We did have a vote, remember? You just disagree with the outcome an the remit the OSMF has.
Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 19, 2010, at 8:31 PM, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 7:05 PM, SteveC <st...@asklater.com> wrote: > > On Jul 19, 2010, at 3:34 PM, John Smith wrote: > > > On 19 July 2010 23:19, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > >> And honestly, if at any future time two thirds of active OSM contributors > >> want to change to a non-SA license, why should we keep them from it? In one > >> or two years, "two thirds of active contributors" will be a greater number > >> of people than all of us today. Who are we to tell them what to do? We're > >> the minority ;) > > > > I wonder if you realise the fine line you are walking here by > > employing such hard line tactics, you are literally risking an out > > right rejection of ODBL because of this. How much time and effort will > > have been in vein exactly? > > I think you're overblowing the numbers here with 'risking a out right > rejection'. 200,000 people, or whatever, will be asked about the ODbL under > the plan, and there are about 20 people here slugging it out. From my > experience off list with all the people frustrated both in email and in > person, those 20 or so people here just don't represent everyone else who'd > prefer all this discussion to go to legal-talk and just move on with the > license. > > So why are you afraid of putting it to a vote? > > Why have you felt the need to coerce 30,000 newbies by not giving them a > choice? Not, even linking to the license that they are being asked to agree > to? > > My experience off list is clearly different to yours. > > 80n > > > > > > Steve > > stevecoast.com > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
