I it matters most how this group will provide efficacy, what does success look like, and who is paying attention to the outputs?
Thanks for your input @3kv
It would be great to some examples on things you would like this group to cover into those categories, or are you suggesting those are categories we should develop?
Well, it seems that without an end result, then participation will fall off. If the objective is to discuss how OSM can be better, then the result will/should be a better OSM.
However, the real issue with humanitarian mapping is audience. Who is the audience? and What do I get out of participating?
Right now the audience is us, and the likelihood of impacting the ‘aid world’ from this venue seems slim at best. So, I’m a bit lost on the purpose of it all.
I have been trying to offer a different solution for some years, but no one really wants to talk about it, I’m guessing because it’s more than ‘just’ a mapping platform. In fact, in my thing, mapping isn’t explicitly performed, but all the things we’d ever want on a map are provided and the data originator (people) is always in control of what’s viewed.
I see a real growing need for tools that protect sovereignty.
So long as we are throwing messages in a bottle, out into the wild, hoping someone with influence will pay attention and do something about … whatever, then it seems like we’ll never feel like we are winning. Involving yourself with Aid and governance almost always involves compromises, not the least of which is loss of control over one’s data. These days, identity is a big deal and cannot be adequately protected by any central ‘service’.
So, I guess my questions could become topics, but that might sound more like “why are we here?” which isn’t something I’ve seen talked about much.
What is the chance this group will influence the way UN and UNOCHA does business? Will it change how HHI trains aid workers to never tell humans what’s being shipped and when it will arrive? Will it end the colonialist mindset that has completely infected the major organizations across the world?
I feel the only way to regain personal control of data is to ensure that whatever citizens output is completely secured to their control by the very tooling that is used to share information. Once you have that though, you are actually creating a ‘full identity’ solution, which the world and crypto has been seeking desperately. But… if we were able to pull that off, then the participation rate would be insane because there’s no other service offering sovereign protection to individuals.
I’ve described my ideas a bit here: https://github.com/om-design/receipt-chain/issues/2
I think your point falls out of the scope of this topic, which is talking about these forums governance model.
I can move your messages to a separate topic if you want to discuss about OSM in general.
This forums governance model is already a symptom of the wider issue
Although i would agree, much of what you’re talking about is too bug picture for this thread. Especially since this topic is more about day to day process and procedures then overriding goals. It might help to help to enumerate some of those goals and see how they might change what OSM does on a regular basis. I’d be interested to discuss the loftier goals them on another topic theead.
Thank you. Not having seen anything yet, the type of organizational choices seem moot until we have a vision of some sort.
There is a mission statement at the bottom of wiki about page. It’s not great.