On 09/11/2014 06:45 PM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com>" wrote:
On Thursday, 11 September 2014 at 14:14:38 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
...
Which unsound general statement? ...
I was quoting relevant passages.
...
If the community
'the community'?
is trying to undermine the license
I don't even see that happening. What I saw was Daniel voicing a polite
request based on his perception of the situation and drama immediately
ensuing without any further adult discussion.
through what might be described as "verbal abuse",
I discourage such behaviour, but the statements made by you and ketmar
in response to Daniel meet similarly low standards. I suggest not to
ascribe this incident too much importance.
then the license is put in doubt. I can
then not assume that the next version will be released under the same
license. That makes the source code less attractive. This is what
Dicebot achieves. The question is, is this what the original authored
wanted? And why should Dicebot have the privilege to undermine the
license? This is a trust issue.
...
If this happened, then you would be the one who authorizes Dicebot to
have such an effect: by your distrust.
How has your 'freedom' been 'restricted', if at all?
Look up the word "shunning".
...
I encourage you to look it up yourself. Nothing of that sort has taken
place.
...
I don't know what you are talking about. The license grants your
freedoms.
It grants you certain _rights_. It guarantees you that you won't be sued
for certain actions that would usually be up to prosecution without
licensing.
