Re: [OSM-talk] Intercultural differences / cultural diversity / OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Hi, all,

Just jumping back into this thread with a link to a diary post about the
Comms Survey and the Comms project in general.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/courtiney/diary/401468

As I mentioned before, we are presenting at SotM US on the 9th and will
post a follow-up to that sometime shortly after.

Over in the community forum, Arnalie Vicario mentioned two possible next
actions: 1) documenting survey best practices and 2) having BoF discussion
about this in Richmond; I like both ideas, particularly if the data can
guide us in the approach. There is a lot that can be done and maybe we
could work asynchronously and together at SotM EU, Asia and Africa.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/survey-about-osm-communication-behaviors/98460/15

--Courtney

On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 6:36 PM Courtney 
wrote:

> Just to tie up a few of the loose ends.
>
> Nothing that anyone has said has been dismissed or downgraded as merely
> "pushback."  This has all been very instructive for me and I've learned a
> lot.
>
> In the first post, Marjan described the companies and roles of the folks
> to whom I'm referring to as my "team."
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2023-April/088217.html
>
> These three folks are former colleagues since I used to work at TomTom.
> Now, I am a strategic communications consultant and a writer. I still
> volunteer for the CWG, and I'm also consulting a bit with the OSMF on its
> fundraising.  Even though I'm not with TomTom anymore, I am still
> interested in the communications data project, so I have continued to work
> on it as a volunteer. We are presenting at SotMUS in June. We are in the
> 4:30pm slot on Friday.  https://2023.stateofthemap.us/schedule/
>
> I don't see any way to have avoided saying that Marjan and I volunteer for
> the CWG because it's relevant to the study. Being on the CWG helped us
> understand more about how OSM communicates and gave us the idea to study
> the channel and forum data. It also gives me a way to volunteer within the
> community since I'm not a GIS expert or software engineer.
>
> I think this covers everything? If not, let me know.
>
> Don't forget to take the survey!
> https://osmf.limequery.org/875881?lang=en (There is a bit more about the
> project in the introduction)
>
>
> On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 4:27 PM John Whelan  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Courtney wrote on 5/3/2023 4:00 PM:
>> Compare a statement like this:
>>
>>  "I know you may be relatively new here, so to help you be successful,
>> here are some ideas for how to structure for your project"
>>
>> to a statement like this:
>>
>>  "I am disappointed to yet again see someone doing this wrong and
>> ignoring the requests of the community"
>>
>>
>> There is a difference in the level of language proficiency needed to use
>> the first sentence so you're asking a great deal of people using a second
>> language to use that level of proficiency.
>> This might be appropriate for easing people into a new situation  but I
>> think you also have to take into account that technical people and there
>> are many here usually are more direct , blunt if you like.
>>
>> How would you rephrase Fredrick's post by the way?  I may have missed
>> your answer.
>>
>> Can you clarify who "your team" in this context is? You were introduced
>> in Marjan's initial post as "OSMF Communication Working Group Member" and
>> were the only of four names without a TomTom affiliation. You are posting
>> this neither from an OSMF nor from a TomTom address but from a gmail one.
>>
>> Is "your team" a corporate TomTom endeavour? Is it the OSMF
>> Communications working group? Or...?
>>
>> Unclear affiliations are a problem, as I pointed out in this thread a few
>> days ago. Has everything I said been filed away under "pushback" and
>> ignored?
>>
>> Many Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>> --
>> Sent from Postbox <https://www.postbox-inc.com>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> --Courtney Cook Williamson
> survivalbybook.substack.com
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Hello, all,

Just a quick note to say this survey closes this Friday at 15:00 CET.  If
you weighed in on this thread, I hope you'll fill out the survey and share
some comments there.

Here's the link to the Limesurvey.

https://osmf.limequery.org/751285?lang=en

Please share the link with other listserv lists if you like--we are only
posting it here, but you're welcome to post it in your local community
list, as well.

