Imho, there is no place in osm for “favorite” routes. If you want that, go to alltrails or wikiloc. If segments of a cycle highway are missing, a good bicycle router should be able to find a good alternative based on the tagging. It should pick separate cycle tracks, or roads where cars are not allowed to drive fast, avoid traffic lights, look at the surface tags, etc.

This has been discussed on int. mailing list of fora in the past. Always with the same outcome: only objective criteria in osm

@Magick93, I’ve heard of OpenStreetCam. It might have been a viable alternative while it was maintained (more or less) by Telenav. I’m not sure whether I trust the current owners (Grab). And from what I read here and there, no updates nor fixes have been made in a long time.

Thanks for being so open. I hope other board members will start doing the same. Some boards member’s action as more visible to me than others, because they are active in the same channels.

Summaries like this would help in appreciating the hard work the board members do in less known areas, at least that is what I hope.

Het mag niet, omdat Google niet toelaat dat hun luchtfoto’s door OSM gebruikt worden. Zie 2.a. van dit document: https://maps.google.com/help/terms_maps/

Je mag enkel die luchtfoto’s gebruiken die in de editors worden aangeboden.

U weet toch dat u Google maps NIET mag gebruiken, ook niet om er even naast te leggen.

Thanks you for pointing out my mistake. Then it is just unfortunate that my comment is the first in the list.

I also think that more diversity can achieved via local groups, small iniatiatives etc. This has nothing to do with the board.

Repeating how toxic the communication is within OSM has probably a negative impact on the intake of new mappers. On the other hand, how many mappers are actually seeing any of this toxic communication? Such communication is bad, but generalizing the problem will not help.

A [list] (osm.wiki/Tagging_in_Support_of_Women_and_Girls) for dedicated tagging for women and girls is imho more about enforcing stereotypes than embracing diversity. I doubt my wife has needed any of those POIs more than me. When she uses a map it is for spare time and hobbies, not for the items listed on that page. I am honestly interested in finding out whether women map other items then men, but such a study should differentiate between societies where women have (almost) the same rights as men and those where this is not the case.

Can you explain to me why you accuse me of “wallowing in their bias and intolerance” and why my comment on Heather’s diary is about “speculating together about how, after assuming power, the project could be reshaped according to their own ideas and cultural values”

With my comment, I tried to point out that I do not like the idea of board members that get a seat just because they are women or belong to a certain group, not because they get elected. Yes, I fear that when certain board positions have to be filled in by certain groups, the candidates can all come from corporations. I thought that you have pointed out the dangers of that in the past and gave voting advice again people for this reason.

And now I am speculating about reshaping the project?

Hello Heather,

I always thought that the working groups did not find enough volunteers (male or female). Will those codified restrictions mean they have to turn down the rare (male) volunteers until women start participating? Wouldn’t this make it harder for the WGs?

As for the board, would not there be a chance that requiring female boards members, that there will be an uneven representation of “craft” mappers, vs corporate employees vs HOT members? While all three groups have the best intentions to create great map data, I have the impression they have different methodologies to achieve this. I have no problem with a more diverse board (gender and geographically), as long as the members can choose which way they prefer. Requiring that certain groups are represented in the board might go against this.

Furthermore, would such kind of favouritism not work against the female board members?

Are you sure that people voted for an all-white, male, Western board because of those 3 characteristics, and not because of the experience and the manifestoes of the candidates?