[talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Matt wrote "But the problem is I've become disillusioned - the fun and community has gone." Matt, Once the licence change is complete I think the community will slowly grow back, both with some old timers and then with new mappers as well. Till then we will continue to see the same old disrupters trying to destroy OSM. Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
A whole lot of angst I don't often email the list, but I've been kicking around OSM for maybe four years, and done a bit of mapping here and there, as well as generating the odd Garmin map for people to use. This email is a bit rambly, so I apologise in advance. To be honest, I'm over it. People have been beating each other over the head with CC-by and ODbL for so long now that we've all been pretty much brain damaged. All the posts degenerate into slanging matches inside of three replies, and the level of discourse as plummeted. So, here's my take on this: Mapping (both creating and using the maps) should be fun. But the fun has gone for me. The license debate has unfortunately slowly destroyed the community feel of the project, pissing off a lot of existing contributors, and no doubt making it less welcoming for new ones. The talk-AU list is dominated by a handful of people with very strong opinions, which is intimidating to any new comers, and off putting to the rest. That's not to say that the opinions expressed are wrong, but they do tend toward the 'fanatic' end of the spectrum. The silent majority who subscribe but don't post must wonder where the fun went. And everything just muddies the water. I've accepted the new CT's, but that's probably a bit moot as I haven't contributed much recently. Personally, I think the license debate is a bit of a furphy - contracts and licenses are important from a moral standpoint, but only practically worthwhile if you are prepared to police and enforce them. It's not really about license enforcement, it's about respect for the project. Any project that expends all its energy trying the control the usage of the project, rather than actually improving the content of the project, will eventually fall of a cliff as people move on. I guess my question is 'what is the goal of OSM?', and also 'what are the goals of the contributors?'. Weren't we trying to make a map that people could use in many and varied ways? Have we now lost sight of that goal - to make OSM accessible to all - and turned on ourselves and started eating our young? I don't care about attribution for my contributions - that's not why I was mapping in the first place. I just wanted a map I could use, and a project that was both enjoyable to contribute, and fun to be a part of. The license has changed, and I'm not sure what that means for the garmin maps I make - do I have to change the attribution, or do different things to meet the license requirements? I don't know, and to be honest I don't care. If I'm doing something wrong or incorrectly, maybe I'll get round to fixing it, maybe I won't. But the problem is I've become disillusioned - the fun and community has gone. And that's the sad part about the whole thing. Matt osmaustralia.org ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Hello,
Firstly let me say that I have no alliances with either side of the debate. I
have been trying to sit on the fence throughout the entire process.
Until the recent Nearmap announcement I was unable to legally accept the
change; Now I can.
I agree with those who state that the license change is actually a fork of OSM.
Instead of forking they are forcing everyone else to fork. This is very messy.
Based on the performance of Steve Coast on this list in recent times I have
decided to stop contributing to OSM. This is not the sort of community I want
to be associated with. The approach lacks respect. It is dismissive of
alternate opinions without good reason. All that was wrong with the process of
the license change (read that clearly; the process not the actual license) has
been repeated by Steve Coast on this list in the last few days.
I was particularly appalled at the treatment of "All Blokes" whose opinion was
completely dismissed to the point of suggesting he is not even a real person.
This is not a healthy community. As Steve is a representative at the highest
level I hold little hope for improvement.
Regards,
Neal
>From The Antipodes
"So long and thanks for all the fish. So sad that it has come to this"
On 09/07/2011, at 7:48 AM, Steve Coast wrote:
{so many wrong things I have lost count and in such a way as to be offensive
many times}
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Steve Coast wrote: > Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes because most of the community I'm > familiar with, which is all of the EU and the US, consider government data a > nice starting point but mappers on the ground as generally much better. Is the > perception in Australia that you should just do whatever the government says > you should do? Or that OSM should just be a host for government data? Mappers on the ground are much better, but government data is *already collected*. It also has stuff that's difficult or impossible to collect on the ground (or water), like marine park and national park boundaries. Also, Australia is incredibly remote. When the US talk about remote locations and low populated areas, we've got 'em beat. > So they're only a potential source, things have not been imported? Some has, but it's not compatible with ODbL and will probably be deleted. I don't think anything has been imported for a while because of that. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Steve Coast wrote: > Well the eternal right thing applies to CC and most other licenses, so I There's a difference between an irrevocable licence and an irrevocable, all-encompassing rights grant. CC and most other open licences are the former, OSM's CTs require the latter. > suspect that you don't like who the licensee is, OSMF? That's the reason it's Don't care who. The Free Software Foundation requires a copyright assignment for contributions to GNU projects and I'm uncomfortable with that too, even though I feel I can trust FSF way more than OSMF. > shaped that the OSMF immediately license it back. From what I remember, our > legal advice was there has to be a licensing party that things are assigned to > in order to make it work. The contributor can be the licencing party, there's no requirement for OSM to take that role. > As for future licensing, do you have a better idea? Yes. Stick with CC-BY-SA and don't demand a rights grant. > Why don't you start at the beginning and explain what, where and when this > data > was imported? Did you ever bring it up with the LWG? Australian government data, and this has been the main sticking point in the licencing debate since the start. Are you seriously going to claim ignorance on this? -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ATTN Steve Coast RE" Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 00:51 -0700, All Blokes wrote: > I would not in any way presume to speak for any other Australians > other than myself, but I object most strenuously to the implication > that I have in some way been "perverted by 80n or any other person at > all. FWIW, Id like to point out that after 3 years mapping with OSM, I knew of fosm for several months before I learned who 80n is, and that he ran it. I was disgruntled with the OSM process and was looking for alternatives. Many names were thrown around, fosm being one of them. Several weeks after becoming a member, the first I became aware of the fact that 80n ran the server was after asking for help and someone directing me to him. > I think your threat to "come out to Australia and debate this in the > pub with 80n as if that would sway people frankly is pretentious I think Steve has some understated feeling of how important 80n is. Steve may feel that with himself being the 'figurehead' of OSM, he feels that 80n is the figurehead of everyone against the change. He is not, he is simply one of many who didnt just dislike the change, he actively did something about it. > If you care to come out you will be welcome but if you want to debate > 80n this forum is your best chance and It does not appear, to me FWITW > that you are doing so well at making your points against him. Seriously, Id like to see that. We could even arrange for a few copyright lawyers to come along, so that maybe Steve will understand the law is different in different places, he apparently needs to hear it from a lawyer or he wont believe it. I wonder how many lawyers it would take to convince him. David > > "You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the > community, Australia being a good example as the checks and balances > of > normal community communication are harder because of the timezone > differences and costs of flying. Essentially, people in Australia > don't > get to hear from the rest of us on the phone or in the pub and we let > you spam the lists for a long time. So to an outsider it can look > like > you're this rational guy who used to be on the board and so on. I've > heard about the various conspiracy theories you've been peddling > personally off-list too." > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] missing messages
