https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mapeamento-aberto-para-gestao-de-riscos-reuniao-para-conversar-sobre-o-assunto/98604/46 + https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Grupo_de_Trabalho_em_Mapeamento_Aberto_para_Gestão_de_Riscos_de_Desastres/Reunião_1
2023-08-16 
:
Text added on on 2023-08-22 (before this, this message was hidden, “Your post was flagged as off-topic: the community feels it is not a good fit for the topic, as currently defined by the title and the first post.)”
The link is a public news from São Sebastião/SP, where two big NGOs received complaints from the population of affected areas (there’s even protests in the roads, which became noticed by local news, I will not attach the photos of the protest here but is possible to follow links on the post). The municipality government was initially accused by its own population of not giving the donations, but these donations were in control of these NGOs (which got a lot of publicity in the middle of the crisis as go-to for donations). The whole situation forced the municipal government of São Sebastião/SP, with help from the Province government of São Paulo, to take action to make the NGOs expenses be investigated. They took as evidence for example, the simplified public spending not matching people who didn’t receive money in the early days of the calamity.
The result of the investigation is not finished (and it is likely they might attempt an agreement with Ministerio Publico if they made something wrong). Yet, as a fact, both NGOs at least admit they’re holding money (without being clear how much) that still needs to be passed for the population, despite several months after the event, so at minimum, they’re less efficient than the local government itself.
From the body of the initial post, two quotes to not make this (now edited) reply still on topic, since I mentioned that messages which could reveal doing or not a crime could be hidden.
TL;DR: I want to complain about the moderator (the same warned early) on Brasil (Brazil) which already in conflict of interest by his employee is using the forum to incentive others to hide content which can be used to know further information to reveal if actions of a proto-working group is doing could be or not a crime in Brazil. (…)
(…)The cited names of the persons who supposedly visit one of the affected cities (e.g. what’s on the link for the wiki) was not recognized by the civil defense coordination of that region (and I have this by email). (…)
As said previously (and despite attempted confusion with not-even-confirmed endorsement from another municipality, Guarulhos/SP) the call-for-mapping was not recognized by the civil defense of São Sebastião/SP (“COMDEC São Sebastião/SP”), which actually replied very fast by mail, but at that time I was not aware that had all this massive public discussion with now NGOs acted in that city. The minutes of the proto working-group (while open to partnerships with government) already were considering work with local NGOs as alternative mapping activities.
Mentioned the links for both a post and the Wiki minutes, because they share in common “Instituto Verdescola”, which is one of the 2 big NGOs. I have no further more specific opinion what relation the proto working group (which is coordinated by the moderator which is also employee of Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team United States Inc) have with the NGO, but I’m sorry, they’re using both OSMF-sponsored forum and the OSM Wiki to cite that NGO which even the local population from the affected areas gone on the streets to protest asking where the money gone. Also the civil defense Province of São Paulo (which includes both cities I said not be the same) also is, as is mentioned in the news, supporting the investigation of the government of São Sebastião/SP of NGOs, so regardless of be truly coincidence, the cases of use of the group, are very bad for trust inside Brazil on the very same organizations that would lead emergency response, it is just more obvious in São Paulo province. Also, before attempting this local NGO, the only reference of potentially any organization behind would be the civil defense of a different city (which still not confirmed if was endorsed activity or not)
Also, the news in Portuguese , not because of the proto working group on Brasil (Brazil), but the NGOs in São Sebastião/SP and and even one from the province of Minas Gerais paid by the NGOs, already do exist a very high awareness of NGOs attempting to work on disaster response in Brazil while asking donations. So an additional reason to me to suggest edit the Wiki and try to distanciate OpenStreetMap brand from this working group is that the civil defense at city level might make public statement of the activities on OpenStreetMap are part of a financial donations scam (data not used for the emergency). This may seem too much, but note that they could do this because of the kind of local NGO allowing reuse of its name for coordinating the mappaton or even if it is promised that anyone without experience could do it.
PS.: In addition to a COMDEC/COMPDEC (coordination of civil defense at municipality level) do not allow work without invite in a different municipality than it own territory, any individual either from universities or member of education programs of federal-level government agencies cannot go public and imply coordinate civil defense in a city without explicitly authorization. In Brazil, by law, the lead response is at municipality level, all the rest of civil defense coordination as support. So any of you receive affirmations contrary to this to refute my complaints, please record.