On 07/15/2010 10:38 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 15 July 2010 18:55, Rob Myers<r...@robmyers.org> wrote:
OSM has a clear mandate for the change. A majority (more than half) of the
electorate voted, and a clear majority of the votes were for the change.
Less than 49% of those eligible to vote, voted for the change, I don't
see this as a majority, just an exercise in the manipulation of
statistics to preserve a predetermined outcome.
By the same logic we find that only 6.05% of those eligible to vote
actually voted against the change.
But non-votes are not "yes" or "no" votes. We cannot claim that they
support or oppose relicencing.
Given this, the facts are still that a majority voted and a clear
majority of the votes were in favour.
Would I rather more people had voted? Yes. But that doesn't invalidate
the outcome.
Not to mention that was only OSM-F members, we keep getting told it's
the contributors/communities that matters so much, but the community
hasn't been asked.
The informal poll here indicates strong support from the community -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License#Vote
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