You may have messages filtered, but I indeed have noticed a lot of missing messages, and often messages that are missing but arrive a few hours late, after Ive already seen the responses to them. I have no blocks or filters, that would be stupid since I am actually interested in following all sides of this issue. I can think of a number of people who dont offer much to the conversation (sorry Fred), who possibly would be worth filtering, but I think everyones opinion is worth reading, even if I might disagree with it. I agree it is difficult as you point out when messages are missed, to keep up with all the important points in the conversation. This seems to be one of the problems with using email and mailing lists for this form of communication, when it works its great, but its easy to miss one message and not be aware of it until everyone else has replied to it. David On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 23:18 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: > It's been pointed out that I'm not replying to hundreds of messages from > John Smith, Anthony and friends. > > I don't see them as they're automatically deleted. I find life is better > without having the trolls fill my inbox. > > However, if I have missed any reasonable points in there then feel free > to repost them, just don't put those guys email addresses in the > to/from/cc fields... > > Steve > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What A Day
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Sam Couter wrote: > > I personally cannot seem to be able to get any joy from fosm.org, at > > the moment I am just getting a "500 Internal Server Error" message. > > Me too. Previous efforts were more successful (no error messages), but > I've never seen a map, just a blank grey box where a map probably goes. > It has had some outages. The default layer on http://maps.bigtincan.com/ is rendering from fosm data. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7/8/2011 2:01 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 11:05:28 -0700 Steve Coast wrote: If you go look at talk@ you'll find a lot of history from the people who now inhabit this list. In fact, several of them have either been banned or moderated. big snip of trash I've known them for a lot longer than you have it seems, and as I mention they've been kicked, banned or moderated before. I have not been kicked, banned or moderated, not on any list in my life. Don't you ever say Hello? Am I missing out on something here? Why am I discriminated against? Are such questions on your mind often? I can confirm that other mappers have received emails telling them that "their views are well known, and don't require repeating". Likewise I can confirm that All Blokes is not a pseudonym of John Smith. I see. And to return to the topic I'm hardly mapping anything now - since the big argument blew up I have little interest and decided to do some other things. Did you come to me because you are hardly mapping anything now - since the big argument blew up you have little interest and decided to do some other things? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 11:05:28 -0700 Steve Coast wrote: > If you go look at talk@ you'll find a lot of history from the people > who now inhabit this list. In fact, several of them have either been > banned or moderated. > big snip of trash > > I've known them for a lot longer than you have it seems, and as I > mention they've been kicked, banned or moderated before. I have not been kicked, banned or moderated, not on any list in my life. Am I missing out on something here? Why am I discriminated against? I can confirm that other mappers have received emails telling them that "their views are well known, and don't require repeating". Likewise I can confirm that All Blokes is not a pseudonym of John Smith. And to return to the topic I'm hardly mapping anything now - since the big argument blew up I have little interest and decided to do some other things. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Anthony wrote: > On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Steve Coast wrote: >> At this point really the positive gestures need to come from you, for >> example helping us switch so we can all (including FOSM) move on. > > If the only way you are willing to have a mutually beneficial > relationship is if I/we/FOSM/CommonMap agree to help you switch to a > license that I/we/FOSM/CommonMap do not approve, then it's not going > to happen. > > I cannot support a switch to the ODbL. But I am very much willing and > interested in supporting OSMF in its larger goal of mapping the world. > > Anthony In case you missed my previous email to explaining this (and for the benefit of those who didn't receive it), my main sticking point is this: "If you publicly use any adapted version of this database, or works produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL." I find that to be completely infeasible from a technical standpoint. I don't keep around copies of my adapted databases after I create a produced work from it. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Steve Coast wrote: > Anthony > > The reason we have a hostile relationship is because of all your spamming > and trolling. I'm not FOSM, so that's rather irrelevant, even if it were true. I also thought that relationship had been mended, as the previous conversation we had was cordial. > You were kicked from the legal list, the only person I'm aware > of to have managed that. I was placed on moderation on the "legal" list. I have no idea if I am unique in that respect. > I suspect the real reason you want a nice relationship is funding and other > benefits we've worked hard for, while refusing to help with the community > process to switch licenses. I'm not interested in your funding. Not in the least. You're right that I think I would benefit from a nice relationship, though. And you're right that I don't want to help the community switch licenses, as I don't agree with the new license (I explained that to you last time we emailed, which apparently you've forgotten). As you say that the license disagreement is a "minor difference", I'm not sure why you're harping on it. I agree with you that we both have much more in common in our greater goals of mapping the world. > At this point really the positive gestures need to come from you, for > example helping us switch so we can all (including FOSM) move on. If the only way you are willing to have a mutually beneficial relationship is if I/we/FOSM/CommonMap agree to help you switch to a license that I/we/FOSM/CommonMap do not approve, then it's not going to happen. I cannot support a switch to the ODbL. But I am very much willing and interested in supporting OSMF in its larger goal of mapping the world. Anthony > On 7/8/2011 6:23 AM, Anthony wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Steve Coast wrote: >>> >>> I mean throw away the efforts of all the licensing work we've done >>> because >>> one guy doesn't like technical detail X or has moral objection Y. That >>> is, >>> that we have spent many man years on this and there is no way to make >>> everyone happy. We tried hard and it's time to move on. Also, once we're >>> switched it's much easier to make the kind of fixes you want as >>> subsequent >>> switches are orders of magnitude more easy. Thus, lets put our minor >>> differences aside and work for the greater goals we have, like mapping >>> the >>> world. >> >> I for one think a partnership between FOSM and OSMF would be a great >> thing. We *are* both trying to map the world. I've made this >> invitation before but I'd like to make it again: Work with us to help >> preserve, and keep up to date, the CC-BY-SA data which