Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 05:36:42PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> It is only goodwill that restrains me from introducing "remove
> non-free" every year.
OTOH, you certainly don't restrain yourself from following up to every
possible message on these topics you can.
I note the non-free issue was brought up fairly regularly until it was
settled clearly too; and that settling that issue required a number of
votes to establish a satisfactory procedure to do so. I'm sorry if you
thought that the "editorial changes" vote would settle this one once
and for all, but it hasn't.
Cheers,
aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Jérôme Marant <jmarant@free.fr>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Jérôme Marant <jmarant@free.fr>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
- From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>