Guten Tag Grant Slater, am Sonntag, 5. Juli 2009 um 13:10 schrieben Sie:
GS> 2009/7/5 <[email protected]>: >> .... dann könnte man auch mit einfließen lassen wieviel ein >> Mapper am Datenbestand wirklich beigetragen hat. Also eine >> entsprechende Stimmgewichtung mit einfließen lassen z.B. anhand der >> Gesamtanzahl ways+nodes oder edits über das letzte halbe Jahr etc. >> oder wie auch immer. Entsprechende Auswertungen anhand der Datenbank >> sollten ja überhaupt kein Problem sein. >> GS> This has been discussed in Licensing Working Group calls, and there GS> was no very simple way of working out total contributions and how to GS> divide it out. We got limited by time and no resolution was made. What GS> do you recommend? GS> / Grant The osmmapper from ito counts the number of ways for example. OSM community does have many good programmers who can do it the one or a another way. I think we should at least have an information 'how much' data is influenced by the license change. Even if different counting methods lead to different results we will have a more or less plausible information. Maybe different counting methods parallel so we (users) can compare. (database size etc.) The number of users alone gives nearly no feedback to the data itself. This relation to data will make the decisions more transparent or how decisions influenced osm. o.k. if it should be worked into voting itself decisions must be done before. But than we could start a voting for how the voting should be done this will never end... Beside that i suggest to make the voting process open for an adequate time, so that every user not responding until dead line will be counted as a YES for the new license! This will eliminate the problems with "what to do with users not responding". paypal, insurance companies and nearly all other companies do it this way if there policy changes. So this can'T really be wrong. PD> Why? This is like the introduction of a two class system. I thought in OSM PD> we would be above simple "contribution counting". How do you want to measure PD> contribution anyway? 2 nodes equal one way? number of inserted tags? How are PD> you going to take wiki-eddits into account? What is about organisation of PD> mapping parties and so forth? PD> I agree that people who did not make a single edit should not be able to PD> vote on a new license. But from there on it is one mapper one vote! PD> Peter Yes you are right. Measuring the level of whatever distributions and weighting it is difficult. Maybe a 'softer' version of a two class system. Agree on that "not a single edit"idea maybe combined with a time frame. (until May 2009 or whatever). Combined with the 'information how osm datas is influenced' will make the voting process and osmf decisions more transparent. My opinion is that a voting culture by itself is the death of an intact open source system, so i hope we are gone through that voting as soon as possible. -- Greets mightym [email protected] _______________________________________________ Talk-de mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
