<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><div><div>I believe that narrative B best fits what I know about LocationTech and their interactions with OSGeo.</div><div><br></div><div>Note that this is my personal opinion.</div><div><br></div><div><div><div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Calibri">----</font></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Calibri">Michael Smith</font></font></div><div><div>OSGeo Foundation Treasurer</div><div><a href="mailto:treasurer@osgeo.org">treasurer@osgeo.org</a></div></div></div></div><div><br></div></div></div><div><br></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span> Discuss <<a href="mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>> on behalf of Rob Emanuele <<a href="mailto:rdemanuele@gmail.com">rdemanuele@gmail.com</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span> Monday, November 16, 2015 at 7:59 PM<br><span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span> Mateusz Loskot <<a href="mailto:mateusz@loskot.net">mateusz@loskot.net</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span> OSGeo Discussions <<a href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship<br><span style="font-weight:bold">Resent-From: </span> Michael Smith <<a href="mailto:michael.smith@usace.army.mil">michael.smith@usace.army.mil</a>><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;"><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>I think there's two narratives that are at conflict in this entire thread. I'm going to try to try to spell them out as I see them:</div><div><br></div><div>A. LocationTech is a newer-than-OSGeo organization that is trying to make a name for itself, capture market share, promote it's brand, in general act in a way that makes itself grow. The intention behind LocationTech's actions in offering services as a
professional conference organizer is mostly for it's own gain; LocationTech wants to smoothly slide into becoming a part of OSGeo's annual conference for the profit and promotion of itself, to the potential loss of OSGeo. For that reason, it is best for the
OSGeo community to protect itself from LocationTech, keep measured distance between the organizations, not allow it to become part of the FOSS4G international event, or at least to be suspicious of it's stated good intentions in offering itself to be PCO.
The real story is that LocationTech's intentions are primarily about the profits and higher visibility it will gain from being part of FOSS4G, and the help it is offering plays a secondary role.</div><div><br></div><div>B. LocationTech is an organization that was created out of intentions to help parts of the community that were perhaps not best served by OSGeo at the time. It has it's own governance and ways of doing things, which include being backed by small and large
companies looking to contribute financial support to the open source community, which allows for things like paid staff. The model is different than OSGeo, the structure is different than OSGeo, and the aims are similar but have differences. One differences
is that it's parent organization is the Eclipse Foundation, who have professional conference organizers on staff and a lot of experience running successful conferences. Seeing this is a valuable thing that the open source geospatial community can take advantage
of, LocationTech offers it's services as a professional conference organizer to the FOSS4G NA regional conferences, and now has offered it's services to the international conference in 2017. While certainly not eschewing the increase in visibility in the community
that being part of the conferences would afford LocationTech, that plays a secondary role to the earnest desire to help the open source geospatial community.</div><div><br></div><div>Have I captured these narratives correctly or incorrectly? They are based on impressions and implicit opinions that I've tried to understand from these conversations. I think perhaps explicitly stating them would be useful, so if I have failed to do so
correctly please correct me.</div><div><br></div><div>I obviously have a preference for believing that narrative B best fits the reality of the situation. Self promotion surely must play some role in LocationTech's actions, but is it naive to think that the intentions of LocationTech are for the community
first and itself second? Perhaps. I don't think so though. The alternative is certainly not how I operate when I participate in LocationTech.</div><div><br></div><div>I prefer the narrative of openness and trust vs the narrative of mistrust and suspicion that sounds like bad politics. I hope that this community that I choose to participate in is not such a political mess that breeds that sort of selfish market share
power plays, and instead it is a community of people and organizations that take actions based on how they can contribute to an overall good.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Mateusz Loskot <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:mateusz@loskot.net" target="_blank">mateusz@loskot.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 16 November 2015 at 23:11, Jody Garnett <<a href="mailto:jody.garnett@gmail.com">jody.garnett@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> If I was to sum up the difference in outlook between the two organizations<br>
> today it would more be along the lines of LocationTech being "developer<br>
> focused" and OSGeo being "user focused'. I think that is more a reflection<br>
> of where the projects involved are in their incubation process that any<br>
> strategic difference.<br><br></span>Jody,<br><br>
I have to admit, to me as OSGeo member as developer (+SAC supporter),<br>
this whole thread has not clarified almost nothing.<br><br>
As much as I appreciate (and carefully read through) all your inputs,<br>
that summary leaves me with even more questions.<br><br>
And, BTW, I agree with you about the FAQ, it also reads naive and silly<br>
(e.g. comparing Apache vs Mozilla, two different scopes, to<br>
LocationTech vs OSGeo,<br>
two with clear overlap).<br><br>
Putting all the emotional cream whipped so far aside and objectively,<br>
clearly, that it is all about potential, capacity and market share.<br><br>
OSGeo has proved its potential, it is capable to paddle its own canoe<br>
for a decade or more,<br>
via large self-organized community and successful projects.<br><br>
LocationTech is a fairly new player with huge & rich organization behind,<br>
that has to prove it's capable to secure market share, and its position.<br>
Otherwise, the parent organization will simply shut it down as any<br>
failed project.<br><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
Best regards,<br>
--<br>
Mateusz Loskot, <a href="BlockedBlockedhttp://mateusz.loskot.netBlocked" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
BlockedBlockedhttp://mateusz.loskot.netBlocked</a><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></span></body></html>