wonderchook has commented on the following diary entries
|OpenStreetMap Foundation Chairperson's Report for the Annual General Meeting||almost 2 years ago||
One of the reasons for the waiver program is that adjusting the fee to GDP or some other index doesn't help with the issue of having cheap methods of transferring money. In many places that is still more than the cost of membership.
|OpenStreetMap Foundation Chairperson's Report for the Annual General Meeting||about 2 years ago||
Ouch, I knew if I named people I was thanking someone will be omitted! I'm very much looking forward to continuing to serve with Paul and Frederik!
I agree with @woodpeck that the key with the waived membership fee is getting the word out and having a plan.
|OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike||over 3 years ago||
There are two things I'd like to see regarding licensing in OSM.
In my work with the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team there are times where the license is an issue. For example many UN agencies have non-commercial clauses in their data, so simply removing the share alike wouldn't help. With government there are some groups that do not have issues with the ODbL and certainly others that do, usually depending on how they are contributing or benefiting from OSM.
Basically I'm saying there needs to be more research and a possible path shown. At the moment a license change feels impossible so getting many people on board even with the idea would prove difficult.
|OpenStreetMap - Increasing diversity||almost 4 years ago||
Just wanted to mention I posted this to the diversity-talk mailing list. I would like to convene a meeting with interested parties to discuss.
|Is the OpenStreetMap Rails App Appropriate for Other Data Sets?||over 4 years ago||
@ebwolf: One thing we've done is link things the other way. To the OSM ids. Which isn't perfect either since people can delete the feature and re-add it or split it or any other number of things that could change the OSM id. Though it has worked fine for what we have been doing so far.
@mikel: I wonder maybe the issue is that the OSM code base has completely been aimed at one base. I think there have been forks of it but the modifications have been for specific projects rather than with the goal of creating a geodata platform that could be deployed for a number of uses.
I think also the social aspects you are suggesting would make the rails application more useful for other types of communities. Meaning I would think the goal of using the codebase for another project would be to build a community around data. Currently that would be really hard, since all the other community tools that osm uses would also have to be set-up.