Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: This is the OSM community here. We're on an OSM mailing list. From the perspective of this community, John Smith's contributions are not usable. Certainly, he's made a valuable contribution to other communities elsewhere - but not this one. The complaint was that this community was unappreciative of his contribution - to which the response is that there is no contribution to this community. The community has rejected the contributions. They were made, in good faith, under the licence that had been agreed to at the time. Let's extend it further. John Smith shows up at my birthday party driving a new Mercedes which is his present to me. Then in conversation I let slip that I'm a Family First supporter. He says if you don't change your mind, you can't have the car. Holy crap, you really don't understand what's happened here at all. Really, you told him his car's not worth shit and you don't want it unless he also joins Family First. Even though yesterday you said you'd like it and he should get it for you at considerable personal effort. Have we stretched this analogy past breaking yet? Refusing to accept the outcome (or rather, persisting vainly with the idea that maybe it will change), and refusing to accept the CTs amounts to blackmail at this point. I think you've got the blackmail finger pointed in the wrong direction. -- 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] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??
lol again... you've gotta love argument by analogy... :) jim On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au wrote: Really, you told him his car's not worth shit and you don't want it unless he also joins Family First. Even though yesterday you said you'd like it and he should get it for you at considerable personal effort. _ Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of doubtful sanity.' - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963) Please send URLs, not attachments: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] maxspeed removal
PS - quite a few declines spent a lot of time just tracing from nearmap but never bothered to go out and collect the information on the ground such as street names etc. Most of this is still untagged and since it will disappear in April and needs survey anyway, maybe me should delete them now as well. Once again this will help by focusing attention on the real red areas. We'd have to be careful of non residential roads since one decliner has been removing names for quite a while now and putting them into relations (which raises a whole new set of problems for us to fix.) Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Mass revert now??
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au wrote: The community has rejected the contributions. They were made, in good faith, under the licence that had been agreed to at the time. Look, I don't think there's anyone on this list that particularly likes the way the license change was handled. Certainly not me. But sometimes shit happens, and we can either move forward, or keep banging our heads against the wall complaining about wretchedly unfair it all is. Refusing to accept the CTs will not change the CTs and it won't change the licence used by OSM. All it does is cause that data to be deleted. Really, you told him his car's not worth shit and you don't want it unless he also joins Family First. Even though yesterday you said you'd like it and he should get it for you at considerable personal effort. Yep, there's no question whatsoever that I (meaning OSMF) have behaved like a complete dick. Now, do we continue this game of well, you behaved like a dick, so I'm going to behave like a dick, or do we take the higher moral ground of well, you behaved like a dick, but I joined this project for the good of the greater community, and I'm not going to let my hurt feelings get in the way of that. What's more important - the ideological dispute with OSMF, or building an awesome map database? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Splitter decliners
If a decliner splits a ,mappers road then he/she becomes the version 1 owner of that mappers copyrightable information for the rest of the way. I think it's morally (maybe even legally) wrong for the decliner to now extinguish this copyright by refusing to relicence it. Since I think it unlikely that they see things as I do, I think it would be good if we could find all such occurrences in the OSM database and list out the original owner so that they could reclaim their copyright. Maybe we could. If two ways with the same name are geographically close but not touching then list out the version 1 owners, lat/lon and name. (only if exactly one of the two version 1 owners is a decliner.) Unfortunately this wouldn't cover the cases where the decliner has done a single split, thus taking over the way, or where he has split the way, discarded the front bit and then back filled from the split. The first example of the last case that I've noticed is in Sydney but fortunately I have surveyed that particular area myself so I can reclaim the mappers information using my own data. Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
