"I sistemisti sono pagati o sono su base volontaria? Nel secondo caso bisognerebbe incominciare da loro ad assumere.."
+1111 Francesca 2014-10-22 15:10 GMT+02:00 sabas88 <saba...@gmail.com>: > > > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it