From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

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

From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

nicolas chavent
Hi all,


Apologies for crosspostings, resending to talk an email sent to
osmf-talk about the HOT US Inc presence at the Board of the OSMF.

Best,
Nicolas


Dear OSMF voting members and mappers,

This short note (also published in my diary [1]) to draw your
attention on the danger for OSMF (and the OSM project) in the case the
United States NGO "Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team US Inc" (aka HOT US
Inc) got a majority at the OSMF Board after this 2015 election.

Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi, all members of the NGO
HOT US Inc, are running for the OSMF Board [2]; Kate Chapman, the
former ED of HOT US Inc serves already as Board Officer in OSMF.

Shall Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi be elected, HOT US
Inc will get a majority at the Board of the Foundation.
This will provide a single organization of the OSM ecosystem (HOT US
Inc) with an unprecedented and excessive power of influence over the
Foundation.

This running of three candidates from the same organization is
puzzling and troublesome when one considers that HOT US Inc (and
therefore its perspective around OpenStreetMap) is already represented
at the OSMF Board since Sept 2013. Why extending its presence and
influence and consequently diminishing the OSM diversity represented
at the OSMF Board?

A greater HOT US Inc presence at the OSMF Board would be a matter of
concern in terms of :
- balance of powers
- diversity of visions, thoughts and practices around OSM
- board dynamics: a collective of HOT US Inc Boardees would interact
with single individuals.
This is a bad practice which is not followed by any Organizations;
this is specifically true for representative bodies (organization
representing organizations) such as OSMF

Here are some elements that OSMF voting members shall have in ming
prior casting their ballot 28-Nov onwards bearing in minds that HOT US
Inc and this perspective about OSM is already represented at the OSMF
Board through Kate Chapman.

The HOT US Inc perspective informs, like other perspectives, the work
of the Foundation and has its effect on the OSM project, there is no
need to take risks in providing this group with more room in the
Foundation which is hot enough in these times of winter.

Best,
Nicolas

[1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nicolas Chavent/diary/36750
[2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM15/Election_to_Board




--
Nicolas Chavent
Projet OpenStreetMap (OSM)
Projet Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)
Projet Espace OSM Francophone (EOF)
Mobile (FRA): +33 (0)6 52 40 78 20
Mobile (CIV): +225 78 12 76 99
<[hidden email]>
Email: [hidden email]
Skype: c_nicolas
Twitter: nicolas_chavent

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

john whelan-2
My personal view is it doesn't really matter.  It is an election as I understand it so members do vote for whom they wish to represent them.  Perhaps a larger concern might be the concentration of board members from a particular country or region.

Cheerio John

On 24 November 2015 at 18:01, nicolas chavent <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,


Apologies for crosspostings, resending to talk an email sent to
osmf-talk about the HOT US Inc presence at the Board of the OSMF.

Best,
Nicolas


Dear OSMF voting members and mappers,

This short note (also published in my diary [1]) to draw your
attention on the danger for OSMF (and the OSM project) in the case the
United States NGO "Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team US Inc" (aka HOT US
Inc) got a majority at the OSMF Board after this 2015 election.

Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi, all members of the NGO
HOT US Inc, are running for the OSMF Board [2]; Kate Chapman, the
former ED of HOT US Inc serves already as Board Officer in OSMF.

Shall Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi be elected, HOT US
Inc will get a majority at the Board of the Foundation.
This will provide a single organization of the OSM ecosystem (HOT US
Inc) with an unprecedented and excessive power of influence over the
Foundation.

This running of three candidates from the same organization is
puzzling and troublesome when one considers that HOT US Inc (and
therefore its perspective around OpenStreetMap) is already represented
at the OSMF Board since Sept 2013. Why extending its presence and
influence and consequently diminishing the OSM diversity represented
at the OSMF Board?

A greater HOT US Inc presence at the OSMF Board would be a matter of
concern in terms of :
- balance of powers
- diversity of visions, thoughts and practices around OSM
- board dynamics: a collective of HOT US Inc Boardees would interact
with single individuals.
This is a bad practice which is not followed by any Organizations;
this is specifically true for representative bodies (organization
representing organizations) such as OSMF

Here are some elements that OSMF voting members shall have in ming
prior casting their ballot 28-Nov onwards bearing in minds that HOT US
Inc and this perspective about OSM is already represented at the OSMF
Board through Kate Chapman.

The HOT US Inc perspective informs, like other perspectives, the work
of the Foundation and has its effect on the OSM project, there is no
need to take risks in providing this group with more room in the
Foundation which is hot enough in these times of winter.

Best,
Nicolas

[1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nicolas Chavent/diary/36750
[2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM15/Election_to_Board




--
Nicolas Chavent
Projet OpenStreetMap (OSM)
Projet Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)
Projet Espace OSM Francophone (EOF)
Mobile (FRA): <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%296%2052%2040%2078%2020" value="+33652407820">+33 (0)6 52 40 78 20
Mobile (CIV): <a href="tel:%2B225%2078%2012%2076%2099" value="+22578127699">+225 78 12 76 99
<[hidden email]>
Email: [hidden email]
Skype: c_nicolas
Twitter: nicolas_chavent

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


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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Dave Corley
In reply to this post by nicolas chavent

It's an open election, open to anyone to stand and open to anyone (members) to vote for who they choose.