On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 3:19 AM Marjan Van de Kauter <
marjan.vandekau...@tomtom.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>
> I was out on holiday and have just caught up on this great discussion.
> Reading it has been very insightful, so I’d like to thank you all for
> participating in the conversation.
>
>
> I understand the concerns people had about the platform used for the
> initial survey, so I’m glad that thanks to the OSMF we were able to offer
> an alternative in LimeSurvey.
>
>
> To add to Courtney’s comments about our affiliations—my TomTom colleagues
> and I do dedicate TomTom time to this project. We believe it’s important
> for us to better comprehend how the community uses its channels, so we can
> communicate about TomTom’s activities in OSM in the best possible way to
> achieve the transparency needed by the community and even prescribed in the
> Organised Editing Guidelines. In the course of learning about OSM for
> TomTom activities, it has become clear that communication in OSM is a
> complex topic, so we think sharing our findings with the community to
> contribute to a better understanding of communication practices is a good
> thing to do.
>
>
> I myself am also looking into this topic from a personal interest, since I
> have a background in communications, writing and languages.
>
>
> Finally, coming back to the survey, I just want to say I’m happy to see
> how many people have already responded. Thank you for that, we’re looking
> forward to the results.
>
>
> For those of you would still like to fill out the survey—we are planning
> to close it after May 12.
>
> https://osmf.limequery.org/751285
>
>
>
> Have a great weekend everyone!
>
> Marjan
>
>
>
> *From:* Marjan Van de Kauter 
> *Sent:* Friday 28 April 2023 15:30
> *To:* talk@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> We are doing a research project on how OpenStreetMap users interact with
> each other. Are you willing to help us learn more about communication
> behaviors in OSM? Take this quick and anonymous survey and tell us if and
> how you use the OSM community forum, mailing lists, social media and other
> channels:
>
> https://forms.gle/UeAGs3VahuxBN7Ec7
>
> We will share the results of this survey, along with other data, with the
> community. This can help users better understand communication habits in
> OSM, so they can identify the most effective ways to reach other community
> members. We will be presenting our findings at State of the Map US in
> Richmond, Virginia and in diary entries. So stay tuned for more and thank
> you for participating in our survey.
>
> Have a great weekend!
>
> Marjan Van de Kauter (OSMF Communication Working Group member and TomTom
> community engager)
>
> Courtney Williamson (OSMF Communication Working Group member)
>
> Keara Dennehy (TomTom business analyst)
>
> L.J. Lambert (TomTom business analyst)
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Intercultural differences / cultural diversity / OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Just to tie up a few of the loose ends.

Nothing that anyone has said has been dismissed or downgraded as merely
"pushback."  This has all been very instructive for me and I've learned a
lot.

In the first post, Marjan described the companies and roles of the folks to
whom I'm referring to as my "team."

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2023-April/088217.html

These three folks are former colleagues since I used to work at TomTom.
Now, I am a strategic communications consultant and a writer. I still
volunteer for the CWG, and I'm also consulting a bit with the OSMF on its
fundraising.  Even though I'm not with TomTom anymore, I am still
interested in the communications data project, so I have continued to work
on it as a volunteer. We are presenting at SotMUS in June. We are in the
4:30pm slot on Friday.  https://2023.stateofthemap.us/schedule/

I don't see any way to have avoided saying that Marjan and I volunteer for
the CWG because it's relevant to the study. Being on the CWG helped us
understand more about how OSM communicates and gave us the idea to study
the channel and forum data. It also gives me a way to volunteer within the
community since I'm not a GIS expert or software engineer.

I think this covers everything? If not, let me know.

Don't forget to take the survey!
https://osmf.limequery.org/875881?lang=en (There
is a bit more about the project in the introduction)


On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 4:27 PM John Whelan  wrote:

>
>
> Courtney wrote on 5/3/2023 4:00 PM:
> Compare a statement like this:
>
>  "I know you may be relatively new here, so to help you be successful,
> here are some ideas for how to structure for your project"
>
> to a statement like this:
>
>  "I am disappointed to yet again see someone doing this wrong and ignoring
> the requests of the community"
>
>
> There is a difference in the level of language proficiency needed to use
> the first sentence so you're asking a great deal of people using a second
> language to use that level of proficiency.
> This might be appropriate for easing people into a new situation  but I
> think you also have to take into account that technical people and there
> are many here usually are more direct , blunt if you like.
>
> How would you rephrase Fredrick's post by the way?  I may have missed your
> answer.
>
> Can you clarify who "your team" in this context is? You were introduced in
> Marjan's initial post as "OSMF Communication Working Group Member" and were
> the only of four names without a TomTom affiliation. You are posting this
> neither from an OSMF nor from a TomTom address but from a gmail one.
>
> Is "your team" a corporate TomTom endeavour? Is it the OSMF Communications
> working group? Or...?
>
> Unclear affiliations are a problem, as I pointed out in this thread a few
> days ago. Has everything I said been filed away under "pushback" and
> ignored?
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Cheerio John
> --
> Sent from Postbox <https://www.postbox-inc.com>
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Intercultural differences / cultural diversity / OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

It's valid to ask for more specifics. You're right that "combative" just
ends up being an alienating word.

Here's an example that I think everyone can benefit from.

When I see a comment that reflects a kind of tired, angry emotion about
having to point out a mistake or breach of protocol yet again, I always
flinch. This is because it is almost certainly the first time for the
person who made the mistake. And, it seems unfair to burden them with the
anger that comes from the mistakes of others who came before them. You can
see that in some of the earlier comments in this thread.

