Hi, On 03/03/15 07:43, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > +1 for process /and/ a limit (e.g. 6 per year). > > An osm community process could also help improve the survey questions: > often the ones out the gate have horrid flaws.
Yes, too often researchers are unwilling to engage with their "subject" directly, preferring to watch from the outside - some might even believe that academic rigour requires it. I remember that Pascal Neis who has produced an interesting body of (Open Access) OSM research once told me that his impartialness as a researcher was occasioanlly questioned due to his personal involvement with OSM. I agree that some well defined process which might include an oversight rule for the OSMF would be good. Muki's code which Richard Weait has linked to is excellent (requiring, among other things, that the researcher does some mapping, discusses his findings with the community to avoid mistakes in interpretation, and publishes their work in Open Access journals). Bye Frederik PS: Researcher who triggered this particular thread has been politely asked to stop by DWG, and has since apologised and stopped. -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