otherwise would >> be left to rot in a static "final dump". If you believe, as you say, >> that CC-BY-SA might work out the problems (which you say are minor) in >> the 4.0 license, then you'll be especially glad you have FOSM to help >> you switch back. >> >> There's no reason that FOSM and OSMF have to have a hostile >> relationship. We're both trying to map the world, under the license >> we deem most appropriate. >> > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Anthony The reason we have a hostile relationship is because of all your spamming and trolling. You were kicked from the legal list, the only person I'm aware of to have managed that. I suspect the real reason you want a nice relationship is funding and other benefits we've worked hard for, while refusing to help with the community process to switch licenses. At this point really the positive gestures need to come from you, for example helping us switch so we can all (including FOSM) move on. Steve On 7/8/2011 6:23 AM, Anthony wrote: On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Steve Coast wrote: I mean throw away the efforts of all the licensing work we've done because one guy doesn't like technical detail X or has moral objection Y. That is, that we have spent many man years on this and there is no way to make everyone happy. We tried hard and it's time to move on. Also, once we're switched it's much easier to make the kind of fixes you want as subsequent switches are orders of magnitude more easy. Thus, lets put our minor differences aside and work for the greater goals we have, like mapping the world. I for one think a partnership between FOSM and OSMF would be a great thing. We *are* both trying to map the world. I've made this invitation before but I'd like to make it again: Work with us to help preserve, and keep up to date, the CC-BY-SA data which otherwise would be left to rot in a static "final dump". If you believe, as you say, that CC-BY-SA might work out the problems (which you say are minor) in the 4.0 license, then you'll be especially glad you have FOSM to help you switch back. There's no reason that FOSM and OSMF have to have a hostile relationship. We're both trying to map the world, under the license we deem most appropriate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7/8/2011 4:28 AM, Sam Couter wrote: Also, your frame of reference is with OSM up and running and having these kinds of relationships. When I started OSM we had no data at all and nobody wanted to give us data under any license, let alone cc. So those of us who climbed the mountain to get those people to give us data see asking people to switch (such as ordnance survey for example) as a far smaller problem. I don't see it as a small problem. Australian government data is mostly released under CC licences, which are widely compatible with most open uses. They've hit the 99% mark, so there's not a lot of motivation to change further. OSM-F has placed OSM in the remaining 1%. Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes because most of the community I'm familiar with, which is all of the EU and the US, consider government data a nice starting point but mappers on the ground as generally much better. Is the perception in Australia that you should just do whatever the government says you should do? Or that OSM should just be a host for government data? Im confused that I was discussing nearmap but you jumped to the government, what am I missing? The bit where you mentioned "large sclerotic government institutions". I think we've just about covered Nearmap, and the government sources in Australia are collectively the next biggest potential data source. So they're only a potential source, things have not been imported? In any case, as someone who built this project and has convinced many organizations and government agencies to open up, I urge you to have a longer timeframe outlook. These types of agencies tend to get with it in the end. Even the ordnance survey has, for example. You've mentioned Ordnance Survey many times. Are they the only success story? No, we have lots, just read the LWG minutes. Australian agencies have already gotten with it. We have data available under various open licences. How are Australians supposed to go to the Australian government agencies (individually, of course) and explain that while it's exactly what we've been asking for for a long time, it's not good enough because one specific project chose a licence based on concerns that they needed to protect rights that don't exist in Australia or even in the majority of the world? Well by not being defeatest for a start. What I think I'm trying to get across is that we convinced our governments, in fact these days they want to be involved with OSM rather than OSM going to them to be involved. So, why is it different in australia? Is there a culture of submitting to the government (which would be the opposite of the US, but closer to the UK) or something? What are the sticking points, and how are they different from the sticking points we managed to go through in the EU and US? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7/8/2011 5:04 AM, Sam Couter wrote: SteveC wrote: No, John smith and friends are a separate issue, they troll many different discussions. Who are "and friends"? I only watch talk-au so if there's trolling going on elsewhere I haven't seen it. What I have seen is you dismissing others as being deliberately disruptive or as having hidden agendas, instead of addressing what they actually say. Ah, you need some context. If you go look at talk@ you'll find a lot of history from the people who now inhabit this list. In fact, several of them have either been banned or moderated. Actually no, I've said im unaware of any reasons not to accept (given we fixed near map, we fixed ordnance survey...) which is not the same as saying there aren't any. Many reasons have been given. I'll give you my two biggest right now: Eternal, irrevocable rights grant and indeterminate future licencing. Well the eternal right thing applies to CC and most other licenses, so I suspect that you don't like who the licensee is, OSMF? That's the reason it's shaped that the OSMF immediately license it back. From what I remember, our legal advice was there has to be a licensing party that things are assigned to in order to make it work. As for future licensing, do you have a better idea? As I've said, if we gave a more strict definition then a whole lot more people would complain, if it was more loose then more would complain. So the line has to be drawn somewhere and the LWG chose that balance. I doubt very much we could draw the line anywhere else without more, not less, problems. For my own contributions using my own GPS traces and survey work, that's one thing. I haven't yet decided if I'll create a new OSM account and click "Accept", I've clicked "Decline" for my existing OSM account because of the sources I've used in the past. But I can't agree to the CTs when I'm using CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. Nearmap isn't the problem and doesn't need fixing, ODbL is. Maybe it can't be fixed any time soon, but denying that it's a problem doesn't help. You keep repeating that I am deny all these problems. Could you go back and read, as above, where I point out all sorts of problems and it's about finding a balance? Whatever we do, there will be problems. you have denied any problems with licence incompatibility. Where did I do that? I think I mention multiple times how many problems we have had in many areas. You seem to think that all the Australian CC-BY and CC-BY-SA data that has been imported can either be kept, which seems unlawful to me, or deleted without considering it any real loss. You keep doing this too. Where do I say anything of the sort? I have no idea what this data is you're referring to, or what license it's under. Why do you assume I do know all about it? Of course you can't just relicence data without permission, and of course we want to minimize deletion. Why don't you start at the beginning and explain what, where and when this data was imported? Did you ever bring it up with the LWG? [Sam:] I hate to sound like a third-grader, but you started the ad hominem. I did, where? The first message I replied to. Accusing others of hidden agendas or riling you up for no reason other than enjoyment. I've known them for a lot longer than you have it seems, and as I mention they've been kicked, banned or moderated before. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Steve Coast wrote: > I mean throw away the efforts of all the licensing work we've done because > one guy doesn't like technical detail X or has moral objection Y. That is, > that we have spent many man years on this and there is no way to make > everyone happy. We tried hard and it's time to move on. Also, once we're > switched it's much easier to make the kind of fixes you want as subsequent > switches are orders of magnitude more easy. Thus, lets put our minor > differences aside and work for the greater goals we have, like mapping the > world. I for one think a partnership between FOSM and OSMF would be a great thing. We *are* both trying to map the world. I've made this invitation before but I'd like to make it again: Work with us to help preserve, and keep up to date, the CC-BY-SA data which otherwise would be left to rot in a static "final dump". If you believe, as you say, that CC-BY-SA might work out the problems (which you say are minor) in the 4.0 license, then you'll be especially glad you have FOSM to help you switch back. There's no reason that FOSM and OSMF have to have a hostile relationship. We're both trying to map the world, under the license we deem most appropriate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