I see why people get worn out having to say things over and over,
especially when they are documented in wikis, but there are other factors,
most importantly that new people are joining the community every day.

Compare a statement like this:

 "I know you may be relatively new here, so to help you be successful, here
are some ideas for how to structure for your project"

to a statement like this:

 "I am disappointed to yet again see someone doing this wrong and ignoring
the requests of the community"

In my writing world, this is a question of audience. The first version
speaks to the person who posted. The second one speaks to all of the people
who already know each other in the forum.  The first one is inherently
inclusive. The second one excludes the newcomer from the conversation.

This is just an example---food for thought.

Courtney

On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 3:41 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 3, 2023, 1:00 PM Brian M. Sperlongano 
> wrote:
>
>> I would caution against hyper-simplifying the combativeness of
>> the mailing lists
>>
> I am not sure using a term such as "combative" is going to be effective in
> bringing about the change you desire.   First the term has strong negative
> connotation,  and second it is non specific. The people you view as
> combative probably don't see themselves as combative and don't what
> specifically is causing you to perceive them as such, and thus don't know
> what to do differently.
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Intercultural differences / cultural diversity / OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

I think it's really cool how this thread has turned into a compendium--or
commonplace book--of ideas about the culture here. To me, all of the causes
you've discussed are in play, including the impact of types of tools and
types of data collection methodology.  It's why I am so drawn to this
community: the many forms of national, regional and other kinds of
identity, types of professional training or skill, different generational
approaches, levels of technology literacy, class consciousness (or lack
thereof), etc., are really cool, especially in the context of a globally
shared project. Then, add to that, the exponential number of available
communication channels and tools which confer yet another dimension of
complexity. I was going to try to write a bit about this in a diary post,
but honestly, you all have said almost everything I would have said, and
said it better than I could.

I do resonate with this idea about productive conflict:

"[Talk-OSM] is characterized by *"deep-level diversity," and as a result,
more productive conflicts are expected than usual,* which is normal based
on some diversity research [3]. This means that diverse perspectives and
experiences can lead to more engaging discussions and ultimately result in
innovative solutions and ideas for the community."

Although this thread was initially bruising, the outcome has been powerful.
That said, for anyone whose personality tends more toward "flight" than
"fight" this is a pretty high barrier to access.

Our presentation is primarily going to be about the quantitative
communications data that we are able to obtain from the publicly available
sources, but I will also make a point of drawing from this thoughtful
commentary and gathering it together as part of the survey findings.  Maybe
I can find a place for it to live in the wiki, so there is an online home
for it. Or maybe I can just post it in some diary entries. You all can
advise on this when the time comes.

If anyone in this thread wants to join us in looking at the data and/or
processing the survey, please reach out to me off-list. One of my big
takeaways from this conversation is that this is a big project--all help is
welcome!

C



On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 2:31 PM stevea  wrote:

> On May 3, 2023, at 11:07 AM, John Whelan  wrote:
> > A very accurate summation in my opinion.
>
> > Imre Samu wrote on 5/3/2023 1:03 PM:
> >> Courtney  ezt írta (időpont: 2023. ápr.
> 30., V, 19:06):
> >> This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the
> main "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the
> only one that is producing such a negative tone?
> >>
> >> Hi Courtney,
> 
>
> I agree this is an excellent summation and an important takeaway from it
> that our Etiquette Guidelines may need bolstering in these directions.  In
> fact, I quoted Imre's short essay on our community forum [1] in a
> discussion about trail_visibility that I slightly hijacked off-topic (and
> have since steered back on-topic) about European / German-speaking usage of
> the word "wasteland" (which my US-English ear finds somewhat harsh) versus
> my preferred word for these areas, which I and others might consider
> "wilderness."
>
> OSM is a global project (somewhat obviously, but apparently often
> forgotten or ignored).  We do well to strive to understand, embrace and
> even celebrate cultural and language differences as part of our greatest
> strengths.
>
> Köszönök mindent, Imre.
>
> [1]
> https://community.osm.org/t/tag-trail-visibility-proposed-improvements-for-this-descriptive-tag/97865/98
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

I like all that you say here, and importantly, the very good intentions of
everyone who posted in this thread is entirely legible to me.

I agree that the need to hear different points of view is essential and
that it needs to happen in a public forum. As an American, I have a strong
predilection for and tolerance of free speech ideology and the importance
of free thought and free discourse.  I have no interest in the trend toward
sanitizing or "moderating" intellectual discussion. This leads only to
mediocrity and, in the worst case, censorship and groupthink.

