On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 08:34:31PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The real issue is not that you [Francesco Poli] were posting without > > disclaimers. > The issue that led to those disclaimers was *exactly* that some > thought Francesco should make it clear he is not speaking officially. Well, it's the same thing really - adding the disclaimers is one (poor) way of addressing... > > When someone posts to debian-legal asking for help figuring out if a > > license is ok for Debian main, and you respond saying that it isn't > > because of license feature X; and you are well aware that the > > ftpmasters have previously and consciously accepted other licenses > > into main with that same feature, and have not been swayed by your > > arguments; that's not appropriate. ...the problems with him making statements that sound more authorative than they should be. > Perhaps so. But that's not the issue that led to Francesco habitually > appending disclaimers to his messages. Ideally there'd be no need for such disclaimers because the content of posts wouldn't create misleading impressions. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]