On 3 Feb 2013 00:31, "Tom Taylor" <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...They don't contribute to the mapping that is presumably our primary interest. >
@ Robin > ...where was the option for "i don't want a board, we don't need representing?" Our main page states: the project that creates and distributes free<http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright> geographic data for the world. Nice to have lots of data, with lots of different quality levels, but what the hack if it's not being used and improved due to interaction with humans using navigation apps, search engines, and other applications aimed at user experience? I'm very interested in the motives of people contributing to Google Map Maker. Why won't they use Openstreetmap? Why voluntarily choose for a closed system instead of an open system? The answer so far: because Google Maps is being used by a lot of people, you can help much more people by contributing through GMM than through OSM. And maybe they are right. The goal of OSM is indeed not to have a benefit for people. The goal is to create data. And following that goal, it's not important to be big. It's not important to ask yourself why only 30.000 of the 1.030.000 registered OSM'ers are active contributors. It's not important to ask yourself what can be done to encourage the other 1.000.000 to become an active contributor. Just let me do my own thing. And don't have some people think of these things because they are interested in the future of OSM. It's too political. It's too (dirty word) strategic. That doesn't help mapping..... My sentences above are not cynical. It's just what the community wants (oops, how do 'we' measure that actually?). 'We' didn't encourage 1.000.000 registered but inactive users yet to become active. 'We' didn't wonder why GMM succesfully created a large community. 'We' didn't ask ourself the question why businesses rush to get their geolocation in Google Maps, and refuse (personal experience with big corporations like McDonalds) to have their geolocation in OSM. So, it's good to have a lot of mappers doing their thing using great hardware and software (created by centralized decisions by people with a vision to create OSM, get help from a university to host hardware, create Potlatch, JOSM, Mapnik etc etc). It's also good to have a sort of centralized thinking about the future of OSM, not only by OSMF, but by anyone who is interested in thinking about 'our' future. Where do we want OSM to be in a few years? But, that's my opinion. If I'm the only one in the community asking myself these questions, than I'll shut up. Pulling on a dead horse is heavy.... Cheers, Johan An addicted mapper http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?It%27s%20so%20funny > ______________________________**_________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk> >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