Not to be blunt, but if you don't like that, propose an amendment to the governing rules which can be voted on.

In other words, to paraphrase the techies, patches welcome

Dave


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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

dieterdreist

2015-11-25 1:59 GMT+01:00 Dave Corley <[hidden email]>:

It's an open election, open to anyone to stand and open to anyone (members) to vote for who they choose.

Not to be blunt, but if you don't like that, propose an amendment to the governing rules which can be voted on.

In other words, to paraphrase the techies, patches welcome


yes, of course it is an open election, but of course Nicolas or anyone else has the right to express his/her concerns and share them with the electorate. Everybody can evaluate individually how to treat this information and whether it will influence his/her voting behaviour or not.

Cheers,
Martin

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Dave F.
In reply to this post by nicolas chavent
How do you perceive these "dangers" will manifest themselves?

Dave F.

On 24/11/2015 23:01, nicolas chavent wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> Apologies for crosspostings, resending to talk an email sent to
> osmf-talk about the HOT US Inc presence at the Board of the OSMF.
>
> Best,
> Nicolas
>
>
> Dear OSMF voting members and mappers,
>
> This short note (also published in my diary [1]) to draw your
> attention on the danger for OSMF (and the OSM project) in the case the
> United States NGO "Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team US Inc" (aka HOT US
> Inc) got a majority at the OSMF Board after this 2015 election.
>
> Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi, all members of the NGO
> HOT US Inc, are running for the OSMF Board [2]; Kate Chapman, the
> former ED of HOT US Inc serves already as Board Officer in OSMF.
>
> Shall Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi be elected, HOT US
> Inc will get a majority at the Board of the Foundation.
> This will provide a single organization of the OSM ecosystem (HOT US
> Inc) with an unprecedented and excessive power of influence over the
> Foundation.
>
> This running of three candidates from the same organization is
> puzzling and troublesome when one considers that HOT US Inc (and
> therefore its perspective around OpenStreetMap) is already represented
> at the OSMF Board since Sept 2013. Why extending its presence and
> influence and consequently diminishing the OSM diversity represented
> at the OSMF Board?
>
> A greater HOT US Inc presence at the OSMF Board would be a matter of
> concern in terms of :
> - balance of powers
> - diversity of visions, thoughts and practices around OSM
> - board dynamics: a collective of HOT US Inc Boardees would interact
> with single individuals.
> This is a bad practice which is not followed by any Organizations;
> this is specifically true for representative bodies (organization
> representing organizations) such as OSMF
>
> Here are some elements that OSMF voting members shall have in ming
> prior casting their ballot 28-Nov onwards bearing in minds that HOT US
> Inc and this perspective about OSM is already represented at the OSMF
> Board through Kate Chapman.
>
> The HOT US Inc perspective informs, like other perspectives, the work
> of the Foundation and has its effect on the OSM project, there is no
> need to take risks in providing this group with more room in the
> Foundation which is hot enough in these times of winter.
>
> Best,
> Nicolas
>
> [1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nicolas Chavent/diary/36750
> [2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM15/Election_to_Board
>
>
>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Augustin Doury-2
Hi Dave,

Your question is not adressed to me but I'd like to participate here.

My name is Augustin Doury, I've been active in OpenStreetMap since end
2012 as a daily commitment to sustain the growth of OSM communities in
West Africa, especially on the field in Senegal where I've been a HOT
volunteer for 5 months and last year as a Projet Espace OpenStreetMap
Francophone volunteer in Burkina Faso for 1 year, plus missions in Ivory
Coast (volunteer) and Togo (paid). I'm a HOT US Inc member since 2013.

Because I've seen what HOT became this last 3 years, I don't want to see
OSM project suffering the same problems as the HOT project.

As others, I think that HOT is a project about using OSM in humanitarian
and development fields, and as any open/free project, everybody should
be able to choose his/her approach within the HOT concept but what
occurs now is that choices are more and more restricted, less choices
for individuals and collectives.
Because HOT US Inc, with its specific vision, has almost monopolized the
HOT project in terms of communication&tools (the logo, the communication
channels, the lists, the story/reputation, the Tasking Manager, the HOT
Exports  ...), I fear that a position at the OSMF board reinforce its
influence.

During the two pasts HOT US Inc elections, I tried as others to give
this point of view and advocate for the definition of a HOT Project with
a HOT Charter and HOT Commons that any individual or organization could
concur with and even officially join and/or fund, as explained by
Severin Menard on his diary [1]. It's for us, in our diversity, the good
way to maintain diversity in the HOT Project, respecting minorities.
I've seen how the HOT US board rejected this approach, saying that there
is not HOT US Inc, there is just HOT and HOT US Inc is HOT and should
not be called « US Inc » because it creates dividness within the HOT
community. I've seen the level of violence some HOT US Inc people were
able to trigger to close the debate without respect for those who work
hard everyday, especially from the field, for making what the HOT
project is now.

