2014-10-22 14:23 GMT+02:00 Cristian Consonni <kikkocrist...@gmail.com>:
> (Rinomino l'oggetto in italiano per attirare di più l'attenzione ed > evitare il cross posting) > > Steve dice: > * dobbiamo concentrarci sugli indirizzi > Certo, è là che c'è il cash $$$ > * in 3 anni diventeremo la migliore mappa del mondo sotto gni aspeto > Solo se continuano ad arrivare tizi pagati per fare QA ed inserire la roba pallosa :-) > * abbiamo bisogno di board (per OSMf) più snello e funzionante, > possibilmente affiancato da uno staff. > I sistemisti sono pagati o sono su base volontaria? Nel secondo caso bisognerebbe incominciare da loro ad assumere... > Che ne dite? > > Ciao, > > C > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Steve Coast <st...@asklater.com> > Date: 2014-10-22 12:15 GMT+02:00 > Subject: [OSM-talk] A Better Map > To: "<osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org>" <osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org>, > "t...@openstreetmap.org Talk" <t...@openstreetmap.org> > > > Why are we here on these mailing lists? Why do we spend so much time > making maps? I think ultimately because it’s fun. It’s a neat hobby > and we’re making the world a slightly better place. > > You need the right environment for things to be fun. Someone has to > install the toys in the playground. Someone needs to pay for the > slides and install the swings so that the kids can run around. Then > someone else needs to fix them when they fail and make sure you don’t > break your neck unexpectedly. > > In the past I’ve tried hard to make OSM a fun playground, by doing > things like taking all the warning labels off and letting people do > whatever they like. Things like open tagging or letting anyone edit, > which were crazy ideas in 2004. I’ve also at times been responsible > for it not being fun. Partly because I was a kid learning the hard way > and partly because sometimes you need to make decisions. > > I agree that in some ways OSM isn’t a fun playground right now. But > that doesn’t mean it can’t be again. > > We had a lot of fun with our swings and our slides. But now there are > a lot more people to join the fun from far away places and we’re > older. Maybe we now prefer bumper cars and video games to the old > swings and slides. > > We should keep the swings and the slides. People new to the playground > will still enjoy them. But we should also build a bumper car arena and > maybe a video game arcade. Sometimes we might go back and play on the > slide too. We need some new skills to build these new toys. > > Together, we need a mission and then a couple of course corrections to > make it happen. > > I think addressing should be our mission. We built the worlds best > display map already. We won. If you print out any OSM map of > practically anywhere, it’s the best. But we can’t find anything on it > without comprehensive and global addressing information. It’s the > hidden data behind the map we now need to go after. All the other > things we need to do are also good things. Diversity in all it’s > forms, faster servers, better tools, easier documentation and more. > > A clear mission provides a framework and guidance for achieving those > things. “Map more stuff” got us very, very far. But now, we should > focus on what’s stopping us replacing proprietary maps. And that is > addressing. > > How would we go achieve that? > > There are two basic fixes. Make the board functional and give the > board bandwidth. > > The board is too big. It grew for good reasons but now it’s just hard > to achieve anything. Seven people mean that if everyone speaks for > five minutes in a conversation on some issue, you use over half an > hour. In an hour-long meeting that means you can barely discuss two > things. Ignoring all the other issues, just the pure mechanics shows > you how hard it is to talk through something let alone achieve a > consensus. The board needs to be 3 people. 5 at maximum. > > Being on the board is a difficult job, especially as a volunteer. Most > people aren’t used to such roles. They may think like I did that they > need to please everybody all the time. They aren’t able to attend > meetings because they have a day job and other life commitments. The > board needs to meet in person regularly with a facilitator and also > have guidance about what it means to be on a board. We can’t expect > volunteers to naturally figure all this stuff out by themselves and > then also devote the time to also achieve goals. > > The board needs paid staff. There are a variety of things those paid > staff can do which the board can decide. It’s clear that there are > things that volunteers don’t have fun doing and therefore they don’t > happen at all, but are still very important for a functioning > organization. Having paid staff isn’t about deprecating volunteer > involvement, it’s about plugging the gaps. It’s not a perfect solution > but the alternative is to rely on companies to do many of these > things, and that really isn’t perfect either. > > In terms of the mechanics, > > 1. Change the mission statement of OSM to be something like “The > world’s best addressable map” > 2. The board figures out how to voluntarily shrink to 3-5 people, and, > meets in person 2-4 times a year > 3. Consulting with the community on exact roles and remit, hire 1-3 people > [*] > > Together, we could do this in 6-12 months and finish addressing in 1-3 > years. At that point we wouldn’t have just made the world slightly > better, we would have put a big dent in the universe. Nobody would use > a closed map ever again, and it would be people like you that made it > happen. > > So why don’t we go do that? > > — > > A digression. > > In Peter Thiel’s book “Zero-to-One” he catalogs the fate of HP’s > board. HP used to be a very innovative place and then it wasn’t any > more. Thiel posits that there were two board factions at a critical > time. On the one hand there were people who wanted to chart out things > to build and then go build them. On the other hand there was a group > who felt the board wasn’t competent to do that, and they should focus > on making sure all the rules were being followed. The latter > apparently won. > > What happened next is that HP's board blew up over wiretapping in > search of someone leaking things to the press. HP collapsed in value > making sure all the rules were followed while people who build new > things did very well, like Apple. > > Let’s not be HP. Let’s be Apple. > > Steve > > [*] - I could speak at length on funding, but I don’t think finding > money will be a hard problem. > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > t...@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-it mailing list > Talk-it@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it >
_______________________________________________ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
