Code of Conduct Reminder

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
23 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Osmf-talk] [hotosm-membership] Re: Code of Conduct Reminder

Rafael Avila Coya
Hi, Dale:

My comments inline.

On 15/12/17 20:41, Dale Kunce wrote:
> Rafael,
> Saying things like "x is childish" is not in keeping with good manners.

Maybe not with your own, cultural, manners. It's ok for me. That's what
I thought when I read his email. Honestly.

>
> I think the larger point is that this space is not "gentle."

Not gentle for you. Not for everybody.


> We clearly
> need a CoC or at the very least to enforce the rules we (OSM) already
> have in place. OSM is not so special from every other internet
> community. Most software projects, data projects, and even media
> companies have open CoC and expectations for how you behave in there
> space. OSM is not unique, we need to set clear expectations about how to
> act in this space.

"CoC at the very least", no less.

Enforce... yes, always enforce.

Software projects, data projects and media are different. I refer you to
Christoff Hoffmann's emails, where he explains you clearly why OSM is
not comparable to those.

And how do you think we have to behave in OSM? Not only me. Africans,
Asians, Southamericans... That won't lead anywhere, I assure you.

>
> Is it so hard for people to be nice to one another?

No. It isn't really. I use to make that effort since back to 1991, not
always with success. Human beings are not perfect. But human beings
usually like freedom, including speech.

> I think it behoves
> everyone in this community to make the affirmation of being nice to one
> another the same way we all made the commitment to the ODBL.

ODbL and freedom of speech in the same tense. Really? The first is law;
the second is something we don't need legally (nor morally nor practically).

> I think it
> behoves us all to call out bad behavior when we see it.

Again: what is bad behaviour. Some people here don't see bad behaviour
in Ralf's email. Some others do. I respect fully both of the "groups".

> Keep others
> honest and on topic not through enforcing a CoC but through the
> accepting the rules outlined in the CoC or etiquette guidelines.

I have already said that etiquette guidelines are that: guidelines. I
haven't seen them enforced yet, and I would like to know who would
enforce them, and with what mandate.

Respectfully,

Rafael.

>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Rafael Avila Coya
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi, Pete:
>
>     Yes, I forgot to say my opinion about the user who said he was
>     unsubscribing.
>
>     In my opinion, it's childish to quit an open forum, where anyone can
>     subscribe, just because somebody says something you don't like.
>     Specially when you see already some people telling you that no one
>     can control what others have to say.
>
>     If it was me, I would say it politely, like "I think not having a
>     tool to create squared buildings in iD is a pity, because if we had,
>     more squared buildings would be mapped". But what I, you or Dale
>     think about politeness is something that depend on many factors, the
>     most important of them cultural. Believe me when I tell you that I
>     didn't find it unpolite, and it passed unadverted to me.
>
>     We, the overall OSM community, are very gentle and pacific in
>     general, so we can govern ourselves without the need of any CoC. All
>     this thread tells me very clear how negative a CoC in OSM lists
>     would be.
>
>     Are we confortable with that? We can tell him things similar to
>     those that others said already to him, in the way "what one person
>     says, whether you don't like it, is what one person says, but not
>     what the rest thinks. And maybe he wasn't meaning that he hates you,
>     but he hates that you iD devs don't have a building tool like JOSM".
>     There are ways to say the same better and more clear. But what I am
>     clearly against is to put him under the foot of a CoC. Only the
>     name, CoC, scares me a lot.
>
>     I hope I make me more clear now.
>
>     Cheers,
>
>     Rafael.
>
>     On 15/12/17 19:39, Pete Masters wrote:
>
>         Hi Rafael, I see your point about the CoC and ownership of the
>         list. But that was only the third paragraph of Dale's email.
>
>         The fact remains that a person was told they are one of a hated
>         group of people and left the list. It's a loss. Are we
>         comfortable with that? Is it just the way it is and everyone has
>         to live with it?
>
>         Personally, I am not comfortable with it and welcome further
>         discussion.
>
>         Cheers,
>
>         Pete
>
>
>
>         On 15 Dec 2017 18:24, "Rafael Avila Coya" <[hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]> <mailto:[hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>
>              Hi, Dan:
>
>              The thing here is that [hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>
>              <mailto:[hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>> is, as far as I know, an OSM mailing
>              list, not HOT US inc.'s. I would find it weard that another OSM
>              mailing list was governed by the Red Cross, and that
>         talk-es was
>              governed by the Spanish Government, for example.
>
>              Cheers,
>
>              Rafael.
>
>              On 15/12/17 19:11, Dan S wrote:
>
>                  Hi
>
>                  It does seem to me that more clarity would be good
>         here, i.e.
>                  slightly
>                  disentangling the lines of accountability regarding the
>         hot@ mailing
>                  list.
>
>                  Mikel's response has logical sense, but it's probably
>         not clear
>                  to the
>                  average participant in the hot@ mailing list whether
>         they are
>                  automatically made a part of the HOT community. Whether
>         the best
>                  clarification is to have two mailing lists, or for the
>         info page
>                  <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>
>                  <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>>> to make clear
>                  whether
>                  it is in general governed by HOT's rules, I don't know.
>
>                  Best
>                  Dan
>
>
>              _______________________________________________
>              HOT mailing list
>         [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>
>              <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     HOT mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>     <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>
>
>
>
>
> --
> sent from my mobile device
>
> Dale Kunce
> http://normalhabit.com
>