All that said, there are folks in Talk-OSM who could learn two or three
very easy, very commonly used, rhetorical techniques that make
spirited discourse more effective and more inclusive to more ideas and more
styles of thinking.  I believe that my team's research project can provide
some data-backed best practices for this, which is why I am so passionately
advocating for it. I know OSM'ers need data to back community proposals, so
I am hoping we can provide it.

I also believe that it doesn't hurt anyone to take a beat, reflect on the
feedback that they are getting, and try to keep an open mind.  It's
important for folks to not expect everyone, all over the world, across
experience, across nations, culture, professions, training, and etc. to
communicate like a European engineer or data analyst.  Every great team--
every great innovation--every great technological leap forward--came from
two or three or ten people, working together, who had a diverse range of
skills, thinking styles, and ways of communicating.The starting point for
truly synergistic collaboration is communicating with openness and
curiosity instead of scorn and defensiveness.

I don't think it's putting too fine a point on it to say that OSM is at an
inflection point. Can the community work together to meet the phenomenally
interesting challenges of this decade? In my opinion, it can, and should.

Or is it going to keep doing the same old flame wars?

It's precisely because I care very much about the future of this remarkable
community that I am insisting on a reckoning in this area.  It's not really
about my team's survey and research project.  It's about the future of the
project. Can we grow and evolve? Or not? I think the moment is upon us to
find out.

On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 4:02 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 10:42 PM Ewen Hill  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>   I am really disappointed by the anger and outrage in this thread and
>> that, to castigate a volunteer in public,
>>
> I understand you, and some others may feel this way, but what I am seeing
> is simply an exchange of ideas between people that have different points of
> view - some of those views are very strongly held.  If that is your idea of
> "anger, outrange, and castigation", then we have a problem, because for the
> vitality of the community - and our individual development and learning -
> we need to be able to express our views and hear views from others. The
> only "anger" I heard was towards companies that some on this mailing list
> believe compromise our privacy.  Whether you agree with those people or
> not, I don't think there is a problem with anger directed at such companies
> and their alleged  behavior - but perhaps others feel differently.  If
> there was a particular statement or statements that you felt were
> problematic, perhaps you could point to the general type of case (probably
> shouldn't call folks out by name) so that the rest of us could learn and
> improve.
>
>
>
>>
>>   I hope in future, that if someone objects strongly to a scenario
>> presented, then they contact the original poster directly first and if they
>> have no luck, then reply to the group.
>>
> It is important that these debates happen in the open so we all can hear
> all different points of view.  For example, you responded to the entire
> list, and now we know you feel there has been "anger, outrage, and
> catigation" on this list.  If you provide more details to the list, I am
> sure most of us will make an effort to do better (as long as it doesn't
> involve refraining from expressing our views and debating the issues).
>
> Mike
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Yes, I understand the concern and am in the middle of adding clarification
to the introduction to all 23 copies of the survey.

C

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 9:25 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 4:58 PM Courtney 
> wrote:
>
>> Here, too, we gave quite a bit of careful thought to the decision. We
>> felt that if we did not disclose that we were on the CWG, that it might be
>> seen by some as a lapse of transparency.
>>
> It is good that you disclosed your affiliations.  However, you also need
> to make it abundantly clear that this project is not part of your work for
> the CWG (and for those of you employed by TomTom, not part of your
> employment). Otherwise, you are potentially misleading people to believe,
> as I did, that this was an official CWG survey.  I am assuming that you had
> the best of intentions and that you were not trying to mislead anyone.
>
> As Frederick pointed out, members of some other working groups seem to do
> a very good job of making it clear as to whether they are speaking as part
> of a WG or as an individual.
>
> Mike
>
>>
>>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Here, too, we gave quite a bit of careful thought to the decision. We felt
that if we did not disclose that we were on the CWG, that it might be seen
by some as a lapse of transparency.  Further, I think it's relevant that
we're on the CWG, as it shows why we are interested in this topic, and
indeed suggests that we are going to be able to make sure that it benefits
the whole community.  It is also a credential: there aren't a lot of
communications-focused people in OSM, and I want it to be clear that is
where I, personally, am coming from.  In Marjan's case, it is relevant
because she is doing a good percentage of this work in her capacity as an
OSM volunteer, which she takes very seriously, and not in her capacity as
an employee of TomTom.  Here, again, it would be nice to have the best of
intentions assumed instead of the worst.  I stand by the decision to
disclose our committee affiliation.

