Okay, actually this thread Alcanzar mayor participación a la organización de juntas actually is a better summary of how skewed is trust on moderation of #communities:latam, @forums-governance .
Some TL:DRs
- The Country community Telegram: Contact @Comunidad_OSM_Panama (39 members) already existed.
- However Telegram: Contact @OpenstreetmapPanama (27 members) was created anyway.
- The LATAM community Telegram: Contact @OSMLatam (367 members) already existed.
- However, Telegram: Contact @OsmLatamJuntas (24 members) was created anyway.
- Poor or simply absolutely zero disclosure of conflicts of interests most of the time.
- However, it is easy to triangulate a reasonable number of #communities:latam moderators with HOT “Hub de mapeo abierto - América Latin” while disjoint with the bulk of existing groups.
- The whole community.openstreetmap.org may have bias towards HOT, however #communities:latam seems beyond repair. People in the ground not already aligned with HOT have reason to distrust, and this happens based on factual history in their “priority countries” (I could write more here if anyone really think I should) in other continents.
By the way, the recent post here Encuesta en línea sobre cómo apoyar a las comunidades OSM Latam, “(…) les pedimos llenar la siguiente encuesta anónima con preguntas sobre criterios para aplicar a fondos de apoyo a las comunidades (…)”, have a flaw: it openly admit interest to pay money (which comes from foreguein country with very detailed past in average schoolbook in the LATAM region) for projects in exchange to feel welcomed in Latin America to sort of represent OSM and make voices like @mariotomo seems exception. Is out of scope to explain here how colonialism/interventionism is perceived in Latin America, but this (with outside money involved) is on the borderline of being perceived by others around as a traitor, being against their own people.
Full recall on communities:latam
With all this said, I strongly recommend @forums-governance the full recall of all current moderators at #communities:latam (however no changes on other moderation roles, such as country level, just LATAM one) on the grounds not just conflict of interest, but actually being using the community.openstreetmap.org as step to, just as one example, to legitimize the “Hub de mapeo abierto - América Latin”, regardless of such hub be public know (wiki, telegram, etc) mostly decided by paid people by HOT in a region openly hostile to foregeiner Intervention, so no surprise have people in the ground without interest to be represented by such hub. To make things more blatant, on Encuesta en línea sobre cómo apoyar a las comunidades OSM Latam (archived link Encuesta en línea sobre cómo apoyar a las comunidades OSM Latam - LATAM - OpenStreetMap Community) the LATAM moderator openly talks about HOT willing to pay money (and assuming the dates, likely this post was in response to the criticism on 4 days ago) as a means to try stay relevant. They are already very lost on how to react, and they know are living in a bubble.
PS: For all others here, in special dilemma the of people not here, don’t need to know the entire LATAM context, but assume for a moment the following hypothesis: the response to complain about forum moderation by you in your country (let’s say, Germany, etc, think any European one) have the practical response (instead of review the moderation or at least some self-awareness) be people from the current moderation offer money from from a foreign country for projects in your country for anyone else willing to accept, and do it in openly the same forum you’re complaining about moderation be biased. Then, my sort of rhetorical question: does anyone here think that such action coming from existing moderators themselves was in your country would be defensible, even without any specific rule against this? It’s not about average users making such announcements, but moderators themselves being allowed to use money to influence decisions.