[NB: I am subscribed to debian-legal. Please follow debian list policy and refrain from double mailing me.] On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Henning Makholm wrote: > The word "obfuscating" was to be taken somewhat lightly. I don't > think that replaing the author's name with "NN" and the program's > name with "<The Program>" would inhibit the discussion notheworthily. Well, you'll note that in the message the program's name is not mentioned. Only the Subject: mentions it. > Please note that I'm not trying to criticise you personally for not > having obfuscated (or whatever) your example statement, even though > it happened to be your message that prompted me to raise the issue. Understood. I think it's more important that when these sorts of statements get made that they are self contained and declare clearly that this is a suggestion for a license in a particular case or whatever the author deems appropriate. Where possible, they should be generalized. However, the fear of being quoted out of context shouldn't prohibit anyone from writing concrete, non-circumscribed statements when it makes sense. Don Armstrong -- N: It's a ploy. B: What? N: This drug money funds terror, it's a ploy. B: Ploy? N: A manipulation. I mean why should I believe that?" B: Because it's a fact." N: Fact?" B: F, A, C, T... fact" N: So you're saying that I should believe it because it's true. That's your argument? B: It IS true. -- "Ploy" http://www.mediacampaign.org/multimedia/Ploy.MPG http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
pgp2VzTebdsTT.pgp
Description: PGP signature