I was quietly reading this list until I saw my name, so here's my reply about what I plan to do. I only map from my traces and therefore the change of license doesn't affect me (does it?) so my plan is to keep mapping OSM. I'll keep checking fosm.orgevery now and then but so far I can't reach it. Anyway, these days I'm holidaying in Asahikawa, a town mostly uncharted, a paradise for mappers :-) what you see is virtually my own: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.763190507&lon=142.38959312439&zoom=14 Diego > From: Andrew Harvey > Sent: Wednesday, 6 July 2011 9:30 PM > To: OSM Australian Talk List > Subject: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of > CT/license > changes > > > > Since the ban on all contributors who didn't sign the CTs, and ban on all > new contributors from using NearMap and other CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources, I'm > no > longer actively contributing to the OSM database. Instead I am now actively > contributing to the fosm database. I am interested to hear what other > active > Australian OSM contributors will be doing now. > > Just looking through the list at http://odbl.de/australia.html we have a > fair amount of people who have been locked out, and also people who ticked > the CTs who have used CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources in the past who may want to > keep this data and continue using these sources in the future. > > So, active Australian OSM contributors, are you staying with the OSM db? If > so how are you going to do edits going forward, because any CC-BY-SA > derived > data you add may be removed if OSM abandons CC-BY-SA at some point in the > future (or may even be conflicting with your agreed CTs now...). > > Are you moving to the fosm db? If so, great! Less problems with trying to > merge your data into fosm, and we can all get back to mapping. Do you have > any concerns over the switch? > > Are you going to stop contributing data altogether? Or are you putting you > efforts on hold at the moment. > > I'm interested in Australia wide, but I'm personally most interested to > hear > from Franc, behemoth14, rrankin, Zhent, Ebenezer, swanilli, inas, Diego, > good2010, dexgps. (these are just those that come to mind from looking over > recent edits in the Sydney area) > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What A Day
Hi, That would be Steve Coast as the Troll of the day. CommonMap is the ccBY alternative (were also on the osm-fork mailing list) and doing just fine, thanks :) Now back to work on SchemaTroll 2.011 cheers, Sam On 7/8/11, Sam Couter wrote: > Andrew Laughton wrote: >> I would say a single troll, who it must be admitted has had quite a >> reaction. > > Are you referring to me or Steve? I assume it's one of us given our > message volume over the past couple of days. Name names! Quit being so > passive-aggressive, poor communication like that is what causes these > kinds of problems in the first place. > > Despite my disagreements with Steve, I don't think either of us is > trolling, so either way you're wrong. > >> It might be to distract mappers from discussing what they are doing. > > Here's my bit, and I encourage others to discuss their intentions: > > My contributions have never been all that significant, so it doesn't > really matter, but I'm not looking forward to seeing my past efforts > disappear and I'm undecided if I'm going to continue in the future. > FOSM doesn't yet seem to be a valid alternative either. > >> I personally cannot seem to be able to get any joy from fosm.org, at >> the moment I am just getting a "500 Internal Server Error" message. > > Me too. Previous efforts were more successful (no error messages), but > I've never seen a map, just a blank grey box where a map probably goes. > -- > Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au > OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C > -- --- Across Canada Trails - Beyond 2017 - The National Trails Network Victoria, BC Canada Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blog: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: 'Sam Vekemans' Member, CommonMap Inc. http://commonmap.org/ IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #CommonMap Also find us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What A Day
Andrew Laughton wrote: > I would say a single troll, who it must be admitted has had quite a reaction. Are you referring to me or Steve? I assume it's one of us given our message volume over the past couple of days. Name names! Quit being so passive-aggressive, poor communication like that is what causes these kinds of problems in the first place. Despite my disagreements with Steve, I don't think either of us is trolling, so either way you're wrong. > It might be to distract mappers from discussing what they are doing. Here's my bit, and I encourage others to discuss their intentions: My contributions have never been all that significant, so it doesn't really matter, but I'm not looking forward to seeing my past efforts disappear and I'm undecided if I'm going to continue in the future. FOSM doesn't yet seem to be a valid alternative either. > I personally cannot seem to be able to get any joy from fosm.org, at > the moment I am just getting a "500 Internal Server Error" message. Me too. Previous efforts were more successful (no error messages), but I've never seen a map, just a blank grey box where a map probably goes. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
SteveC wrote: > No, John smith and friends are a separate issue, they troll many different > discussions. Who are "and friends"? I only watch talk-au so if there's trolling going on elsewhere I haven't seen it. What I have seen is you dismissing others as being deliberately disruptive or as having hidden agendas, instead of addressing what they actually say. > Actually no, I've said im unaware of any reasons not to accept (given we > fixed near map, we fixed ordnance survey...) which is not the same as saying > there aren't any. Many reasons have been given. I'll give you my two biggest right now: Eternal, irrevocable rights grant and indeterminate future licencing. For my own contributions using my own GPS traces and survey work, that's one thing. I haven't yet decided if I'll create a new OSM account and click "Accept", I've clicked "Decline" for my existing OSM account because of the sources I've used in the past. But I can't agree to the CTs when I'm using CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. Nearmap isn't the problem and doesn't need fixing, ODbL is. Maybe it can't be fixed any time soon, but denying that it's a problem doesn't help. > > you have denied any problems with licence incompatibility. > > Where did I do that? I think I mention multiple times how many problems we > have had in many areas. You seem to think that all the Australian CC-BY and CC-BY-SA data that has been imported can either be kept, which seems unlawful to me, or deleted without considering it any real loss. > [Sam:] > > I hate to sound like a third-grader, but you started the ad hominem. > > I did, where? The first message I replied to. Accusing others of hidden agendas or riling you up for no reason other than enjoyment. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fw: ATTN Steve Coast RE" Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Oops!!! I didnt realise Steve posted this from his own address and copied talk-au@openstreetmap.org in to the email. so when I replied it appears that it only went to st...@asklater.com... This corrects that. Wouldn't want to be accused by someone of having private conversations!!! Paul (The one and only of me!!!) - Forwarded Message - From: All Blokes To: SteveC Sent: Friday, 8 July 2011 9:35 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] ATTN Steve Coast RE" Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes There you go again Steve putting words into some one else's mouth this time you are accusing ME of saying things that I did not say. For a start I did not say... (explicitly or otherwise), I am not prepared to change my mind. I said "I don't want to have my mind changed. I've made it myself and if I change it I will do that myself too." But this appears to me to be how a lot of this debate is being run from your side ...take something that is said and instead of answering the main point attack a side issue ...and as in this case, if there isn't one, make one. Vitriol!!!? I may not be much of an orator but I can use a dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vitriol tells me Vitriol is ... 1. another name for sulphuric acid 2. any one of a number of sulphate salts, such as ferrous sulphate ( green vitriol ), copper sulphate ( blue vitriol ), or zinc sulphate ( white vitriol ) 3. speech, writing, etc, displaying rancour, vituperation, or bitterness — vb , -ols , -oling , -oled , -olling , -olled 4. to attack or injure with or as if with vitriol 5. to treat with vitriol I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are only accusing my email as containing Vitriol in the meaning of 3. above. If you think that email was displaying Rancour vituperation or bitterness... I can tell you what you would have said to you if you did come to Australia. There would be suggestion made to you that you should start to put a teaspoon of cement powder in to your morning porridge to try to help you to harden up!!! I would really like to have you reply to me and copy passages that I said that display vitriol ... so that others who are reading tese posts can see and make a judgement based on facts as to what language I used that was displaying rancour, vituperation, or bitterness... unless I have made a wrong assumption and instead you saying that my email contained language that attacked you or injured you with sulphuric acid or that I treated you with sulphuric acid. Im very happy to prove my email account is not a puppet email account or that I am not John smith, Anthony or a friend of them. I have had an email discussion with John Smith/ It consisted of four emails and the last one was sent by me on 19 May 2011 at 00:50 (Australian time... sorry if that inconvenienced you, but it suited me to send it at the time and I was unaware that the time of postings was such an issue to you) I could show you the emails, but frankly, I don't believe it is any of your business who I talk to or why, anyway. I am prepared to prove my bonafides to you on two conditions 1 That you don't share any of my personal details that I give to you with anyone else without my permission and 2 When I do that (prove my bonafides you then post clearly on here that you were wrong in you assertions that were against my character and in fact belittled me and my opinion by implying that I am not a real person or not who I purport to be. If you agree to those conditions, here in this forum I will then send to your @asklater email address my Name, mobile phone number, a photograph of me holding a note to you would that do? There you go Steve, I'm calling your bluff. Are you game to take me up on it or will you use some sort of weasel excuse to get out of it. You made the assertion here I am going to put it to bed one way or another. I can assure you, I'm sitting here in Tropical Queensland. We are not used to the cold so I am in my beanie and a jumper because it is about 5 degs C outside and tipped to go to -1C tonight. It will be one of our coldest nights of the year. I don't exactly look very attractive but I am me. Paul From: SteveC To: All Blokes Cc: "talk-au@openstreetmap.org" Sent: Friday, 8 July 2011 7:06 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] ATTN Steve Coast RE" Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes Don't know how I can reply to someone who explicitly declares they don't want to change their mind or debate. In amongst the vitriol is perhaps a nugget that's worth responding to, this idea that somehow everyone on talk-au is 80n's puppet, is of course absurd. Unless you prove this isn't just another puppet email account however, I have no reason to believe "all blokes" isn't just yet another email address for John smith, Anthony or friends
Re: [talk-au] What A Day
> So what has caused this earthquake and corresponding tsunami? I would say a single troll, who it must be admitted has had quite a reaction. It might be to distract mappers from discussing what they are doing. I personally cannot seem to be able to get any joy from fosm.org, at the moment I am just getting a "500 Internal Server Error" message. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] What A Day
The quiet and languid mailing list of normally laid back Australians exploded into vitriolic exchanges after a non-Australian hijacked a thread on the list. A number of listees found themselves offended by rash statements and then attempts were made to claim that white was black and black was white. I understand that this mail will not be read by the offending poster*, as I would happily say that I am a friend of John Smith. I don't always agree with him, but certainly we can discuss our differences without the need for alcohol to keep the peace. I am quite disturbed by the failure of the offending poster to even follow the thread of his own argument. Sadly, I have to deal with people like this every day, as I do see a large number of elderly and dementing people in my job. My biggest concern is quite different. What provoked this virtual visit to the list? Why are rabble rousing Australians such a threat to a world wide project? I thought that it came from our ability to think for ourselves and make our own decisions, but the accusation was made that we were drawn to our ways by the influence of a single Pom. I have no recall of the offending poster appearing on the list before, but do not claim to have searched the archives to support this hypothesis. So what has caused this earthquake and corresponding tsunami? * ie, the one who caused offence ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
SteveC wrote: > I wouldn't say we chose it. We were told by legal that cc didn't work, so we > spent a lot of time evolving the odbl (originally started by cc folks) and > the CTs. It might look from that side of the planet that it was a hand of god > type decision, but that's not the case. It's been multiple years of work > around every possible solution. I didn't mean that you and some secret cabal conspired in secret, I meant that OSM-F chose it by whatever process. I also understand that the process was quite long and involved. The end result of the licence being chosen was the important part for my comment, not the process by which it was chosen. > Also, your frame of reference is with OSM up and running and having these > kinds of relationships. When I started OSM we had no data at all and nobody > wanted to give us data under any license, let alone cc. So those of us who > climbed the mountain to get those people to give us data see asking people to > switch (such as ordnance survey for example) as a far smaller problem. I don't see it as a small problem. Australian government data is mostly released under CC licences, which are widely compatible with most open uses. They've hit the 99% mark, so there's not a lot of motivation to change further. OSM-F has placed OSM in the remaining 1%. > Im confused that I was discussing nearmap but you jumped to the government, > what am I missing? The bit where you mentioned "large sclerotic government institutions". I think we've just about covered Nearmap, and the government sources in Australia are collectively the next biggest potential data source. > In any case, as someone who built this project and has convinced many > organizations and government agencies to open up, I urge you to have a longer > timeframe outlook. These types of agencies tend to get with it in the end. > Even the ordnance survey has, for example. You've mentioned Ordnance Survey many times. Are they the only success story? Australian agencies have already gotten with it. We have data available under various open licences. How are Australians supposed to go to the Australian government agencies (individually, of course) and explain that while it's exactly what we've been asking for for a long time, it's not good enough because one specific project chose a licence based on concerns that they needed to protect rights that don't exist in Australia or even in the majority of the world? -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
