Re: GR: Editorial amendments to the social contract

[Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>]

Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 04:31:49AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>
>> But it's essentially a different topic from the message Raul was replying
>> to, which was explaining that there are only two possible ways to
>> interprent the "...will remain 100% Free Software" part of the sentence,
>> and that his "and/or" interpretation simply wasn't one of them.
>
> No, I still think you're missing the point. Once you admit that the
> meaning of "Debian" varies with context, it follows that "Debian will
> remain 100% Free Software" has more interpretations. Firstly, the two
> that you posted, but then:
>
> Debian (the project) will remain 100% free software - meaningless.
> Debian (the people) will remain 100% free software - meaningless.

Then, WTF, what do you gain by enumbering more interpretations that are
grammatically possible, and then at once declaring that they are
semantically and legally meaningless? I don't see any point in this. We
still have exactly two possibilities that are worth discussing.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie