Hey Sev, I understood the suggestion, but there aren't that many people in HOT's membership that are qualified in that way. I certainly am not.
I think key instead is to make friends/partnerships with those already in those positions so they know they can depend on us for support. -Kate On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Séverin MENARD <[email protected]> wrote: > OK seems there are some misunderstandings cause I might not have been very > clear. My idea was not HOT to train people to become emergency GIS officers > but to think about how we could coordinate in emergency phases in the > possibility one Hottie get such a position. As an example, I worked for OCHA > after the 2010 Earthquake in Haiti during 2 months (so I know the MapAction > people, their methodology, etc. as they were my colleagues during that time) > then in Pakistan for WHO during the 2010 floods, and I was asked for Horn of > Africa last year but was already involved in a mission in Haiti. From my > experience, I know the benefits the hum relief could get with a good > coordination with the remote vtech communities. I also know that the UN Org > can still not fully understand these benefits, and that the organizations > hiring this kind of consultants for the UN may be kind of reluctant to work > with the vtech communities, as they would like to appear as the unique or > best solution. This is why I think we could try to think about what we could > bring and formalize it on a document. > > Sev > > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Mikel Maron <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Strongly second Kate's view. Deployment to a disaster zone is very >> complicated and risky endeavor. >> We'd do best with our resources to support organizations like MapAction, >> UN agencies, and NGOs, so that they can work with OSM and relate with HOT in >> an efficient manner. >> Probably the best way to help that happen is by HOTties training and >> embedding with MapAction. Harry Wood has attended a weekend training, >> previously, and I know they are very open to more. >> >> * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Kate Chapman <[email protected]> >> To: Fran Boon <[email protected]> >> Cc: Séverin MENARD <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 8:00 PM >> Subject: Re: [HOT] 1st Activation Working Group meeting report >> >> I personally think we should first focus on remote deployment. If you >> look at the way MapAction runs for example there is quite a bit of >> infrastructure in place to support those deploying to the ground. At >> the moment I think we can be most effective by supporting responders >> and then providing training during the recover period. Or in the best >> cases training and organization around preparedness. >> >> There have been discussions with potential partners before about >> potential deployments, but I think HOT itself as an organization needs >> some time before that can be a reality. Just the potentials of >> insurance, making sure people are properly vaccinated and things like >> that would keep me up at night. >> >> Additionally there just aren't that many people in HOT with the right >> type of field experience right now. Beyond activation procedures >> there is a lot of training methodologies that would need to be worked >> out first. Though continuing with internship programs and workshops >> is a good start. >> >> I'd also be interested to compare position descriptions for >> preparedness to those for response. They might not be exactly the >> same. >> >> -Kate >> >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Fran Boon <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 16 March 2012 13:36, Séverin MENARD <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Soory I missed this chat but will be present to the next one. >> >> Remote response apart, what should be our potential ground deployment ? >> >> I >> >> think a ground team who would activate and train quickly the local >> >> communities, could drive the HOT remote support, provide imagery >> >> feedbacks >> >> (precise GPS coordinates, interpretation, etc.) or even imagery itself >> >> taken >> >> by a drone (some tests are ongoing in Haiti) would make sense. IMHO >> >> HOT's >> >> kind of uniqueness is to be able to provide coordinated ground and >> >> remote >> >> response. >> > >> > Hi Severin, >> > >> > What you outline sounds great, however it requires an essential >> > element which remote support doesn't: $ >> > A remote support can be done using relatively little volunteer time to >> > set up & then it's up to the community how much they're able to engage >> > in the actual work - as HOT we cannot be responsible for that - we >> > just set up the infrastructure and make the call (being careful not to >> > abuse this so we don't get volunteer fatigue). >> > >> > Ground support would either require HOT to have it's own funds or else >> > to have the requesting Organisation sponsor it (even if the time was >> > all donated). >> > I agree that we should have a clause in about this and this can start >> > by saying 'As HOT has no funds of it's own, a ground support request >> > would require the requesting organisation to find funds for this' >> > What else do we need to define around this? >> > * Role descriptions (I know Kate has done this) >> > * Being sure we don't send people out uninsured? >> > * Being sure that people we send out are suitably qualified? >> > * Being sure that people we send out are suitably equipped? (which >> > might not require very much) >> > >> > Anything else? >> > >> > F >> > >> > >> >> Severin >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 8:00 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Send HOT mailing list submissions to >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> >> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> >> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> >> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> >>> than "Re: Contents of HOT digest..." >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Today's Topics: >> >>> >> >>> 1. 1st Activation Working Group meeting report (Schuyler Erle) >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> >> >>> Message: 1 >> >>> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:22:42 +0530 >> >>> From: Schuyler Erle <[email protected]> >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >>> Subject: [HOT] 1st Activation Working Group meeting report >> >>> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >>> >> >>> Hello Team, >> >>> >> >>> Today we had the first meeting of the HOT Activation Working Group on >> >>> the >> >>> IRC channel. The meeting lasted an hour. Pierre Beland, Fran Boon, >> >>> Andrew >> >>> Buck, Robert Banick, Harry Wood, and I participated. >> >>> >> >>> The stated objective of the working group is to develop a strategy and >> >>> tactics for optimally allocating HOT's resources in response to >> >>> humanitarian >> >>> crisis. We noted that humanitarian crises range quite widely in >> >>> severity and >> >>> in level of international response, and that HOT's response should be >> >>> commensurate with the degree to which our services will be used by >> >>> responders on the ground. >> >>> >> >>> The substance of the discussion today revolved around identifying >> >>> HOT's >> >>> possible responses to crisis (including documenting data sources, >> >>> acquiring >> >>> imagery, setting up volunteer tasking services, and mobilizing >> >>> volunteers), >> >>> and working backwards to identify the triggers for those activities. >> >>> >> >>> We also discussed at length the distinction between "activation", and >> >>> simply responding to requests made by partner organizations. We agreed >> >>> (I >> >>> believe) that prompt and reliable response to partner inquiries should >> >>> be a >> >>> priority for HOT and should be taken up as a subject for discussion >> >>> and >> >>> recommendation by the working group. >> >>> >> >>> I think that the working group members agreed to start documenting >> >>> some of >> >>> these ideas on the OSM wiki for further discussion. We also agreed >> >>> after >> >>> talking for an hour to pick up the discussion again one week from >> >>> today, at >> >>> 14:00 UTC on Thu 22 Mar 2012. >> >>> >> >>> The IRC log for today's meeting is here: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OpenStreetMap_Team/Activation_Working_Group_22_Mar_2012 >> >>> >> >>> Hope to see those of you who are interested in the subject on #hot >> >>> next >> >>> Thursday! I'll send out a reminder a couple days ahead of time. >> >>> Cheers! >> >>> >> >>> SDE >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> ------------------------------ >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> HOT mailing list >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> End of HOT Digest, Vol 25, Issue 13 >> >>> *********************************** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> HOT mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > HOT mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >> _______________________________________________ >> HOT mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