I like Andrew's message below as I am Interested in what others are doing and why. So below is what effects the licence has had on me and I hope I might encourage others to share what they will be doing. Hopefully this might help us all make more informed decisions, knowing what Australians plan to do and why. I know whatever I admit I am doing some people will disagree (very strongly in some cases). I don't intend to argue my position. Frankly I see no enjoyment or profit in such arguments. My silence on any rebuttal does not imply I am convinced with an excellent argument only that I have chosen not to reply. Now the effect the licence change has made to me. One sentence overview: On the whole I have become disillusioned and have stopped adding to any database and have vastly curtailed my use of open map data. Why? Well I did use CC-BY-SA OSM data in three areas and no project fills all those needs for me anymore. Area 1. Creating maps for internal web based applications in a mid-sized listed Australian company. As soon as it was discovered that OSM was moving from the familiar CC-BY-SA licence to an unfamiliar licence I was instructed to use a Microsoft product instead. The reason being that the legal cost of reviewing any unfamiliar licence would far exceed the cost of a Microsoft product we were being offered. (CC-BY-SA was easy. We went to our in-house council and they passed on to us a free document from one of the big legal firms going over the pros, cons and risks.) The time and money has been invested now so there will be no coming back from the decision in the near term. Area 2. my own little mapping applications .and preventing my contributions being exploited Same unfamiliar licence issue as above. I could read the licence myself but I am not a lawyer. I could pay a lawyer but I have better uses for my money. FOSM is probably the best alternative. Area 3. Maps on various Garmin GPSrs Sites such as www.osmaustralia.org enable me to easily use OSM maps on my GPSrs. These maps tend to be much better for bush trails and I can of course help improve them. OSM is still the best for these. On the whole I have put mapping out of my mind to come back to later. I have done similar things with other hobbies. Maybe I will come back to it like I did wargaming or maybe it will still be sitting (metaphorically) in the garage in 20 years like my model trains have been. Mark (aka NilbogAus) From: Andrew Harvey Sent: Wednesday, 6 July 2011 9:30 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes Since the ban on all contributors who didn't sign the CTs, and ban on all new contributors from using NearMap and other CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources, I'm no longer actively contributing to the OSM database. Instead I am now actively contributing to the fosm database. I am interested to hear what other active Australian OSM contributors will be doing now. Just looking through the list at http://odbl.de/australia.html we have a fair amount of people who have been locked out, and also people who ticked the CTs who have used CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources in the past who may want to keep this data and continue using these sources in the future. So, active Australian OSM contributors, are you staying with the OSM db? If so how are you going to do edits going forward, because any CC-BY-SA derived data you add may be removed if OSM abandons CC-BY-SA at some point in the future (or may even be conflicting with your agreed CTs now...). Are you moving to the fosm db? If so, great! Less problems with trying to merge your data into fosm, and we can all get back to mapping. Do you have any concerns over the switch? Are you going to stop contributing data altogether? Or are you putting you efforts on hold at the moment. I'm interested in Australia wide, but I'm personally most interested to hear from Franc, behemoth14, rrankin, Zhent, Ebenezer, swanilli, inas, Diego, good2010, dexgps. (these are just those that come to mind from looking over recent edits in the Sydney area) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] missing messages
On Jul 8, 2011, at 3:11, Sam Couter wrote: > SteveC wrote: >> >> As it happens however, my view that John smith and others are trolls is >> widely held. And unless you have anything to discuss other than you >> believing what I write to be bullshit I'm afraid you will go in the same >> bucket. > > I didn't really expect anything different given our differing opinions. I am unaware of where our opinions differ? I think you will find we are actually very close in agreement. > -- > Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au > OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Jul 8, 2011, at 3:10, Sam Couter wrote: > SteveC wrote: >> Sam >> >> Underlaying your attacks is the notion that I dismiss people who disagree >> with me, or that I can't understand different points of view. I find that >> strange given my rational responses to several disagreements on this list >> and outlaying where I feel misunderstandings have come from. I have also >> agreed with the points of view of several people but still shared why I came >> to a different conclusion while still understanding their perspective. Thus, >> it's difficult to understand why you feel I'm being dismissive. > > You blame misunderstandings on trolls instead of genuine disagreement, No, John smith and friends are a separate issue, they troll many different discussions. > you have stated multiple times there's no reason to decline the CT's, Actually no, I've said im unaware of any reasons not to accept (given we fixed near map, we fixed ordnance survey...) which is not the same as saying there aren't any. > you have denied any problems with licence incompatibility. Where did I do that? I think I mention multiple times how many problems we have had in many areas. > These aren't > rational responses of someone who accepts that others have differring > opinions. > >> PS - Your ad hominem attack, while not bad, isn't as piercing as the good >> old days on the talk@ list. If you go back over that list I'm sure you can >> find much stronger words than "brat" used. By using those old posts you >> should be able to construct far more cutting and personal jibes. Perhaps >> mention my mother, or the size of my genitalia. By doing so, I'm sure you >> will achieve your goals. > > I hate to sound like a third-grader, but you started the ad hominem. I did, where? > I > don't like to do it and I definitely wasn't going for piercing. > >> PPS - I too was adolescent and used to attach PGP fingerprints to my >> e-mails. It's sad we don't use more encryption. > > 8/10. I nearly bit. > -- > Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au > OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] missing messages
SteveC wrote: > > As it happens however, my view that John smith and others are trolls is > widely held. And unless you have anything to discuss other than you believing > what I write to be bullshit I'm afraid you will go in the same bucket. I didn't really expect anything different given our differing opinions. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
