On 20/06/11 16:33, Steve Coast wrote:
I think the LWG is more than well aware that they are imperfect human
beings volunteering in a horrible environment to make things better.
So, can you point to where LWG itself has explicitly asked for help? Or
recognised it's difficulties with communication in writing? Perhaps we
need a request for help page on the wiki? It would be good to have them
ask for specific types of help because people with those skills can step
forward.
I'd take a long look at how you have sucked up the LWGs time, Tim,
before you make these kinds of statements.
Steve, can you stop changing the subject on to me? It's ad hominem and a
violation of etiquette. And it is off topic and doesn't assume good
faith. Do you understand what I am asking, as you keep doing it even
when I ask you to stop?
Everything I have done, I have done in good faith. I shouldn't have to
defend myself on every thread. (And Steve, if you want to talk about
this seriously, try constructively responding to my email to the LWG on
15th June first. Continued discussion on this probably should be off the
mailing list.)
On 20/06/11 16:39, Chris Hill wrote:
Maybe part of the reason that these volunteers are working too hard is
because some people demand individual attention. Imagine if everyone
made their own demands of the LWG ...
Are you seriously saying that a handful of people directly talking to
the LWG is a significant factor in LWG having communication
difficulties? Or is this just another ad hominem? Is there a
constructive solution to this? or are you telling me to shut up?
It seems to me the same issues come up again and again, but never
concluded, so it is not necessarily the fault of the person asking the
question (or even of the LWG). I suggest that people directly trying to
communicate with the LWG is a symptom and not a cause of the
communication problem.
Of course the LWG has a tough job, because legal issues are very hard to
resolve and I have never denied that. But the solution is not to blame
me or LWG but to actually try to solve the problems. So stop pointing
fingers, please.
Perhaps if we can reduce the barriers to people helping OSM it would
help. We obviously do this in mapping with friendlier tools. But I am
told we talk people that can do sys admin tasks and get involved with
the LWG (and probably many other things I don't know about). This might
be due to the selection of pretty obscure prerequisites to get involved:
ruby on rails in development (I have never met a RoR developer in
person, at least knowingly), and being familiar with the background of
ODbL (which most normal legal professionals can't understand, unless
they are specialists). I suggest as many tasks as possible be moved into
domains were people actually have the skills to help out. (This might be
a lame idea but at least I am trying to be constructive.)
Regards,
TimSC
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
