Re: [Amendment] Reaffirm the GR process
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:52:22PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 08:03:46PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > I'd also like to complain about the title text of the initial GR. It is
> > clearly manipulative, as it pretends to be merely describing the proposed
> > changes when in fact it is asserting an opinion. I hope the Secretary
> > will fix this.
> I think the title is also not the best one and just used Joerg's
> What about:
> General Resolution sponsorship requirements
Sounds good to me.
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."