The concept of attribution is essential in the OSM project and I feel
like HOT US Inc, by its communication hegemony, benefits from the work
of numerous volunteers from South and North who give their time for the
HOT/OSM project, not for a NGO (which is nowadays in an active
fundraising campain).

I would not like to see this logic implements in OSMF. And simply I do
not understand the aim of the candidates from HOT US Inc to get more
seats at the OSMF board when Kate Chapman is already a board member.
In my opinion, HOT US Inc should not get more than one seat to let the 6
other seats to people who represent other aspects from the OSM ecoystem.

Have a good night from Togo and good vote,

Augustin

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/sev_hotosm/diary/21846

On 25/11/2015 12:10, Dave F. wrote:

> How do you perceive these "dangers" will manifest themselves?
>
> Dave F.
>
> On 24/11/2015 23:01, nicolas chavent wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> Apologies for crosspostings, resending to talk an email sent to
>> osmf-talk about the HOT US Inc presence at the Board of the OSMF.
>>
>> Best,
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>> Dear OSMF voting members and mappers,
>>
>> This short note (also published in my diary [1]) to draw your
>> attention on the danger for OSMF (and the OSM project) in the case the
>> United States NGO "Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team US Inc" (aka HOT US
>> Inc) got a majority at the OSMF Board after this 2015 election.
>>
>> Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi, all members of the NGO
>> HOT US Inc, are running for the OSMF Board [2]; Kate Chapman, the
>> former ED of HOT US Inc serves already as Board Officer in OSMF.
>>
>> Shall Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi be elected, HOT US
>> Inc will get a majority at the Board of the Foundation.
>> This will provide a single organization of the OSM ecosystem (HOT US
>> Inc) with an unprecedented and excessive power of influence over the
>> Foundation.
>>
>> This running of three candidates from the same organization is
>> puzzling and troublesome when one considers that HOT US Inc (and
>> therefore its perspective around OpenStreetMap) is already represented
>> at the OSMF Board since Sept 2013. Why extending its presence and
>> influence and consequently diminishing the OSM diversity represented
>> at the OSMF Board?
>>
>> A greater HOT US Inc presence at the OSMF Board would be a matter of
>> concern in terms of :
>> - balance of powers
>> - diversity of visions, thoughts and practices around OSM
>> - board dynamics: a collective of HOT US Inc Boardees would interact
>> with single individuals.
>> This is a bad practice which is not followed by any Organizations;
>> this is specifically true for representative bodies (organization
>> representing organizations) such as OSMF
>>
>> Here are some elements that OSMF voting members shall have in ming
>> prior casting their ballot 28-Nov onwards bearing in minds that HOT US
>> Inc and this perspective about OSM is already represented at the OSMF
>> Board through Kate Chapman.
>>
>> The HOT US Inc perspective informs, like other perspectives, the work
>> of the Foundation and has its effect on the OSM project, there is no
>> need to take risks in providing this group with more room in the
>> Foundation which is hot enough in these times of winter.
>>
>> Best,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> [1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nicolas Chavent/diary/36750
>> [2]:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM15/Election_to_Board
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Augustin Doury-2
In reply to this post by Dave F.
- Sorry if you receive this email twice, internet connection from Togo
is uncertain tonight -

Hi Dave,

Your question is not adressed to me but I'd like to give my opinion here.

My name is Augustin Doury, I've been active in OpenStreetMap since end
2012 as a daily commitment to sustain the growth of OSM communities in
West Africa, especially on the field in Senegal where I've been a HOT
volunteer for 5 months and last year as a Projet Espace OpenStreetMap
Francophone volunteer in Burkina Faso for 1 year, plus missions in Ivory
Coast (volunteer) and Togo (paid). I'm a HOT US Inc member since 2013.

Because I've seen what HOT became this last 3 years, I don't want to see
OSM project suffering the same problems as the HOT project.

As others, I think that HOT is a project about using OSM in humanitarian
and development fields, and as any open/free project, everybody should
be able to choose his/her approach within the HOT concept but what
occurs now is that choices are more and more restricted, less choices
for individuals and collectives.
Because HOT US Inc, with its specific vision, has almost monopolized the
HOT project in terms of communication&tools (the logo, the communication
channels, the lists, the story/reputation, the Tasking Manager, the HOT
Exports  ...), I fear that a position at the OSMF board reinforce its
influence.

During the two pasts HOT US Inc elections, I tried as others to give
this point of view and advocate for the definition of a HOT Project with
a HOT Charter and HOT Commons that any individual or organization could
concur with and even officially join and/or fund, as explained by
Severin Menard on his diary [1]. It's for us, in our diversity, the good
way to maintain diversity in the HOT Project, respecting minorities.
I've seen how the HOT US board rejected this approach, saying that there
is not HOT US Inc, there is just HOT and HOT US Inc is HOT and should
not be called « US Inc » because it creates dividness within the HOT
community. I've seen the level of violence some HOT US Inc people were
able to trigger to close the debate without respect for those who work
hard everyday, especially from the field, for making what the HOT
project is now.

The concept of attribution is essential in the OSM project and I feel
like HOT US Inc, by its communication hegemony, benefits from the work
of numerous volunteers from South and North who give their time for the
HOT/OSM project, not for a NGO (which is nowadays in an active
fundraising campain).

I would not like to see this logic implements in OSMF. And simply I do
not understand the aim of the candidates from HOT US Inc to get more
seats at the OSMF board when Kate Chapman is already a board member.
In my opinion, HOT US Inc should not get more than one seat to let the 6
other seats to people who represent other aspects from the OSM ecoystem.

Have a good night and vote,

Augustin

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/sev_hotosm/diary/21846



On 25/11/2015 12:10, Dave F. wrote:

> How do you perceive these "dangers" will manifest themselves?
>
> Dave F.
>
> On 24/11/2015 23:01, nicolas chavent wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> Apologies for crosspostings, resending to talk an email sent to
>> osmf-talk about the HOT US Inc presence at the Board of the OSMF.
>>
>> Best,
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>> Dear OSMF voting members and mappers,
>>
>> This short note (also published in my diary [1]) to draw your
>> attention on the danger for OSMF (and the OSM project) in the case the
>> United States NGO "Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team US Inc" (aka HOT US
>> Inc) got a majority at the OSMF Board after this 2015 election.
>>
>> Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi, all members of the NGO
>> HOT US Inc, are running for the OSMF Board [2]; Kate Chapman, the
>> former ED of HOT US Inc serves already as Board Officer in OSMF.
>>
>> Shall Mikel Maron, Joseph Reeves and Yantisa Akhadi be elected, HOT US
>> Inc will get a majority at the Board of the Foundation.
>> This will provide a single organization of the OSM ecosystem (HOT US
>> Inc) with an unprecedented and excessive power of influence over the
>> Foundation.
>>
>> This running of three candidates from the same organization is
>> puzzling and troublesome when one considers that HOT US Inc (and
>> therefore its perspective around OpenStreetMap) is already represented
>> at the OSMF Board since Sept 2013. Why extending its presence and
>> influence and consequently diminishing the OSM diversity represented
>> at the OSMF Board?
>>
>> A greater HOT US Inc presence at the OSMF Board would be a matter of
>> concern in terms of :
>> - balance of powers
>> - diversity of visions, thoughts and practices around OSM
>> - board dynamics: a collective of HOT US Inc Boardees would interact
>> with single individuals.
>> This is a bad practice which is not followed by any Organizations;
>> this is specifically true for representative bodies (organization
>> representing organizations) such as OSMF
>>
>> Here are some elements that OSMF voting members shall have in ming
>> prior casting their ballot 28-Nov onwards bearing in minds that HOT US
>> Inc and this perspective about OSM is already represented at the OSMF
>> Board through Kate Chapman.
>>
>> The HOT US Inc perspective informs, like other perspectives, the work
>> of the Foundation and has its effect on the OSM project, there is no
>> need to take risks in providing this group with more room in the
>> Foundation which is hot enough in these times of winter.
>>
>> Best,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> [1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nicolas Chavent/diary/36750
>> [2]:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM15/Election_to_Board
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Tom Taylor-2
In reply to this post by Augustin Doury-2
Thank you for a thought-provoking reply. I am neither a HOT voting
member nor an OSMF voting member, so I'm probably unaware of any
internal politics that are going on. I do chair the HOT Training WG,
which I see as an attempt to solve a problem: hundreds or thousands of
volunteers who want to contribute and have to be made capable of doing
so in a very short time. And I do see a general trend toward
professionalization of HOT operations, more or less for the same reasons.

As a naive lurker on the lists, I took the announced candidacies at face
value. That is, committed individuals decided individually to run for
office. I agree that if all of them got elected, HOT would dominate the
Board, but that is surely not a foregone conclusion. But do you really
have evidence of a HOT conspiracy as opposed to a set of committed
individuals?

I note the references to Kate Chapman as representative of HOT. She is
no longer executive director there. Is she not up for re-election?

Tom Taylor
TomT5454

On 27/11/2015 6:27 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> Your question is not adressed to me but I'd like to participate here.
>
> My name is Augustin Doury, I've been active in OpenStreetMap since end
> 2012 as a daily commitment to sustain the growth of OSM communities in
> West Africa, especially on the field in Senegal where I've been a HOT
> volunteer for 5 months and last year as a Projet Espace OpenStreetMap
> Francophone volunteer in Burkina Faso for 1 year, plus missions in Ivory
> Coast (volunteer) and Togo (paid). I'm a HOT US Inc member since 2013.
>
> Because I've seen what HOT became this last 3 years, I don't want to see
> OSM project suffering the same problems as the HOT project.
>
> As others, I think that HOT is a project about using OSM in humanitarian
> and development fields, and as any open/free project, everybody should
> be able to choose his/her approach within the HOT concept but what
> occurs now is that choices are more and more restricted, less choices
> for individuals and collectives.
> Because HOT US Inc, with its specific vision, has almost monopolized the
> HOT project in terms of communication&tools (the logo, the communication
> channels, the lists, the story/reputation, the Tasking Manager, the HOT
> Exports  ...), I fear that a position at the OSMF board reinforce its
> influence.
>
> During the two pasts HOT US Inc elections, I tried as others to give
> this point of view and advocate for the definition of a HOT Project with
> a HOT Charter and HOT Commons that any individual or organization could
> concur with and even officially join and/or fund, as explained by
> Severin Menard on his diary [1]. It's for us, in our diversity, the good
> way to maintain diversity in the HOT Project, respecting minorities.
> I've seen how the HOT US board rejected this approach, saying that there
> is not HOT US Inc, there is just HOT and HOT US Inc is HOT and should
> not be called « US Inc » because it creates dividness within the HOT
> community. I've seen the level of violence some HOT US Inc people were
> able to trigger to close the debate without respect for those who work
> hard everyday, especially from the field, for making what the HOT
> project is now.
>
> The concept of attribution is essential in the OSM project and I feel
> like HOT US Inc, by its communication hegemony, benefits from the work
> of numerous volunteers from South and North who give their time for the
> HOT/OSM project, not for a NGO (which is nowadays in an active
> fundraising campain).
>
> I would not like to see this logic implements in OSMF. And simply I do
> not understand the aim of the candidates from HOT US Inc to get more
> seats at the OSMF board when Kate Chapman is already a board member.
> In my opinion, HOT US Inc should not get more than one seat to let the 6
> other seats to people who represent other aspects from the OSM ecoystem.
>
> Have a good night from Togo and good vote,
>
> Augustin
>
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/sev_hotosm/diary/21846
>
...

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Christoph Hormann
On Saturday 28 November 2015, Tom Taylor wrote:
> [...]
>
> As a naive lurker on the lists, I took the announced candidacies at
> face value. That is, committed individuals decided individually to
> run for office. I agree that if all of them got elected, HOT would
> dominate the Board, but that is surely not a foregone conclusion. But
> do you really have evidence of a HOT conspiracy as opposed to a set
> of committed individuals?

Within the general OSM community it is probably not a widespread
assumption that there is a cabal within HOT that pulls the strings
behind the curtains - although there are events where you can get this
idea - like when several people from HOT suddenly turn up in a
discussion all representing the same standpoint.  But many mappers
notice that people engaged with HOT often share certain views and
approaches to things that are less common among other mappers.  You can
see this to some extent in the answers to the questions for the OSMF
board candidates.

So when people have reservations w.r.t. board candidates with a HOT
background this does not necessarily mean they have a problem with the
HOT project or its organization or its influence on the OSMF.  It could
simply be they have reservations regarding the views shared by those
people which could well be the same views that also motivated them for
participating in HOT.

> I note the references to Kate Chapman as representative of HOT. She
> is no longer executive director there.

This probably deserves some clarification:  In contrast to the OSMF
where everyone able to spend the membership fee can become member
membership of the HOT origanization is restricted, the current members
vote who can become a new member.  See

https://hotosm.org/voting-members

Also in contrast to the OSMF activities of the HOT membership are not
generally public (feel free to correct me if i am wrong here).  Also
HOT members have certain obligations of contributing to HOT activities
as outlined on

https://hotosm.org/sites/default/files/HOT_Membership_Code.pdf

According to the available information Kate is a member of HOT - so are
several candidates for the OSMF board:

Mikel Maron
Joseph Reeves
Yantisa Akhadi

Other candidates are active in HOT to some extent (like participating in
HOT mapping tasks) but are not members of the HOT organization.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Joseph Reeves
Dear all,

I've enjoyed reading these emails this week, but have stayed out of the discussion. I just wanted to clarify some quick points:

  1. I have not discussed my running for the OSMF Board with any other candidates
  2. I have not discussed my running for the OSMF Board with the HOT group. I did sent an email to the listserv [0] but got no feedback other than the suggestion that I send it to the public HOT list after initially only sending it to the Members' list
  3. I am not convinced that the answered questions uncover any HOT colluding 
  4. I view my HOT Membership as the recognition that I previously have made a commitment / contribution to HOT
  5. I have no decision making powers within HOT - I am a member just as I am an OSMF Member
  6. I am not a member of a secret society that controls HOT from the shadows. I don't think such a thing exists, although I would check that there have been no pizza vans parked outside the OSMF HQ for a suspiciously long time
I look forward to the ongoing election process and am genuinely excited about the next OSMF Board term. Hopefully I can be a part of it!

Thanks, Joseph



On 28 November 2015 at 10:32, Christoph Hormann <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Saturday 28 November 2015, Tom Taylor wrote:
> [...]
>
> As a naive lurker on the lists, I took the announced candidacies at
> face value. That is, committed individuals decided individually to
> run for office. I agree that if all of them got elected, HOT would
> dominate the Board, but that is surely not a foregone conclusion. But
> do you really have evidence of a HOT conspiracy as opposed to a set
> of committed individuals?

Within the general OSM community it is probably not a widespread
assumption that there is a cabal within HOT that pulls the strings
behind the curtains - although there are events where you can get this
idea - like when several people from HOT suddenly turn up in a
discussion all representing the same standpoint.  But many mappers
notice that people engaged with HOT often share certain views and
approaches to things that are less common among other mappers.  You can
see this to some extent in the answers to the questions for the OSMF
board candidates.

So when people have reservations w.r.t. board candidates with a HOT
background this does not necessarily mean they have a problem with the
HOT project or its organization or its influence on the OSMF.  It could
simply be they have reservations regarding the views shared by those
people which could well be the same views that also motivated them for
participating in HOT.

> I note the references to Kate Chapman as representative of HOT. She
> is no longer executive director there.

This probably deserves some clarification:  In contrast to the OSMF
where everyone able to spend the membership fee can become member
membership of the HOT origanization is restricted, the current members
vote who can become a new member.  See

https://hotosm.org/voting-members

Also in contrast to the OSMF activities of the HOT membership are not
generally public (feel free to correct me if i am wrong here).  Also
HOT members have certain obligations of contributing to HOT activities
as outlined on

https://hotosm.org/sites/default/files/HOT_Membership_Code.pdf

According to the available information Kate is a member of HOT - so are
several candidates for the OSMF board:

Mikel Maron
Joseph Reeves
Yantisa Akhadi

Other candidates are active in HOT to some extent (like participating in
HOT mapping tasks) but are not members of the HOT organization.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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


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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Christoph Hormann
On Saturday 28 November 2015, Joseph Reeves wrote:
>    5. I have no decision making powers within HOT - I am a member
> just as I am an OSMF Member

It seems to me this is not quite correct although - since the work of
the HOT members is not in public - i cannot really say for sure.

In addition to the right (and in case of HOT apparently the obligation)
to vote for the board you also have the right - together with your
fellow members - to decide who becomes a member.  To me this seems a
quite fundamental difference to the OSMF.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Joseph Reeves

Your understanding of new member admission is correct, however, these decisions are made by majority vote, so I still have little individual say. The problem we face in HOT on this issue is getting enough members to approve new intakes rather than the actions of individuals.

I still fail to see how HOT members could subvert the OSMF, but perhaps I lack imagination.

Cheers, Joseph

On 28 Nov 2015 12:11, "Christoph Hormann" <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Saturday 28 November 2015, Joseph Reeves wrote:
>    5. I have no decision making powers within HOT - I am a member
> just as I am an OSMF Member

It seems to me this is not quite correct although - since the work of
the HOT members is not in public - i cannot really say for sure.

In addition to the right (and in case of HOT apparently the obligation)
to vote for the board you also have the right - together with your
fellow members - to decide who becomes a member.  To me this seems a
quite fundamental difference to the OSMF.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Jean-Guilhem Cailton
In reply to this post by Dave F.
Le 25/11/2015 13:10, Dave F. a écrit :
How do you perceive these "dangers" will manifest themselves?

Dave F.



Dear OpenStreetMap Community members,

Let me first apologize for writing about topics that usually do not need to be considered by those who only care about improving this wonderful common good that is OpenStreetMap. Unfortunately, it has become necessary because there seems to be a potentially serious threat on what OpenStreetMap is and will be.

Some might consider this issue to be more specifically appropriate for the OSMF-talk list, as those with a right to vote on the current election must be there. However, it is not of concern only to the registered members of the OSM Foundation, as it might end up impacting the whole of OSM. It also happens that I have stopped renewing my membership to the OSMF after an election where a candidate was excluded from the vote because his views on a controversial subject (related to license change) were strongly different from those of the majority of the previous Board. Note that Mr. Maron was already a member of this outgoing Board, that had a conception of basic democracy different from mine, according to which it should have been up to the voters not to vote for a candidate if they didn't agree with his views. So, anyway, I cannot write to that list.

A recent exchange with some mappers not familiar with what goes on in HOT US Inc., as well as some of the emails I read on the osmf-talk web archive, have made me aware that it could be useful to summarize how I view it after being involved in many crisis activations since Haiti 2010 earthquake, before HOT US Inc. or the [hidden email] mailing list even existed. This might also be seen as another attempt to answer Frederik's question on osmf-talk : “What should OSMF *not* learn from HOT?” (Even though I see now that Rod has answered that quite well).

In short, it seems that HOT US Inc., besides its officially started purpose, and certainly because it views these secondary purposes as necessary to accomplish it, aims to collect money from donors willing to support the « humanitarian » use of OSM, and exercise control over the ways people contribute to these uses. Its reality in practice is thus in direct opposition to the « support – not control - OSM » motto of the OSMF.


A lesson I remember from my high school philosophy teacher is that you shouldn't judge a foreign culture based on your values, but on its own. If I try to apply this guide to HOT US Inc., based on what I think I know of some US values, that some might even be tempted to consider universal, or at least broadly admired and shared, here is what I find :

- Democracy : Voting members of HOT US are selected through a strict cooptation mechanism, with constraints sufficient to ensure that the initial members keep their dominating influence. This can also be observed in the result of the votes. Yet some leaders of HOT US sometimes present themselves as legitimate representatives of the broader community of OSM/HOT contributors, which is false by construction.

- Free speech : As you probably know, this is protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Yet in several current cases, it appears that prominent and legally responsible members of HOT US Inc. consider that some provisions of the « HOT Code of Conduct » should prevail on this US constitutional right. You may also have noticed that I've been submitted to a priori moderation on the [hidden email] mailing list, without notification, and without justification by at least an example of an inappropriate email, when I became aware of it and asked for a reason. So the most likely explanation is that Mr. Maron (who had silently setup this moderation) must have been afraid that I could ask questions about his conflicts of interest or the cronyism around him, as I had done on an internal list before. As he is also moderator of several of the most important OSM mailing lists, including this “talk” list, this example of abusing of his moderator role to protect his personal interest could be already in itself worrying to all those in the OSM community who think that the possibility to exchange views freely is necessary in a sound community, as now everyone would have to worry about exposing oneself to such a measure before writing to the lists.

- Rejection of public lies : Several communications of HOT US Inc., both internal and external, are in contradiction with facts. They sometimes combine with the next item, ...

- Prohibition of theft : … to take undeserved ownership and credit on things done by others (and in particular numerous voluntary mappers around the World – most of them in non-English speaking parts, or, for examples on more specific points, what was done with humanitarian drones, or some satellite imagery to support disaster mapping), and present them as if they were HOT US's, to justify asking for undue recognition or funding (including from the public).

- Duty to assist : This value should of course be particularly important for a so-called « humanitarian » organization. Yet I have witnessed several cases where other considerations – such as a narrow view of pleasing potential donors maybe, took precedence over actions that would have been in the general interest of the affected populations, that HOT US Inc claims to help help.
The most deeply worrying recent development is the policy to put aside very experienced activation coordinators, who have had a critical role in large scale activations, such as for Haiyan, Ebola or Nepal earthquake, and replace them with a self-nominated coordinator, without any previous experience of real activation coordination, as has been the case recently for the Afghanistan & Pakistan earthquake. We can thus expect that for the next large scale disaster that will hit, the OSM/HOT response will be far from what it could be, and thus less efficient in helping saving lives. All that because some apparently consider that their power to exercise control on activations should come as first priority, above any other consideration.

It is also disturbing that some large « humanitarian » partner organizations apparently choose to ignore these issues. Maybe they are not sufficiently aware of the damage they cause to the real efficiency of their contributions. Or maybe it is a symptom that this is not what they really care about, in fact.

As others have written before, it has been very disturbing to try to raise these issues with people in charge at HOT US Inc., who could apparently at first be considered honest and of good faith, and be confronted to a kind of deaf arrogance, always very certain of being right.

If I take a step back, and if you allow me an broad analogy on a different scale, it reminds me of the march towards the 2003 Iraq invasion, where knowledgeable experts, millions of people demonstrating around the World, and in particular the leaders of my country, were telling the US leaders that they were wrong, and that the « weapons of mass destruction » pretext story was false. Yet they carried on, invaded Iraq, disbanded its army; and in 2014 Daech took Mosul. And a couple of weeks ago slaughtered 130 people in Paris.

I don't know exactly where OSM will be in a few years if HOT US Inc., through his number of candidates, and Mapbox too through Mr. Maron, are allowed to extend their influence over the OSMF Board. If you remember the multiple Mapbox pressures on the OSM license, the « share alike » clause, necessary for OSM to resist in front of big businesses, might be gone. Strange things could happen on the copyright front, as was evoked in the osmf-talk thread. Or in the field of OSM based services. I don't know. But based on what we have seen on the « humanitarian » side, even though OSM had, and still has, such a broad and wonderful potential there, many unthinkable and not very nice things could happen.

So, if you care about the future of OSM as a common good for the general interest, and if you have the right to do so, please vote wisely.

Best wishes,

Jean-Guilhem
France
(where, particularly since the Charlie Hebdo attack, we are somewhat reluctant to submit to pressures to restrict our freedom of expression).

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Mateusz Konieczny-2
On Wed, 02 Dec 2015 23:12:22 +0100
Jean-Guilhem Cailton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> - Rejection of public lies : Several communications of HOT US Inc.,
> both internal and external, are in contradiction with facts. They
> sometimes combine with the next item, ...

Maybe I missed it but see absolutely no evidence for that claims in
your message. Is it maybe present somewhere and I missed it?

Making heavy accusations and providing no evidence is a poor
combination.

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

Paul Norman
In reply to this post by Jean-Guilhem Cailton
On 12/2/2015 2:12 PM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton wrote:
> It also happens that I have stopped renewing my membership to the OSMF
> after an election where a candidate was excluded from the vote because
> his views on a controversial subject (related to license change) were
> strongly different from those of the majority of the previous Board.
> Note that Mr. Maron was already a member of this outgoing Board, that
> had a conception of basic democracy different from mine, according to
> which it should have been up to the voters not to vote for a candidate
> if they didn't agree with his views. So, anyway, I cannot write to
> that list.

Although I wasn't on the board at the time, I was around then, and the
situation was a bit different.

In 2012 two people tried to run for board without being members (i.e.
they couldn't), and then someone tried to pay or register for their
membership on their behalf. The board at the time rejected their
application.

I can't find any minutes from the time and can't speak to the views of
the board at the time, but there was a view that the person attempting
to pay was doing it solely to cause problems.

The board at the time was Steve Coast, Henk, Oliver, Mikel, Matt Amos,
Dermot, and Richard Fairhurst.

I didn't know the background on one of the individuals, but I'd have
rather seen the other become a member the normal way (paying
themselves), run for board, and lose.

Under the AoA the board cannot stop a member from running in a board
election, and a member can only be removed for a small number of
reasons, and they have a right of appeal to the next general meeting.
There are also provisions under the Companies' Act for OSMF members to
remove board members.

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

nicolas chavent
In reply to this post by nicolas chavent
Hi all,

At the request of Stephane Henriod, I am forwarding a contribution to this email which was first posted on the HOT US Inc memberships list since Stephane was not on the other mailings lists (osmf and talk) where this dicussion has been unfolding those past 10 days.
Stephane is currently working in Bishkek (Kyrgyzstan), like most of us he is caught by heavy work deadlines and had no time to subscribe and email directly. He therefore contacted me to make his view known by OSMF members and mappers on osmf and talk lists in the context of this current OSMF Board election.

Here goes Stéphane's email below.

Best,
Nicolas
 

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Stéphane Henriod <[hidden email]> wrote:

    Dear all

    I believe we have disgressed quite a lot during these email exchanges.

    My understanding is that the main initial topic concerned the risk oh having "too much" of HOT (or HOT-US inc) at the board of OSMF. I do agree with this statement and would like to quickly explain why. But first, let me say what this statement doesn't mean:

    - it doesn't mean that people are bad
    - it doesn't mean that people are dangerous
    - it doesn't mean that people are not competent
    - it doesn't mean that HOT (as a community or as an NGO) is bad / dangerous / vicious

    It only means that every global organisation needs some balance. In Switzerland, we have a college of 7 Ministers, who are elected by our Parliament respecting the (although weakening) so-called "Magic formula". This means that the main political parties must be represented according to the results of their parties but it also means that we try to keep a balance between the linguistic / cultural areas of our country.

    I definitely do not agree with all these ministers. But I do believe that this balance is essential, for thousands of reason that I don't want to detail here (for the sake of keeping this email short enough).

    For the OSMF election, I believe that the same principle is beneficial. Saying that "too much HOT is dangerous" only means that the OSMF board needs more plurality: people who use OSM in a different way, for other purposes, maybe even with a different philosophy.

    Exactly in the same way, I wouldn't be happy with 7 ministers elected from my hometown. That would be probably quite cool on the short term but it's definitely dangerous on the long term and would lead to quite some instability.

    Thanks all

    Cheers

    Stéphane



On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Paul Norman <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 12/2/2015 2:12 PM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton wrote:
It also happens that I have stopped renewing my membership to the OSMF after an election where a candidate was excluded from the vote because his views on a controversial subject (related to license change) were strongly different from those of the majority of the previous Board. Note that Mr. Maron was already a member of this outgoing Board, that had a conception of basic democracy different from mine, according to which it should have been up to the voters not to vote for a candidate if they didn't agree with his views. So, anyway, I cannot write to that list.

Although I wasn't on the board at the time, I was around then, and the situation was a bit different.

In 2012 two people tried to run for board without being members (i.e. they couldn't), and then someone tried to pay or register for their membership on their behalf. The board at the time rejected their application.

I can't find any minutes from the time and can't speak to the views of the board at the time, but there was a view that the person attempting to pay was doing it solely to cause problems.

The board at the time was Steve Coast, Henk, Oliver, Mikel, Matt Amos, Dermot, and Richard Fairhurst.

I didn't know the background on one of the individuals, but I'd have rather seen the other become a member the normal way (paying themselves), run for board, and lose.

Under the AoA the board cannot stop a member from running in a board election, and a member can only be removed for a small number of reasons, and they have a right of appeal to the next general meeting. There are also provisions under the Companies' Act for OSMF members to remove board members.


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



--
Nicolas Chavent
Projet OpenStreetMap (OSM)
Projet Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)
Projet Espace OSM Francophone (EOF)
Mobile (FRA): +33 (0)6 52 40 78 20
Mobile (CIV): +225 78 12 76 99
Email: [hidden email]
Skype: c_nicolas
Twitter: nicolas_chavent

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

Re: From osmf-talk: "Balancing the presence of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT US Inc) in the OpenStreetMap Foundation"

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Paul Norman


sent from a phone

Am 04.12.2015 um 10:58 schrieb Paul Norman <[hidden email]>:

>> this outgoing Board, that had a conception of basic democracy different from mine,
>
> I didn't know the background on one of the individuals, but I'd have rather seen the other become a member the normal way (paying themselves), run for board, and lose.


+1, to both, I also thought it had left some bitter taste to stop these candidacies top down rather than give confidence to the voters.

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