CWG meeting 2011-10-03

From OpenStreetMap Foundation

Communication Working Group meeting on 3rd October 2011


  • Richard Weait
  • Harry Wood
  • Jonathan Bennett


  • Various roll-over of topics plus...
  • Press releases / quarterly updates
  • twitter and how to get more people responding via the @openstreetmap account
  • facebook confusing proliferation of pages etc


  • rweait - Ask around regarding collabtweet and other services for sharing a twitter accounts
  • rweait - draft statement about scrapers
  • Harry - Discuss the WG summaries blogging plan at the Management meeting
  • Harry - remind Emilie to add RichardF and JonoB to the communication@ mail group
  • Harry - wiki facebook links
  • Harry - contact Steve. Find out what he knows about facebook adminship.

IRC logs

(21:00:29) rweait1: hello
(21:01:22) rweait1: Both RichardF and Oliver have offered their apologies.
(21:01:41) harry-wood: Hello
(21:01:46) JonathanB: Evening
(21:01:55) rweait1: just asking Hurricane if she's available.
(21:02:14) harry-wood: Perhaps we should see if hurricane wants to join via skype (switch to skype voice call instead)
(21:02:34) rweait1: no reply yet.
(21:02:54) ***JonathanB starts to panic about needing a headset
(21:03:44) rweait1: no, no. Just a headset. WGs are about talking, not about listening. ;-)
(21:04:19) rweait1: shall we get started until we hear from Hurricane anyway?
(21:04:42) JonathanB: OK by me
(21:04:44) harry-wood: ok
(21:05:31) harry-wood: previous minutes are here:
(21:05:31) harry-wood:
(21:05:49) rweait1: So from last meeting I had the OGD post on Planet, etc. and the SotM wrap up. Both are done.
(21:06:07) rweait1: The planet post had 11 retweets.
(21:06:27) harry-wood: Nice
(21:06:37) rweait1: no notice to speak of re: SotM.
(21:07:04) harry-wood: I noticed you opengeodata post didn't actually mention the new city extracts, or the new design
(21:07:15) harry-wood: more of a general reminder
(21:07:45) rweait1: Right. That was deliberate. No need to advertise one service over another, when the new planet page shows them nicely.
(21:08:05) harry-wood: I think we chalk those things up as successes for the engineering working group, so can mention them in a working groups update
(21:08:08) rweait1: I reinforced that smaller portions were available from Region to city.
(21:08:52) rweait1: Yup, the new planet page is great.
(21:09:41) rweait1: any other actions to report on?
(21:10:07) harry-wood: Well... I didn't really kick off the discussions regard working group updates/blogging
(21:10:12) harry-wood: with the management team yet
(21:10:20) harry-wood: because haven't heard anything about a meeting
(21:10:30) harry-wood: but today I did nudge Henk to set it up
(21:10:39) harry-wood: (supposed to be this Wednesday)
(21:11:07) rweait1: Was it scheduled previously then moved, or was it waiting for him to return from the continent?
(21:11:27) rweait1: He's been a very busy lad.
(21:11:31) harry-wood: Don't know
(21:12:14) harry-wood: so anyway... will report back on that after Wednesday I guess
(21:13:10) rweait1: Shall we approve the previous minutes? I'm okay with them. :-)
(21:13:18) JonathanB: Yes
(21:13:54) harry-wood: What else should we discuss now?
(21:14:04) harry-wood: Richard's email about his email sounds interesting
(21:14:20) rweait1: Indeed.
(21:14:31) harry-wood: I think we should definitely get back to them with quarterly updates
(21:14:31) rweait1: Do we want to steal his thunder?  :-)
(21:14:38) JonathanB: Was this on the CWG distro list? Don't think I'm on that yet.
(21:15:07) rweait1: Ah, okay, we should get the list sorted out. Is that you, Harry, or Emilie?
(21:15:09) harry-wood: I'll have to remind Emilie to do that for us
(21:15:14) rweait1: okay.
(21:15:20) rweait1: I'll forward it
(21:16:05) rweait1: sent
(21:16:35) rweait1: In the meantime, I can give an update on talk-au@ which CWG has been moderating for some time now.
(21:16:38) JonathanB: Right -- got it.
(21:17:24) JonathanB: I would agree that packaging press-friendly material every quarter/whenever is a good idea, but I don't think we should go as far as packaged copy specifically and only for Directions.
(21:18:06) harry-wood: yes. so that's a question. Would it need to be "excusive"?
(21:18:23) harry-wood: I'm not sure what the normal way of doing press copy is
(21:19:02) harry-wood: I mean "press release" is the same text going to all press, which presumably they dont just copy word-for-word
(21:19:12) JonathanB: If you're a commercial organisation selling products you do sometimes do exclusives to get initial favourable coverage.
(21:19:35) JonathanB: That depends on being able to control access to information (or products).
(21:19:47) JonathanB: Since OSM is an open project we don't and probably can't do that.
(21:20:03) JonathanB: harry-wood: Some outlets do just copy the PRs
(21:20:34) rweait1: most of the talk-au@ list is back to unmoderated. A few "repeat-offenders" are still on moderation. Most of the "repeat offenses" are off-topic, or conspiracy theory posts. Sadly some bullying is still attempted. I recommend that the repeat offenders stay on moderation until they've demonstrated an ability to post within the community guidelines.
(21:21:04) rweait1: I see no reason to offer any media outlet any exclusives.
(21:21:13) rweait1: Certainly not for a regular summary.
(21:21:25) JonathanB: Most of what we'd be telling Directions will have already happened anyway.
(21:22:01) harry-wood: I dont think we can offer an "exclusives" as in exciting news which nobody has access to
(21:22:42) harry-wood: might be feasible to offer text worded specially for one press contact. Could be worth the effort, but it would be frustrating if they didn't bother publishing it
(21:23:05) rweait1: The weekly updates are nice. If somebody wanted to format and combine those every few months we could send them a link to that and offer (as with anybody else) to answer questions.
(21:23:26) JonathanB: I'd be willing to answer questions by email (preferably as an anonymous "spokesman" though)
(21:24:12) rweait1: What about Qs1 and 3 from RichardF. I think those are interesting too.
(21:24:37) rweait1: can we get more folks using the @openstreetmap twitter account?
(21:24:56) JonathanB: As respondees?
(21:25:06) JonathanB: er, ers, even/
(21:25:10) rweait1: I think that is the intent.
(21:25:34) rweait1: most @openstreetmap tweets get retweeted widely.
(21:26:00) rweait1: If a team of folks can respond to OSM-related questions from others, it will be seen as the Project being responsive.
(21:26:25) JonathanB: I can chip in on an ad-hoc basis, but how do we avoid treading on each other's toes?
(21:26:42) rweait1: Excellent question for which I have no answer. ;-)
(21:26:51) harry-wood: also does it require all contributors to have the password to that twitter account?
(21:30:24) rweait1: (04:27:19 PM) rweait1: I'm not sure how it is currently managed (or by whom)
(21:30:24) rweait1: (04:27:20 PM) JonathanB: Yes, it will
(21:30:24) rweait1: (04:27:40 PM) rweait1: There are services that allow multi-folk to use one account without password sharing.
(21:30:24) rweait1: (04:27:51 PM) rweait1: but it relies on that external to twitter service.
(21:28:48) rweait1:
(21:31:36) rweait1: So I think Grant has the @openstreetmap account details, but I'm not sure who else might.
(21:31:49) rweait1: What about q3?
(21:31:55) harry-wood1: yeah so I think we should use one of those services if we're getting a few people involved
(21:32:02) rweait1: Oh yes.
(21:32:15) harry-wood1: know the name of such a service?
(21:32:50) JonathanB: Just looking at Collabtweet
(21:33:08) rweait1: is another
(21:33:13) JonathanB: It would have to be something hosted on OSMF servers, no?
(21:33:28) harry-wood1: no
(21:33:38) rweait1: it would be good to get feedback from someone who knows how we keep from having three people spend time on the same answer.
(21:34:02) rweait1: Perhaps put this question out to talk and see what advice we get?
(21:34:06) JonathanB: Unless we just set up #osmf-cwg and be done with it?
(21:34:18) harry-wood1: I guess the "army of awesome" system for firefox (Steve mentioned in his talk) is people tweeting from their own accounts
(21:34:21) rweait1: That could work.
(21:34:36) JonathanB: If you're planning to reply to a tweet you just post there.
(21:35:41) harry-wood1: a third party service could do what we need. Question is, does it do it without any evil lock-in or link redirecting
(21:35:59) JonathanB: I'd be more comfortable with something under our complete control, but I may just be paranoid.
(21:36:28) rweait1: let's ask the crowd. As a fallback #osm-cwg would be a good start.
(21:36:54) rweait1: then pipe answers to Grant if needed, or password-share or something.
(21:37:35) harry-wood1: ok. You going to ask the crowd then? (talk mailing list?)
(21:37:42) rweait1: Sure.
(21:37:56) harry-wood1: actually asking on twitter's probably the best way :-)
(21:37:57) JonathanB:
(21:38:18) JonathanB: Given the date on that the script might need updating, but it's just some PHP
(21:38:39) harry-wood1: aha right
(21:38:42) JonathanB: Ah, has stopped working apparently
(21:40:07) rweait1: Sent a note to Grant first to see what currently in place.
(21:40:16) harry-wood1: jolly good
(21:40:28) harry-wood1: what else is on the agenda?
