OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Sorry / Bad choice of words

Posted by woodpeck on 10 December 2020 in English.

Hi,

I’ve recently got some flak about a mailing list post that I wrote opposing a candidate for the OSMF board election. I felt that this candidate and their employer, Facebook, were getting away with too many things that would be inacceptable from anyone else.

Because the candidate and his employer steadfastly claim that the attribution they provide was in accordance with the license, I saw an analogy with Donald Trump claiming stuff that was obviously not true, like “I had the greatest crowd in my inauguration” or so. And getting away with it.

To make this point as drastically as possible, I used a quote from Trump from before the 2016 election, the infamous “Access Hollywood Tape”. I still remember when that - deeply misogynistic - claim of getting away with sexual assault hit the press. I was sure: This man is never going to be elected; it is just not possible. I was proven wrong. That’s why the quote stuck in my head, as the eternal conundrum of why so many people can vote for a politician who says such deplorable things. (There are other examples in history books; but this one I lived through.) When I wrote the mailing list post, I felt that, in terms of the values we have as OSM, claiming that you can simply ignore our attribution requirements and hoping get away with it, was equally impossible.

The echo to my mailing list post has shown me that I should have been more careful in which words I pick up and re-use. It was totally my intention to say “don’t vote for that candidate because they think they can get away with crass violations of what we think is proper”. But I now see that, by choosing these words and not, for example, the quote about Trump being able to shoot a person dead on Fifth Avenue and get away with it, I have dealt a blow to women in OpenStreetMap. Had I spoken about shooting a person, that would have been “any person” of any gender and equally bad for everyone; but my choice of words singled out women and contained a drastic picture of sexual assault, something that far too many women have been subjected to, or at least know someone who has been. By even mentioning it, no matter what the context is and how many quotes or “not”s you put around it, you can already make a female reader feel discouraged - such a serious topic, and it’s being used here for a cheap political takedown.

A couple of women in OSM whom I have known for a while have reached out to me personally to make this point and I appreciate that very much. I now understand that no matter how many people are using the phrase, we should all work towards getting rid of it as soon as possible, rather than using it as if it was everyday language to make points that do not even have anything to do with sexual assault. I will certainly be more careful in the future. I will still be finding clear words when speaking out against things or behaviour that I find problematic, but I will double check not to put anyone in the crossfire by choosing the wrong words or the wrong figures of speech.

If you are a woman and if anything I ever said or wrote in OSM has given you the impression that I am in the least a misogynist, or don’t want women in OSM, or think that they are inferior programmers, or their place is in the home with the kids or any of that last-century shit, please be assured that nothing could be further from the truth. I have worked with many women in OSM and I think we got along well even when we had different opinions. Over the years, I’ve personally introduced more than a hundred women to OSM mapping through introductory courses at the local university and other events. I’m also teaching women to code as part of their GIS studies at the local university, and I think that within the limits of what I can do as a man, I’m doing these jobs well, treating women with the greatest respect, encouraging them, never once being condescending or giving them the impression that their male classmates are “better at tech” (newsflash, they’re not, though they often think they are).

I’m totally on board with the idea that people of any gender should get the same chances in life. That includes taking steps to support underrepresented genders in OSM, and that includes not throwing around phrases about sexual assault in discussions about map attribution. I am sorry for that; it was a bad judgement on my part. If you are a woman in OSM - or a woman interested in OSM - and there’s something I can do to make OSM a nicer place for you, feel free to reach out. OSM needs more women, not less.

Sincerely, Frederik

Discussion

Comment from RebeccaF on 10 December 2020 at 10:30

Hi Frederik, thank you very much for posting this message. This level of self-reflection is important, and I really hope this serves as an example to other in OSM about how we can all own up to and learn from mistakes. As the statement mentions, the systemic behaviours described span many years and many people, and the creation of it is not down to the specific actions of any one individual, but to wanting to make the collective ecosystem more inclusive overall. Thank you

Comment from ndrw6 on 10 December 2020 at 11:22

There is no “systemic misbehaviour” in OSM. This is not an opinion, it is a fact.

Yes, there are proposals for systemic racial, ethnic and gender discrimination that attempt to bypass OSMF democratic process. See the Heather’s post yesterday, which is by the way far more offensive and divisive than anything Frederik have said.

There’s indeed a lot of discrimination in the world, often codified in law. Changing these laws is a worthy goal but it is outside of scope of OSM and OSMF. The best thing we can and should do about it is to allow everyone to participate in development of Openstreetmap on equal terms and that’s exactly where we are now.

Comment from TTPC_Checksum on 10 December 2020 at 13:19

Fortunately here in the US, most Trumpisms do not make their way into normal language as a literary tool. I’ve observed that the same statements do not work when used by others. For every statement Trump has made, there is a crowd of people to claim that he did not say what everyone heard from the microphone. There is also a group of ‘high priests’ to interpret the same words in different ways to suit their local circle of discussion and assign a meaning that casts it in a positive light.

Comment from TylerOSM on 10 December 2020 at 15:18

Hi Frederik thank you for writing this, Tyler

Comment from Heather Leson on 10 December 2020 at 16:54

HI Frederik, thank you for this reflection.

