. To the contrary - I
am full of energy and ideas but at the same time I am a bit afraid
that if this energy does not lead anywhere then I will be burnt
out in this project because of the frustration that I cannot
change
Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
From: Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org
To: Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 7:09 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Paweł's q: what can be done?
Hi
On 2013-02-04 07:02, Michal Migurski wrote:
which concerns me no end. what position of authority does simon
hold? over whom?
Simon is the elected chairman of the OSMF board, and can speak on its
behalf. He holds a position of authority over the Geocode Inc. issue
because apparently the
On 2013-02-05 06:56, Simon Poole wrote:
participated it has always struck me how little alignment of goals
there
is in the community as a whole (I'm not saying it is surprising,
just
that is so). Outside the very generic mission that OSM creates and
distributes free geographic data for the
On 2013-02-04 07:35, Jeff Meyer wrote:
To answer your first question, I do. Others have voiced the same
you're making a decision not to have a decision any more (leading
implies someone making decisions on your behalf)? that's rather
contradictory
opinion - theyd like to see some
Indeed. I suppose if one joins a project on the assumption that there is no
direction and no goals, at least you'll never be disappointed in how it turns
out.
On Feb 4, 2013, at 10:26 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:
Noted.
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Robin Paulson
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, what does strategic planning even mean in the context of OSMF?
OSMF currently operates under the strategy of keeping its influence pretty
much as minimal as somehow possible. It mostly limits it self to operating
Am 05.02.2013 08:15, schrieb Clifford Snow:
Third parties bring unique value to OSM. However, is
it inconceivable that we might be able to offer something more than
just a database?
For example funded Software development has been done by companies
like
CloudMade, MapQuest on a
On 2013-02-03 07:41, Jeff Meyer wrote:
was: geocoding trademark thread
I think Paweł has hit on a key question: does the OSMF have plans to
operate and lead OSM in a more efficient, organized manner or not?
what makes you think anyone wants to be lead, i certainly don't? or
wants to be
Am 03.02.2013 09:57, schrieb Robin Paulson:
On 2013-02-03 07:41, Jeff Meyer wrote:
was: geocoding trademark thread
I think Paweł has hit on a key question: does the OSMF have plans to
operate and lead OSM in a more efficient, organized manner or not?
what makes you think anyone wants to be
On 02/02/2013 11:49 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
you are too impatient, at least too impatient for the occasionally
glacial pace at which things move in OSM(F).
You have been with OSM for about 6 months now if I'm not mistaken,
and most of your recent messages (at least most of the messages that
On 2013-02-03 12:14, Michal Migurski wrote:
Communication is hard, and there are ways to do it that make people
feel like they're getting a complete story instead of a confused
glimpse through an accidentally-open door. Simon's mail left out a
lot
of important things, most notably that he's a
to defend itself.
Gert Gremmen
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Michael Buege [mailto:mich...@buegehome.de]
Verzonden: zondag 3 februari 2013 11:55
Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Paweł's q: what can be done?
Am 03.02.2013 09:57, schrieb Robin Paulson:
On 2013-02-03
On Feb 3, 2013, at 3:37 AM, Robin Paulson wrote:
On 2013-02-03 12:14, Michal Migurski wrote:
Communication is hard, and there are ways to do it that make people
feel like they're getting a complete story instead of a confused
glimpse through an accidentally-open door. Simon's mail left out a
Hi,
On 03.02.2013 12:36, Paweł Paprota wrote:
What I want right now is some sign that OSM is not fading away as a
project.
Shouldn't this be the other way round - shouldn't somebody who claims
that OSM was about to fade away have proof for that?
Number of users raising:
To answer your first question, I do. Others have voiced the same opinion -
they'd like to see some organization, to know that their efforts are being
applied for the most benefit. Your voice is noted, but there should be room
for disagreement, no?
One of the goals of a strategic exercise would be
Michal Migurski wrote:
We seem to have an OSMF that's not effective at communicating
I tried :(
FWIW Communications Working Group is very good, just under-resourced. There
needs to be more of them, and they need to be given the space to thrive
without interference.
cheers
Richard
(ex-board,
On 02/03/2013 07:35 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 03.02.2013 12:36, Paweł Paprota wrote:
What I want right now is some sign that OSM is not fading away as a
project.
Shouldn't this be the other way round - shouldn't somebody who
claims that OSM was about to fade away have proof for that?
Am 03.02.2013 20:42, schrieb Paweł Paprota:
.
Nice way to interpret the data :-) Look closer and not only if the
charts are rising and you can see a different picture:
Number of users grew from 500k to 1M since some time in 2011 until
January 2013:
Hi,
On 03.02.2013 20:42, Paweł Paprota wrote:
At the same time the percentage of (highly) active users is falling
since at least 2009 and this number is now below 2%.
Seeing the number of highly active mappers rise would mean that we have
a small number of mappers doing a lot of work; the
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Strategic thinking is long-term thinking, and in our case requires to get
a lot of pepole on board in a suitable process, including those who think
that we shouldn't have a strategy (we can't just kick them out and say
Hi,
On 03.02.2013 23:59, Clifford Snow wrote:
I want to make sure we are clear. Are you signaling your belief that we
need some strategic planning?
I'm hesitant to say yes because your sentence can mean a lot of
different things to different people.
In the worst case, we need some
Clifford Snow wrote
Frederik,
I want to make sure we are clear. Are you signaling your belief that we
need some strategic planning?
Well, what does strategic planning even mean in the context of OSMF?
OSMF currently operates under the strategy of keeping its influence pretty
much as minimal
was: geocoding trademark thread
I think Paweł has hit on a key question: does the OSMF have plans to
operate and lead OSM in a more efficient, organized manner or not? And, to
an even more relevant issue: how many people like Paweł show up on the
doorstep and don't bother engaging for the same
On 02/02/2013 07:41 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:
There's a group working in parallel to put together a strategic plan,
in the absence of one, but doing this without leadership and support
from the top can be problematic.
Couple of people have mentioned the Strategic Working Group[1] to me in
the last
For what it's worth, I agree with Jeff and Paweł on this.
If OSMF is going to be a big, beautiful mess it should own that and publish the
CD for everyone to see. Anarchists gonna anarchate.
If on the other hand we want strong leadership that can handle a trademark
dispute on its own, then
On 02/02/2013 19:55, Michal Migurski wrote:
For what it's worth, I agree with Jeff and Paweł on this.
If OSMF is going to be a big, beautiful mess it should own that and publish the
CD for everyone to see. Anarchists gonna anarchate.
If on the other hand we want strong leadership that can
Pawel,
you are too impatient, at least too impatient for the occasionally
glacial pace at which things move in OSM(F).
You have been with OSM for about 6 months now if I'm not mistaken, and
most of your recent messages (at least most of the messages that reach
me) are about how and why
On Feb 2, 2013, at 2:49 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
And Jeff followed up:
I think Paweł has hit on a key question: does the OSMF have plans to operate
and lead OSM in a more efficient, organized manner or not?
In what way would an organisation with great strategic planning, one that is
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Finally, I am somewhat puzzled by the connection that you (and also Jeff)
seem to make between the perceived lack of planning and the current
trademark issue that spawned the thread.
I didn't make that connection
35 matches
Mail list logo