_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Osmf-talk] [hotosm-membership] Re: Code of Conduct Reminder

john whelan-2
In reply to this post by Dale Kunce
In the UK at the end of the evening there is a well known phrase used in places that serve alcohol.

"Time gentlemen please."

The post that set this off had an element of frustration and it was unfortunate that the subject was a sensitive one at that time.  With a bit of good will it could have been accepted as such.

All programmers know that unless it is a one man band they write to the specs and if a feature wasn't included in the specs then its wrong to blame the programmer.  I used to be one and I recall once when asked why wasn't a feature included by a high level manager and I had to reply I specifically asked if it should be but was told by the business contact no it was not to be included.

There is a cultural difference between HOT and OSM.  I seem to recall once someone from an NGO say they didn't need OSM mappers they could provide their own in maperthons.

If HOT and OSM can work together then there are gains for both sides.

Armchair mapping is only good to drop in the basic outlines.  HOT projects are reasonably good at dropping in a highway network and identifying settlements.  It really does need local expertise to finish the job.  So micro grants, training on the ground all help and hopefully we'll start to see a few internet cafes and bicycle repair shops mapped which is normal OSM style mapping that gets enriched over time.

Can we accept there are some differences and please move on.  Can we work on finding some areas where we agree?

Thanks John

 

On 15 December 2017 at 17:38, Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi, Rory:

My comments inline.

On 15/12/17 20:19, Rory McCann wrote:
What's wrong with each mailing list having separate, per list moderation and rules?

Well, the OSM community at large should approve each list rules. Quite a mess, having so many OSM fora. Don't you think so?

Why not give HOT Inc moderation power of the hot@ list? If a group wants to run its group according to specific rules (within some limits), what's wrong with that?

Because HOT inc is an independent org. It's easier to have a list on their own, like the hot membership list and others, apart from the HOT inc tasking manager, github account, etc. Each org has the right to decide their own rules of governance. I am fine with that.


OSMF doesn't have a global code of conduct (yet 😉), but State of the Map conferences do. Same idea.

State of the Map is a face to face event, not mailing list. It's normal that there can be some rules to avoid problems with the country hosting the event. A mailing list is of universal access. Therefore, what is acceptable in one place is unacceptable in other. Some people of one area find normal what others find rude. There is nothing bad in that. The huge majority of us are good faith people. We just need to be a bit flexible, that's it.

Cheers,

Rafael.


On 15 December 2017 19:43:43 CET, Dale Kunce <[hidden email]> wrote:

    Just to clear the air. I misspoke in my initial post when I said the
    HOT CoC would be enforced on this list. I've since learned that the
    HOT list is not administered by HOT and thus our community crafted
    CoC does not apply here. Note: it does apply to all other HOT
    communication channels, including Tasking Manager, GitHub, slack, etc.

