I should stress that this is currently my personal opinion and my personal view and not the opinion of OSM-UA.
I think I don’t quite understand some ideas of Herr Ramm.
Herr Ramm seems to be misunderstanding the nature of OSM. OSM is not a business like Geofabrik. It is not enough to make a resolution to see it working. You have no army, no corporate security, no riot police. No way to one-way enforce a decision. You need (surprise!) to convince people.
First of all, “there was really not any doubt” is not an argument. It is a way to avoid presenting documents. Simply put, it is sophistic.
Next, the argument of “not silently” is simply false. You (and I mean DWG here) never posted the transcript of your discussion, neither did you make a statistic check on community to realistically evaluate if your decision is implementable. You were not elected by the community. We have no reason to trust your decision except your reputation, and reputation is a fragile thing.
Next, I do agree that “political map” is not the intention of OSM. But OSMF needs to take some political decisions into account, or risk being subjected to national and international laws. Putting disclaimers in your resolution doesn’t make it any better. We are not “misinterpreting”. We are extrapolating the effects of this decision, and evaluate your actions, not your words, just as one old dusty book teaches us. Russian propaganda (namely, rg.ru, the official state press of Russian Federation) already uses your decision and both you and I have absolutely no way to stop them.
Maybe I’m too rough here, but don’t expect me to clear your mess. Accept responsibility for your actions. I’m used to hear that it is your recurring notion that the fate of OpenStreetMap should be decided by common volunteers, not corporations. Maybe one day a certain founder of Geofabrik will take this belief to heart.
I must say, >I think that it is internationally recognised that Russia currently has control of Crimea
is a most peculiar way to interpret >Currently, we record one set that, in OpenStreetMap contributor opinion, is most widely internationally recognised and best meets realities on the ground, generally meaning physical control
from your policy. I am genuinely astonished with this new revolutionary vision of the concept of international recognition. My congratulations on this exemplary victory over yourself. I’m a fan of Eric Arthur Blair so I can properly appreciate it.
PS. I believe a fact that three members of DWG are also members of the OSMF Board which currently considers our appeal over DWG’s resolution deserves a separate mention. I genuinely want to be pleasantly surprised, but something tells me it is not meant to happen.
PPS. Working closely with the community to develop uniform rules for representing territorial disputes and ground control (occupation status, annexation status etc) would be a much more constructive decision of DWG’s part.