Come on that wasn't a flame - now any reasonable point is a flame? Can you restate the question as I don't have mail archives etc here (on my phone)
Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 19, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Peteris Krisjanis <[email protected]> wrote: > 2010/7/19 SteveC <[email protected]>: >> >> On Jul 19, 2010, at 3:34 PM, John Smith wrote: >> >>> On 19 July 2010 23:19, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> 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. > > Steve, can you instead of flaming back give me stright answer what do > you think about suggestion I mentioned in the first post of this > thread? > > Already thanks for answer, > Cheers, > Peter. > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