    As Mikel said the existing OSM Etiquette rules, however, do apply in
    this space.

    My earlier statement of asking all community members of this list to
    think twice about what you say on this list. This is not an effort
    to curb free speech but instead to build a positive collaborative
    space to discuss.

    On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Russell Deffner
    <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

        Hi all,

        I would prefer to participate in mailing lists that are governed
        by CoC and enforced by an organized group rather than individuals.

        =Russ

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Dan S [mailto:[hidden email]
        <mailto:[hidden email]>]
        Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 11:11 AM
        To: Rafael Avila Coya
        Cc: [hidden email]
        <mailto:[hidden email]>; Mapa Nauta;
        [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
        Subject: Re: [HOT] [Osmf-talk] [hotosm-membership] Re: Code of
        Conduct Reminder

        Hi

        It does seem to me that more clarity would be good here, i.e.
        slightly
        disentangling the lines of accountability regarding the hot@ mailing
        list.

        Mikel's response has logical sense, but it's probably not clear
        to the
        average participant in the hot@ mailing list whether they are
        automatically made a part of the HOT community. Whether the best
        clarification is to have two mailing lists, or for the info page
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>> to make clear
        whether
        it is in general governed by HOT's rules, I don't know.

        Best
        Dan

        _______________________________________________
        HOT mailing list
        [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
        https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>


        _______________________________________________
        HOT mailing list
        [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
        https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>




    --     sent from my mobile device

    Dale Kunce
    http://normalhabit.com


--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk


_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk


_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Osmf-talk] [hotosm-membership] Re: Code of Conduct Reminder

nicolas chavent
Hi all,

Resending the below-piece on the HOT US Inc membership list as well as the [hidden email] mailing lists that were dropped by some in their last exchanges.
It looks like the conversation make progresses towards areas of agreement. 

Thanks for those who contributed to this discussion about the regulation of the [hidden email] mailing list (one of the many OpenStreetMap Commons) as as a response to Dale Kunce.
As president of HOT US Inc, Dale attempted to enforce its organization regulation to the English OSM list for discussions about OSM uses across the humanitarian and development sectors.
His email reminding the [hidden email] subscribers “of the Code of Conduct https://www.hotosm.org/hot_cod. [that] will be enforced and offenders will be asked to leave our community", is troublesome:
- it introduces confusion in terms of OSM mailing-lists regulations
- it can read as an attempt to seize and control an OSM common resource (Commons) by one single organization
- it singled again himself and his organization specific culture the same way it did during the OSMF election [1].

The discussions allow yet to make progresses and produce clarity.

Thanks to Mikel Maron, it’s established that: 
> The [hidden email] mailing list is not subject to any more restrictions than any other OSMF maintained list. It is not restricted to HOT members and partners, nor is it subject to HOT governance.
> The OSMF hosted mailing lists fall under the etiquette and moderation guidelines at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquette.

This rightfully resumes the 2017 OSMF talks about the status of discussions in OSM shall they happen over the web (mailing lists, fora, wikis…) or during local events.

Our talks shall focus on the status of this OSM Etiquette, its past uses if any and the relevance of future uses and the how, what and who of any enforcement.

Looking at CoC for local events, one shall note that this is also largely cultural and contingent in OSM and in the OpenData world. Many SOTM global and local in the past happened without any CoC, the same goes for large similar events like the Dec 2016  OpenGovernmentPartnership (OGP) summit in Paris (5,000 participants).   

Best,
Nicolas

On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 12:10 AM, john whelan <[hidden email]> wrote:
In the UK at the end of the evening there is a well known phrase used in places that serve alcohol.

"Time gentlemen please."

The post that set this off had an element of frustration and it was unfortunate that the subject was a sensitive one at that time.  With a bit of good will it could have been accepted as such.

All programmers know that unless it is a one man band they write to the specs and if a feature wasn't included in the specs then its wrong to blame the programmer.  I used to be one and I recall once when asked why wasn't a feature included by a high level manager and I had to reply I specifically asked if it should be but was told by the business contact no it was not to be included.