SteveC wrote: > Sam > > Underlaying your attacks is the notion that I dismiss people who disagree > with me, or that I can't understand different points of view. I find that > strange given my rational responses to several disagreements on this list and > outlaying where I feel misunderstandings have come from. I have also agreed > with the points of view of several people but still shared why I came to a > different conclusion while still understanding their perspective. Thus, it's > difficult to understand why you feel I'm being dismissive. You blame misunderstandings on trolls instead of genuine disagreement, you have stated multiple times there's no reason to decline the CT's, you have denied any problems with licence incompatibility. These aren't rational responses of someone who accepts that others have differring opinions. > PS - Your ad hominem attack, while not bad, isn't as piercing as the good > old days on the talk@ list. If you go back over that list I'm sure you can > find much stronger words than "brat" used. By using those old posts you > should be able to construct far more cutting and personal jibes. Perhaps > mention my mother, or the size of my genitalia. By doing so, I'm sure you > will achieve your goals. I hate to sound like a third-grader, but you started the ad hominem. I don't like to do it and I definitely wasn't going for piercing. > PPS - I too was adolescent and used to attach PGP fingerprints to my e-mails. > It's sad we don't use more encryption. 8/10. I nearly bit. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Jul 8, 2011, at 2:57, Sam Couter wrote: > Steve Coast wrote: >> >> We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting >> clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm >> aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'. > > The solution to the problem of "We chose a licence and impose terms on > contributors that's incompatible with most sources of data" isn't to go > to each source of data individually to try to get them to relicence. > That's as ridiculous as choosing a GPL-incompatible software licence and > then whining that you can't legally incorporate all those wonderful GPL > licenced projects into yours. I wouldn't say we chose it. We were told by legal that cc didn't work, so we spent a lot of time evolving the odbl (originally started by cc folks) and the CTs. It might look from that side of the planet that it was a hand of god type decision, but that's not the case. It's been multiple years of work around every possible solution. Also, your frame of reference is with OSM up and running and having these kinds of relationships. When I started OSM we had no data at all and nobody wanted to give us data under any license, let alone cc. So those of us who climbed the mountain to get those people to give us data see asking people to switch (such as ordnance survey for example) as a far smaller problem. > >> So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer >> want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic >> government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. > > I don't think you understand the depths of recalcitrance when it comes > to the Australian government. I think I have an idea, I used to campaign around issues like identity cards and encryption in Britain. > Having data released under CC licences at > all was a huge leap, there's effectively zero chance of OSM being able > to licence the data under ODbL. The federal and state governments just > don't care. Im confused that I was discussing nearmap but you jumped to the government, what am I missing? In any case, as someone who built this project and has convinced many organizations and government agencies to open up, I urge you to have a longer timeframe outlook. These types of agencies tend to get with it in the end. Even the ordnance survey has, for example. > -- > Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au > OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Steve Coast wrote: > > We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting > clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm > aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'. The solution to the problem of "We chose a licence and impose terms on contributors that's incompatible with most sources of data" isn't to go to each source of data individually to try to get them to relicence. That's as ridiculous as choosing a GPL-incompatible software licence and then whining that you can't legally incorporate all those wonderful GPL licenced projects into yours. > So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer > want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic > government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. I don't think you understand the depths of recalcitrance when it comes to the Australian government. Having data released under CC licences at all was a huge leap, there's effectively zero chance of OSM being able to licence the data under ODbL. The federal and state governments just don't care. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Sam Underlaying your attacks is the notion that I dismiss people who disagree with me, or that I can't understand different points of view. I find that strange given my rational responses to several disagreements on this list and outlaying where I feel misunderstandings have come from. I have also agreed with the points of view of several people but still shared why I came to a different conclusion while still understanding their perspective. Thus, it's difficult to understand why you feel I'm being dismissive. Steve stevecoast.com PS - Your ad hominem attack, while not bad, isn't as piercing as the good old days on the talk@ list. If you go back over that list I'm sure you can find much stronger words than "brat" used. By using those old posts you should be able to construct far more cutting and personal jibes. Perhaps mention my mother, or the size of my genitalia. By doing so, I'm sure you will achieve your goals. PPS - I too was adolescent and used to attach PGP fingerprints to my e-mails. It's sad we don't use more encryption. On Jul 8, 2011, at 2:28, Sam Couter wrote: > Steve Coast wrote: > > [ rubbish about Australians being led astray by some guy] > >> It's hard to fix that, however I am resourceful. > > You're an immature brat who thinks shouting loudest and longest means > you win the argument. That's not resourcefulness. > > It's impossible to carry on any kind of rational debate with someone who > can't comprehend that others may disagree with them. > >> The first step is to meet your clownmails message-for-message so you don't >> automatically have the loudest voice. By pointing out the simple facts and >> having you talk past them and get to the real issues (you want to rile people >> like me up, make us fret and worry) it is now clear to a rational observer >> what >> the intentions are. > > Here's what this rational and until now unengaged observer sees: You are a > closed-minded person who assumes people who disagree with you are doing it > for the lulz rather than because they genuinely have a different opinion. I > don't know who 80n is or what he's done, so don't dismiss my opinion as just > another rube being led astray. > >> I think your nightmare scenario is that I fly to Australia and sit in the pub >> and discuss the real reasons you're so upset. > > Please do so. Your communication skills in this medium are atrocious, > maybe in person you're not such an arse. > -- > Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au > OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Steve Coast wrote: [ rubbish about Australians being led astray by some guy] > It's hard to fix that, however I am resourceful. You're an immature brat who thinks shouting loudest and longest means you win the argument. That's not resourcefulness. It's impossible to carry on any kind of rational debate with someone who can't comprehend that others may disagree with them. > The first step is to meet your clownmails message-for-message so you don't > automatically have the loudest voice. By pointing out the simple facts and > having you talk past them and get to the real issues (you want to rile people > like me up, make us fret and worry) it is now clear to a rational observer > what > the intentions are. Here's what this rational and until now unengaged observer sees: You are a closed-minded person who assumes people who disagree with you are doing it for the lulz rather than because they genuinely have a different opinion. I don't know who 80n is or what he's done, so don't dismiss my opinion as just another rube being led astray. > I think your nightmare scenario is that I fly to Australia and sit in the pub > and discuss the real reasons you're so upset. Please do so. Your communication skills in this medium are atrocious, maybe in person you're not such an arse. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] missing messages
