In message <3EB19615.7090506 at eds.org>, Josh Steiner <joschi at eds.org> writes >Ian Clarke wrote: > >>>i know you will be *shocked* to hear me say this, but I think that's >>>kind of silly. it seems pretty obvious to me that nothing is going >>>to be changed. >>> >> >>Firstly, at what point did I say that not doing anything was not an >>option? Secondly, making a request to freesite authors is hardly >>"not doing anything". >> > >you may feel like this has done somehting, but if this is the extent of >your action, then in *reality* you have done nothing. you are still >linking to the same sites which have all the same issues you wanted to >address from the start. >> >> >>> as cofe has made it abundantly clear, he's gone over all arguments >>>about linking child porn and arrived at his personal opinion to keep >>>things the way they are right now... >>> >> >>Not necessarily, if you look at today's CofE he is clearly considering >>alternatives. >> > >ian, read it again, he says very clearly that he is not going to change >TFE at all: >
No he doesn't. >"My suggestion is of course by no means the only possible solution, and >I encourage the debate to continue. Removing a direct TFE link from the >gateway will *not* cause me to stop updating it. So don't let that >concern be a barrier to change. Although do be aware that I will also >not be changing TFE in any way simply to ensure it does get a permanent >gateway link under any new stricter linking regime." > > He says that if he makes a change it won't be purely because TFE would otherwise be removed from the gateway page. My conclusion - he may change TFE if he thinks it is a good idea to change it, in all the circumstances. You have not been charged for this interpretation. -- Roger Hayter _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