There is a cultural difference between HOT and OSM.  I seem to recall once someone from an NGO say they didn't need OSM mappers they could provide their own in maperthons.

If HOT and OSM can work together then there are gains for both sides.

Armchair mapping is only good to drop in the basic outlines.  HOT projects are reasonably good at dropping in a highway network and identifying settlements.  It really does need local expertise to finish the job.  So micro grants, training on the ground all help and hopefully we'll start to see a few internet cafes and bicycle repair shops mapped which is normal OSM style mapping that gets enriched over time.

Can we accept there are some differences and please move on.  Can we work on finding some areas where we agree?

Thanks John

 

On 15 December 2017 at 17:38, Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi, Rory:

My comments inline.

On 15/12/17 20:19, Rory McCann wrote:
What's wrong with each mailing list having separate, per list moderation and rules?

Well, the OSM community at large should approve each list rules. Quite a mess, having so many OSM fora. Don't you think so?

Why not give HOT Inc moderation power of the hot@ list? If a group wants to run its group according to specific rules (within some limits), what's wrong with that?

Because HOT inc is an independent org. It's easier to have a list on their own, like the hot membership list and others, apart from the HOT inc tasking manager, github account, etc. Each org has the right to decide their own rules of governance. I am fine with that.


OSMF doesn't have a global code of conduct (yet 😉), but State of the Map conferences do. Same idea.

State of the Map is a face to face event, not mailing list. It's normal that there can be some rules to avoid problems with the country hosting the event. A mailing list is of universal access. Therefore, what is acceptable in one place is unacceptable in other. Some people of one area find normal what others find rude. There is nothing bad in that. The huge majority of us are good faith people. We just need to be a bit flexible, that's it.

Cheers,

Rafael.


On 15 December 2017 19:43:43 CET, Dale Kunce <[hidden email]> wrote:

    Just to clear the air. I misspoke in my initial post when I said the
    HOT CoC would be enforced on this list. I've since learned that the
    HOT list is not administered by HOT and thus our community crafted
    CoC does not apply here. Note: it does apply to all other HOT
    communication channels, including Tasking Manager, GitHub, slack, etc.

    As Mikel said the existing OSM Etiquette rules, however, do apply in
    this space.

    My earlier statement of asking all community members of this list to
    think twice about what you say on this list. This is not an effort
    to curb free speech but instead to build a positive collaborative
    space to discuss.

    On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Russell Deffner
    <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

        Hi all,

        I would prefer to participate in mailing lists that are governed
        by CoC and enforced by an organized group rather than individuals.

        =Russ

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Dan S [mailto:[hidden email]
        <mailto:[hidden email]>]
        Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 11:11 AM
        To: Rafael Avila Coya
        Cc: [hidden email]
        <mailto:[hidden email]>; Mapa Nauta;
        [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
        Subject: Re: [HOT] [Osmf-talk] [hotosm-membership] Re: Code of
        Conduct Reminder

        Hi

        It does seem to me that more clarity would be good here, i.e.
        slightly
        disentangling the lines of accountability regarding the hot@ mailing
        list.

        Mikel's response has logical sense, but it's probably not clear
        to the
        average participant in the hot@ mailing list whether they are
        automatically made a part of the HOT community. Whether the best
        clarification is to have two mailing lists, or for the info page
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>> to make clear
        whether
        it is in general governed by HOT's rules, I don't know.

        Best
        Dan

        _______________________________________________
        HOT mailing list
        [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
        https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>


        _______________________________________________
        HOT mailing list
        [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
        https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
        <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>




    --     sent from my mobile device

    Dale Kunce
    http://normalhabit.com


--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk


_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk


_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot




--
Nicolas Chavent
Les Libres Géographes
Projet OpenStreetMap (OSM)
Projet Espace OSM Francophone (EOF)
Projet GeOrchestra
Mobile (FR): +33 (0)6 52 40 78 20
Mobile (Bénin): +22962 55 85 91
Email: [hidden email]
Skype: c_nicolas
Twitter: nicolas_chavent

_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
12