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 6:46 PM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Now that we seem to have established that this was not a CWG thing to
> start with, could everyone who was involved in creating this
> announcement please review their communication behaviour, *especially*
> when it comes to signing messages as "so-and-so, OSMF communications
> working group" when you're not writing in an official capacity. This is
> something that other working groups as well as the OSMF board have been
> practicing carefully for ages and I'd hope that it would not be beyond
> members of a communications working group to be precise in their
> communication.
>
> On 4/28/23 15:29, Marjan Van de Kauter wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > We are doing a research project on how OpenStreetMap users interact with
> > each other. Are you willing to help us learn more about communication
> > behaviors in OSM? Take this quick and anonymous survey and tell us if
> > and how you use the OSM community forum, mailing lists, social media and
> > other channels:
> >
> > https://forms.gle/UeAGs3VahuxBN7Ec7 <https://forms.gle/UeAGs3VahuxBN7Ec7
> >
> >
> > We will share the results of this survey, along with other data, with
> > the community. This can help users better understand communication
> > habits in OSM, so they can identify the most effective ways to reach
> > other community members. We will be presenting our findings at State of
> > the Map US in Richmond, Virginia and in diary entries. So stay tuned for
> > more and thank you for participating in our survey.
> >
> > Have a great weekend!
> >
> > Marjan Van de Kauter (OSMF Communication Working Group member and TomTom
> > community engager)
> >
> > Courtney Williamson (OSMF Communication Working Group member)
> >
> > Keara Dennehy (TomTom business analyst)
> >
> > L.J. Lambert (TomTom business analyst)
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Hi, all,

Here, thanks to the generosity of some folks on the OWG and OSMF who
donated their time to us so that we could have access to an open source
tool of this quality, is a LimeSurvey version.

https://osmf.limequery.org/751285?lang=en

Please do fill it out and share it widely within the mailing lists. Please
do not share it in other channels (Twitter, Mastodon,
community.openstreetmap.org, etc.) as I will be posting unique versions in
those channels.

Once again, it is OBVIOUSLY our first choice to offer an open source
survey; we didn't because we initially couldn't. Now, we are able to, and
I'm glad of it.  I share the concerns that many of you expressed and fully
understand and value the complexity and importance of the commitment to
open source software and data.  I also have a good understanding of the
nuances and complexity of this conversation. Indeed, I celebrate them.

I object only to the tone of some of the comments, and to assumptions that
are made about our motivation, decision process re: our approach, and
quality of our skills. I'm not alone in objecting to problems of tone more
broadly, and so I feel comfortable insisting on a higher quality discourse
here on behalf of myself and the many others who share this concern. I
think that good forum etiquette requires that people assume the best and
ask clarifying questions. As well, there are several very commonly used
phrases and rhetorical devices that can be deployed to make 'advice' feel
like advice instead of condemnation or scorn.

C




On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 3:56 PM Greg Troxel  wrote:

> Courtney  writes:
>
> > Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
> > more about OSM communication habits?
>
> I think you are misinterpreting.  I detected no objection to trying to
> learn.  I only see objection to proprietary tools and pushing users to
> surveillance.
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

John,

This is all very insightful and I agree with all of it. One reason we
posted the survey in 12 different channels was because we have all worked
within OSM for a long time and we are familiar with the different cultures
within the different channels.

You wrote, "So are you interested in a sample of OpenStreetMap mappers or a
sample of online forum mappers who are happy with Google forms as your
sample? There is a difference and as long as you don't say our survey says
everyone in OSM thinks this about online forums I'm happy and content."

We want the former, but there are limits to our reach and resources, so we
will have to be content with something less than that, but hopefully not as
limited as the latter. It reassures me that what you are looking for is for
us to give appropriate context and framing, because I can absolutely
promise that we will do that.  Thank you for this thoughtful response. :)

C

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:46 PM john whelan  wrote:

> My background was working with surveys and my comments simply came from
> that background and the steps taken to obtain accurate results.  Nothing
> else.
>
> Typically a university run survey isn't done to high standards.
>
> Your comment on questions from talk I think relates to the users.
> OpenStreetMap roots are in open data and a desire to avoid proprietary
> systems.  The old fogies, if you will, tend to use mailing lists, they do a
> lot of editting and background work to make it run smoothly
> disproportionately so.  Often they don't use the flavour of the month
> online forum.
>
> So if you ask in an online forum are on line forums great you'll get a
> positive answer.  Those who don't think they are great won't use them.
>
> If you ask in the talk mailing list you get a different set of respondents.
>
> As I said before the selection of the sample is critical.  There is a
> story told of an interviewer who surveyed passengers at a railway station
> about gambling.  100% were in favour.  It was only later it was spotted
> she'd interviewed people who were there to catch a special train to a race
> course.
>
> So what exactly are you trying to measure?  Are you weighting the replies
> against the number of edits the person has made?  Does a HOT mapper who has
> made three edits count.  Remember that they will almost certainly have been
> recruited through social media.
>
> Then you get people who map quite happily by themselves or in a very small
> group of two communicating one on one via email.  Not everyone feels the
> need to group hug in an online forum.  The mapper I'm thinking of is exHOT
> and prefers to quietly map parts of Africa that are basically unmapped.  We
> do work together and communicate via email to decide which bit to map
> next.  Remember HOT is very much working together and for some mappers this
> doesn't work well.
>
> So are you interested in a sample of OpenStreetMap mappers or a sample of
> online forum mappers who are happy with Google forms as your sample?
>
> There is a difference and as long as you don't say our survey says
> everyone in OSM thinks this about online forums I'm happy and content.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 13:06 Courtney 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the
>> survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language
>> and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language.
>> We have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well.
>>
>> We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said
>> in my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger,
>> long-term study that relies on publically available data from OSM
>> communication channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings
>> within the context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate
>> reference to everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting
>> a free survey across a global community, to the short amount of time that
>> we have to do the survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to
>> deliver the one true, definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication
>> behaviors to rule them all. We are attempting to uncover some
>> directional behaviors, and see if we can foster
>> a better conversation within the community.
>>
>> This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main
>> "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only
>> one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of
>> using only open source software adopted across the community? We already
>> had a q

