On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:48:05 +0100 (CET), Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, January 21, 2006 21:52, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> So, can the developers dispute this? Obviously, the developer body >> can dispute any delegated action. But a GR can't overturn something >> seen as fact (so no GR stating PI=exacly 3.14 or 22/7). > Could you please explain how you arrive at the conclusion that an > interpretation of guidelines can be seen as a fact? If you do not see closed source software as incontrovertibly non-free, I have no desire to discuss this issue with you. > This is not exact science, even though you link it to the value of > pi. In judicial systems one can dispute an interpretation of the law > at a court, because the law is seen as something that is subject to > interpretation. Even inexact sciences have things accepted axiomatically. Under some (extreme) viewpoints, there are no facts (you, sir, are a figment of my imagination, as is the universe). > This goes even further here, because the DFSG is not even a strict > set of rules but are guidelines. As we all know, guidelines are > subject to interpretation on a case-by-case basis, that's what > distinguishes them from rules. Therefore, I think a specific > application of guidelines can not be seen as a fact. This is not a metaphysical or existential debate. If you are of the opinion that everything about licensing is a matter of opinion, and every opinion counts, I must beg to differ. If opinions are scattered on an issue like a bell curve, I am not interested in the long tails --- and I am trying to determine how far off the mean ad along the tail my own opinion lies. manoj -- Good night, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are. Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]