How Can OSMF Better Support Local Communities

General talk
,
1

Hello everyone,

I’m writing to you today as a candidate for the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF) Board.

I’d like to open a discussion on this topic and hear your thoughts. How do you see the connection between local chapters and the OSMF? What’s working well? What could be improved? What are the biggest challenges or opportunities?

Some specific questions I have in mind are:

  • How can the OSMF better support local chapters in their activities, from community building to legal and financial matters?

  • How can local chapters provide more meaningful input and feedback to the OSMF board and working groups?

  • Are there ways to improve the affiliation process for new local chapters or create new models for less-formal user groups?

  • How can we ensure that local knowledge and priorities are better represented in the global strategy of the OSMF?

Your input will be invaluable in shaping my vision and, if elected, my work on the board.

Thank you for your time and for all you do for OpenStreetMap.

1 Like
2

I think you first need to answer “why does OSMF want local chapters to exist?” Once you define an answer to that, it becomes easier to work out how better to support them.

3

I am not sure if the OSMF should even support local chapters in areas like community building or legal and financial matters.

I think it is important that local chapters form organically. In my eyes, the OSMF should start getting involved once a local group contacts the OSMF asking for support; under no circumstances should the OSMF somehow try to “generate” local chapters. (Same for community building; I don’t think anyone, neither the OSMF nor local chapters, should attempt to construct a community that would not grow by itself.)

Once a local group contacts the OSMF asking for support, the OSMF must be careful to ascertain that the group contacting OSMF does indeed encompass (or at least: endeavour to encompass) the full breadth of the community in the region; we have seen very close-knit groups (like a university department from the capital) or even for-profit entities applying for local chapter status in the hope of bolstering their own recognition but with limited regard for community members that did not happen to be part of that group.

This can be a painful process that can (and must, in some cases) lead to rejection, and the OSMF must not lower its standards just to “tick off” more countries with local chapters. If there isn’t a group yet that has what it takes to be a local chapter, then maybe in a couple of years.

I think that the creation of less-formal user groups is welcome but I don’t see the OSMF playing a role in that. If local users don’t find it in themselves to band together and use the OSMF-provided communications channels to set up a regular meeting or whatnot, then I don’t see why the OSMF should try to goad people to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In my eyes, that’s bound to fail.

I think that if at all possible, local chapters and the OSMF should keep their finances separate. I don’t want local chapters to be eligible for financial support from the OSMF, nor do I want local chapters to pay the OSMF money - in order to keep both independent. I fear that if the OSMF were taking money from larger local chapters, those chapters could gain undue influence, and if the OSMF were supporting smaller local chapters, that could provide an incentive to boldly start local chapters that don’t have a leg to stand on.

I don’t think that local knowledge and priorities should influence global OSMF strategy at all. Local knowledge and priorities should influence the map and OSMF should keep out of that. Local priorities could lead to a local chapter lobbying the local government to release imagery or data or carve out an exemption in some law or other; all these things rightfully belong in the realm of the local chapter and have nothing to do with global OSMF strategy. I am also worried that any formal involvement of local chapters in OSMF business would create some “democracy issues” where you’ll find yourself in endless discussion about whether a chapter representing a country with 10,000 mappers should have more or less influence than a chapter representing a country with 1,000.

The one thing I’m surprised about how little it happens is inter-local-chapter communications. I am pretty sure that many local chapters must face comparable issues and I think it would be worthwhile for local chapters to discuss among themselves their challenges and solutions they found. Maybe I just don’t see it but it seems to me that very little such communication is taking place. Even though each local chapter is contractually obliged to send a report to the OSMF every year, I’m not even aware of any combined “state of the local chapters” report - how big are they in terms of budget or maybe even employees, etc. – I am not sure though if this is something where the OSMF needs to do something or maybe this is just another one of those “if local chapters wanted to talk to each other, they could” things.

I think what is working well is the relatively ample breathing room the OSMF gives local chapters - the local chapter agreement has very few rules and the trademark policy is very lenient. Other organisations in a similar situation can sometimes be overreaching or even paranoid in their rules about branding.

I would suggest that, should you become a member of the OSMF board, you focus on OSMF board stuff and let local chapters be local chapters; I think there is more than enough board stuff that needs doing and the best thing you can do for local chapters and for the other board workload is to leave local chapters be :wink:

I have prefixed most paragraphs here with an “I think” because I know full well that mine is not necessarily a majority opinion.

9 Likes
4

Realising that the whole World doesn’t run on UTC time!

The invitation is out to join the OSMF Board meeting at 14:00UTC - but that’s midnight for me, & well & truly past my bedtime!

Yes, I know “most” mappers are in Western Europe / Eastern US so it’s convenient for them, but how about have 4 meetings a year set at e.g. 14:00 UTC+4, +8, -8, & -4?

Sure, European Bard members may have to get up in the middle of the night once a year, but isn’t that fairer?

6 Likes
5

I’m not going to repeat everything from Improving the affiliation scheme of the OSMF - #4 by SimonPoole and ff. except to re-point out that when we devised the LC system we specifically avoided creating financial dependencies for good reasons.

As to the relationship between the OSMF and LCs outside of the above, it essentially doesn’t exist, and I’m saying that as the president of LC #3. I very much doubt that any of the board members (German speakers excepted) even know that there is a LC in Switzerland.

6

Your question highlights an important distinction:
“Local Chapters” ( formal organisations ) versus “Local Communities” ( all the ways mappers connect and contribute ).

In my experience, our best mapping often happens outside formal structures. Perhaps OSMF could celebrate this full spectrum?

Core principle: Enable communities to act, don’t control how they organise.

After all, the best maps grow where communities thrive freely.

4 Likes
7

This. Local Chapter is different from Local Community. The first derives from the second, and it’s a formal and legally-recognized group of people with OSM as common interest, while the second one is just a group of people with OSM as common interest, and in some cases not even an organized group.

If OSMF would want a better connection with the local communities, then there should be also a support towards them to better organize themselves as such groups. In theory. Because organizing a local community is by itself difficult in most cases. Is not just somehow bringing together the active mappers, but also finding people who actually want and have time to deal with bringing the local community together in a somewhat organized matter. Many active mappers aren’t aware of most of the communication channels of their community, and even if they are, they may deal with the bare minimum for interaction.

1 Like
8

While I agree with basically everything you write here, I think there is one space where OSMF could help: OSMF has, by some developing country’s standards, loads of money.

Founding a legal entity can be cheap in some places, but I can imagine (& have heard) that it costs a lot of money (by local standards) in some developing countries (anyone have any numbers?). The OSMF can just pay that!

I’ve heard some people from developing countries
If there’s some active group who want to be a local chapter, but registration costs one month’s salary for someone, then they’ll be discouraged. The OSMF can just pay that for this group! It might just be a few hundred euro for OSMF.

Course you’d have to spend less money on perks & flights for the leaders, but that’s another issue. I’ve heard some people from developing countries complain that founding a legal entity is expensive. I can entirely believe that, so I always told theses people to apply to OSMF for money.

9

The thing is if the founding is expensive, likely the operations, if not expensive, are at least involved. Operations as in accounting, tax prep and other administrative requirements.

So while funding the incorporation costs has always been the one thing that has always been on the table for support, it would mean more scrutiny and control of the proposed organisation and its plans, and, seriously, given the current state of OSMF operations there is just nobody that would both be qualified and has the time to do that. There is a reason just alone the legal department of the WMF has a budget that is an order of magnitude larger than that of the whole OSMF.

1 Like
10

Local legal risks are also an important topic.

The challenge: Local chapters are vulnerable - members live locally, follow local laws, and authorities can easily reach them.
So need some essential protections:

  • OSMF must maintain legal support and emergency funds for chapters under legal pressure
  • Local chapters should avoid running controversial services (like servers showing disputed borders) that create legal exposure
  • Clear crisis response plan when governments harass local communities or leaders

The OSMF Mission Statement says that the Foundation will
“handle legal challenges to the project and its people” -
But in practice, it is not clear how this will work in difficult or high-risk situations.

For example, the “Local Chapters/Template agreement” could be improved with a short section on “Legal Support and Protection”.
This would explain what a Local Chapter may expect from the OSMF, such as:

  • basic legal advice and coordination,
  • a legal defence fund for urgent costs (where resources allow),
  • and public support for the Local Chapter when needed.
11

Though we should keep in mind, OSMF founding is quite limited and there is not that much benefit from having a LC for the OSMF or OSM globally compared to the effort you need to put in to handle something like this. Just the existence of a LC doesn’t thrive a community.

12

I would think that the budget of the OSMF is not enough to cover all legal cost globally all the LC and mappers can cause.

1 Like
13

While I agree that could be misread, I don’t believe that the board intended that to mean actually getting involved in the legal defense of individuals outside of OSMF employees and board members (the OSMF ToS clearly says the opposite btw: see Terms of Use - OpenStreetMap Foundation). Definitely this would be widely outside of the financial capabilities of the foundation.

BTW, to see how these things can go, see Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) - Wikipedia

3 Likes
14

Some ideas that don’t neccessary involve giving money to a LC we could think of:

  • Tool to organize the local chapter. Some just use a wiki and thats enough, but if a local chapter starts to get money and is getting bigger a tool might be useful. But bigger LC might host a tool on their own as well later on. Small chapters could benefit from a lightweight, shared tool to get started and moving to their own infrastructure.
  • If a LC wants to get legal help or an insurance, what to look for. What area of expertise is needed or needs to be covered. (e.g. non-profit law, data protection, liability insurance, …?)
  • Collect and share a “how to run a chapter” knowlege, with templates for bylaws, membership management, event organization, running AGMs, tipps for handling donations
  • Networketing support - helping LCs to connect with each other, through regular mettings. Why should someone connect, what are potential benefits?
  • Provide brochures, presentations, explainers that the LCs can adapt for outreach to potential members, partners or sponsors. Maybe thats handled with better networking naturally - the german LC supports a lot for german speaking LCs. If a LC gets bigger they probably will get their own material because local community need other forms or engagement or material.
  • Guidelines or checklists for new chapters. Like, what are the first 10 things to do once you are recognized as LC? Maybe something like Open Source Clubs Guide - Linux Professional Institute (LPI) this?

Maybe this is some stuff that might help? I shared this thread also in the Matrix Room about communities from @joost_schouppe OSM Community and Local Chapter group

15

Please keep in mind that official legal support is not only giving suggestions but also comes with being responsible for that suggestion. On top, law is different in each country. So basically you suggest in such case, OSMF should find a lawyer in UK/Europe with knowledge in the law of the specific country. Where usually this is much easier to find in that country itself.

In general I agree, but on the other side, isn’t one of the reasons to have a LC that the local community has an organization that fits their needs and culture? If everything is Copy&Paste that might be not the case anymore.

16

No, i do not suggest that OSMF should look for lawyers at all. But of course its absolutely possible to give suggestions on what to talk about when talking with the insurance about your needs. Freedom of panorama - Wikipedia could be something when taking pictures for OSM. Just a “Don’t forget to ask your lawyer about that.”

And the same is with the the other stuff. Nobody is forced to take the offered information. But i think a newly formed LC could benefit from some tipps without having to talk immediately to someone else at first. To get some ideas on how to set up everything. A starting point.

These examples could also contain some wildly opposing stuff, just to show some variation.

I just thought of some stuff with what the OSMF could help a local chapter thats getting up newly, maybe without a lot of experience.

17

Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about. How OSMF should know this better what you should talk with an insurance company in Ruanda than someone from Ruanda? The only thing coming to my mind is asking a lawyer knowing about the laws in Ruanda. General “bla bla” doesn’t help much or isn’t anyhow reliable.

Think about in that way: Ask a Chinese guy what you should ask your car insurance for. He might tell you, no need for fully comprehensive insurance, it’s way cheaper to bring your car to the small repair shop and high coverage for invalidity you won’t need either, if the other is seriously hurt, just hit im again with your car until he is dead, that’s cheaper. And now try this in Austria. :wink:

18

“Hey, i want to get a car, any idea what to look for and ask for?” - “Well, check your local law if you need an insurance and what you need if you are in an accident. You might also check if there is something like an insurance available for parking accidents and check for that case. And you probably should think about what happens if you have a lawsuite because something happens, you might need for legal protection”

You are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. “Check your local about ‘Freedom of panorama’”. You probably should check what happens when someone is trying to sue a member because something happened on something they entered." Thats nothing detailed and every LC still has to check locally everything. Because law differ wildly. Its till possible to explain what happened somewhere else and to say “But check with your local insurance lawyer.”

It was just an idea.

1 Like
19

Maybe I think that to complicated, as I think the level of detail you think might be helpful, ChatGPT might provide you as well. You don’t need OSMF for that. ChatGPT might even be more specific :wink:

1 Like