On Jul 8, 2011, at 2:14, Sam Couter wrote: > Steve Coast wrote: >> It's been pointed out that I'm not replying to hundreds of messages >> from John Smith, Anthony and friends. >> >> I don't see them as they're automatically deleted. I find life is >> better without having the trolls fill my inbox. > > I really don't know how to respond to this level of immature bullshit. > >> However, if I have missed any reasonable points in there then feel >> free to repost them, just don't put those guys email addresses in >> the to/from/cc fields... > > And waste my electrons? You don't seem to think any point you disagree > with is reasonable or worth responding to. You simply dismiss anybody > who disagrees with you as a troll without consideration. Looks like you don't have an actual point to discuss other than what I think about a few of the anonymous people on this and other lists, surely there must be something more important? How could we get more mappers perhaps, or where we can find more aerial imagery? As it happens however, my view that John smith and others are trolls is widely held. And unless you have anything to discuss other than you believing what I write to be bullshit I'm afraid you will go in the same bucket. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] missing messages
Steve Coast wrote: > It's been pointed out that I'm not replying to hundreds of messages > from John Smith, Anthony and friends. > > I don't see them as they're automatically deleted. I find life is > better without having the trolls fill my inbox. I really don't know how to respond to this level of immature bullshit. > However, if I have missed any reasonable points in there then feel > free to repost them, just don't put those guys email addresses in > the to/from/cc fields... And waste my electrons? You don't seem to think any point you disagree with is reasonable or worth responding to. You simply dismiss anybody who disagrees with you as a troll without consideration. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ATTN Steve Coast RE" Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Don't know how I can reply to someone who explicitly declares they don't want to change their mind or debate. In amongst the vitriol is perhaps a nugget that's worth responding to, this idea that somehow everyone on talk-au is 80n's puppet, is of course absurd. Unless you prove this isn't just another puppet email account however, I have no reason to believe "all blokes" isn't just yet another email address for John smith, Anthony or friends are hiding behind. Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 8, 2011, at 0:51, All Blokes wrote: > I have not had very much to say on this but I have been reading the posts > fairly closely. > I would not in any way presume to speak for any other Australians other than > myself, but I object most strenuously to the implication that I have in some > way been "perverted by 80n or any other person at all. when I first heard of > the licence change and how it was being done I didnt like it I had not > even read a post against it at that stage and I didn't post one either . > I make my own mind up. > I'm just a dumb busted a*se bulldozer driver so Im sure you would be able to > out debate me on this steve but mate winning the debate does not mean that > you are right. > I'm not entering into a debate about the pros and cons of this licence > against that licence. I don't want to have my mind changed. I've made it > myself and if I change it I will do that myself too. I have not signed up for > any other mapping group yet. Time is an issue for me at the moment and I > figure I can wait and see what happens anyway. I'm sad to see that OSM has > become what it is but I am not interested in being involved with the > organisation as it currently is. > > I have not talked to anyone on the phone or in the pub about OSM or FOSM > I think your time zone differences excuse is rubbish frankly. > I think your threat to "come out to Australia and debate this in the pub with > 80n as if that would sway people frankly is pretentious like you think a > lot of people care so much about your point of view to come??? Come on > just pinch yourself as you read that, Steve so that you have a reality > check. You definitely have your best Australian audience right now. If > you care to come out you will be welcome but if you want to debate 80n this > forum is your best chance and It does not appear, to me FWITW that you are > doing so well at making your points against him. > Like I said I'm not some great orator and I'm not even very experienced > about OSM but I don't like the way it has been taken or where it has gone > to. > Regards, > Paul. > "You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the > community, Australia being a good example as the checks and balances of > normal community communication are harder because of the timezone > differences and costs of flying. Essentially, people in Australia don't > get to hear from the rest of us on the phone or in the pub and we let > you spam the lists for a long time. So to an outsider it can look like > you're this rational guy who used to be on the board and so on. I've > heard about the various conspiracy theories you've been peddling > personally off-list too." > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] ATTN Steve Coast RE" Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
I have not had very much to say on this but I have been reading the posts fairly closely. I would not in any way presume to speak for any other Australians other than myself, but I object most strenuously to the implication that I have in some way been "perverted by 80n or any other person at all. when I first heard of the licence change and how it was being done I didnt like it I had not even read a post against it at that stage and I didn't post one either . I make my own mind up. I'm just a dumb busted a*se bulldozer driver so Im sure you would be able to out debate me on this steve but mate winning the debate does not mean that you are right. I'm not entering into a debate about the pros and cons of this licence against that licence. I don't want to have my mind changed. I've made it myself and if I change it I will do that myself too. I have not signed up for any other mapping group yet. Time is an issue for me at the moment and I figure I can wait and see what happens anyway. I'm sad to see that OSM has become what it is but I am not interested in being involved with the organisation as it currently is. I have not talked to anyone on the phone or in the pub about OSM or FOSM I think your time zone differences excuse is rubbish frankly. I think your threat to "come out to Australia and debate this in the pub with 80n as if that would sway people frankly is pretentious like you think a lot of people care so much about your point of view to come??? Come on just pinch yourself as you read that, Steve so that you have a reality check. You definitely have your best Australian audience right now. If you care to come out you will be welcome but if you want to debate 80n this forum is your best chance and It does not appear, to me FWITW that you are doing so well at making your points against him. Like I said I'm not some great orator and I'm not even very experienced about OSM but I don't like the way it has been taken or where it has gone to. Regards, Paul. "You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example as the checks and balances of normal community communication are harder because of the timezone differences and costs of flying. Essentially, people in Australia don't get to hear from the rest of us on the phone or in the pub and we let you spam the lists for a long time. So to an outsider it can look like you're this rational guy who used to be on the board and so on. I've heard about the various conspiracy theories you've been peddling personally off-list too." ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] missing messages
On 8 July 2011 16:18, Steve Coast wrote: > It's been pointed out that I'm not replying to hundreds of messages from > John Smith, Anthony and friends. > > I don't see them as they're automatically deleted. I find life is better > without having the trolls fill my inbox. > > However, if I have missed any reasonable points in there then feel free to > repost them, just don't put those guys email addresses in the to/from/cc > fields... As usual, tuck your tail between your legs and run off, unwilling or unable to justify position, this is partially the reason for no faith in OSM-F, it has nothing to do with planes or time zones, not to mention all the BS we're currently being fed by out PM, I doubt even the OSM-F could even compete with her. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