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Yes, it is not one or the other. That's my point exactly. So what is the
harm in doing our best to get a feel for what people prefer, how they
balance these concerns, and how the different choices affect them?

I welcome all the pushback and have already learned a very great deal--this
is one of the things I love about OSM--it is a space for nearly unlimited
learning, which I relish and seek. I am dismayed by what I consider to be
the negative tone, as well as comments that are based on speculation or
assumptions about our intentions, skills, or the overall approach. At a
minimum, kindly worded questions could be asked instead of opinions levied
that are based on assumptions.  We did know that some would not like a
Google form. We had to make a tough choice.  Why is it assumed that we just
ignored the question of open or closed source entirely. What level of fool
would do that for a survey in OSM? We are not that level of fools.  Of
course we didn't ignore them. But we do not have unlimited powers and
resources and we had to make the choice that could move our work forward.

In my experience it is a common critique of this forum that it is negative
and even mean-spirited. Perhaps some of the commenters here could take that
feedback with the same enthusiasm that they are giving feedback to me.
Then, we can all be learners.

C

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:16 PM Marc_marc  wrote:

> Le 30.04.23 à 18:29, Courtney a écrit :
> > It will be interesting to get a sense of how many within the community
> > have principled objections to proprietary software compared to members
> > of the community who are looking at useability, localization, and/or
> > accessibility as well as open sourcing in their choices of software.
>
> wtf, with such biased questions, I wonder what point there
> is in answering, the only thing that is proven is your lack
> of sensitivity in this point
>
> it is not one or the other
> it's useability with no respect for privacy
> or useability with privacy
> or useability without any knowledge that you are offering
> your personal data to the company hosting the service
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the
survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language
and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language.
We have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well.

We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said in
my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger, long-term
study that relies on publically available data from OSM communication
channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings within the
context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate reference to
everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting a free
survey across a global community, to the short amount of time that we have
to do the survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to deliver the
one true, definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication behaviors
to rule them all. We are attempting to uncover some directional behaviors,
and see if we can foster a better conversation within the community.

This conversation has opened up important new questions.  Why is the main
"Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only
one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of
using only open source software adopted across the community? We already
had a question to this effect within the survey, but we will now be able to
learn more by adding the limesurvey. None of this is going to be
definitive. All of it is going to be interesting and help raise new
questions that hopefully can be studied.

Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit
more about OSM communication habits? I understand the impulse to give
advice--this is welcome even when the advice is predicated on the idea that
we lack any kind of insight or experience--there is always more to learn.
But, I don't understand the degree of ire and frankly, incredulity that is
being levied here.  Should we wait until there is a university study that
is fully funded and staffed, and with a perfect approach, with a year's
worth of pre-testing, to ask these questions? Is that the standard here?
Wait for perfection or do nothing?  Is that how OSM itself was built? I
don't understand the tone or the defensiveness of these comments. If the
goal is to advance the OSM project, is it better to gate keep all inquiries
to a suffocating degree? Or to try to learn and grow?

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:45 AM John Whelan  wrote:

> Just a comment on Fredrick's input.  Selecting the sample is one of the
> most difficult parts of a survey to get right.  The self selection part of
> this survey makes it open to bias, as Frederick has commented this is
> compounded by the platform. I'm not making a comment about if the platform
> is appropriate or not just that if it affects your response then it begins
> to cast doubt on your results.
>
> The second is knowing enough about your target audience so they will
> understand your questions.  Perhaps have someone non technical with an
> English Language background, a librarian, for example check it for jargon.
>   One technique is to run a trial survey against a true random sample.  I
> don't think this was done here.
>
> If they don't understand what you're asking then you aren't going to get a
> reliable answers and to be honest I didn't.
>
> I'm not sure if this particular survey is trying to justify a particular
> stance or get accurate information.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> Frederik Ramm wrote on 4/30/2023 11:18 AM:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:
>
> I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
> have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
> no use of google forms for some of us).
>
>
> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed
> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage
> with the community via such a product.
>
> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that
> without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working
> group.
>
> Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or
> your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they
> will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google, i.e.
> the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would not be
> represented.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
>
> --
> Sent from Postbox <https://www.postbox-inc.com>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

We are working on setting up a limesurvey for those who don't wish to use a
Google form. I'll post it as soon as I have time to create and distribute
it.

We also now have a new datapoint for our research. It will be interesting
to get a sense of how many within the community have principled objections
to proprietary software compared to members of the community who are
looking at useability, localization, and/or accessibility as well as open
sourcing in their choices of software.

On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:24 AM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote:
> > I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
> > have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
> > does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
> > no use of google forms for some of us).
>
> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed
> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage
> with the community via such a product.
>
> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that
> without a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working
> group.
>
> Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or
> your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they
> will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google,
> i.e. the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would
> not be represented.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

 whether something is reachable or
> not - from both of the countries you mentioned.**
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
> ** I'm not being more specific because I don't want to advertise an
> activity that might be "frowned upon" in a particular country, or which
> particular OSM channel people doing that might be found in.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Not only do I understand the concern about unrestricted internet access, it
is one of the reasons why we are undertaking our study of OSM community
communication practices and habits--there are hundreds of channels,
globally, and many of them have to do with working around this particular
challenge.  To the concern about Google specifically--we knew the
challenges and drawbacks of using this form, but the benefits outweighed
them, as there is no ideal option for this kind of survey available.

In general, there is no perfect form and no perfect software for collecting
this kind of data, and we are doing the best with available resources. For
example, we are reaching out to the OSM community through Telegram, Reddit,
Matrix, Discourse, Discord, and many other forums, and we are also looking
at other forms of communications data in our analysis.

To the specific comment about a CWG member knowing better. It is precisely
because we are on the CWG that we are seeking to understand the community's
communication behaviors, so that we can study it and offer our findings
back to the community. We don't have perfect tools, we don't have unlimited
means, and we are doing the best that we can do informed, considered,
inclusive work. Interestingly, one of our questions has to do with "do you
find OSM community forums to be positive and encouraging."  I am finding
the irony of this to be a bit rich at the moment.

I would encourage skeptics to fill out the survey and tune in to our
presentation in June and then judge our approaches.

Courtney Williamson


On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 10:56 AM Sören Reinecke  wrote:

> I am impressed that some of you always choose the path to complain about
> things going against their own world view rather to provide useful
> suggestion / realistic alternatives or even better getting involved in the
> implementation as developers do. Google or Microsoft are unfortunately the
> choice of many non-technical users because it is what they know, feel
> comfortable with and is most of the time easy to use. Only few OSS projects
> come near their level (the good ones like Linux).
>
> So please stop complaining about when someone does not share your
> ideologic attitude. And wanting to use OSS only is a ideology. In this case
> privacy is not even a concern. So please stop polluting email threads with
> unnecessary replies.
>
> For myself I can say that I don't like the giants too but I use what the
> most know and what is an established standard like POSIX or GDrive. I even
> administrate a Google Workspace subscription althought I do not like it
> because Google Workspace has way too limited administration options and a
> questionable permission system in GDrive.
>
> The argumentation of "restricted internet access" is a weak one in an
> online project like OpenStreetMap.
>
>
> Maybe I get a warning for saying this. But I got banned from tagging
> already because I brought up an important topic three times prior warning
> not to do that so nothing to loose here :)
>
> Sören
>
> Apr 28, 2023 16:27:41 Andy Townsend :
>
> > On 28/04/2023 14:57, Marc_marc wrote:
> >> part of the active opendata community
> >> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise
> >
> > It's actually worse than that.
> >
> > OpenStreetMap has mappers all around the world.  Some of those places
> don't have the virtually unrestricted Internet access that people in the
> west may be accustomed to, and I wouldn't assume that a website of a major
> American company (Google) is available in all those places.  Previously the
> Board and other OSMF working groups have taken care to ensure that everyone
> can contribute to surveys like this.  Of all people, I'd have expected the
> Communication Working Group to be aware of this potential issue and to have
> taken steps to ensure that it wasn't one.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > (writing in a personal capacity rather than as a member of the DWG)
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] 3 Bay Area mapathons

[Courtney Clark]

Hello OSM friends,

You're invited to any of Peace Corps' 3 upcoming mapathons in the Bay area
of California. We're headed to Cali for the Global Entrepreneurship Summit
hosted by President Obama June 21-25.

