On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 05:43:31 -0700 (PDT) Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net> wrote:
> I realise Liz has already posted elsewhere that > she's aiming to be disruptive, but I hadn't realised that it was some > form of sub-4chan concerted trolling expedition. As the choices offered by some people seem to be limited to accept licence || leave OSM accept the views of group X || trolling and as I am substantially older than the majority of you, I know that the world is not black and white, and that consensus is possible, even at this stage in the argument. Disruption can be the passive resistance of Mahatma Ghandi or the fire-bombing tactics of IRA (I guess my choices here show my age). Certainly continuing to ask questions which are relevant and which don't get answered is disruptive, because it forces people to stop what they are doing and answer, even though some of the answers I receive are immature and impolite. The data I have contributed (by ground survey, please note) will remain copyright to myself, and is not going to be included in the ODbL database. Would you kindly indicate how you are going to remove it? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