(21:40:36) rweait1: I'll follow up to talk if he hasn;t already got it sorted.
(21:40:40) rweait1: Q3 ?
(21:40:44) harry-wood1: yes. statement on blocking scrapers
(21:41:07) rweait1: is this news that is ready to go live? or are we just drafting something?
(21:41:34) harry-wood1: We need to draft something
(21:42:02) rweait1: "The scrapers, leaving a trail of slime wherever they go ..."
(21:42:10) rweait1: How's that for a start?
(21:42:26) harry-wood1: hehe
(21:42:30) rweait1: I can volunteer for this but I'm happy to let others have a go.
(21:43:12) harry-wood1: ok. The points in Richard's email are a starting point too
(21:43:20) harry-wood1: gotta stop saying "Richard"
(21:43:23) harry-wood1: you know what I mean
(21:43:27) rweait1: np.
(21:43:39) harry-wood1: need some nicknames
(21:43:41) harry-wood1: :-)
(21:43:44) rweait1: I understand that I'm "other Richard" at best. :-)
(21:44:08) rweait1: JonathanB, do you want to take a stab at this one?
(21:44:37) JonathanB: Do we have anything like a deadline?
(21:45:04) harry-wood1: no
(21:45:18) JonathanB: Maybe absent Richard and I could bounce it off each other.
(21:45:30) rweait1: Sounds good.
(21:45:33) harry-wood1: No deadline but we'll just keep mentioning as an agenda point until we're so fed up of hearing about it that somebody does it :-)
(21:46:10) JonathanB: Tell you what, you get me added to the distro list and it'll suddenly get easier for me to collaborate with everyone else.
(21:46:33) harry-wood1: Well you haven't actually missed any emails until today
(21:46:35) rweait1: :-) Any feedback or guidance on the talk-au@ update?
(21:46:57) harry-wood1: talk-au thing sounds like a good plan
(21:47:06) harry-wood1: didn't realise the mailing list could do that
(21:48:06) rweait1: anything else for today then?
(21:48:44) JonathanB: There's Facebook
(21:49:05) JonathanB: The OSM presence on FB is a bit confused and confusing.
(21:49:28) JonathanB: There's the "official" page:
(21:49:42) JonathanB: This one:
(21:49:59) JonathanB: ...which has more "like"s than the one with any content.
(21:50:15) JonathanB: Then there's the OSM US group
(21:50:57) rweait1: who has the keys to those castles?
(21:51:18) JonathanB: Oh, and an App calling itself OpenStreetMap:
(21:51:25) rweait1: still no reply from Hurricane.
(21:51:47) JonathanB: There was once a group that had Steve and a couple of others as admins
(21:52:59) rweait1: the facebook app appears to put osm diary entries (or changesets?) on your facebook wall.
(21:53:13) rweait1: based on their about page.
(21:54:19) harry-wood1: interesting.
(21:55:19) rweait1: Do we want to follow up with Steve and see if he has the details on the facebook page?
(21:55:51) JonathanB: That would be a start. We then need to see about getting the two pages merged, if that's at all possible.
(21:56:00) harry-wood1: Is that the "official" one he set up?
(21:56:04) rweait1: That sounds sensible.
(21:56:45) harry-wood1: I will do some wiki fiddling
(21:57:09) JonathanB: Oh, and just to confuse things further.
(21:57:28) JonathanB: That's the group that Steve set up. God knows who's in charge of the other pages.
(21:57:47) harry-wood1: there's a HOT group too :-)
(21:57:53) harry-wood1: a HOT page
(21:59:50) harry-wood1: So there's a few things to sort out there, if only in terms of being clearer about what we consider to be "official"
(22:00:17) harry-wood1: I'm not much of a facebook expert myself
(22:00:27) JonathanB: "Facebook Pages Terms
(22:00:29) JonathanB: 1. Any user may create a Page; however, only an authorized representative of the subject matter may administer the Page. Pages with names consisting solely of generic or descriptive terms will have their administrative rights removed."
(22:01:18) rweait1: For some "epic", consider the osm canada page.!/pages/OpenStreetMap-Canada/129173017125834
(22:01:27) rweait1: not sure why it is an "application"
(22:01:57) rweait1: it was created by somebody who then made everybody who joined an admin. then somebody un-adminned the page creator.
(22:02:21) rweait1: it's been quite idle since last year.
(22:02:40) rweait1: Who's going to ping steve on the fb stuff?
(22:04:32) harry-wood1: Go on then. I'll do it
(22:04:47) harry-wood1: Maybe he'll be in the management team meeting
(22:05:20) rweait1: okay, are we going to extend our meeting for a bit or just schedule for next week?
(22:05:28) rweait1: Same time, same channel?
(22:05:37) JonathanB: Good for me
(22:05:37) harry-wood1: I think we're ready to wrap up for today
(22:07:19) rweait1: good to speak with both of you!
(22:07:25) rweait1: see you next week.
(22:08:37) harry-wood1: okay. See you! (I'll paste in the IRC logs)