Back

@zverik Partly true. In my (questionable) opinion, there's a fundamental difference in the motivations of Overture and OSM. Overture is a commercial interest group while OSM is a public interest collective. One is driven by profit motives and enablement of "industries" and the other is not explicitly aimed towards such an outcome (or at least doesn't seem to be).

It's not that they won't talk to each other. It's just that there's nothing to talk. There is no overlap in intentions.

@zverik “Я ничего не жду от OSMF, но «пиджаки» могли бы понять, что тут происходит” (translated for me as “I don't expect anything from OSMF, but the ‘suits’ might understand what's going on here”) feels off.

The elected representation of OSM should have been the ones creating Overture a decade or more ago! That it had to be created outside is, to me, a downstream symptom of a pervasive strategy deficit. Professionally and personally it is a relief to no longer have to think about OSMF.

@migurski Well I see where you're coming from, but OSM Board is a group of elected hobbyists who are expected to spend like a couple hours a week on OSMF duties. That's not leading, that's helping. Which is mentioned in the OSMF Board mission.

We need proper managers — and I think that was the sentiment shared by many yesterday, including the Board folks. Without paid management we cannot have good corporate relations and a strategy.

@zverik yes, 100% agreed! That’s been something parts of the board have fought vigorously over the years though, and it’s the core strategy miss of the organization. I’ve been happy to see board members turn around on this lately.

@migurski @zverik this was a big realization/growth for OpenStreetMap US. Hiring an Executive Director means more can happen and there's consistent vision. Also, even one person's full time is way more productive than several people's volunteer-able time.

@ian @migurski Oh, I totally forgot about the OSM US case! Indeed, thanks Ian!