Heather

Comment from benoitdd on 10 December 2020 at 18:14

@nrdw6: “There is no “systemic misbehaviour” in OSM. This is not an opinion, it is a fact.” ==>It’s your opinion, not a fact.

Comment from Yury Yatsynovich on 10 December 2020 at 21:12

Country of origin, race and gender of OSM contributors are not observable – can there exist discrimination based on unobservable characteristics?

Comment from bryceco on 11 December 2020 at 05:50

Dude, you don’t need to see a person to discriminate against them: just post a sign saying “Croatians not appreciated” for example. It’s easy to offend and demotivate a particular segment of the population without naming individuals.

Comment from Fintocubano on 11 December 2020 at 09:49

Hi Frederick,

Thanks for your reflections. I think the choice of appropriate, considerate words will always set a civil tone for a conversation in any forum.

If you have strong feelings about Facebook, this shouldn’t lead you to express these feelings publicly by using metaphors that include rather offensive words. And if you then offer an apology is there really any added value to use yet another inappropriate word [1] to describe something else equally deplorable? Being a leading person in the OSM community, your examples will set the tone for many other OSM users to follow.

Also, I would consider appropriate to apologise to the Facebook employee/candidate for the OSM board who was quoted in the metaphor. Before expressing such an extraordinary judgement, irrefutable evidence should be provided.

On the other hand, I don’t feel there was an ‘’intentional behaviour to exclude participation by women and minority groups’’ from OSM. On the exclusion of women and minority groups perhaps the OSM board or those in charge may wish – given quite a few users strongly feels so – to ascertain to what degree this is true in OSM and therefore have a (independent?) review carried out and then, when findings are presented, take the appropriate/necessary actions? A manifesto like the one proposed is of little use I think.

I would instead welcome – also based on my previous (and not very pleasant) experience with other Italian OSM users on the mapping comment boxes and mailing lists, of which you were made aware once in May via a submission by myself to the DWG – a more robust and truly enforceable Etiquette/Code of Conduct for all OSM users. This should help users to understand that unfriendly and disrespectful tones/words/expressions in any OSM mailing list or elsewhere on the OMS website are not welcome and may be sanctioned.

Thanks, F

[1] ‘’[…] Women […] their place is in the home with the kids or any of that last-century shit.’’.

Comment from Smef09 on 11 December 2020 at 17:08

It is good to own your mistakes, even after you feed the flames in a pile in for a couple of days. This shows some level of character and can only be welcomed.

I hoped that the gender and ethnic conversation would be handled more calmly when this is over and not as part of this. Some people want to start that off using your badly judged comments as a basis, and using you as a typical example of comments in the osm community probably to validate their own behaviours and failings and divide us all up.

Comment from gileri on 11 December 2020 at 17:19

I agree with you Smef09, the debate seems way too much heated to me, leading to a level disparing comments which I haven’t seen yet. Also most of those come from people “promoting inclusivity”.

Comment from Mateusz Konieczny on 11 December 2020 at 20:18

Thanks for that entry!

The comment was very unfortunate but some reactions were very overblown.

Comment from mapeadora on 11 December 2020 at 21:16

Dear Frederick, Thank you for this clarification. It’s clear that neither your email in the list, nor our collective reaction, has tried to say that you identified with Trump’s quoted expression, nor that we personally blamed you for the common discrimination against women and other minorities in OSM. And in the end, except with proof to the contrary, most of the time we assume the good faith of other users. As you have pointed out very correctly, it is in spite of this that the reading of such expressions and passionate tones has the effect (being accumulated and experienced for years), of distancing many people from any gender, from the various channels, because it seems too much difficult, but above all time consuming, argue in these tones. But above all, no one wants to experience this voluntary activity in this type of affect. And the real effect is abandonment. So your message was a trigger for a call to action that has been around and has been silent for years. It is very appreciated that you give the example of someone who sincerely seeks to understand others’ perspective, and analyze his actions. I think it can inspire the community.

Comment from westnordost on 20 December 2020 at 15:19

This thing went totally past me, I just skimmed through it now because it was mentioned on weeklyOSM. As an outsider who didn’t take part in any discussion concerning this, I’d just like to say that I am glad that Heather Leson is not in a position of power at the OSMF any more.

I don’t trust people in positions of power who talk about power all the time and pull off these kind of power-plays.

Whenever I read something on OSM Weekly about what Heather Leson has written in the past few years, and I read up about it, I came away with the impression that this is pure politics, (ironically) quite hateful and made to damage the OSMF and OSM community in general. And to what end. And the latest example would be this “open letter”. Any normal person would have just called out that crude comparison in that emotional post of yours as a reply to that post, like Rory did, or contacted the list’s moderators about it. Instead, manufacture a public scandal in order to cancel an (apparent) adversary? Wow.

Comment from gileri on 20 December 2020 at 21:18

While I don’t like pointing one individual in particular, that was also my (to be fair not very researched) sentiment @westnordost.

What has been said to and about Frederik was a very large overreaction and looked like a power grab under sexist and racist pretense.

Log in to leave a comment