Dear board, Am 10.12.18 um 18:14 schrieb Tom Hughes: > On 10/12/2018 16:55, Martijn van Exel wrote: > >> On November 17, the OSMF Board of Directors received a request to >> review the Nov 14, 2018 Data Working Group decision regarding Crimea. >> >> The Board decided that this decision is to be reversed and the >> previous situation, as laid out in the May 5, 2014 Data Working Group >> minutes, is to further remain in effect. >> >> The board highly values the Data Working Group’s work and appreciates >> the difficulty and complexity of the cases they are asked to review on >> an ongoing basis. >> >> A more comprehensive statement will follow in the next weeks. > > With respect that doesn't make much sense. > > Either you have a rationale for the decision, in which case you should > state it, or you don't and just want to placate a vocal community. > > At the moment it sounds like you've decided what result you want and > now you're going to desperately cast around for a way to rationalise > that decision in the eventual statement.
+1 @Board Did you consult the working group being involved in boundary disputes (DWG and LWG) before you came to that decision? How does your decision comply with the on-the-ground rule? Could you please share the original complaint with redacted names or a summary of it and its arguments? How many board members agreed, how many disagreed? Did any board member not participate in the voting due to a conflict of interest? Did these members participate in the decision making? Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten ausgenommen) I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk