Max wrote: > just a question of setting the standard. 1) I'm not sure one who doesn't follow the established standards set by English and common email convention of making the conversation flow in chronological order rather than random reverse order when quoting other people has much room to speak on the subject of setting new standards.
2) If we have nothing to hide (we don't), and especially given that nothing about OSM is anonymous, what's with this irrational insistence that anonymity is the standard all the sudden? Does OSM as a project even care or attempt to log who is receiving the data to begin with?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
