Dermot McNally wrote: > > On 10 June 2011 23:01, Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I cannot think of any democratic process where only the 'yes' voters are >> allowed to participate in the results. Can you? > > About a year ago, Bavaria held a referendum to ban smoking in just > about all indoor public places including pubs, restaurants and Beer > Tents. Non-smokers were free to vote "no", and we must presume that > many did. But because the vote was carried they are no longer free to > smoke in those places. > > They are, of course, free to use them without smoking indoors. Just as > opponents of the OSM licence change will be free to participate in OSM > post-change, just not under their preferred terms. It seems a perfect > analogy. >
It's a flawed analogy, since there were two decisions for smokers: whether to vote yes or no on the referendum, and (after it passed) whether to patronize these places. With OSM there is only one decision; someone who 'votes' against the change gets their contributions removed, as if someone who voted no on the referendum was no longer allowed to visit the pub and grab a beer with friends. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Join-the-OSMF-tp6461437p6464001.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
