On Jul 17, 2010, at 12:06 PM, 80n wrote:
> In other words, we were wrong, we chose the wrong license out of ignorance. 
> Shit happens.
> 
> Yeah, shit happens, OSM becomes outrageously successful and nobody abuses the 
> spirit of the license.  What kind of shit is that?

People abuse it all the time, cf Nike and many others.

I'm not surprised it's low level anyway right now, the amount of abuse will be 
a function of the completeness of the data. We're not really a routable dataset 
just yet and most of the planet is missing address data. As we approach these 
points fast, the amount of abuse will go up with it.

Anyway. Let me make two points:

My take on the idea of having a vote on whether we'd theoretically move to the 
ODbL so long as everyone else does... is that it's basically just a vote on 
whether to have a vote. It's also without any consequences.

The consequences part: Because nothing will really happen either way if the 
majority of this proposed step vote yes or no, that means that the incentives 
to vote yes or no are vastly different than saying yes or no to the actual 
license change. That means that people will vote differently and perhaps to the 
extent that it will be uncorrelated with an actual license change decision. In 
other words, your reasons for voting yes or no 'theoretically' are very 
different to voting yes or no in actuality. If anyone here has a degree in 
economics or psychology they'd be able to wave around all kinds of textbooks 
showing how hard it is to measure things like this when you have no real 
incentives - for example asking people if they'd pay for and go to a gym to get 
fit - we all know people say they'd like to do those things and never do.

Based on the theoretical vote being wildly inaccurate and also not really 
affecting anything, I say the LWG should just push ahead with the plan. If 
everyone catastrophically says 'no' to the ODbL (which I doubt, but hey) then 
they can go back to the drawing board with a concrete result. If we all agree, 
then we can just get on with mapping. But going back to the drawing board with 
a proxy to a vote - a vote on whether to have a vote - is incredibly flimsy and 
will just pull out everyone on the other side of the argument who'll charge 
that it was an invalid vote.

In sum, having a vote on whether to have a vote just slows us all down for no 
particular reason.

Therefore, just put the voluntary license change thing out there (so people can 
change if they want to) and continue with the rest of the plan. If it turns out 
to be awful and we lost lots of people (which I doubt) then you can consider 
things at that stage.

Oh and by the way, as a thought experiment - if 50% of people drop out due to 
the license change then you only have to wait a few months for the data to be 
put back in by other new people - go and look at the user growth and data 
growth graphs. It's really not as bad as it looks, even under a bad scenario 
like 50%.



My second point - have a think on what affect you're all having on the people 
in the LWG. They've now been working on this for _years_ meeting every week. 
That's a huge amount of effort and investment. These are good people doing 
their best to find a way forward. But, every time they do something, the 
mailing lists fill up with new things they should do which leads to a steady 
state - they complete one task and then are given a new one to do without 
actually approaching the goal. They have to balance this with a fair number of 
people complaining that it's taking them forever to get anywhere. That's not a 
fun situation to be in. For years.

Very few of us here with all these opinions and time on the mailing list - 
whether they are good, bad or ugly opinions - have the time, whatever our 
position for or against the license etc, to sit through this stuff week after 
week in the working group and push this stuff forward.

I'm worried that we're going to burn the guys on the LWG out. They must feel 
like they're in some kafka-esque dialogue with no upside for them.

They chose to be on the working group and do all this work of course, but the 
worst thing that could happen is that they conclude that it will take another 
couple of years to get anywhere and decide to go and do something more useful 
with their time. I know for a fact that some of them don't even read some of 
these mailing lists anymore because of it. So why don't we just cool off a bit 
and give them a nod of thanks before diving on with this stuff - whatever 
direction it goes in.

Steve

stevecoast.com
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to