On 1/27/2012 6:48 PM, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
Hi Mike and Graham, >We should not assume that contributors' acceptance of the new licence means that they are particularly in favour of it - they may have just accepted because it was easier than getting involved in the >argument, and did not see it as doing any harm. From a personal point of view I fall into that category - I have no interest in changing the licence, but am not against it per-se, so accepted. Because I see >negligible benefit in changing the licence, I find it very hard to justify data loss by progressing with it. +1 on this : this is precisely my view. I really don't mind one way or the other about the licence, and have kept out of it until now mostly because I have no wish to get into arguments... but what I definitely don't want to see are large holes appearing on the map come April 1st. I am particularly concerned about my local patch, Hampshire, with a former mapper, almost certainly in the top 5 Hampshire contributors, having declined the CTs. I do wonder if it will do more harm than good to switch over.
I in fact oppose the license change. But I oppose it because of the damage it will do, so declining would be hypocritical.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
