Hi John You've expressed my thoughts really well re. awards.
Martin, I have many thoughts on volunteered/acquired/stolen geodata, for another chat. (Maybe we should get a microgrant and run a forum on the topic, if we run it in beechworth that'd be ace!) Alex, thanks for your action reaching out to Paul that's great!! Sooner the better - a public draft is a strong statement in itself ;). Cheers, Adam On Thu, Mar 30, 2023, 15:16 John Bryant <johnwbry...@gmail.com> wrote: > Adam wrote: >> >> Awards - personally not my thing and (IMO) about the last thing a >> community org should focus on. I've just returned from a couple of >> years in Norway dealing with a community that is strongly cult of >> personality (rockstar/award/??) based, and it sucks. Where was the >> community discussion about awards in OSGeo Oceania? >> > > I feel similarly. I think it's nice to recognise people's successes and > wins, but industry body awards feel like an echo chamber to me, reinforcing > in-group relationships. I've always admired OSGeo for its focus on reaching > the broader community, creating an inviting and open space where anyone can > participate regardless of affiliations. > > The APSEA awards seem like particularly odd bedfellows for OSGeo > Oceania... despite the "Asia-Pacific" name, they're predominantly > (entirely?) Australian. Not making a criticism but it doesn't seem in step > with OSGeo Oceania's community. > > Ohyeah, an MoU *has to be* public and reviewable by the community. >> OSGeo's MoU with OGC is a good example of this practice. >> > > +1 > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 08:14, Martin Tomko <tom...@unimelb.edu.au> wrote: > >> Oh, sorry – you mean VGI? That was me the academic speaking - Volunteered >> Geographic Information, e.g., OSM, or any other geo content (e.g., >> Mapillary Cam data, or OpenDrone Map, or other) that is volunteered by >> people, as opposed to a “super” category - User Generated Content, which is >> any stuff that may be gathered from people out there, even unknowingly >> (some call this Coerced Geographic Content …) >> >> >> >> >> >> Agreed with your other points – and this makes it quite tricky to write a >> good MoU 😊, but there is hope, >> >> M. >> >> >> >> *From: *Adam Steer <adam.d.st...@gmail.com> >> *Date: *Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 10:05 am >> *To: *Martin Tomko <tom...@unimelb.edu.au> >> *Cc: *OSGeo Oceania Board <oceania-bo...@lists.osgeo.org>, OSgeo - >> Oceania <oceania@lists.osgeo.org> >> *Subject: *Re: [Oceania-Board] [OSGeo Oceania] Geospatial Council of >> Australia - thoughts? >> >> Hi Martin >> >> >> >> Unfortunately unsurprising, I hope we can all work together to be better. >> >> >> >> Noncompetition for grants is a great addition to an MoU, alongside >> preventing channeling of OSGeo, OSM, HOT etc (global) funds to non-open >> activities. Leading naturally to the principle of open data from >> open-branded activity; and hackathons resulting in PRs to existing projects >> rather than fork -> rebrand -> claim. >> >> >> >> What does "VGC" expand to? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> Adam >> _______________________________________________ >> Oceania-Board mailing list >> oceania-bo...@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania-board >> > _______________________________________________ > Oceania mailing list > Oceania@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania >
_______________________________________________ Oceania mailing list Oceania@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania