Thomas Beale wrote:
> Tim.Churches wrote:
> > David Forslund wrote:
> > > Molly,
> > >
> > > Incorporating OSHCA in the US doesn't necessarily imply US domination.
> >
> > No, but US citizens need to be sensitive to the negative feelings
> > towards the US which are present and growing in many countries around
> > the world. Whether this antipathy towards the US is justified depends a
> > great deal on one's standpoint - and I don't think we should debate it
> > here - but it definitely exists and is remarkably pervasive - in some
> > countries it is the dominant attitude, in others, it is present in a
> > sizeable minority of the population.
> Come on everyone, we need action not endless debate... There are some
> relatively simple things to be done, someone who currently has the
> energy and wherewithall to do it (Molly); we should be looking at the
> "least pain" route to getting the organisation going (which as far as I
> can tell is: set it up in Malaysia, in the first instance). We can't
> base that thinking on the complexities of geopolitics (and I am the
> first to agree that the world situation is a concern of the first order)...
Thomas, I think that it important to discuss this issue (where OSHCA is
to be incorporated in the first instance), up to a point. I don't think
that the debate that has occurred has delayed Molly's work on
incorporation - it is, to use a much abused term, orthogonal to that.
Also, OSHCA will, as an advocacy group with international scope, need to
interact with many different organisations, and here geo[socio]political
considerations do play a part. Far from merely being a convenient and
relatively cheap location to do business, incorporation of OSHCA in
Malaysia sends strong, positive signals to a wide range of people and
organisations in a way that incorporation in the US, Australia, Canada,
or the EU would not. The fact is that there is genuine concern in many
countries about US (and to a lesser but real extent, EU) cultural,
economic and technological (and, um, military) hegemony, influence or
encroachment. Thus there are strong benefits in OSHCA, as an
international organisation, having its incorporated base in Malaysia,
which: a) is a developing/transitional country: b) has a long history of
and reputation for non-alignment; c) has a reputation for promoting and
fostering the use and development of technology, especially information
technology, as a means of accelerating appropriate economic and social
development; d) is a secular, religiously-tolerant and -moderate state
which has an association with the Islamic faith. Some or all of these
these attributes are likely to matter to the people with whom OSHCA
wishes to engage (or ought to wish to engage) in developing and
transitional countries. Wayne is absolutely correct: the main game for
free open source health software is in the poorer majority of the world.
In rich, developed countries, open source software in health is
important, but realistically it is not going to become the dominant
source of deployed health information systems in those countries in the
next decade or two. But that is not the case in developing and
transitional countries, where FLOSS has the real potential to become a
or the major provider of health informatics infrastructure and systems.
So, Malaysia does matter, but yes, let's let Molly get on with it.
> However, OSHCA has a much more focussed agenda, a reasonably clear
> mission, and we need to be thinking about what comes after the
> organisation is running (hopefully a matter of weeks, not years!), not
> obsessing about where it should be incorporated, or the relative evils
> of Malaysian injustices v US injustices.
I think the point that I was attempting to make is that no country is
beyond criticism in some important respect, and thus there is no
"perfect" home base for OSHCA.
> The latter may be relevant to
> how we live our lives, but I really doubt that it has any practical
> impact on just getting the horse called "OSCHA" out the gate.
I disagree - as expounded above, I feel that place of incorporation will
have a bearing on teh success of OSHCA as an international adovocy body
for FLOSS in health.
> Our main
> strengths are the individuals here, not the countries they come from.
Sure, but external perceptions of OSHCA will not primarily based on the
personal characteristics of its members or Board. Perceptions will be
based on published documents and statements of principal, on the
countries of origin of its Board/steering committee and its members
(hence the desire to have one Board member of steering committee member
from each continent/region), and on the location of its home base.
> Many of us here have worked in some kind of advocate or champion mode in
> the e-Health arena; Molly is doing this right now - what she doesn't
> need is more obstacles and "buts" from the debating gallery; she needs
> support and resources.
Yup. And for many, many reasons, Molly is the perfect person to taking
the running and lead the rebirth and reconstitution of OSHCA.
Tim C
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
