Thanks for the heads up. It’s good to finally see this role documented, and evolving slowly into something with more responsibilities. The yearly vote will produce balance and checks which is positive for the community.
Difficult to say since I was told the previous undocumented forum admin role was to only remove spam and warn offensive language, but what I can comment on:
POSITIVE:
- Bringing one more moderator (@Nithinat_S) who is very proactive and familiar with government rules and wiki updates
- Bringing together organized editing teams (@mishari, @stephankn) and knowledge working with these companies
- Offering different scope of knowledge (@mishari: organizations/street complete, @stephankn: general/high-level, @Nithinat_S: local/government knowledge)
NEGATIVE:
1. possible conflict of interest with Grab.
@Mishari didn’t publicly document the fact that he’s occasionally consulting for organizations on OSM-related matters and had a history of remunerated contracts with Grab including recently (it seems only @stephankn was aware of this).
The fact that whenever Grab’s recurrent issues were raised in the forum, @Mishari guided the conversations possible in favor of Grab could be seen as a conflict of interest.
Even Grab agreed with this take when reached for comment, and they even mentioned they already asked @mishari to update his public OSM profile months ago. I have also raised the issue directly with Mishari and was promised a public profile update, which hasn’t happened.
Don’t get me wrong, having a moderator working closely with organized editing teams is positive for the community, but hiding this relationship is not.
2. possible lack of inaction against recurring Facebook/Grab issues:
Even if the previous forum role was misunderstood, most people are looking at admins/moderators as role models that have a bigger responsibility especially when important issues arise.
A few mappers who left OSM after recurring Facebook/Grab issues told me privately they blamed admins for not taking action. This is a bit harsh, but I also do not understand why DWG was never involved (they even proposed it) to at least give the organizations a warning. Grab only stopped their conflicting remote campaigns after I proposed to submit a case to DWG I had prepared.
I could see Johnny Carlsen, one of the longest members and most active contributors, joining back the community and perhaps if he has time and interest in fulfilling this role.
For me, any existing/future moderators gaining any OSM-related financial/career incentives with organizations should disclose publicly their links in their OSM profile. Until then, I will vote no for their renewal/candidacy.