We'll host a mapathon as part of the Summit at Stanford University on June
25th, with additional mapathons at Mapbox's headquarters and UC Berkeley.
See below for details and the Eventbrite pages.

We will be mapping for Peace Corps HOT tasks, and we really hope to see you
there!

*Details: *
Peace Corps Mappy Hour
<https://www.eventbrite.com/e/peace-corps-mappy-hour-tickets-25867652846>
June 22, 6:30-8:30 pm
Mapbox HQ, 149 9th St, San Francisco

UC Berkeley Event
<https://www.eventbrite.com/e/innovating-with-open-geographic-data-a-peace-corps-mapathon-tickets-25951036248>
June 24, 10:00-11:30am
UC Berkeley Center for Public Service

Global Entrepreneurship Summit Partner Event
<https://ges2016mapathon.eventbrite.com/>
June 25, 9:00am-12:00pm
Stanford Haas Center for Public Service, Stanford University

Cheers,

Courtney Clark

-- 
Innovation Specialist, Peace Corps <http://www.peacecorps.gov/>
Member, Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team <http://www.hotosm.org>
Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, Guinea 2012-2014
Loyola University Chicago
231-740-9595 | courtneycla...@gmail.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap celebrates International Women's Day

[Courtney Clark]

Dear OpenStreetMap Community,



Gender disparity in OSM participation has been well-documented
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity> by a number of gender
equality advocates in our community. We know the immense benefits of
participating in our community -- the chance to shape the world’s map,
technical training, access to a global network and professional
opportunities. To participate, many of us enjoy privileges that are denied
to millions of women and girls around the world, including digital
literacy, access to the Internet, and the luxury of free time to edit OSM.



We will all be stronger -- including the map itself -- when the OSM
community reaches gender parity. International Women’s Day presents an
invaluable opportunity for us to rally around gender equality in OSM. This
year’s theme is #PledgeforParity <http://www.internationalwomensday.com/>,
and of course International Women’s Day is March 8th.



Because editing OSM gives participants a voice in how their communities are
represented to the world, because digital literacy is a must-know skill,
because women and girls around the world are disproportionately burdened
with work that prevents their participation in “extra” activities, this
International Women’s Day we ask every OSM community member around the
world to contribute to gender parity.



These contributions can take many forms, including:


   - teaching a woman or girl in your life how to edit OSM.
   - hosting a mapping party/event specifically for women and girls.
   Promote your event on the International Women’s Day website here
   <http://www.internationalwomensday.com/Events>.
   - mentoring a female member of the OSM community and encouraging her
   involvement in mailing lists and working groups.
   - participating in our upcoming social media campaign -- make your
   #PledgeforParity public with Facebook and Twitter cover photos and more
   (instructions on how to join will be sent soon).
   - mapping features in OSM
   <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_in_Support_of_Women_and_Girls>
that
   disproportionately affect women, such as women’s health services or
   childcare providers.



American Red Cross/Missing Maps, MapGive, OFDA, USAID and Peace Corps have
also teamed up to host an International Women’s Day Mapathon in Washington,
DC on March 8th from 6-9pm. Participants will map for HOT tasks that
feature issues that disproportionately affect women. RSVP here
<http://www.eventbrite.com/e/international-womens-day-mapathon-tickets-20488246898>
.



We welcome your feedback, suggestions and ideas and are more than happy to
assist anyone who would like to get involved or host their own event.



Sincerely,



The OpenStreetMap Foundation, The Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team Board and
OSM US

Courtney Clark, Erika Nunez, Drishtie Patel and Vanessa Knoppke-Wetzel


-- 
Innovation Specialist, Peace Corps <http://www.peacecorps.gov/>
Member, Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team <http://www.hotosm.org>
Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, Guinea 2012-2014
Loyola University Chicago
231-740-9595 | courtneycla...@gmail.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-ca] UMap log in and import

[Rieger, Courtney]

Hi,

I'm trying to sign up for a UMap account but I keep getting 'Bad Gateway'.
I think there is a problem with the website... I was going to try to use
the UMap program to create layers on top of a live OpenStreetMap basemap.

CR

-- 
Courtney Rieger MSc (current)
Environmental Science and Social Justice
Department of Geography
University of Lethbridge
403 329 2401
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [OSM-talk] Fw: read this

[Courtney Clark]

Spam, do not open link

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Andrew Wiseman  wrote:

> Hello!
>
>
>
> *New message, please read* http://yqny.net/health.php
> 
>
>
>
> Andrew Wiseman
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
Innovation Fellow, Peace Corps
Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, Guinea 2012-2014
Loyola University Chicago
231-740-9595 | courtneycla...@gmail.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk