[OSGeo-Standards] OSGeo finances

[Angelos Tzotsos]

Dear Henrique,

Thank you for your email.
I will add your proposal to the agenda for the next board meeting.

Best,
Angelos

On 3/12/25 10:27, Munich Orientation Convention wrote:
> Dear Angelos,
>
>
> I'd have a simple solution for the mentioned financial problem.
> The only condition is: OSM reconsiders the merit principle, and this in
> favor of the consumer.
>
> The good intention of the OSM rules is to avoid any dependence of big techs.
> But at the same time OSM is combating inventors like me and impeding any
> discussions and progress.
>
> I've developed a STANDARD proposal for all orientation tools, see the video
> https://volksnav.de/aSimpleCircle .
> One problem: if this standard would be "open", immediately hundreds of
> "better" standards would arise, destroying the goal.
>
> Concerning cartography, the fundamental innovations - respectively quantum
> jumps - would be:
>
> 	- A non-academic, metrical and zoomable reference grid .
> 	Actual preference of OSM, OGC, Google etc.:	 ignore/combat
> https://volksnav.de/YouAreHere
>
> 	 - IMAGINABLE location codes including house numbers and room
> numbers
> 	Actual OSM preference: 	ignore/combat
> 	Others preference: 		enigmatic ones
> https://volksnav.de/alternatives
>
> I'm for example proposing the invention to Overture maps but I'm for example
> seeing that Meta etc. would be interested to impede that Google etc. can use
> it.
>
> I'd prefer a cooperation with OSM but OSM combats the merit principle: those
> who have a salary and aren't inventors demonize those who insist on a return
> of intellectual investment.
>
> The way out I see would be a good old but forgotten tool: symbolical fees.
>
> The fee would depend on the value of the benefit. For example, Cameroon
> wants a digital addressing system https://volksnav.de/Cameroon . In this
> case the fee of course would be a higher one than for just a humanitarian
> map.
>
> Do you think in the meantime the board would be open minded enough for
> non-conventional proposals?
>
> Henrique
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] Im Auftrag von Angelos
> Tzotsos via Discuss
> Gesendet: Montag, 10. März 2025 14:34
> An: OSGeo Discussions
> Cc: OSGeo Board; projects at lists.osgeo.org
> Betreff: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo finances
>
> Dear OSGeo community,
>
> In February 2026, OSGeo will celebrate its 20 year anniversary. In these
> two decades it has seen incredible growth, from the number of incubated
> projects, to the proliferation of Local Chapters, to the number FOSS4G
> conferences around the world, as well as the constant increase in the
> number of participants to these conferences. Without a doubt, the
> community has significantly expanded and, in many aspects, it has become
> successful. However, the current situations brings compelling challenges
> that the Foundation must address, one of which is clearly the financial
> aspect.
>
> The 2025 budget has been discussed and was recently approved
> (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Budget_2025 /
> https://www.loomio.com/d/W2qoQdbB/osgeo-budget-2025/1) and it brought
> important cuts almost everywhere. To SAC, to OSGeo projects, to the
> marketing committee and others. Furthermore, it is not the first year
> that the requested amounts could only be partially approved, delayed or
> even denied and every time, the decisions were not easily taken. Thus,
> it is safe and sad to say that today, the OSGeo Foundation is
> under-funded and without fundamental changes, the risk of collapse due
> to its own success is real.
>
> It has become more obvious after the COVID pandemic: the combination of
> almost complete dependency on the financial success of the yearly global
> conference, coupled with the lack of structure and agreements between
> the OSGeo Foundation, Local Chapters and local and regional FOSS4G
> conferences is having dangerous consequences on the budget. Even more,
> given that the Foundation relies solely on volunteers (except for a very
> limited amount of consulting fees for SAC) and that it has no
> professional staff, is a significant hindrance when it comes to
> attracting and retaining sponsors.
>
> We want to assure the community that addressing this situation is a top
> priority for the OSGeo board and we have started to work on drafting
> potential changes on the current structure, financial setup and status
> that would curve the current trajectory and would allow the Foundation
> to serve its community on the long run. In the near future, the board is
> planning a dedicated meeting for which your participation, as well as
> your suggestions are more than welcomed.
>
> On behalf of the OSGeo Board,
> Angelos
>


-- 
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
President, Board of Directors
Open Source Geospatial Foundation
https://www.osgeo.org/member/angelos-tzotsos/